Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
Brody Pope | PentecostalTheology.com
So apparently, its legalistic and wrong for me to wear a suit to church. Let me say this, I wear I suit because I chose to give God the best I have and I chose to represent God in the best manner I know how. I don’t condemn people who don’t wear suits or whatever, but its seems that more people are condemning those who do. I do believe that a Christian is suppose to come out from among the world and be separate. And I do believe that Christians should dress MODESTLY. But I’m not gonna condemn someone who may not know or understand this. People who complain about judging are the ones who do the judging. Thoughts on this?
John Kissinger [03/16/2016 9:13 AM]
http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/what-is-a-progressive-hipster-pastors/
Ricky Grimsley [03/16/2016 9:20 AM]
I think if you pray, study and preach under the anointing, it doesnt matter what you wear. However, considering your congregation they maybe distracted by what you wear. I would just be myself. If your heart condemns you for not wearing a suit then you certainly should for conscious sake.
Charles Page [03/16/2016 9:32 AM]
Should women preachers were suits?
Timothy Nail [03/16/2016 9:34 AM]
Just like there is reverse racism there is reverse legalism.
John Kissinger [03/16/2016 9:35 AM]
Should preachers preach wearing scarves? Charles Page http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/holiness-modesty-and-a-christ-like-demeanour/
John Conger [03/16/2016 9:51 AM]
Sounds spot on to me Brody. Some people will always grip.
John Conger [03/16/2016 10:02 AM]
Proves my point ?
Ricky Grimsley [03/16/2016 11:08 AM]
Lol
Jimmy Humphrey [03/16/2016 11:58 AM]
How is one giving God their best by wearing a suit?
John Conger [03/16/2016 12:09 PM]
Socially it’s considered nicer aka better.
Troy Day [03/16/2016 12:34 PM]
Jimmy Humphrey can preach in his bath robe and still look nice
Michael Marquez [03/16/2016 12:45 PM]
Can’t address this adequately as I am on my lunch break right now which is almost up. But here are a some thoughts:
It is not legalistic or un-legalistic if you choose to wear a Suit, Business Casual Dress, Casual Dress or Jeans and a Shirt. As long as you are covered properly and your junk is not hanging out (men or women) it’s fine. What would make dressing legalistic is when we say one must dress a certain way to be holy or right with God. You can be legalistic by saying that you have to dress casual to go to church just as much as it is legalistic to say you have to wear a suit to go to church. Dressing your best for God is relative. I personally like business casual dress over suits though I have worn suits at times when I’ve preached. Bottom line I think it’s a heart issue. God does not look on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart and I think that’s what we always have to remember.
As far as unbelievers go, they may come into our churches dressed inappropriately. The wrong thing to do would be to tell them to leave till they change their clothes. We have to remember that we may catch the fish but God does the cleaning. In time (salvation being the starting point) their dress will change as the Holy Spirit deals with them and as they are taught the word.
When they arrived, Samuel saw Eliab and thought, “Surely the Lord’s anointed stands here before the Lord.” But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” – 1 Samuel 16:6-7 NIV
Troy Day [03/16/2016 12:47 PM]
Anybody can preach in a suit. But just try preaching in skinny jeans
Stan Wayne [03/16/2016 1:07 PM]
Stan Wayne liked this on Facebook.
Tim Renneberg [03/16/2016 2:28 PM]
I can’t even wear skinny jeans (you’re welcome). I’m not sure how clothing that covers the necessities is still an issue. I missed the verses about the suit requirement and one about the sacrilege of relaxed fit jeans on a Sunday…
Charles Page [03/16/2016 2:36 PM]
women preachers wear real skinny jeans with high heel pumps and a mid-drift tee-shirt. -FB video of the man’s wife preaching from a stage and pulpit.
Phil Hoover [03/16/2016 3:50 PM]
And if you want to wear a suit, that’s fine brother. I rarely ever wear a suit…but I am neatly dressed for morning worship.
Linda Brown Bilbrey [03/16/2016 8:44 PM]
Man looks on the OUTWARD appearance, God looks on the heart.
Timothy Nail [03/16/2016 10:34 PM]
I’m not saying God cares if you wear a suit or if you wear jeans but I do believe that verse has been applied to how people dress when it is simply saying man looks at how strong, how talented, or how attractive one may be it God sees the inner goodness and strength of a man. This statement is used when Samuel is picking the new king and David’s brothers look more acceptable than he does. We have used this Scripture to justify certain dress. This could apply but it is out of context to use it concerning dress.
Ben Corley [03/17/2016 3:28 PM]
I think its ok to wear a suit if thats what you choose to do. But its also ok to wear dress slacks and a nice shirt if you so desire. After all, men use to dress in bib overall and flannel shirts and thats ok too. The point is, as long as we are right with the Lord on the inside, it will be right on the outside. Just saying.
Josh Willis [03/17/2016 5:10 PM]
I don’t wear a suit but I don’t condemn someone for it or think differently of them. I wear a t-shirt and blue jeans. I’ve grown up in Pentecostal churches all my life but just received my salvation 2 1/2 years ago. For the first 8 months I went to every type of church I could find of every denomination just to see what all was out there. I went from Catholic to Baptist to Lutheran to Pentecostal to Methodist to Presbyterian to non-Denominational. Other than how boring most of them were, considering I’m used to the Pentecostal way, one of the biggest things that made me uncomfortable in a lot of those churches was my dress attire. Not all of the people were judgemental but I had a lot of people who looked me up and down because they couldn’t believe I wore blue jeans to church. I got snubbed by a lot of people with disgusted looks. Luckily for me I grew up in church all my life so I knew that wasn’t right but it did discourage me from wanting to go to other churches. Not everyone has grown up in church so they may not know realize that’s not the Christian way and they may give up. For many people that one time they find themselves in a church is their only chance at salvation. I understand that means they’re not serious about Christ but how do you expect the lost to find the right way if they feel uncomfortable from the beginning when they walk in? What I’m trying to say is I try to put myself in the shoes of the unsaved who’s never heard anything about Christ and how I felt in those churches. I figure if they see the church hasn’t ran me out and I’m dressed like a bum then it must be a good group of people. I don’t see anything wrong with looking nice though as we do have people in our church who dress up but I hope I can be that one person who makes them feel comfortable and not turn back to the world.
Varnel Watson
This topic was offered by Brody Pope and affirmed by Charles Page but unfortunately did not gain much interested. Still a very important question for modern day Pentecostals and post-modern Charismaticostal churches
John E Ollis
But there should at least be basic standards of dress in God’s House, men would not go to their job dressed as if they were going surfing!!!
Paul Hughes
But not in the New Testament, which states principles, not absolutes of dress.
John E Ollis
Really? Perhaps u need to look again there is
Paul Hughes
Um, no, still not.
John E Ollis
1 Tim 2:9 hives a basic standard for ladies !!!!!!
Walter Polasik
You may have heard me take the side that calls, “Legalist! Legalist!” and sometimes, depending on what it is, I do. But I agree with you. At my church, (Bethel Chapel Church, Philadelphia PA) we don’t dress fancy but we do dress conservatively, respectably. We definitely don’t show up for Sunday morning church in t-shirts and jeans! And yes, how the article phrases it (“I come to church dress in the best way I know how, to honor God”) is the correct way of talking about dress standards. Paul says about tithing, “As a man purposes in his heart.” That should apply to a lot of things. And you’re right: I can’t come to work dressed any ol’ way. (Especially since I’m a manager!)
Varnel Watson
Walter your statement on personal holiness is highly uninformed So is Paul Hughes on the topic of sanctification. Legalism is a highly criticized and unacceptable approach. Reformed theology does a great job explaining the holiness of God but not the personal holiness of man. Legalism is what people expect from man’s personal holiness, not what God anticipates. John Wesley makes a strong case of entire sanctification possible in this life time. So do ap. Peter and ap. Paul. Please read thew new Sanctifying Interpretation by Dr. Chris Green http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/new-book-sanctifying-interpretation/
Walter Polasik
OH Lord, not THAT again! (Entire Sanctification) Give it a REST Troy! Have we not discussed the flaws of that doctrine and its’ inconsistency with what the Bible has to say on the subject? Please don’t call someone “uninformed” when you tout a doctrine that detracts from the finished work of Christ on the cross. Sheesh!
Paul Hughes
You would not judge me wrongly, Troy Day, if you actually read what I have written about law and sin. I get my conclusions about these subjects from the NT, not traditions of men. To assemble my book, God’s Laws: Sin, Law, Grace, and Obligation in Pauline Theology, I went through all of Paul’s statements on these subjects, classified them for content, and drew conclusions from what he actually said. Paul actually taught just 2 basic but comprehensive laws. As I wrote (pp. 194 f.),
“Paul discovered through his Damascus experience the failure of Moses’ Law to create righteousness. He realized the irony that he had become a gross sinner while trying to defend God, and failed in his most earnest attempts to establish his own righteousness. Paul rejected the works of the Law, yet concluded that God’s law is still not so simple as “Moses out, grace in.” He was not a Libertarian. Those freed from bondage to the “Letter of the Law” are not so free as to “continue in sin, that grace may abound” (Rom. 6:1). Paul took pains to stake out the moral middle ground between Legalism and Libertinism, in which God’s interests are served. Christians may not live altogether without law, for God’s laws are built into Creation, and lawlessness is utter rebellion. Sound doctrine, derived from the Gospel, dictates that Christians reject both the extremes of dogmatic Legalism and libertarian self-actualization in order to live by a higher law, the Law of Faith.
“The Law of Faith says that we are saved by faith alone, by God’s grace, not because we have the ability to earn salvation, or to pay the price (other than by our own eternal damnation). Since we are saved by faith, moreover, we should then act in accordance to what we have believed: to wit, that Christ’s blood frees us from bondage to sin and the consequences of the Law of Sin and Death. We who have received forgiveness of sin should forsake those sins for which we have been forgiven, rather than pile up more and expect the Lord to cover them like the proverbial “blank check.” Such a mindset is akin to throwing excrement on Christ and his Cross. Jesus declined to condemn the woman caught in adultery, yet commanded, “Go, and sin no more” (Jn. 8:11, see also 5:14).
“The Law of Faith further presupposes the Law of Christ. The Law of Christ says that since Christ loved us enough to die in our place, we are therefore obligated to return love to him by acting in love toward all others for whom Christ also died. We have been redeemed from sin, bought and paid for, hence are Christ’s servants, not free to do as we please without our Master’s permission. We are thereafter acting as Christ’s emissaries in Christ’s interests and, since all who believe have entered “into Christ,” also for the interests of the entire Body of Christ, in which we share. The Apostle James is fully in agreement with Paul and with Christ when he writes, “Show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works” (2:18). Those redeemed are to go on to do good works toward others, to serve Christ by edifying his Body, and to share the Gospel wherever possible, in word and in deed.
“Consequently, the believer does not ultimately live under the laws of Men, even the letter of Moses’ Law, but according to the Law of Faith. The Law of Faith upholds Gods’ Moral/Natural Law (which embodies all that is morally right and according to God’s purpose in Creation), and is expressed to the World through the Law of Christ. To the extent that Civil Law and culture coincide in spirit with God’s Moral/Natural Law, they represent no encumbrance to obeying God’s laws and fulfilling God’s perfect will.”
https://books.google.com/books?id=u0TuBgAAQBAJ
Paul Hughes
Furthermore, pp. 196 f.,
“So how does the Christian fulfill God’s laws without simply becoming legalistic? God’s laws are rightfully expressed through the combination of the Law of Faith and the Law of Christ, as described above. There remain, first and foremost, moral absolutes—adultery and murder are always sins against God’s eternal moral law. The repentant believer acquiesces to such clear-cut, eternal laws, in humility before God, or else he does not believe the revelation of the Gospel, nor the evidence displayed in the created order: in short, he remains an infidel and a rebel. Second, there is the sovereign will of Christ as is conveyed through God’s Word and the revelation of the Holy Spirit. The servant listens for his Master’s voice, heeds, and obeys. Spirit-filled believers seek the will of the Lord through the Holy Spirit, and are able to hear the Master’s voice when He speaks, thus highlighting the indispensable nature of Pentecostal Spirit Baptism.
“A third classification of obedience to and discernment of God’s law, at which point the Law of Christ comes especially into play, is that which involves “matters of conscience”: those things which are neither clear-cut and subject to eternal principles, nor a revelation of the Lord’s specific and particular will for a time, a place, and a person or persons—but in the absence of a set of Ordinances such as Moses’, a matter apparently left to the discretion of the individual believer. Paul describes, himself, various instances in which even he, an apostle, having been granted various endowments of revelation, yet renders his own judgment (“to the rest speak I, not the Lord”) based on his best understanding of the will and purpose of the Lord. In this realm of activity we as believers exercise the prerogative afforded by God, who would have all Men to freely choose to serve him or not, to decide for ourselves, according to knowledge of his Word and of his nature, what is good and appropriate to do. Paul in essence walks us through the process, outlining the problem, describing the opposing interests, and presenting alternative solutions, in his several passages on eating meat sacrificed to idols. Yet too many Christians, even leaders and teachers, become heedlessly obtuse when Paul’s own clear-cut example is brought up; they demand a law, chapter and verse, clearly stated, to which we are bound, in the absence of which they assert personal sovereignty and claim license to please themselves.”