What About Tattoos and Body Piercings?

Does Leviticus 19:28 constitute a binding mandate, establish a lasting principle, or have any relevance at all in the Christian Age? Translated literally, the verse reads: “And you (all) shall not make cuttings in your flesh for the dead nor put marks on you (all), I am Yahweh.” The Hebrew noun seh'-ret refers to an incision, cut, or gash. The corresponding term qa`aqa`  essentially means the same but can also include “imprintment” or “tattoo.”¹  The latter expression, with the verb naw-than' (“put” or “give”), is variously rendered in English, “put any marks upon” (KJV), “print any marks upon” (ASV), “tattoo” (ESV), “tattoo any marks on” (NKJV, N/RSV), “make” or “put” any “tattoo marks on” (CSB, NASB, NIV).²

Context

The above directive could be used against circumcision and ear piercing, both enjoined in the Law of Moses (Lev. 12:3; Deut. 15:16-17), if context and the qualifier “for the dead” are ignored. And what about other medical surgeries and procedures, cosmetics, athletic glare-reducing “eye black,” face painting, or temporary water-based tattoos? Obviously the Law of Moses does not contain prohibitions against such matters, unless, of course, context is disregarded and the hermeneutical fallacy of proof-texting is implemented. “A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text.”³ 

Leviticus 19–20 addresses moral and ceremonial laws for the post-exodus/pre-Christian people of Israel, including Sabbath observance, sacrifices and offerings, harvest surplus for the needy, not mixing livestock or seed or clothing fibers, corporal punishment, abstaining from fruit until the fifth year of production, hair removal restrictions, death penalty, distinguishing between clean and unclean animals, et al.  

Many of these instructions were intended to make observable distinctions between the set-apart children of God and the idolatrous peoples around them.⁴ “And you shall not walk in the customs of the nation that I am driving out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I detested them .... You shall be holy to me, for I the Lord am holy and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine" (Lev. 20:23-26, ESV; cf. 18:3, 24-30). Separation from heathen religious practices is clearly a major concern in this passage (Lev. 19:4, 26, 31; 20:2-6, 27), and the law concerning cuttings and markings on the body (Lev. 19:27; cf. 21:5) immediately follows instructions about blood, the occult, and haircutting.

Rounding off or shaving part of the scalp-hair and shaving or disfiguring the beard were conventional signs of devotion to a cultic deity. Hair-offering rituals were also common.⁵ Jeremiah, using a derogatory epithet, alludes to uncircumcised pagan nations who “cut off” (qatsats) “corners” (pe'ah) [of hair] (Jer. 9:26; 25:23; 49:32).⁶ The fifth-century-BC historian Herodotus, in describing the Arabians in particular (descendants of Ishmael, inhabiting lands southeast of Israel), observed that in dedication to their god Orotal (’Οροτάλ), Greek equivalent Dionysus (Διόνυσος): “the cropping of their hair is like the cropping of the hair of Dionysus, cutting it round the head and shaving the temples” (Histories 3.8).

From an ancient Jewish perspective, cutting off a man’s beard, or even a portion of it, was regarded as shameful (2 Sam. 10:4-5; 1 Chron. 19:4; Isa. 15:2), purification ordinances notwithstanding. Cutting the flesh, as a frenzied religious practice (1 Kings 18:28), and shaving the hair were also mourning rituals borrowed from pagans (Jer. 16:6; 41:5; 47:5; 48:37). The Lord, therefore, commanded the Israelites, “you (all) shall not make cuttings in your flesh for the dead ...”

New Testament Application

Certain moral principles have been carried over from the old-covenant system of Judaism into Christ’s new-covenant order (e.g., Rom. 1:17; 2:6; 7:7; 12:19-20; 13:9; et al.). But many of the specific rules, prohibitions, and practices have not. Note, for example, Leviticus 20:25, “You shall therefore separate the clean beast from the unclean ... which I have set apart for you to hold unclean,” compared to Romans 14:14, “I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself ...” It is a mistake, therefore, to try to bind any of these old-covenant regulations without clear parallels in the New Testament (cf. Acts 10:9-16; 15:1-5; Rom. 14:3-5; Gal. 3:10-13; 15:1-4; et al.).

What, Where, Why?

When it comes to modern-day tattooing, the deciding factors for Christians should be (a) what it is, (b) where it is, and (c) why it’s there. Surely we can appreciate the difference between a satanic symbol and a Bible verse, between the blatantly obvious and the subtle, between an inconspicuous or innocuous image in memory of a deceased loved one and a swastika tattooed on the forehead. Let’s be careful about making blanket statements and extreme arguments that do not and cannot equally apply.

Cultural or Countercultural?

In a number of places, tattoos and other forms of body art have cultural significance and are more socially acceptable, representing things like tribal identity, rites of passage, kinship, and family history. For the Māori people of New Zealand, for example, tattoos (tā moko) are inextricably linked to cultural heritage, genealogy, and personal identity. For Samoans, tattoos (tatau) represent commitment to family and cultural values. The red dot (bindi) on an Indian woman’s forehead is indicative of marital status. Some African Americans practice skin branding or scarification to commemorate African heritage or commiserate ancestral slavery.

In other cultures, however, tattoos and comparable markings have been associated with rebellion and civil defiance, gang affiliation, criminality, or overall worldliness. A Christian’s appearance can either inhibit or enhance his or her influence. What are my motives? How do I want to represent Christ? Do I wish to draw others to the Lord or inadvertently give them pause or drive them away? As we consider the what, where, and why, let’s not forget the why not? A wise and observant person of faith ought to be able to make these distinctions.

The Overriding Factor

The New Testament principle of modesty addresses this issue most readily. With respect to outward appearance, 1 Timothy 2:9-10 is concerned about adorning oneself in such a way that draws undue attention to oneself. In mid-first-century Mediterranean societies this involved elaborate hairstyles, ornate jewelry, and expensive clothes. Although the text’s immediate focus is on Christian women, the “likewise also” (ὡσαύτως καί) of v. 9 makes the principle just as applicable to Christian men. Anything that stands out and silently screams “look at me,” focusing more attention on one’s outward appearance than one’s inward character, especially if it displays more worldliness than godliness, is not conducive to a Christ-like demeanor (cf. Rom. 13:14; 1 Pet. 3:3; Rev. 17:4).⁷

Immodesty in today’s westernized world would include skimpy or vulgar outfits, over the top makeup and jewelry, unnatural hair colors and outlandish hairstyles, countercultural attire and body art, and extreme facial or body piercings. While facial piercing and associated jewelry are not foreign to the biblical record,⁸ surely common sense sees the difference between discreet versus immoderately excessive.

Conclusion

What about those who already have tattoos and piercing-scars before becoming Christians? While options might include concealment or laser removal, it seems to me the better option, especially considering prospective and new Christians, is relatively simple. We can extend grace and non-judgmental acceptance. “For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all ...” (1 Cor. 9:19).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The New Brown–Driver–Briggs–Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon by Francis Brown, with S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs (Lafayette, IN: Associated Publishers and Authors, 1980) 891.

     ² The wording could also be rendered, “nor make engraven (or branded) writing upon yourselves.” See C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the OT: The Pentateuch, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968) 424.

     ³ D. A. Carson attributes this quote to his father. See “Filled with the Spirit,” The Gospel Coalition (27 March 2005), <Link>.

     ⁴ This is illustrated as a constant reminder in the prohibition against mixing livestock, seed, and fabric (Lev. 19:19; cf. Deut. 22:9-11).

     ⁵ See Bellarmine Museum of Art, “Hair in the Classical World Ritual and Rites of Passage Wall Text,” Ephemera 16 (2015), <Link>; G. J. Tassie, “Hair-Offerings: An Enigmatic Egyptian Custom,” Institute of Archaeology (1996) 7:59-67, <Link>. Pliny the Elder reported: “The Arabs wear turbans or else go with their hair unshorn; they shave their beards but wear a moustache—others however leave the beard also unshaven” (Natural History 6.28).

     ⁶ Cf. ASV, CSB, ESV, NASB, NET, N/RSV. Some translations render the expression, “in the farthest corners” (NKJV) or “in distant places” (NIV), but miss the apparent derision implied by the description. See J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 322.

     ⁷ See K. L. Moore, “Braided Hair, Jewelry, and Expensive Clothes,” Moore Perspective (19 July 2023), <Link>.

     ⁸ Gen. 24:22, 30, 47; 35:4; Ex. 32:2-3; 35:22; Num. 31:50; Judg. 8:24-26; Isa. 3:21; Ezek. 16:12.

Related Posts: How is "Modest" Apparel to be Measured?, The Christianization of a Pagan Symbol

Related articles: Wayne Jackson, Does the OT Condemn Tattoos? 

*For a non-religious case against tattooing, see John Mac Ghlionn, “Inked Nation: The link between tattoos and exhibiting troubling behaviors is growing stronger,” The American Mind (21 June 2023), <Link>.

Image credit: https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/shocking-face-tattoos/

Braided Hair, Jewelry, and Expensive Clothes: Modesty According to 1 Timothy 2:9-10

Aristocratic woman of the Flavian Dynasty

Introduction

From Macedonia Paul wrote 1 Timothy (ca. 62-64), sending the letter to his young colleague who was working with the church in Ephesus at the time (1 Tim. 1:1-3).¹ Although addressed to an individual, it is apparent that behind the apostle’s thought of Timothy was that of the congregation with which he worked, the letter ending with a grace-wish to “you” plural (6:21).

In the main section of the letter, addressing proper conduct in the church (2:1–6:2), the topic of collective prayer (2:1-7) merges with the deportment of men and women (2:8-15). While it was understood that the men of the congregation would be leading the prayers in public assemblies (v. 8), Paul continues: “likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works” (vv. 9-10).² 

The Issue At Hand

The comparative “likewise also that women” indicates godly attitudes and behaviors are in view with respect to both genders. “Nothing is to take place in the church, neither among the men nor among the women, which can hurt its spiritual dignity.”³ Paul then addresses how women are to “adorn themselves.”

The phrase, “in respectable apparel,” is translated from the Greek en katastolē kosmiō, lit. “in respectable⁴ deportment,” involving demeanor and dress. The noun katastolē (its only occurrence in the NT) refers to “deportment, outward, as it expresses itself in clothing … as well as inward … and prob[ably] both at the same time” (BAGD 419), accompanied “with modesty ...” The noun rendered “modesty” [aidōs] (its only occurrence in the NT) carries the sense of “reverence, respect” (BAGD 22), which ought to consume a Christian woman’s entire being, inside and out. “The outward modesty which makes itself known in the dress, is to be accompanied by inward purity and chastity, since the former would otherwise be of no account.”⁵

The associated “self-control” [sōphrosúnē], variously rendered “sobriety” (ASV), “moderation” (NKJV), “discreetly” (NASB), “good sense” (CSB), “propriety” (NIV), is highlighted again at the end of the paragraph (v. 15) and involves soundness of mind, rational thought, and good sense (Acts 26:25). It is the “well-balanced state of mind resulting from habitual self-restraint,” and “speaks of the entire command of the passions and desires, a self-control which holds the reins over these.”⁶

Modesty of Dress, Hair, and Beautification 

With respect to clothing and outward appearance, this passage is mainly concerned about over-dressing and gaudiness, adorning oneself in such a way that draws undue attention to oneself. More specifically, in the cultural setting of ancient Ephesus,⁷ “not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire.” This type of extravagant luxury and adornment was apparently not uncommon among the affluent (cf. 6:9-10, 17) throughout the Roman provinces of Asia Minor at the time (cf. 1 Pet. 1:1; 3:3), while reminiscent of the well-to-do, spiritually anemic, pre-exilic Jews (Isa. 3:24). 

The expression “braided hair” is translated from the single noun plégma (its only occurrence in the NT), alluding to something “interwoven” and comparable to “the external braiding [arranging] of hair” (1 Pet. 3:3), or “elaborate hairstyles” (NIV). Both Paul and Peter issued these directives on the threshold of the Flavian dynasty, a time when women’s hairdos required lengthy grooming sessions and were increasingly ornate.⁸ The arrangement of a woman’s hair, sometimes including hair extensions and wigs, was regarded as a major determinant of her attractiveness and social status, along with leisure, luxury, and vanity.⁹ Clement of Alexandria,¹⁰ promoting practicality over elegance, denounced personal decoration inconsistent with Christian simplicity, including “superficial [artificial] plaiting of hair” (Paedagogus [The Instructor] 3.11). 

Another problem in this cultural environment was the eroticism associated with a woman’s hair, making “it appealing to most male observers and writers (the Christian moralists … are an important exception) …. In the Roman world … hair’s erotic potential made it a lightening rod for anxieties about female sexuality and public behavior. Hence the ancient sources preserve many references to veiling and other strictures regarding female headwear.”¹¹

The “gold or pearls” would include expensive jewelry, like earrings, necklaces, and bracelets (cf. Pliny, Natural History 9.56; 33.12), but also costly ornaments weaved into flamboyant hair designs to exhibit affluence and extravagance.¹² The “costly attire,” along with its adornments, draws attention to the wearer, displays haughtiness and worldliness (cf. Rev. 17:4), and magnifies social distinctions (cf. Luke 7:25; Acts 12:21; 20:33), contrary to the Lord’s design for his church (cf. Jas. 2:1-4; 1 Pet. 3:3). Christian worship assemblies are not intended to be fashion shows. 

Proper Adornment

With the strong adversative allá (“but”), the apostle also affirms that women should adorn themselves “with what is proper [prépō]¹³ for women who profess godliness—with good works.” The noun translated “godliness” [theosébeia], its only occurrence in the NT, conveys the sense of “God-fearing” in a reverential way (an inner conviction), but also the observable lifestyle it produces (cf. Gen. 20:11; Job 28:28, LXX). The word “profess” is rendered from the compound verbal epaggéllomai that usually refers to making or announcing a promise,¹⁴ also carrying the sense of “profess” or “making a claim” (NASB). Although unscrupulous persons make fallacious assertions (6:21), the apostle surely expects God-fearing women to be true to their word, demonstrated “with good works” (cf. 5:10, 25; 6:18; Tit. 2:7, 14; 3:8, 14; Heb. 10:24; 1 Pet. 2:12).

Conclusion

The modern-day application is to avoid dressing in such a way that would unnecessarily direct the focus of onlookers to one’s outward appearance as opposed to one’s inward character. “The body is the shell of the soul, and dress the husk of that shell; but the husk often tells what the kernel is” (Anonymous).¹⁵ A person does not have to expose a lot of skin to be immodestly dressed (cf. Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46). Immodesty in today’s westernized world would include skimpy outfits, excessive makeup and jewelry, outlandish hairstyles, countercultural attire and body art, etc. “Culture should never change the basic principle of modesty in that the Christian woman should always seek to draw more attention to God than to her own beauty and body. Christian women and men on every continent should be mindful of how their speech, actions, and dress can potentially affect others.”¹⁶

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See K. L. Moore, “What Happened After Acts?” in Entrusted With The Faith, ed. D. Y. Burleson (Henderson, TN: FHU, 2018): 79-82.

     ² Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are from the English Standard Version (2016).

     ³ Johann E. Huther, in H. A. W. Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the NT: Handbook to the Epistles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus, <Web>. C. J. Ellicott observes that the duties of these women were “sobriety of deportment and simplicity of dress, at all times, especially at public prayers. It would seem almost as if the apostle intended only to allude to demeanor and dress at the latter, but concluded with making the instructions general” (Critical and Grammatical Commentary 50, emp. in text).

     ⁴ The adj. kósmios (“respectable,” “virtuous”) occurs only twice in the NT, both in this letter (2:9; 3:2).

     ⁵ J. E. Huther, op cit. Compare 1 Cor. 7:34; 1 Pet. 3:3-5.

     ⁶ C. J. Ellicott, Critical and Grammatical Commentary 51; K. S. Wuest, Pastoral Epistles 46. Cognate with sōphrōn (3:2; Tit. 1:8; 2:2, 5), it would be comparable to egkráteia (“self-mastery,” “self-restraint,” “self-control”), cf. Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23; 2 Pet. 1:6.

     ⁷ Ephesus was located on the west coast of Asia Minor (modern-day western Turkey), the principal city of the province of Asia, controlled by the Romans since 129 BC. Augustus appointed Ephesus as the capital of the province, replacing the former capital of Pergamum. Ephesus, because of its strategic location, wealth, and influence, was greater in prominence. The city was a commercial center, a wealthy metropolis, and home of many nationalities. The Romans conferred upon it the status of “a free city,” with the right of self-government under Roman supervision.

     ⁸ See Elizabeth Bartman, “Hair and the Artifice of Roman Female Adornment,” JSTOR 105:1 (Jan. 2001): 1-25. The above image is the bust of an aristocratic woman (ca. 69-96) on display at the Capitoline Museum in Rome. “Apparently hairstyles from this period were made to be flamboyant with hair arranged in high layers of ringlets and then braided and coiled in the back” <Link>.

     ⁹ E. Bartman, “Hair” 1-4; “its appearance derived as much from culture (cultus) as from nature” (5). The hair arrangements of aristocratic women included abundant shaped curls in the front, elaborate braids in the back, as well as crafted buns.

     ¹⁰ In the latter part of the 2nd century Clement of Alexandria, a convert from paganism to Christianity, was well-traveled and well-studied in Greece, Asia Minor, Palestine, and Egypt.

     ¹¹ E. Bartman, “Hair” 4-5. See K. L. Moore, We Have No Such Custom 9-26. 

     ¹² E. Bartman, “Hair” 3. Pliny the Elder, a late contemporary of Paul, writes, “let women wear gold upon their arms and all their fingers, their necks, their ears, the tresses of their hair … let sachets filled with pearls hang suspended from the necks …” (Natural History 33.12.3).

     ¹³ Acting appropriately in a way that is suitable, fitting, proper (Matt. 3:15; 1 Cor. 11:13; Eph. 5:3; 1 Tim. 2:10; Tit. 2:1; Heb. 2:10; 7:26).

     ¹⁴ Mark 14:11; Acts 7:5; Rom. 4:21; Gal. 3:19; Tit. 1:2; Heb. 6:13; 10:23; 11:11; 12:26; Jas. 1:12; 2:5; 2 Pet. 2:9; 1 John 2:25.

     ¹⁵ Tryon Edwards, A Dictionary of Thoughts: Being a Cyclopedia of Laconic Quotations (Detroit, MI: F. B. Dickerson, 1902): 127.

     ¹⁶ Ryan and Sarah Davis, quoted in Chad and Amanda Garrett’s To the Ends of the World 92. 

 

Related Posts: How is "Modest" Apparel to be Measured?, Supply in Your Faith Godliness, A Woman can be a Preacher?, Female Head-coverings: Questions and Criticisms Part 1, Part 4 

Related articles: Adam Faughn, Modesty: Overlooked Verse

 

Image credit: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/2yap1k/a_bust_of_an_aristocratic_flavian_woman_showing_a/

How is “Modest” Apparel to be Measured?

            In the never-ending debates over what constitutes modest vs. immodest clothing, attempts have been made to find an exact standard of measurement in scripture to settle the disputes. But if we are not careful, we might allow our preconceptions to either speak where God has not spoken or distort what God has prescribed.

The Standard of Priestly Underwear?

The directives in Exodus 28 concern “holy garments” for descendants of Aaron in their service as priests in the Jewish tabernacle [and later temple], including a breastplate, ephod, robe, tunic, turban, and sash (vv. 1-4). These were to be made and worn according to very strict guidelines (vv. 5-43), including “linen trousers to cover their nakedness; they shall reach from the waist to the thighs” (v. 42, NKJV).

Nothing is said here about a dress code for men in general, for women, for Jewish priests outside temple service, or for Christians under Christ’s new covenant. The stated purpose of the linen trousers was “to cover their nakedness” (cf. Ex. 20:26).  

While the term “nakedness” in scripture sometimes describes one completely without clothes (Job 1:21; Eccl. 5:15) and involves the exposure of one’s genitals (cf. Gen. 9:22-23; Lev. 20:17), it is mostly used in the following senses: (a) implying sexual activity (Lev. 18:6-19; 20:11, 18-21; Ezek. 16:36-37; 23:18); (b) signifying shame (Ex. 32:25; 1 Sam. 20:30; Is. 20:4; 47:3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Ezek. 16:8, 37; 23:29); and (c) descriptive of one inadequately dressed (Deut. 28:48; 2 Chron. 28:15; Job 22:6; Matt. 25:36-44; John 21:7; Rom. 8:35; 1 Cor. 4:11; 2 Cor. 11:27; Jas. 2:15).

The priestly garment was to “reach from the waist to the thighs,” but nothing more specific is enjoined. Was it to reach down to the upper thighs, mid-thighs, or lower-thighs, and how high was the waist? Was the intended purpose to cover the so-called private parts, or everything above the knees? The biblical text does not say. Moreover, this was an undergarment beneath an exterior tunic and robe.

The Standard of Adam and Eve’s Clothes?

The fig-leaf coverings Adam and Eve made for themselves, presumably concealing their reproductive organs, were apparently insufficient to hide their “nakedness,” so God made them “tunics” [Heb. kethoneth] to wear (Gen. 3:7, 21). Nevertheless, precise measurements are not given. Were these garments above or below the knees, and how many centimeters above or below? Did they have sleeves or not; how much of the arms were exposed? How wide and low were the neck openings? No specifics are given.

Principle or Measuring Tape?

The Bible affirms the basic principle of modest dress but does not provide specific and universal measurements and guidelines. Even though society certainly does not dictate what is right and wrong, society can help determine what might be considered inappropriate in any given culture. For example, it was considered shameful if a woman appeared in public without the customary headdress in mid-1st-century Corinth (1 Cor. 11:4-13), or immodest if she wore expensive clothes and jewelry and elaborate hairstyles in mid-1st-century Ephesus (1 Tim. 2:9) or if she exposed her ankles in 19th-century Europe, or if she exposes her hair and face in 21st-century Saudi Arabia. Christians living in any culture must be mindful of what is communicated by their dress and behavior.

The primary NT text that addresses “modest apparel” (1 Tim. 2:9-10) is actually talking about over-dressing, i.e., adorning oneself in such a way that draws undue attention to oneself. A person does not have to expose a lot of skin to be immodestly dressed (cf. Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46). The modern-day application of this biblical principle would be to avoid dressing in such a way that would unnecessarily direct the focus of onlookers to one’s outward appearance as opposed to one’s inward character. Immodesty in today’s westernized world would include skimpy outfits, excessive makeup and jewelry, outlandish hairstyles, countercultural attire and body art, etc.

Conclusion

What does one’s standard of dress reflect about one’s character and priorities? Being clothed with Christ (Gal. 3:26), with holiness and honor (1 Thess. 4:4-7), with godliness and good works (1 Tim. 2:10), and with a gentle and quiet spirit (1 Pet. 3:4), are reflected in one’s outward appearance. As a result, God is glorified rather than drawing the attention to oneself.

I have my (somewhat conservative) convictions about what I consider modest and immodest, and I try to teach, encourage, and advise accordingly. The problem is, not everyone shares my convictions – some less restrictive and some more restrictive. At the end of the day, we must understand what the Bible actually says (in context) as well as what it does not say, and avoid both extremes. We should be neither more lax nor more prohibitive than the word of God allows, with humble and selfless consideration of how our fashion choices affect and influence those around us.

--Kevin L. Moore

Addendum: In the book To the Ends of the World, co-authored with her husband Chad Garrett, Amanda Garrett quotes Ryan and Sarah Davis: “Culture should never change the basic principle of modesty in that the Christian woman should always seek to draw more attention to God than to her own beauty and body. Christian women and men on every continent should be mindful of how their speech, actions, and dress can potentially affect others” (92). Terry Thacker posted this on Facebook (6 July 2018): “The body is the shell of the soul, and dress the husk of that shell; but the husk often tells what the kernel is.”

Related Posts: Know How to Possess Your Own Vessel, Modesty According to 1 Tim 2:9-10

Related articles: Wes McAdam’s Modesty?, Erynn Sprouse's Not About Modesty  

Image credit: https://shardsofsilence.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/tumblr_mdhclzld0c1rgfuxjo1_500.jpg