Clothing and Gender Roles

Part 2 — New Testament Consistency, Word Studies, and Biblical Modesty

By Al Felder

If the distinction between male and female clothing is rooted in creation and role—rather than in temporary cultural fashion—then we should expect the same principles to remain consistent throughout Scripture. That is exactly what we find.

This is not merely an Old Testament concern. The New Testament reinforces distinction, modesty, and purity—often with language that becomes clearer when we pay attention to key Greek terms.

The New Testament calls for modest apparel—and the word matters

“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel…” (1 Timothy 2:9).

The phrase “modest apparel” includes the Greek expression kata stolē, which conveys the idea of a garment “let down” or lowered—an outer garment that hangs rather than being taken up.[5] That matters because it contrasts the patterns tied to men’s functional clothing (“girding up” for labor, running, or fighting) with the woman’s distinct presentation—a garment that is let down.

This is not about vanity or superiority. It is about a visible distinction that aligns with God’s order.

Nature teaches distinction—and the language of “covering” matters

“Doth not even nature itself teach you…?” (1 Corinthians 11:14–15).

In this passage, Scripture identifies long hair on a woman as a glory and describes it as a covering—the sense of being veiled.[6] That connects with the Old Testament reality that veils and head coverings were distinctively female garments. The New Testament continues the theme: men should not adopt what God presents as feminine distinction, and women should not cast off what God presents as feminine glory.

Effeminacy is condemned—and it is not a meaningless word

1 Corinthians 6:9–10 lists sins that, if persisted in, exclude a person from the kingdom. Among them is the word translated as " effeminate, meaning “womanlike” or taking on womanly characteristics.[7] This is important because Scripture distinguishes between rejecting masculinity (effeminacy) and other categories listed in the same context. The point is plain: God condemns the rejection of the created distinction—including adopting the appearance and manner that belongs to the opposite sex.

Clothing becomes part of that conversation because appearance communicates identification.

How much must be covered? A biblical definition of nakedness

This question matters because modern culture often relocates the line of modesty wherever it wants. But Scripture uses “nakedness” in a way that is more precise than many assume.

Adam and Eve’s first attempt was not enough

After sin, Adam and Eve made “aprons” (Genesis 3:7). The word indicates a girdle or loincloth.[8] It was minimal.

God then clothed them with “coats of skins” (Genesis 3:21). The word describes a tunic with skirts (and commonly understood as a fuller covering than the apron).[9] In other words, God replaced their insufficient covering with something clearly more complete.

That matters: God’s standard was higher than theirs.

Scripture associates shame with exposing the lower leg

Isaiah 47:2–3 links shame with exposure. The term translated as “thigh” in that passage can also refer to the lower leg or calf.[10] The point is not to create a “measurement religion,” but to acknowledge that Scripture treats exposure as morally significant and shameful in its own categories—not ours.

A consistent biblical image: garments that reach downward

Revelation gives a picture of Christ “clothed with a garment down to the foot” (Revelation 1:13). The Greek term emphasizes a garment reaching to the ankles.[11] That image harmonizes with the consistent biblical picture: proper covering is not minimal.

Another strong example is Peter in John 21:7. The text says he was “naked,” yet the term can mean clad only in the undergarment.[12] Peter was not necessarily without fabric—he was without the proper outer covering. That tells us something crucial:

Biblical nakedness can include being without the outer garment that provides sufficient coverage, even if a person is not completely unclothed.

Revelation 3:18 again reinforces this by connecting nakedness with shame and urging proper “raiment,” described as a long outer garment.[13]

Why this matters for families and children

When gender distinction is blurred in clothing and appearance, children grow up confused about roles. And when roles are blurred, it becomes easier for society to discard them entirely. That is not an accidental cultural trend—it is a direct attack on God’s created order.

Scripture reminds us that rebellion against God’s assigned place is serious. Jude 6 describes angels who “kept not their first estate” and left their proper habitation. The principle is sobering: rebellion against God’s order—whether angelic or human—aligns with the spirit of Satan, not the Spirit of God.

So this issue is not “small.” It is part of a larger war against God’s design.

Practicing what is taught

To apply these truths faithfully and wisely:

• Use Scripture as your measuring line, not culture.

• Aim for a clear distinction, not borderline ambiguity.

• Let modesty be rooted in shamefacedness and sobriety (a holy seriousness), not in fear of people.

• Teach children that roles are gifts, not cages. God’s design is for blessing and stability.

• Make your home a place where God’s order is honored, not mocked or minimized.

• 
  

Reflection questions

1. Do I accept that clothing and appearance can communicate rebellion—or obedience—toward God’s design?

2. Have I allowed culture to redefine modesty for me instead of Scripture?

3. Does my appearance clearly reflect male/female distinction in a way that honors God?

4. What “standard” am I modeling for my children—and where did that standard come from?

5. If God replaced Adam and Eve’s covering with something fuller, what does that teach me about taking modesty seriously?

   
   

References for Part 2

[5] Vine, W. E. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Thomas Nelson, 1996, p. 31.

[6] Vine, W. E. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Thomas Nelson, 1996, p. 136.

[7] Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. (Referenced in the original study for “effeminate.”)

[8] Brown-Driver-Briggs. Entry for “apron/girdle (loin covering).”

[9] Brown-Driver-Briggs. Entry for “coat/tunic.”

[10] Brown-Driver-Briggs. Entry for the term used in Isaiah 47:2 (“thigh/lower leg”).[11] Thayer’s Greek Lexicon. Entry for the term in Revelation 1:13 (“down to the foot/ankle-length”).

[12] Thayer’s Greek Lexicon. Entry for the term in John 21:7 (“naked/only in undergarment”).

[13] Strong’s Concordance. Entry for the term in Revelation 3:18 (“raiment/outer garment”).