More on Skirts

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Don't just mean well, I'm just reading a Bible was written to people in the Bronze and Iron age. They didn't have similar attire, they didn't wear Hotel bathrobes. Hillary in a pant suit is a Hell Spewing Abomination.

They wore an inner garment, a tunic, that they secured with a belt. They wore an outer garment, a larger tunic, over it. They wore sandals and hide shoes. And, as Pliny's reference bore out, men and women, sometimes wore pantaloons too keep warm in the colder months. Women wore veils , it was common for both men's and women's outer garments often had a hood. Clothing for both genders was very similar, only differences were the length of the inner and outer tunics. For worn, they extended to the ankle. For men, they extended to the knee or mid calf. Beyond length, differences could include embroidery, color, and sometimes the texture of the fabrics.

If I'm wrong, please provide evidence.

Thanks.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Cultural Marxism is never considered Cultural Marxism by those who are entrenched in it. It is behaves like any other deception. It appears as an angel of light. Yet, Cultural Marxism has been introduced in the 60s. A lot of individuals haven't seen the evolution of American Churchanity in this culture.

Interesting note, the economy of ancient Israel, as described in the Law, is a form of agrarian socialism.

Gleaning rights
Poor tithes
Jubilee with land reallocation
Laws against usury
Farming cooperatives

All are principles of agrarian socialism.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Here we go with misrepresentation of the discussion. I had originally discussed the language of the verse. I used the Greek Old Testament the 3rd century B.C. (the Old Testament used by Jesus and the Apostles), the Latin Vulgate 382 A.D., and the Masoretic text 1524 A.D.. I also repeatedly offered Revelation 19:16 to show that on Jesus' vesture and thigh meaning pants were written. Not that Jesus was tattooed. I pointed out that the Lexicographers where undecided on the Aramaic concerning the word for trousers in Daniel. Yet, did I or Pliny, or Esaias say anything about the color red? No. FZ, don't do that. Especially since you believe, teach, and have a book which attempts to prove that the Gospel of Matthew was a translation of an original Hebrew copy. While you yourself bring up a plethora of circumstantial evidence to present your case. Shame, my friend and brother. To excuse me of believing in such stupid garbage as teaching against shade of color. Still love you and respect you. No wide grin green emoji here.

EB, look how you respond when someone projects something on you. Tisk, tisk. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Aquila]

If I search the Bible and find only references to men wearing sandals or some other article of clothing, does that automatically mean they are strictly for men?

Of course not.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

They wore an inner garment, a tunic, that they secured with a belt. They wore an outer garment, a larger tunic, over it. They wore sandals and hide shoes. And, as Pliny's reference bore out, men and women, sometimes wore pantaloons too keep warm in the colder months. Women wore veils , it was common for both men's and women's outer garments often had a hood. Clothing for both genders was very similar, only differences were the length of the inner and outer tunics. For worn, they extended to the ankle. For men, they extended to the knee or mid calf. Beyond length, differences could include embroidery, color, and sometimes the texture of the fabrics.

If I'm wrong, please provide evidence.

Thanks.

I have, and Esaias has. We have gone back and forth so much, that you flipped out and cursed me out. You apologized twice. And Jason B is more confused than he has ever been.

Seriously too funny.

Your idea of attire in the Bible is everyone wore a hotel robe with flip flops. You actually try harder to allow the Bible to morph to modern culture instead of allowing the Bible to change your culture. As Esaias pointed out you never actually dealt with my original thoughts on Deuteronomy 22:5. You have been digging through Google with fervent madness, but alas only to bring forth issues which have nothing to do with my original thoughts on the discussion. Sandals and sneakers? Bro, there was a time just in the history of Christendom where they had total differences in attire between men and women. Yet, that isn't the culture in which you now deal with. You have a lesbian relative who is married to another lesbian. Which 70 years ago in this country every church, sect, and denomination would of thrown everything from bottles, tomatoes, to the kitchen sink at it. Not now, now you all are slouching toward Gomorrah and will be embraced by Sodom then die in ruin.

Like I posted a few pages back, this thread had died the death of a 1,000 cuts. You all can't even read a dictionary on Aramaic, how in God's name should we continue this already exhausted discussion.

Listen, people who are postmodern, will refuse to believe what I'm posting even if Jesus split the eastern sky carrying King David playing his harp.

We have an entire thread jam pack n full with proof from both sides. Also some of the most insane stupidity I have ever heard in my life.

As the Jedi once said, May the Force be with you.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I have, and Esaias has. We have gone back and forth so much, that you flipped out and cursed me out. You apologized twice. And Jason B is more confused than he has ever been.

Seriously too funny.

Your idea of attire in the Bible is everyone wore a hotel robe with flip flops. You actually try harder to allow the Bible to morph to modern culture instead of allowing the Bible to change your culture. As Esaias pointed out you never actually dealt with my original thoughts on Deuteronomy 22:5. You have been digging through Google with fervent madness, but alas only to bring forth issues which have nothing to do with my original thoughts on the discussion. Sandals and sneakers? Bro, there was a time just in the history of Christendom where they had total differences in attire between men and women. Yet, that isn't the culture in which you now deal with. You have a lesbian relative who is married to another lesbian. Which 70 years ago in this country every church, sect, and denomination would of thrown everything from bottles, tomatoes, to the kitchen sink at it. Not now, now you all are slouching toward Gomorrah and will be embraced by Sodom then die in ruin.

Like I posted a few pages back, this thread had died the death of a 1,000 cuts. You all can't even read a dictionary on Aramaic, how in God's name should we continue this already exhausted discussion.

Listen, people who are postmodern, will refuse to believe what I'm posting even if Jesus split the eastern sky carrying King David playing his harp.

We have an entire thread jam pack n full with proof from both sides. Also some of the most insane stupidity I have ever heard in my life.

As the Jedi once said, May the Force be with you.

You provided no evidence that Deuteronomy 22:5 was about pants. You guys simply referenced two instances where pants like attire is worn by men, and one of you posted a reference showing both genders wore pantaloons under their garments at times. I don't believe they wore bathrobes, in fact, I've gone to great lengths to describe both the common inner and outer garments. I've also pointed out that commentators agree that for the most part, men and women wore similar attire, the differences being primarily length, embroidering, and color.

I'm still waiting to see proof that Deuteronomy 22:5 specifically condemns pants on a woman.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

You provided no evidence that Deuteronomy 22:5 was about pants. You guys simply referenced two instances where pants like attire is worn by men, and one of you posted a reference showing both genders wore pantaloons under their garments at times. I don't believe they wore bathrobes, in fact, I've gone to great lengths to describe both the common inner and outer garments. I've also pointed out that commentators agree that for the most part, men and women wore similar attire, the differences being primarily length, embroidering, and color.

I'm still waiting to see proof that Deuteronomy 22:5 specifically condemns pants on a woman.

Your great lengths as you say, was to provide artists renditions of what they thought the ancient Israelite dressed. Which were pictures of Yemenite Bedouins and Arabs. You also provided what the Temple Mount Faithful believe the priest attire to look like. Also a pair of Medieval era undershorts from Rabbinical Judaism. You offered a few dictionary quotes which thank God that the Lexiographers were more honest then you. Because they pointed out that they were undecided to the exact meaning of the Aramaic Chaldean. Therefore I enlisted three different versions of the text in ancient language of the time.
Also used a portion of Revelation which had gone untouched. Yet you never tackled my original thoughts on this subject. Our discussion at this point is only about you ego. Sadly. Aquila right, everyone wrong, Aquila proves to himself that ultra cons are incorrect and all will be right with Aquila's world.

Some of you people use this place as therapy. Instead of its original purpose.

Like I posted this thread died the death of a thousand cuts. Anyone wants to peruse its context? There is more than enough material. At this point I would be repeating myself.

My suggestion to you is take your own spiritual advise and turn a chapter.

[Aquila]

The Bible itself describes the breeches of the Levites,

Exodus 28:42
And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:

They covered the crotch and thighs. They were like linen boxers, an undergarment. I don't read of bifurcated undergarments for women in Scripture, should we forbid women's underwear?

PS
Barnes commentary states that both men and women wore pantaloons with their inner garments at times.

[Aquila]

I didn't address Revelation because it is symbolic. But, I can see Jesus wearing common cavalry trousers.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The Bible itself describes the breeches of the Levites,

Exodus 28:42
And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:

They covered the crotch and thighs. They were like linen boxers, an undergarment. I don't read of bifurcated undergarments for women in Scripture, should we forbid women's underwear?

PS
Barnes commentary states that both men and women wore pantaloons with their inner garments at times.

Where did Barnes get their information?