Gal Hair 1
What do you see a lot of during seasonably warm days (and nights), which you [thankfully] do not see during frigidly-cold winter days and nights? What does the Devil's media use to attract your attention and to titillatingly tantalize you? What is the basis for all the commotion about abortion homicide and a woman's purported "right" (not simply: capacity) involving "choice?" What is AIDS and venereal disease rather-directly related to? How about the all the hubbub about condoms and contraceptives? And premarital pregnancies? What is the touchy-touchy feelie-feelie extramarital fornication and adultery generally caused and exacerbated by?
What do irrational legalists refer to what they erroneously state that "God only judges by the inward person, not outward appearances"? And we have all heard the excuses about the need to tan, display tanned carcasses for pompous-azz pride, exclaiming and presuming that "it's "warm" out" and "I don't want to sweat," "Everybody's doing it - it's perfectly normal and is the conventional style and fashion for this time of year," etc. etc. ad nauseum.
What looks different about how girls and women in general public view appear nowadays compared to how their great-great-great-great-great grandmothers who lived before 1920 looked back then? Why the change?
What is usually acquired and enjoyed in privacy, away from accusatory and condemnatory eyes and mouths....compared to what hideousness is instead blatantly imposed in non-solicited general public view? What do many librarians and others prudishly censor on network computer screens, but then hypocritically allow to enter and move around within library and other premises?
The ideal, which we get from Scripture, is that all human females walking in and sitting around would be wearing ponytails in back of their heads, long-sleeved blouses, full-length (NOT shortened) slacks or long skirt, and socks on feet under sandals or other footwear.
Hence, the entrance sign posted at or on the doorways of various public buildings:
No Sleeves
No Slacks
No Socks
No Service
or something like that.
There are two basic types of general-public-displayed sexual and erotic impurity:
1 Live-person, full-sized, in-color, in-motion, non-restricted, "legally"-allowed, non-solicited, incomplete bodily exposure of merely (mopheaded) loose long hair, naked arms, nude legs, toes-bared feet, and usually nothing much else....or
2 NON-live-person, merely photographic, smaller-sized, restricted and private, somewhat "illegal," asked-for and therefore solicited, usually-complete-and-total, bodily exposure of what is exposed in (1) above PLUS a logical completion of the satisfying exposure of all other outwardly-visible body parts.
Some might wonder why there can't be both types allowed, and "what's the big deal"?
The goofs who wonder: "What's the big deal?" are fools who simply are not thinking, comprehending, nor contemplating the extensive and far-reaching effects and consequences of both (1) and (2) above. We, for the time being, will let such vile vermin wallow in their own self-righteous and arrogantly-noncooperative ignorance.
There is a certain honestly and forthrightness about not only the young well-proportioned and attractive female models who humbly, voluntarily, cooperatively, kindly, and perhaps greedily pose for privately-public/publicly-private porn, and the want-people-to-enjoy-life-and-God's-creation pimp-types who publicly but discreetly (though often for monetary profit) publicize related photos and movies for private and personal viewing for each man of the public who is interested and has been sadistically enticed (carrot-on-a-stick-style) by usually-anonymous passersby who couldn't care less about the erahtic desires and well-being of those they indiscriminately are seducing by their mis-dressed lasciviousness.
Conversely, there is a certain hypocritical dishonesty about gals who bare only certain parts of their body, expecting no one to be affected (let alone adversely affected) by such non-asked-for not-reliably-consistent exhibition of those parts and nothing beyond that......and expecting no one to admit to what those compromisingly mis-attired gals are doing as to what they are exhibiting and not exhibiting - let alone stating possible or probable irrationalizations (not "reasons") of why they are committing (not "performing") such non-solicited obnoxious atrocities.
It is quite understandable that men would want porn - which can reliably be located geographically, readily handled, and willingly available for easy and quick manipulation with always-consensual utilization - instead of the fleeting, partially-indecent, somewhat-immodest, frequently-anonymous live persons who they generally cannot capture and control....who (more often than not) object with non-compliance and non-cooperation in anti-patriarchal/matriarchal-authority moody and chauvinistic whims of arrogant and insubordinate feminist sexism.
The factor of the tyranny of possibly-already-married-or-engaged, partially-immodest, live-person human females hypocritically and sadistically saying NO! and/or call 911 for police assistance concerning men's logical follow-up with her to their partial-immodesty seduction is completely neutralized when it comes to the never-objecting images of birthday-suit-bared pretty young females in porn pics and movies.
A few bottom-line Scripture verses should enlighten both type of gals mentioned above as to God's primal intentions and inspired directives. Check them out:
REGARDING PROPER HAIRSTYLE IN GENERAL PUBLIC VIEW
Numbers 5:18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and unbind the hair of the woman's head, and place in her hands the cereal offering of remembrance, which is the cereal offering of jealousy. And in his hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse.
Song 7:5 Your head crowns you like Carmel, and your flowing locks are like purple; a king is held captive in the tresses.
First Corinthians 11:14 Does not nature itself teach you that for a man to wear long hair is degrading to him,
First Corinthians 11:15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her pride? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
First Corinthians 11:16 If any one intends to be contentious, we recognize no such practice, nor do the churches of God.
First Timothy 2:8-9 [I would].....that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in decent apparel.....
REGARDING PROPER ARMWEAR IN GENERAL PUBLIC VIEW
Second Samuel 13:18 Now she was wearing a long-sleeved full-length robe; for thus were the virgin daughters of the king traditionally clad.
First Timothy 2:8-9 [I would].....that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in decent apparel.....
REGARDING PROPER LEGWEAR IN GENERAL PUBLIC VIEW
Isaiah 47:1 Come down and sit in the dust, virgin daughter of Babylon; sit on the ground without a throne, daughter of the Chaldeans! For you shall no more be called tender and delicate.
Isaiah 47:2 Take the millstones and grind meal, put off your veil, strip off your robe, uncover your legs, pass through the rivers.
Isaiah 47:3 Your nakedness shall be uncovered, and your shame shall be seen. I will take vengeance, and I will spare no man.
First Timothy 2:8-9 [I would].....that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in decent apparel.....
REGARDING PROPER FOOTWEAR IN GENERAL PUBLIC VIEW
Jeremiah 2:25 Keep your feet from going unshod and your throat from thirst. But you said, 'It is hopeless, for I have loved strangers, and after them I will go.'
First Timothy 2:8-9 [I would].....that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in decent apparel.....
Some blatter that the above verses do not mean anything. So they blatter.
Some blatter that the above verses no longer apply. So they blatter.
Some blatter that one should not focus and concentrate on such verses. So they blatter.
Some blatter that the above verses are only metaphors or euphemisms applying to idol worship. So they blatter.
Some blatter that the above verses only applied to some ancient people a long time ago. So they blatter.
Some blatter that the word meanings changed in translation from Hebrew and Greek to English. So they blatter.
Some blatter that the above verses have to be taken in context and must be rightly interpreted.
So they blatter.
The words will not change. They always and only mean exactly what they say and what typical dictionaries define them as meaning. They mean what is obviously implied. Lots of other words could have been used instead of the exact and precise words that were used. The words directly relate and clearly apply to BOTH historical and present-day reality and problematic situations and contemporary social issues.
Despite nay-saying and froward blurbilizing blatterers.