In Defense of Shame

In a recent radio broadcast Ravi Zacharias said, “You cannot, simply cannot, build a culture when nothing is shameful anymore.” If you believe the truthfulness of this statement and as you watch standards of modest dress decline in the American 'culture' you may be wondering how much time is left before this culture implodes and what, if anything, you can do to combat the spirit of the age. Many are already taking practical measures to defeat the attitude that modest dress does not matter. You should also know the fatal weaknesses of the philosophy that gives rise to the rejection of shame.

Many have already joined the 'women's revolution for modest dress', and are consciously making the effort to find modest clothing for themselves and their daughters. The increase of modest clothing distributors is very encouraging. It is evidence that the Christian community is interested in affecting culture with Biblical principles of living. Certainly Christians must live out God's law daily to be a witness to their culture, but it is not enough to just follow the law yourself. The great commission commands you to teach, 'them [all nations] to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you...'

As a defense mechanism against the guilt caused by violating the objective and transcendent standards of Biblical law, this culture has had to reject the concept of shame. When shame is rejected the logical consequence is that anything goes. If nothing is shameful then nothing can be evil. If nothing is evil then everything is permissible, and culture has degenerated into chaos. This is the fatal weakness of the philosophy that necessitates the rejection of shame.

Most who reject shame in order to justify their desire to wear revealing clothing do not really want chaos. Those who have accepted the evolutionary philosophy of chaos have forfeited their ability to argue for their position. If chaos is the ruling authority for one's decision-making process, then along with shame he must reject logic, because the laws of logic are antithetical to chaos. In order to argue for a position one must accept the laws of logic. Therefore, he has rejected chaos. At this point it is now incumbent upon this person to identify by what standard he is going to base his argument. Unless he attaches authority back to the God of the Bible, who orders the universe, he cannot maintain fixed laws of logic, and he has not truly rejected the ruling authority of chaos. As soon as he accepts the authority of the Christian God he now must accept that modest dress is an important function of culture.

Those who do not truly want chaos can no longer appeal to the philosophy of any thing goes. Those who wish to appeal to chaos as the ruling authority for life have given up the ability to argue, thus they have lost the argument before it even begins. Point this fact out to those wishing to put off shame, and continue to wear modest clothing and you will become an affective warrior in the war for the culture.