Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

[StMark]

I recently spoke to a young pastor (upc) at length about the future of the upc. This is a pastor i would consider fairly conservative. HIs father was and the church still looks old time for the most part.

in the conversation,the standard issue came up and to make a long story short, he told me that within 5-10 years, that pants rule would no longer be an issue. It would only be the old timers holding on to this teaching. Furthermore, he went on to say that he also believed that we are slowly going to have to let go of this rule. I almost swallowed my teeth!!!

He went on to say that most of the younger preachers are waiting for the old gaurd to move from power do they can change these things.



My Question is this, will this change the spirit of the church? I look at the AoG. most of the ones I know (with a few exceptions) have no semblence to Pentecost. I'm not talking about wild services, but they are just plain DEAD. even some of their members complain that something is missing.
however, I do concede that some of our churches are pretty dead yet have long dresses but for the most part, we are pretty lively compared to most, even the deadest ones amongst us.:happydance

Do you agree that this enevitable in the UPC??? ( changing the dress code) or not? and will it change the consecration of the church ?

.

[bkstokes]

I recently spoke to a young pastor (upc) at length about the future of the upc. This is a pastor i would consider fairly conservative. HIs father was and the church still looks old time for the most part.

in the conversation,the standard issue came up and to make a long story short, he told me that within 5-10 years, that pants rule would no longer be an issue. It would only be the old timers holding on to this teaching. Furthermore, he went on to say that he also believed that we are slowly going to have to let go of this rule. I almost swallowed my teeth!!!

He went on to say that most of the younger preachers are waiting for the old gaurd to move from power do they can change these things.



My Question is this, will this change the spirit of the church? I look at the AoG. most of the ones I know (with a few exceptions) have no semblence to Pentecost. I'm not talking about wild services, but they are just plain DEAD. even some of their members complain that something is missing.
however, I do concede that some of our churches are pretty dead yet have long dresses but for the most part, we are pretty lively compared to most, even the deadest ones amongst us.:happydance

Do you agree that this enevitable in the UPC??? ( changing the dress code) or not? and will it change the consecration of the church ?

.

I do

And here in AR -- there are a lot of lively AoG churches.

[StMark]

I do

And here in AR -- there are a lot of lively AoG churches.


you do ... what?

[HeavenlyOne]

If having a dress code is what keeps the church hopping, then we have a bigger problem than women wanting to wear pants.

The Catholic church used to have dress standards, but I don't read where they ever had 'happenin' services. They've always been dead, dull, and boring....LOL!

Those members that complain something is missing.....it's not skirts on the women, but lack of God in the church.

[StMark]

If having a dress code is what keeps the church hopping, then we have a bigger problem than women wanting to wear pants.

The Catholic church used to have dress standards, but I don't read where they ever had 'happenin' services. They've always been dead, dull, and boring....LOL!

Those members that complain something is missing.....it's not skirts on the women, but lack of God in the church.


HO, most American Catholics today rarely go to church except on Christmas, funerals & weddings.

Here in CA. the first generation mexican Catholics are still faithful and are very traditional. some even still wear viels. But the younger ones who have let go of their traditions are just like the rest of America.

[jaxfam6]

If having a dress code is what keeps the church hopping, then we have a bigger problem than women wanting to wear pants.

The Catholic church used to have dress standards, but I don't read where they ever had 'happenin' services. They've always been dead, dull, and boring....LOL!

Those members that complain something is missing.....it's not skirts on the women, but lack of God in the church.

Sister, when are you going to start preaching??? AMEN

[StMark]

Please don't twist what I am saying Ladies.

I'm by no means saying that a dress code brings a revival or move of God. however, it does appear that when AG let go of all any rules, in general, they lost something too. Now they are arguing over whether tongues are even the evidence!!! how many rules do we change before we get to that point???

[jaxfam6]

Please don't twist what I am saying Ladies.

I'm by no means saying that a dress code brings a revival or move of God. however, it does appear that when AG let go of all any rules, in general, they lost something too. Now they are arguing over whether tongues are even the evidence!!! how many rules do we change before we get to that point???

Have you read some of the posts here lately? AoG is not the only ones who seem to question if tongues is necessary.

[Ron]

Not a problem for me.

I have always worn pants and will continue to wear pants!:happydance

[Sam]

Please don't twist what I am saying Ladies.

I'm by no means saying that a dress code brings a revival or move of God. however, it does appear that when AG let go of all any rules, in general, they lost something too. Now they are arguing over whether tongues are even the evidence!!! how many rules do we change before we get to that point???

Whether tongues are THE evidence as in "the initial physical evidence" doctrine or not has been debated and tossed around for many, many years among Apostolic, Pentecostal, and/or Charismatic folks.

[StMark]

Have you read some of the posts here lately? AoG is not the only ones who seem to question if tongues is necessary.



AoG is the only Pentecostal group. Sam, I don't believe any apostolic groups have ever debated such

[Cindy]

AoG is the only Pentecostal group. Sam, I don't believe any apostolic groups have ever debated such

Brother you don't know the half of it.

[jaxfam6]

AoG is the only Pentecostal group. Sam, I don't believe any apostolic groups have ever debated such

I think you miss my point sir. (or maybe I am missing yours) As an organization maybe they are debating it but I am referring to people. Individuals. Read some of the posts here and you will find more than just the AoG questioning it.

[StMark]

I think you miss my point sir. (or maybe I am missing yours) As an organization maybe they are debating it but I am referring to people. Individuals. Read some of the posts here and you will find more than just the AoG questioning it.

I'm talking about officially as an organization jaxfam

[HeavenlyOne]

Sister, when are you going to start preaching??? AMEN

Didn't you know that lady preachers are of the debbil??? LOL!

[HeavenlyOne]

Please don't twist what I am saying Ladies.

I'm by no means saying that a dress code brings a revival or move of God. however, it does appear that when AG let go of all any rules, in general, they lost something too. Now they are arguing over whether tongues are even the evidence!!! how many rules do we change before we get to that point???

Mark, this is what happens when people preach that things are Biblical when they aren't.

[jaxfam6]

I'm talking about officially as an organization jaxfam

I do not think allowing women to wear pants is the reason they are debating it. I think it is a lack of a relationship with God that causes that.
If they had a daily walk with God then it would not be a question. They can have that walk with God with their ladies wearing pants or skirts. It is when they stop walking with God daily they start to doubt the essentials.

[Sam]

AoG is the only Pentecostal group. Sam, I don't believe any apostolic groups have ever debated such

Maybe not recently.
In earlier days of the Holy Spirit movement (Azusa and onward) there were differences of opinion on it. Some believed that prophecy could be an evidence. Over the years some (I know of at least one Oneness preacher) who stated that tongues was one of the signs that would "follow" and his inference was that tongues could happen at some future time after the Holy Ghost Baptism.

[jaxfam6]

Didn't you know that lady preachers are of the debbil??? LOL!

So than my wife preaching at me every day about doing something or getting something for her is of the devil? thank you Jesus for that revelation. I can stop listening to her.

:bliss

[bkstokes]

you do ... what?

I believe that it will go and it is in the process now.

[bkstokes]

I just saw a message from Jack Hayford about spiritual language. It was quite good. He really brought out a lot. It made me want to pray even more in the spirit.

I know it was off subject, but I felt edified.

[Neck]

I recently spoke to a young pastor (upc) at length about the future of the upc. This is a pastor i would consider fairly conservative. HIs father was and the church still looks old time for the most part.

in the conversation,the standard issue came up and to make a long story short, he told me that within 5-10 years, that pants rule would no longer be an issue. It would only be the old timers holding on to this teaching. Furthermore, he went on to say that he also believed that we are slowly going to have to let go of this rule. I almost swallowed my teeth!!!

He went on to say that most of the younger preachers are waiting for the old gaurd to move from power do they can change these things.



My Question is this, will this change the spirit of the church? I look at the AoG. most of the ones I know (with a few exceptions) have no semblence to Pentecost. I'm not talking about wild services, but they are just plain DEAD. even some of their members complain that something is missing.
however, I do concede that some of our churches are pretty dead yet have long dresses but for the most part, we are pretty lively compared to most, even the deadest ones amongst us.:happydance

Do you agree that this enevitable in the UPC??? ( changing the dress code) or not? and will it change the consecration of the church ?

.

I attend a non-upc church where the woman can wear pants and not look like the ladies getting off the FLS bus at a compound.

Not sure what your idea of Pentecost but I grew up UPCI and in the church I am in today had a much better atmosphere.

Many times folks judge other churches without having been in them.

I know from where I spend 40 years and where I am today.

I can't speak for other churches.

[Pragmatist]

If people let up on their consecration to God when they ease up on dress standards, it could be a church's downfall. If people increase their consecration while ceasing to focus so much on outward appearance, we could have revival!

[CC1]

I recently spoke to a young pastor (upc) at length about the future of the upc. This is a pastor i would consider fairly conservative. HIs father was and the church still looks old time for the most part.

in the conversation,the standard issue came up and to make a long story short, he told me that within 5-10 years, that pants rule would no longer be an issue. It would only be the old timers holding on to this teaching. Furthermore, he went on to say that he also believed that we are slowly going to have to let go of this rule. I almost swallowed my teeth!!!

He went on to say that most of the younger preachers are waiting for the old gaurd to move from power do they can change these things.



My Question is this, will this change the spirit of the church? I look at the AoG. most of the ones I know (with a few exceptions) have no semblence to Pentecost. I'm not talking about wild services, but they are just plain DEAD. even some of their members complain that something is missing.
however, I do concede that some of our churches are pretty dead yet have long dresses but for the most part, we are pretty lively compared to most, even the deadest ones amongst us.:happydance

Do you agree that this enevitable in the UPC??? ( changing the dress code) or not? and will it change the consecration of the church ?

.

St. Mark,

I find your account fascinating. I have a fairly young (30ish) UPC evangelist acquaintance who started telling me about three years ago exactly what this guy told you.

The guy I was talking to said that as an evangelist he is in many pastors homes and that many of them, once they felt they could trust him, would confide that they no longer felt the same way about many of the dress code standards as they had been raised but that they did not know what to do.

They did not want to tear apart their churches or destroy peoples belief systems and they also feared a loss of fellowship from fellow ministers they esteemed.

At the time I had a very hard time believing there could be more than a handful who felt this way but perhaps there are more than I thought.

[StMark]

I attend a non-upc church where the woman can wear pants and not look like the ladies getting off the FLS bus at a compound.

Not sure what your idea of Pentecost but I grew up UPCI and in the church I am in today had a much better atmosphere.

Many times folks judge other churches without having been in them.

I know from where I spend 40 years and where I am today.

I can't speak for other churches.

The way you worded that didn't come across very kind or christian like

[Sept5SavedTeen]

There are a few women who are apart of the church in the local assembly I attend that wear pants... I don't agree with it, but it's not for me to say, they're not under my authority, and it's not for my pastor to say, they're not under his authority. He has the authority to preach the word, and if and when he teaches on Deut. 22:5 (for example), the pant wearing women interpret it as, "Well, I won't wear a man's garment like men's jeans, I'll buy women's jeans." there's really nothing else we can do. Unless a women asks another sister, or a brother (although that would be strange and innappropriate) why most women in our assembly choose not to wear pants, then someone may share the application in their life of the command to dress in a gender-appropriate way. You know, though, it's great to not have to worry about what a woman covers her legs with! The UPC should do the same, rather than be a skirt-preaching group, or a "pants are ok"-preaching group, just let the assembly's pastor preach holiness as is appropriate in the culture and locale he finds himself in, give him elders to be accountable to, make sure the leadership and their wives and children display a good example, and things will be fine. In my assembly it's a 90/10 break for skirts to pants for women, and the 10 are just not convinced or convicted, and that's fine. It's far better than having things be secretive in the UPC church and then see a sister at Walmart in a pair of pants- and she sings on the platform no less!

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[bkstokes]

If people let up on their consecration to God when they ease up on dress standards, it could be a church's downfall. If people increase their consecration while ceasing to focus so much on outward appearance, we could have revival!

I think this is quite good.

[StMark]

St. Mark,

I find your account fascinating. I have a fairly young (30ish) UPC evangelist acquaintance who started telling me about three years ago exactly what this guy told you.

The guy I was talking to said that as an evangelist he is in many pastors homes and that many of them, once they felt they could trust him, would confide that they no longer felt the same way about many of the dress code standards as they had been raised but that they did not know what to do.

They did not want to tear apart their churches or destroy peoples belief systems and they also feared a loss of fellowship from fellow ministers they esteemed.

At the time I had a very hard time believing there could be more than a handful who felt this way but perhaps there are more than I thought.



There are MANY who see it like this! I've talked to more than just this one pastor and the ones I have talked to run with others who see it this way.

I have seen Pastors get up in the pulpit and try to change things in one sweep only to split churches, tear families apart, there was one pastor in our area who was even receiving death threats!!!!!!

I think I would have more respect if the pastor just started over someplace else. afterall, it's the peoples' church , they built it and put their hard earned money into it.
Or, If you're going to change things, at least do it very slowly. we're an old church and our bones don't move as fast lol

[bkstokes]

There are a few women who are apart of the church in the local assembly I attend that wear pants... I don't agree with it, but it's not for me to say, they're not under my authority, and it's not for my pastor to say, they're not under his authority. He has the authority to preach the word, and if and when he teaches on Deut. 22:5 (for example), the pant wearing women interpret it as, "Well, I won't wear a man's garment like men's jeans, I'll buy women's jeans." there's really nothing else we can do. Unless a women asks another sister, or a brother (although that would be strange and innappropriate) why most women in our assembly choose not to wear pants, then someone may share the application in their life of the command to dress in a gender-appropriate way. You know, though, it's great to not have to worry about what a woman covers her legs with! The UPC should do the same, rather than be a skirt-preaching group, or a "pants are ok"-preaching group, just let the assembly's pastor preach holiness as is appropriate in the culture and locale he finds himself in, give him elders to be accountable to, make sure the leadership and their wives and children display a good example, and things will be fine. In my assembly it's a 90/10 break for skirts to pants for women, and the 10 are just not convinced or convicted, and that's fine. It's far better than having things be secretive in the UPC church and then see a sister at Walmart in a pair of pants- and she sings on the platform no less!

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

I like this guys innocence.

[AmazingGrace]

Yes Indeedy!!! St Mark is back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Welcome home! This is what we missed! :bliss:happydance:bliss

[CC1]

There are MANY who see it like this! I've talked to more than just this one pastor and the ones I have talked to run with others who see it this way.

I have seen Pastors get up in the pulpit and try to change things in one sweep only to split churches, tear families apart, there was one pastor in our area who was even receiving death threats!!!!!!

I think I would have more respect if the pastor just started over someplace else. afterall, it's the peoples' church , they built it and put their hard earned money into it.
Or, If you're going to change things, at least do it very slowly. we're an old church and our bones don't move as fast lol

Many years ago I was at dinner with a UPC asst. pastor who, along with the pastor, had come to that point. I was having dinner with him immediately after he had been counseling with a well known exUPC pastor.

I was impressed when he told me that the exUPC pastor told him that making those kinds of changes in a church was like steering a large ship. There should be no sudden moves. You have to change directions slowly.

I agree that many times it would be easier for a pastor just to leave and start over somewhere else but I also think those changes can be done in a church if the foundation is laid over time with good biblical teaching. Of course some will never make that journey as their indoctrination or conditioning is too strong after many years. Those folks should be made to feel ok if they decide to change fellowships to stay with folks who will hold to the dress code /standard they can't let go of.

[Hoovie]

I recently spoke to a young pastor (upc) at length about the future of the upc. This is a pastor i would consider fairly conservative. HIs father was and the church still looks old time for the most part.

in the conversation,the standard issue came up and to make a long story short, he told me that within 5-10 years, that pants rule would no longer be an issue. It would only be the old timers holding on to this teaching. Furthermore, he went on to say that he also believed that we are slowly going to have to let go of this rule. I almost swallowed my teeth!!!

He went on to say that most of the younger preachers are waiting for the old gaurd to move from power do they can change these things.



My Question is this, will this change the spirit of the church? I look at the AoG. most of the ones I know (with a few exceptions) have no semblence to Pentecost. I'm not talking about wild services, but they are just plain DEAD. even some of their members complain that something is missing.
however, I do concede that some of our churches are pretty dead yet have long dresses but for the most part, we are pretty lively compared to most, even the deadest ones amongst us.:happydance

Do you agree that this enevitable in the UPC??? ( changing the dress code) or not? and will it change the consecration of the church ?

.


Mark, I think there are many that feel as my wife and I do, that skirts are more feminine, and generally are a good way for women to show Christian modesty in dress. However it is NOT about abominations in Duet., Salvation, or a requirement to all women everywhere.

Naturally, with this view comes a tolerance that was perhaps a bit uncommon 10 - 20 years ago.

[CC1]

Mark, I think there are many that feel as my wife and I do, that dresses are more feminine, and generally a good way to show modesty. However it is NOT about abominations in Duet., Salvation, or a requirement to all women everywhere.

Naturally, with this view comes a tolerance that was a bit uncommon 10 - 20 years ago.

Folks,

Please read this above. Absolute proof that being on TV IS that slippery slope we have all heard about!:reaction

[Sept5SavedTeen]

I like this guys innocence.

Ok... well this is the way my assembly does it. So what's the worse scenario, if a sister wears a pair of pants for a little while longer, waiting to be convinced or convicted, rather than put on a skirt quick to conform? If it takes a while for the women of the assembly I pastor one day to get the "skirt thing" that's fine with me, their pants won't embarass me. My future wife won't be in pants, but that's because she'll be under my authority. Another man's wife is not under my authority and therefore not my responsibility.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[CC1]

Ok... well this is the way my assembly does it. So what's the worse scenario, if a sister wears a pair of pants for a little while longer, waiting to be convinced or convicted, rather than put on a skirt quick to conform? If it takes a while for the women of the assembly I pastor one day to get the "skirt thing" that's fine with me, their pants won't embarass me. My future wife won't be in pants, but that's because she'll be under my authority. Another man's wife is not under my authority and therefore not my responsibility.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex


Hmmm...my wife was raised UPC until she was about 32 and we started attending an exUPC church.

So she has been wearing pants now for about 24 years and hasn't been convicted or convinced to not wear them yet!

In many situations her slacks are much more modest than skirts or dresses.

[Carpenter]

Many years ago I was at dinner with a UPC asst. pastor who, along with the pastor, had come to that point. I was having dinner with him immediately after he had been counseling with a well known exUPC pastor.

I was impressed when he told me that the exUPC pastor told him that making those kinds of changes in a church was like steering a large ship. There should be no sudden moves. You have to change directions slowly.

I agree that many times it would be easier for a pastor just to leave and start over somewhere else but I also think those changes can be done in a church if the foundation is laid over time with good biblical teaching. Of course some will never make that journey as their indoctrination or conditioning is too strong after many years. Those folks should be made to feel ok if they decide to change fellowships to stay with folks who will hold to the dress code /standard they can't let go of.

You know with modern fashion being the way it is, pants are no longer considered men's apparel, unless with full conviction any man will tell me they can go to Dillards or Macy's and shop in the woman's department for flowery capris pants.

The church has had to find another reason to be against women wearing pants and nowadays it is because they are considered immodest. Look at some of the young girls nowadays, and those skirts and tight tops that are being allowed as the "uniform" are not modest, regardless how low the hem.

The problem here is that the church as stigmatized a normal every day behavior as sin. This is why it is so difficult to steer the ship, you have to unbrainwash an entire socioreligious culture.

[StMark]

Many years ago I was at dinner with a UPC asst. pastor who, along with the pastor, had come to that point. I was having dinner with him immediately after he had been counseling with a well known exUPC pastor.

I was impressed when he told me that the exUPC pastor told him that making those kinds of changes in a church was like steering a large ship. There should be no sudden moves. You have to change directions slowly.

I agree that many times it would be easier for a pastor just to leave and start over somewhere else but I also think those changes can be done in a church if the foundation is laid over time with good biblical teaching. Of course some will never make that journey as their indoctrination or conditioning is too strong after many years. Those folks should be made to feel ok if they decide to change fellowships to stay with folks who will hold to the dress code /standard they can't let go of.

for some reason,things are starting to change more rapidly CC. The youth of the UPC in general are totally different then when you or even I were coming up. There are some that will conform simply because they long for affirmation but others say that the times demand change.
I honestly don't know what to think sometimes. I see those who have changed and lost too much. I see that compromise has gone from dress to now moral issues are on the table. maybe not everywhere yet, but it's creeping in slowly

[bkstokes]

Ok... well this is the way my assembly does it. So what's the worse scenario, if a sister wears a pair of pants for a little while longer, waiting to be convinced or convicted, rather than put on a skirt quick to conform? If it takes a while for the women of the assembly I pastor one day to get the "skirt thing" that's fine with me, their pants won't embarass me. My future wife won't be in pants, but that's because she'll be under my authority. Another man's wife is not under my authority and therefore not my responsibility.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

It was a compliment. You seem to be genuine

[Hoovie]

Folks,

Please read this above. Absolute proof that being on TV IS that slippery slope we have all heard about!:reaction

:blah:blah :toofunny

On the contrary, we had these views before TV.

BTW, noone watching the show seemed to think we were on a "slippery slope" on this issue.

[StMark]

Mark, I think there are many that feel as my wife and I do, that skirts are more feminine, and generally are a good way for women to show Christian modesty in dress. However it is NOT about abominations in Duet., Salvation, or a requirement to all women everywhere.

Naturally, with this view comes a tolerance that was perhaps a bit uncommon 10 - 20 years ago.



I also still think that a skirt for women are more feminine then pants. women tend to act and sit differently and also look decidely different then a man when wearing a skirt.

If Duet 22 accounts for nothing, then where do we apply any distinction between the sexes ?? what other scripture would we have to use?? would you advocate that every man is a law to himself????

[Hoovie]

You know with modern fashion being the way it is, pants are no longer considered men's apparel, unless with full conviction any man will tell me they can go to Dillards or Macy's and shop in the woman's department for flowery capris pants.
.


I am looking for some clamdiggers for a cruise and the beach next month... I may check them out. Flowers are good too if they are tropical.


:happydance

[DanielR]

I sure would like to see the pants rule go by the way side, I'd love to return to the breeches and leggins that my ancesters wore for 1000 generations. :gaga Even the kilts would be better than pants. :covereyes

But as far as the women go, whatever dress is appropriate at the time is fine with me, but I do think they look better in dresses/skirts though.

[Jason B]

Mark, I think there are many that feel as my wife and I do, that skirts are more feminine, and generally are a good way for women to show Christian modesty in dress. However it is NOT about abominations in Duet., Salvation, or a requirement to all women everywhere.

Naturally, with this view comes a tolerance that was perhaps a bit uncommon 10 - 20 years ago.

amen, amen, amen, amen. Skirts are more feminine, more modest (as long as their not to short to sit down, or to tight to walk). But I don't think the Duet 22:5 scriptures holds alot of weight in the discussion. I prefer women in church wear skirts all of the time, but wouldn't punish them for not doing so. I don't think I would use them on the platform though, but probably would in sunday school.

[CC1]

for some reason,things are starting to change more rapidly CC. The youth of the UPC in general are totally different then when you or even I were coming up. There are some that will conform simply because they long for affirmation but others say that the times demand change.
I honestly don't know what to think sometimes. I see those who have changed and lost too much. I see that compromise has gone from dress to now moral issues are on the table. maybe not everywhere yet, but it's creeping in slowly

St. Mark,

I work with a guy who attends an area UPC church and a couple of years ago I overheard him discussing a new movie that was in the threaters. I saw him a little while later alone and kidded him that I was going to call his pastor or Bro. Haney about him going to movies. He laughed and told me it was kind of a "don't ask don't tell" policy when it came to movies. Just about all of the younger people did (he is about 30) but you didn't talk about it openly.

The moral issues thing has always been a problem with young people in Pentecost. When I was a teenager kids who wouldn't dream of going to a movie or in the case of girls wouldn't think of cutting their hair or wearing makeup would hop in the backseat of a car and get hot-n-heavy not long after shouting their uncut hair down.

I know there are many wonderful conservative Pentecostal young people who don't fit this description but I have to tell you that my boys experience with UPC girls is that they were "freaky" (meaning wild) compared to most of the girls they dated. I knew what they meant because when I was a teen it seemed like since we couldn't do much of anything (almost everything fun was a sin) so many resorted to physical / sexual pleasure.

[Hoovie]

I also still think that a skirt for women are more feminine then pants. women tend to act and sit differently and also look decidely different then a man when wearing a skirt.

If Duet 22 accounts for nothing, then where do we apply any distinction between the sexes ?? what other scripture would we have to use?? would you advocate that every man is a law to himself????

Beards on men is a natural distinction if body curvatures don't do the trick.

[CC1]

:blah:blah :toofunny

On the contrary, we had these views before TV.

BTW, noone watching the show seemed to think we were on a "slippery slope" on this issue.


That is because the producers edited you to sound and act like Shrek!*
















*An Ogre

[Carpenter]

I also still think that a skirt for women are more feminine then pants. women tend to act and sit differently and also look decidely different then a man when wearing a skirt.

If Duet 22 accounts for nothing, then where do we apply any distinction between the sexes ?? what other scripture would we have to use?? would you advocate that every man is a law to himself????

St. Mark, this is a canned and traditional response to the pants issue. In fact this echos in my ears coming from the pulpit in the last decades.

I have seen some Pentecostal women hair put up, skirts down to their ankles, sleeves covering their watches and adams apples, who were THE most masculine and authority usurping individuals on the planet. In fact, some of these women are actually scary. They look like ladies, but the persona they wear is nothing BUT masculine and man-like. So, for every lady you think acts different when she wears pants, I have a woman dressed in the skirts that would just as soon crush your man-spirit.

So the problem in your using Deut is sorrowfully wrong when you put it in the context of WE this and WE that, as in defining and regulating a corporate morality.

[Carpenter]

St. Mark,

I work with a guy who attends an area UPC church and a couple of years ago I overheard him discussing a new movie that was in the threaters. I saw him a little while later alone and kidded him that I was going to call his pastor or Bro. Haney about him going to movies. He laughed and told me it was kind of a "don't ask don't tell" policy when it came to movies. Just about all of the younger people did (he is about 30) but you didn't talk about it openly.
has always been a problem with young people in Pentecost. When I was a teenager kids who wouldn't dream of going to a movie or in the case of girls wouldn't think of cutting their hair or wearing makeup would hop in the backseat of a car and get hot-n-heavy not long after shouting their uncut hair down.

I know there are many wonderful conservative Pentecostal young people who don't fit this description but I have to tell you that my boys experience with UPC girls is that they were "freaky" (meaning wild) compared to most of the girls they dated. I knew what they meant because when I was a teen it seemed like since we couldn't do much of anything (almost everything fun was a sin) so many resorted to physical / sexual pleasure.

This is 100% true, I have seen and lived both sides of this fence brother! I remember when I turned 18 it was spring and I was still in High School. Our music director (who was also my friend) asked me if I wanted to go to the strip club with him... Scary stuff...

:D

[CC1]

St. Mark, this is a canned and traditional response to the pants issue. In fact this echos in my ears coming from the pulpit in the last decades.

I have seen some Pentecostal women hair put up, skirts down to their ankles, sleeves covering their watches and adams apples, who were THE most masculine and authority usurping individuals on the planet. In fact, some of these women are actually scary. They look like ladies, but the persona they wear is nothing BUT masculine and man-like. So, for every lady you think acts different when she wears pants, I have a woman dressed in the skirts that would just as soon crush your man-spirit.

So the problem in your using Deut is sorrifully wrong when you put it in the context of WE this and WE that, as in defining and regulating a corporate morality.

You are correct. I think St. Matt is seeing those women through the filter of his conditioning because the reality is what you describe.

[Pressing-On]

St. Mark,

I work with a guy who attends an area UPC church and a couple of years ago I overheard him discussing a new movie that was in the threaters. I saw him a little while later alone and kidded him that I was going to call his pastor or Bro. Haney about him going to movies. He laughed and told me it was kind of a "don't ask don't tell" policy when it came to movies. Just about all of the younger people did (he is about 30) but you didn't talk about it openly.
has always been a problem with young people in Pentecost. When I was a teenager kids who wouldn't dream of going to a movie or in the case of girls wouldn't think of cutting their hair or wearing makeup would hop in the backseat of a car and get hot-n-heavy not long after shouting their uncut hair down.

I know there are many wonderful conservative Pentecostal young people who don't fit this description but I have to tell you that my boys experience with UPC girls is that they were "freaky" (meaning wild) compared to most of the girls they dated. I knew what they meant because when I was a teen it seemed like since we couldn't do much of anything (almost everything fun was a sin) so many resorted to physical / sexual pleasure.
So are you saying we make better wives? :toofunny

[CC1]

This is 100% true, I have seen and lived both sides of this fence brother! I remember when I turned 18 it was spring and I was still in High School. Our music director (who was also my friend) asked me if I wanted to go to the strip club with him... Scary stuff...

:D


LOL!! I was never tempted by strip clubs. To me that is like going to Dairy Queen and asking them to set a Banana Split on your table complete with nuts, whipped cream, and a cherry on top but that you are only going to look at it.

[StMark]

St. Mark, this is a canned and traditional response to the pants issue. In fact this echos in my ears coming from the pulpit in the last decades.

I have seen some Pentecostal women hair put up, skirts down to their ankles, sleeves covering their watches and adams apples, who were THE most masculine and authority usurping individuals on the planet. In fact, some of these women are actually scary. They look like ladies, but the persona they wear is nothing BUT masculine and man-like. So, for every lady you think acts different when she wears pants, I have a woman dressed in the skirts that would just as soon crush your man-spirit.

So the problem in your using Deut is sorrowfully wrong when you put it in the context of WE this and WE that, as in defining and regulating a corporate morality.

Yea you are right bcuz I've seen the same thing carp but I think most would agree that attire alone doesn't do the trick. our actions and deeds are always included in the equation. make sense ?

I also think we all agree there needs to be gender distinctives but where we draw the line seems to be the issue. my point here is, if Duet is not valid, what scripture is? and if there is NO scripture to back up gender distinctives, then do we allow everyone to do whatever they deem right in their own eyes ?

[Pressing-On]

Yea you are right bcuz I've seen the same thing carp but I think most would agree that attire alone doesn't do the trick. our actions and deeds are always included in the equation. make sense ?

I also think we all agree there needs to be gender distinctives but where we draw the line seems to be the issue. my point here is, if Duet is not valid, what scripture is? and if there is NO scripture to back up gender distinctives, then do we allow everyone to do whatever they deem right in their own eyes ?

At some point we have to stop preaching it is not a salvational issue, but forcing it on people. I have a problem with that.

[CC1]

St. Mark

I don't want to be offensive to anybody but I honestly have seen some Penteostal women who were so manly in their phsique that a little of that dreaded makeup and jewelry would have greatly enhanced their feminisim and made more of a differentiation between them and men.

[StMark]

St. Mark,

I work with a guy who attends an area UPC church and a couple of years ago I overheard him discussing a new movie that was in the threaters. I saw him a little while later alone and kidded him that I was going to call his pastor or Bro. Haney about him going to movies. He laughed and told me it was kind of a "don't ask don't tell" policy when it came to movies. Just about all of the younger people did (he is about 30) but you didn't talk about it openly.

The moral issues thing has always been a problem with young people in Pentecost. When I was a teenager kids who wouldn't dream of going to a movie or in the case of girls wouldn't think of cutting their hair or wearing makeup would hop in the backseat of a car and get hot-n-heavy not long after shouting their uncut hair down.

I know there are many wonderful conservative Pentecostal young people who don't fit this description but I have to tell you that my boys experience with UPC girls is that they were "freaky" (meaning wild) compared to most of the girls they dated. I knew what they meant because when I was a teen it seemed like since we couldn't do much of anything (almost everything fun was a sin) so many resorted to physical / sexual pleasure.


Yea, He described it pretty well "don't ask Don't tell". It all started with Video as they said would at PSR, Carp :happydance
Church folk talk about movies pretty openly now though as well as secular music.
you are right CC, if we got caught going to the movies they'd put us on the alter and tell us we was going to hell.

[CC1]

At some point we have to stop preaching it is not a salvational issue, but forcing it on people. I have a problem with that.

PO,

Re-read your post. Did you leave out a word or put in one too many? Is this really what you meant to say?

[SoCaliUPC]

HO, most American Catholics today rarely go to church except on Christmas, funerals & weddings.

Here in CA. the first generation mexican Catholics are still faithful and are very traditional. some even still wear viels. But the younger ones who have let go of their traditions are just like the rest of America.

StMark...what do you mean by the younger ones look like the rest of America? Are you talking about the women? They may cut their hair and wear some make-up (down here...not so heavy....very light), but they still wear skirts.

[Pressing-On]

PO,

Re-read your post. Did you leave out a word or put in one too many? Is this really what you meant to say?
Well, I thought it made sense. Yes, I do mean that. It's confusing.

[StMark]

St. Mark

I don't want to be offensive to anybody but I honestly have seen some Penteostal women who were so manly in their phsique that a little of that dreaded makeup and jewelry would have greatly enhanced their feminisim and made more of a differentiation between them and men.


So you are saying that women who don't wear makeup look manly????

that's not going to go over too well CC.

[Hoovie]

That is because the producers edited you to sound and act like Shrek!*

*An Ogre

Hey! :boxing

I resemble that remark...

but aren't ogres usually dressed immodest??

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z116/luckysweep/ogur.jpg

[rgcraig]

St. Mark

I don't want to be offensive to anybody but I honestly have seen some Penteostal women who were so manly in their phsique that a little of that dreaded makeup and jewelry would have greatly enhanced their feminisim and made more of a differentiation between them and men.

PO's not going to like this!

[SoCaliUPC]

Please don't twist what I am saying Ladies.

I'm by no means saying that a dress code brings a revival or move of God. however, it does appear that when AG let go of all any rules, in general, they lost something too. Now they are arguing over whether tongues are even the evidence!!! how many rules do we change before we get to that point???

To me...it is not a matter of DRESS but of wanting more of Him. Are they seeking Him? Wanting Him? Praying? Consecrating? Remember...if my people which are called by name shall humble themselves and pray...THEN.....

Are they playing church or having church?

[Pressing-On]

St. Mark

I don't want to be offensive to anybody but I honestly have seen some Penteostal women who were so manly in their phsique that a little of that dreaded makeup and jewelry would have greatly enhanced their feminisim and made more of a differentiation between them and men.
CC1,
If a woman looks manly makeup and jewelry is not going to help, IMO. How could it?

[SoCaliUPC]

If people let up on their consecration to God when they ease up on dress standards, it could be a church's downfall. If people increase their consecration while ceasing to focus so much on outward appearance, we could have revival!

Ditto!

[StMark]

StMark...what do you mean by the younger ones look like the rest of America? Are you talking about the women? They may cut their hair and wear some make-up (down here...not so heavy....very light), but they still wear skirts.


I think that traditions often make more people connected to church life.
I concur that some traditions are more of a distraction then any good they do but not all.

[StMark]

CC1,
If a woman looks manly makeup and jewelry is not going to help, IMO. How could it?

good point!

[Michael Phelps]

I think that traditions often make more people connected to church life.I concur that some traditions are more of a distraction then any good they do but not all.

You nailed it on the head here. It's a sense of belonging.

[CC1]

So you are saying that women who don't wear makeup look manly????

that's not going to go over too well CC.

No. I am saying that SOME women, who are a bit masculine by nature would look more feminine with a little makeup and jewlery on.

I have seen a few that with their scrubbed faces and severely pulled ack hair in a bun or ponytail looked very masculine.

Remember I said "a few".

.

[Pressing-On]

No. I am saying that SOME women, who are a bit masculine by nature would look more feminine with a little makeup and jewlery on.

I have seen a few that with their scrubbed faces and severely pulled ack hair in a bun or ponytail looked very masculine.

Remember I said "a few".

.

Saving yourself? :toofunny

All they would have to do is stop wearing a ponytail and a bun.

[StMark]

No. I am saying that SOME women, who are a bit masculine by nature would look more feminine with a little makeup and jewlery on.

I have seen a few that with their scrubbed faces and severely pulled ack hair in a bun or ponytail looked very masculine.

Remember I said "a few".

.



well I agree with Pressing on if a woman acts manly, no amount of makeup or earrings is going to soften her actions

[CC1]

CC1,
If a woman looks manly makeup and jewelry is not going to help, IMO. How could it?

It is really subjective but in my opinion I disagree. I think a woman who is not blessed with particularly feminine features can accent her feminiity with a little makeup, jewelry, hairstyle, and clothing.

I have always found it an amusing irony that Pentecostals who are so determined that the seperation of the sexes be of paramount importance discourage facial hair on men and forbid the vast majority of things our culture views as feminine (jewelry, makeup ,etc).

In an age and culture where a certain segment of the lesbian population are known for their manliness I would thing the desire would be to avoid that look as much as possible.

[Pressing-On]

It is really subjective but in my opinion I disagree. I think a woman who is not blessed with particularly feminine features can accent her feminiity with a little makeup, jewelry, hairstyle, and clothing.

I have always found it an amusing irony that Pentecostals who are so determined that the seperation of the sexes be of paramount importance discourage facial hair on men and forbid the vast majority of things our culture views as feminine (jewelry, makeup ,etc).

In an age and culture where a certain segment of the lesbian population are known for their manliness I would thing the desire would be to avoid that look as much as possible.

CC1,
When I worked behind the cosmetic counter - Barton Creek mall - Austin (lol) I found that most women wished they didn't have to fool with all of that but society forces it on them.

That aggravates me to no end.

Most of the men I've dated didn't really care if I wore it or not. My first husband, before I got in church, told me once - "I wish you would stop dressing, everyday, like we are going to the opera!!!" :toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

I am not going to get into this discussion except to say if some apostolic men would just stop wearing those scary hair pieces us women might be able to understand their obssessions with they're looks.

[Pressing-On]

I am not going to get into this discussion except to say if some apostolic men would just stop wearing those scary hair pieces us women might be able to understand their obssessions with they're looks.
:toofunny:toofunny

I've never seen an apostolic man with a "rug". Are you serious?


:toofunny:toofunny

If I do, I'm going to snatch it off and toss it into the crowd and then run!!! I'll make sure my daughter is filming it - put that on You Tube!!

:bliss:bliss

[StMark]

It is really subjective but in my opinion I disagree. I think a woman who is not blessed with particularly feminine features can accent her feminiity with a little makeup, jewelry, hairstyle, and clothing.

I have always found it an amusing irony that Pentecostals who are so determined that the seperation of the sexes be of paramount importance discourage facial hair on men and forbid the vast majority of things our culture views as feminine (jewelry, makeup ,etc).

In an age and culture where a certain segment of the lesbian population are known for their manliness I would thing the desire would be to avoid that look as much as possible.

There are a lot of what is called "lipstick lesbians" who look and act like most all women. you only notice the manly ones because they stick out.
my point is, their putting on makeup and such doesn't change their behavior.
I do agree with you that some "holiness" women can look "severe" and some look very sloppy. but have you been to walmart lately?? there's a lot of non Penty's who look sloppy as well.
I also concur on the facial hair issue. I'll be glad when we finally admit that it's a non biblical issue.

[CC1]

I am not going to get into this discussion except to say if some apostolic men would just stop wearing those scary hair pieces us women might be able to understand their obssessions with they're looks.

LOL!!! One thing that has always puzzled me is the number of older men who get toupees and get them jet black!

They look so fake. Especially on the men who have zero hair left so have no hair on the sides and back for it to blend in to.

Those toupees look like hats on top of their head.

Nothing like seeing a 50 or 60 something man (who if he had hair you know it would at least have some grey in it) walking around with a jet black pile of thick hair sitting on top of his head like a giant cap.

[SoCaliUPC]

There are a lot of what is called "lipstick lesbians" who look and act like most all women. you only notice the manly ones because they stick out.
my point is, their putting on makeup and such doesn't change their behavior.
I do agree with you that some "holiness" women can look "severe" and some look very sloppy. but have you been to walmart lately?? there's a lot of non Penty's who look sloppy as well.
I also concur on the facial hair issue. I'll be glad when we finally admit that it's a non biblical issue.

Are you gonna finally bust out the beard?

[CC1]

There are a lot of what is called "lipstick lesbians" who look and act like most all women. you only notice the manly ones because they stick out.
my point is, their putting on makeup and such doesn't change their behavior.
I do agree with you that some "holiness" women can look "severe" and some look very sloppy. but have you been to walmart lately?? there's a lot of non Penty's who look sloppy as well.
I also concur on the facial hair issue. I'll be glad when we finally admit that it's a non biblical issue.

You are correct that there are plenty of sloppy looking women at Wal Mart who have nothing to do with Pentecost!

[StMark]

CC1,
When I worked behind the cosmetic counter - Barton Creek mall - Austin (lol) I found that most women wished they didn't have to fool with all of that but society forces it on them.

That aggravates me to no end.

Most of the men I've dated didn't really care if I wore it or not. My first husband, before I got in church, told me once - "I wish you would stop dressing, everyday, like we are going to the opera!!!" :toofunny:toofunny

Good point! I think there is a lot of undo pressure by hollywood and such for women to always look young, and the perfect size. no excuse for being a slob, but our society is out of balance the other way too

[Pressing-On]

There are a lot of what is called "lipstick lesbians" who look and act like most all women. you only notice the manly ones because they stick out.
my point is, their putting on makeup and such doesn't change their behavior.
I do agree with you that some "holiness" women can look "severe" and some look very sloppy. but have you been to walmart lately?? there's a lot of non Penty's who look sloppy as well.
I also concur on the facial hair issue. I'll be glad when we finally admit that it's a non biblical issue.
So true. Every time a post like this comes up I look at the women at the grocery store. I'm thinking - Nope, don't like that hair cut, Nope, nope, nope, nope......

[SoCaliUPC]

LOL!!! One thing that has always puzzled me is the number of older men who get toupees and get them jet black!

They look so fake. Especially on the men who have zero hair left so have no hair on the sides and back for it to blend in to.

Those toupees look like hats on top of their head.

Nothing like seeing a 50 or 60 something man (who if he had hair you know it would at least have some grey in it) walking around with a jet black pile of thick hair sitting on top of his head like a giant cap.

They are being used of the Lord to make us laugh!

[StMark]

LOL!!! One thing that has always puzzled me is the number of older men who get toupees and get them jet black!

They look so fake. Especially on the men who have zero hair left so have no hair on the sides and back for it to blend in to.

Those toupees look like hats on top of their head.

Nothing like seeing a 50 or 60 something man (who if he had hair you know it would at least have some grey in it) walking around with a jet black pile of thick hair sitting on top of his head like a giant cap.


HAHA! True!

[Pressing-On]

Good point! I think there is a lot of undo pressure by hollywood and such for women to always look young, and the perfect size. no excuse for being a slob, but our society is out of balance the other way too

Right. My husband likes me the way I am and wouldn't want me to change. I'm blessed!

[StMark]

Are you gonna finally bust out the beard?



Nooooo but I know someone who will :bliss

[Amos]

Many--not all, but many--women dress more to compete with other women than to please their husbands.

[CC1]

They are being used of the Lord to make us laugh!

Now there is a positive way to look at it.

I just don't understand how they can look in the mirror and think "Wow, this looks good! This looks real!".

Now there are some good ones if you have some of your hair left. If you spend the big bucks and get one of those they tie in to your existing hair you usually can't tell they are a wig.

If I went partially but not totally bald that is the route I would go.

[SoCaliUPC]

Nooooo but I know someone who will :bliss

Renda???

[Pressing-On]

LOL!!! One thing that has always puzzled me is the number of older men who get toupees and get them jet black!

They look so fake. Especially on the men who have zero hair left so have no hair on the sides and back for it to blend in to.

Those toupees look like hats on top of their head.

Nothing like seeing a 50 or 60 something man (who if he had hair you know it would at least have some grey in it) walking around with a jet black pile of thick hair sitting on top of his head like a giant cap.

LOL! So true.

Grey hair on a man is very nice. Carpenter used to have an older man in his avatar that was really nice looking. I wonder who he was?

[Pressing-On]

Renda???

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Pressing-On]

Many--not all, but many--women dress more to compete with other women than to please their husbands.

Probably true, to a certain extent.

[SoCaliUPC]

Now there is a positive way to look at it.

I just don't understand how they can look in the mirror and think "Wow, this looks good! This looks real!".
Now there are some good ones if you have some of your hair left. If you spend the big bucks and get one of those they tie in to your existing hair you usually can't tell they are a wig.

If I went partially but not totally bald that is the route I would go.

Or that someone they live with lied to them and said..."Fred, that looks great."

[StMark]

Many--not all, but many--women dress more to compete with other women than to please their husbands.

boy aint that the truth

you can just watch them seethe over the other one outdressing the others:bliss

[Cindy]

:toofunny:toofunny

I've never seen an apostolic man with a "rug". Are you serious?


:toofunny:toofunny

If I do, I'm going to snatch it off and toss it into the crowd and then run!!! I'll make sure my daughter is filming it - put that on You Tube!!

:bliss:bliss

Sis you need to take a closer look at some apostolic men. Of course I like the Michael Jordan look myself, but some men just can't carry it off.

BTW make up is supposed to be applied to enhance beauty not to cover masculine features. As if you are not wearing make up. Which my 19 yr old daughter can and I cannot. Even if I wanted to. But there are some apostolic women that wear some make up,even conservatives. I enjoy seeing the teenage girls at wal mart wearing pj's and underwear in place of shirts. :tic But the blue eyeshadow and black eyeliner scares me.

[StMark]

Renda???

O come on

she's not going to like that ...



Renda check this post out

[SoCaliUPC]

boy aint that the truth

you can just watch them seethe over the other one outdressing the others:bliss

"Gurl...did you see what she was wearing? Who does she think she is?"

Now...at StMark's church....they seethe over, not clothes, but HATS! Who can outdo the other for the gaudiest hat!

[Pressing-On]

Sis you need to take a closer look at some apostolic men. Of course I like the Michael Jordan look myself, but some men just can't carry it off.

BTW make up is supposed to be applied to enhance beauty not to cover masculine features. As if you are not wearing make up. Which my 19 yr old daughter can and I cannot. Even if I wanted to. But there are some apostolic women that wear some make up,even conservatives. I enjoy seeing the teenage girls at wal mart wearing pj's and underwear in place of shirts. :tic But the blue eyeshadow and black eyeliner scares me.

I wear base, but I certainly wouldn't want to go back to all that lip liner drama. Lord, I was so sick of all of that. It's like your whole life is about your face.

I remember one night working the floor, alone. I walked by one of the tall mirrors and began smearing my makeup and saying, "I am so sick of looking at your face." Lord, I was sick of it. Didn't want one more tube or bottle of anything!!! :toofunny

[CC1]

LOL! So true.

Grey hair on a man is very nice. Carpenter used to have an older man in his avatar that was really nice looking. I wonder who he was?

The guy with the really bad toupe that came to my mind when I typed that went to WOP in Austin probably in the 80's.

If I remember right he or his wife were also the ones that sat in the balcony and clipped their fingernails during service!!!

I was on the video camera up there the first time I heard it. They must have had nails of steel because when they clipped them there would be this giant "snipping" noise as the nail was severed and apparently went flying a few feet somewhre.

It was so loud I could not believe they didn't realize what a disraction it was. I was embarressed for them and prayed there were no visitors close by to hear it.

This was not a one time occurance either. They did it just about every service. I think it was part of their grooming routine. LOL!!

[Carpenter]

Yea you are right bcuz I've seen the same thing carp but I think most would agree that attire alone doesn't do the trick. our actions and deeds are always included in the equation. make sense ?

I also think we all agree there needs to be gender distinctives but where we draw the line seems to be the issue. my point here is, if Duet is not valid, what scripture is? and if there is NO scripture to back up gender distinctives, then do we allow everyone to do whatever they deem right in their own eyes ?

good heavens man, you need a scripture to influence you to be able to determine gender distinction??? Doth not nature tell you and all that??? Even the world makes that distinction sans any christian influence (some of you would argue based on seeing one hippy dude you only thought was a woman). All scripture is given for inspiration of course, but why not also have a scripture telling CC1 why banana splits are to be eaten and not just looked at? Why not have a scripture for EVERYTHING even if the context is completely inaccurate?

When do we grow up and begin to use the tools that God has equipped us with and empowered us to use in our own walk with HIM?

[James Griffin]

Many--not all, but many--women dress more to compete with other women than to please their husbands.

LOL amen, as evidenced by the fact that another woman can remember a dress worn months ago, and her husband can't recall what she wore last week !!!

[SoCaliUPC]

LOL amen, as evidenced by the fact that another woman can remember a dress worn months ago, and her husband can't recall what she wore last week !!!

HAHAHA!!!! You got that right.

[Cindy]

It is really subjective but in my opinion I disagree. I think a woman who is not blessed with particularly feminine features can accent her feminiity with a little makeup, jewelry, hairstyle, and clothing.

I have always found it an amusing irony that Pentecostals who are so determined that the seperation of the sexes be of paramount importance discourage facial hair on men and forbid the vast majority of things our culture views as feminine (jewelry, makeup ,etc).

In an age and culture where a certain segment of the lesbian population are known for their manliness I would thing the desire would be to avoid that look as much as possible.

So you don't think they would look like transvestites? :tic

[Pressing-On]

The guy with the really bad toupe that came to my mind when I typed that went to WOP in Austin probably in the 80's.

If I remember right he or his wife were also the ones that sat in the balcony and clipped their fingernails during service!!!

I was on the video camera up there the first time I heard it. They must have had nails of steel because when they clipped them there would be this giant "snipping" noise as the nail was severed and apparently went flying a few feet somewhre.

It was so loud I could not believe they didn't realize what a disraction it was. I was embarressed for them and prayed there were no visitors close by to hear it.

This was not a one time occurance either. They did it just about every service. I think it was part of their grooming routine. LOL!!
Oh, that is so funny, CC1!

We had a couple at Rex Johnson's, well before he was there. They would get up at 9:00 p.m. and go home. I don't care what was going on - they were going home. :toofunny

[CC1]

I wear base, but I certainly wouldn't want to go back to all that lip liner drama. Lord, I was so sick of all of that. It's like your whole life is about your face.

I remember one night working the floor, alone. I walked by one of the tall mirrors and began smearing my makeup and saying, "I am so sick of looking at your face." Lord, I was sick of it. Didn't want one more tube or bottle of anything!!! :toofunny

I am a helpful obedient husband. My wife leaves tomorrow for a family reunion on her father's side in Mississippi so she went and had her nails done toay.

Tonight she informed me that she could not remove her toenail polish herself because it would take off her fingernail polish she just had put on todayt so I had to do it! I did draw the line at putting on the nail polish though. Now she is all "pretty in pink".

[SoCaliUPC]

Oh, that is so funny, CC1!

We had a couple at Rex Johnson's, well before he was there. They would get up at 9:00 p.m. and go home. I don't care what was going on - they were going home. :toofunny

Union saints.

[Pressing-On]

good heavens man, you need a scripture to influence you to be able to determine gender distinction??? Doth not nature tell you and all that??? Even the world makes that distinction sans any christian influence (some of you would argue based on seeing one hippy dude you only thought was a woman). All scripture is given for inspiration of course, but why not also have a scripture telling CC1 why banana splits are to be eaten and not just looked at? Why not have a scripture for EVERYTHING even if the context is completely inaccurate?

When do we grow up and begin to use the tools that God has equipped us with and empowered us to use in our own walk with HIM?

Hey, Carpenter! Who was that older man you used to have in your avatar? I don't know why I am asking. :toofunny

[Pressing-On]

Union saints.

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

LOL!!! One thing that has always puzzled me is the number of older men who get toupees and get them jet black!

They look so fake. Especially on the men who have zero hair left so have no hair on the sides and back for it to blend in to.

Those toupees look like hats on top of their head.

Nothing like seeing a 50 or 60 something man (who if he had hair you know it would at least have some grey in it) walking around with a jet black pile of thick hair sitting on top of his head like a giant cap.

I know, right. And that applies to non apostolic men also. Lord have mercy. Like something died on top of they're heads.

[Pressing-On]

I am a helpful obedient husband. My wife leaves tomorrow for a family reunion on her father's side in Mississippi so she went and had her nails done toay.

Tonight she informed me that she could not remove her toenail polish herself because it would take off her fingernail polish she just had put on todayt so I had to do it! I did draw the line at putting on the nail polish though. Now she is all "pretty in pink".

Awww, you are so sweet. I get my husband to spray the back of my hair when I wear it down. I'm like - STOP, STOP!!! I'm going to have stiff hair like Tammy Wynette!!! :toofunny

[Pressing-On]

I know, right. And that applies to non apostolic men also. Lord have mercy. Like something died on top of they're heads.

I'm going to wake up my son, girl!!!

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

[Carpenter]

LOL! So true.

Grey hair on a man is very nice. Carpenter used to have an older man in his avatar that was really nice looking. I wonder who he was?

:slaphappy :slaphappy

He was the former General Secretary of the Assemblies of God.


HA! He looked pretty good for a heathen harlot church guy right?

fooled ya!

:D

[Cindy]

They are being used of the Lord to make us laugh!

That made me laugh, good to see you posting again also.

[CC1]

Oh, that is so funny, CC1!

We had a couple at Rex Johnson's, well before he was there. They would get up at 9:00 p.m. and go home. I don't care what was going on - they were going home. :toofunny

Wel.....I guess bedtime is bedtime!

Were you there for the split before Rex came? I had a niece dating a guy from there during all that and she would come back from church with really sad stories.

She said the half the church supporting the pastor would stand up when he said to,etc and the half against him would ignore him and sit on him.

I can't imagine what a visitor would have thought. Rex came into a really tough situation and has done fantastic there. A very happy ending for that church.

[Pressing-On]

:slaphappy :slaphappy

He was the former General Secretary of the Assemblies of God.


HA! He looked pretty good for a heathen harlot church guy right?

fooled ya!

:D

Men are men - whatever. I thought he was nice looking. PM me his picture!

J/K!!!!!!!

:toofunny:toofunny

[StMark]

good heavens man, you need a scripture to influence you to be able to determine gender distinction??? Doth not nature tell you and all that??? Even the world makes that distinction sans any christian influence (some of you would argue based on seeing one hippy dude you only thought was a woman). All scripture is given for inspiration of course, but why not also have a scripture telling CC1 why banana splits are to be eaten and not just looked at? Why not have a scripture for EVERYTHING even if the context is completely inaccurate?

When do we grow up and begin to use the tools that God has equipped us with and empowered us to use in our own walk with HIM?


Carp, People today want Proof for everything. They want scriptural backing for every little guideline. we live in a "prove it to " society. A lot of kids today have no home training let alone much common sense.

Yes, a lot of people go by the guidelines of "polite society" but we can't base our lives on what societal norms alone. the more society becomes secualrized, the church will be even more persecuted and peculiar and that's setting aside just dress and appearance

[SoCaliUPC]

Wel.....I guess bedtime is bedtime!

Were you there for the split before Rex came? I had a niece dating a guy from there during all that and she would come back from church with really sad stories.

She said the half the church supporting the pastor would stand up when he said to,etc and the half against him would ignore him and sit on him.

I can't imagine what a visitor would have thought. Rex came into a really tough situation and has done fantastic there. A very happy ending for that church.

Visitor probably thought they went to a re-enactment of the State of the Union address.

[Pressing-On]

Wel.....I guess bedtime is bedtime!

Were you there for the split before Rex came? I had a niece dating a guy from there during all that and she would come back from church with really sad stories.

She said the half the church supporting the pastor would stand up when he said to,etc and the half against him would ignore him and sit on him.

I can't imagine what a visitor would have thought. Rex came into a really tough situation and has done fantastic there. A very happy ending for that church.

Uh, yes - for the whole nine yards!

I learned more about the power of God through that horrible time than any time in my life.

[Carpenter]

Men are men - whatever. I thought he was nice looking. PM me his picture!

J/K!!!!!!!

:toofunny:toofunny

I went to the Assemblies of God web-page and he isn't part of the leadership anymore. Must have retired.

I got lots of questions about who he was, if he was a preacher...etc.

It was pretty funny.

[Pressing-On]

Wel.....I guess bedtime is bedtime!

Were you there for the split before Rex came? I had a niece dating a guy from there during all that and she would come back from church with really sad stories.

She said the half the church supporting the pastor would stand up when he said to,etc and the half against him would ignore him and sit on him.

I can't imagine what a visitor would have thought. Rex came into a really tough situation and has done fantastic there. A very happy ending for that church.
Oh, sorry, just saw this. This isn't how it went, actually. At least, I don't remember this happening. They did wear scarfs over the arms of their jackets and in their hair to support him - like a rebel army.

[Pressing-On]

I went to the Assemblies of God web-page and he isn't part of the leadership anymore. Must have retired.

I got lots of questions about who he was, if he was a preacher...etc.

It was pretty funny.

I used to think it was you. I thought - Wow, he's a nice looking man, he shouldn't post his picture on a forum. :toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

"Gurl...did you see what she was wearing? Who does she think she is?"

Now...at StMark's church....they seethe over, not clothes, but HATS! Who can outdo the other for the gaudiest hat!

hey, HEY, I wear a hat on Sunday mornings, but I am the only one at my church that does. Too bad though, I look marvelous.

[SoCaliUPC]

hey, HEY, I wear a hat on Sunday mornings, but I am the only one at my church that does. Too bad though, I look marvelous.

You need to post a picture.

[Pressing-On]

hey, HEY, I wear a hat on Sunday mornings, but I am the only one at my church that does. Too bad though, I look marvelous.

Maw-vel-us - dawlin'

:toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

The guy with the really bad toupe that came to my mind when I typed that went to WOP in Austin probably in the 80's.

If I remember right he or his wife were also the ones that sat in the balcony and clipped their fingernails during service!!!

I was on the video camera up there the first time I heard it. They must have had nails of steel because when they clipped them there would be this giant "snipping" noise as the nail was severed and apparently went flying a few feet somewhre.

It was so loud I could not believe they didn't realize what a disraction it was. I was embarressed for them and prayed there were no visitors close by to hear it.

This was not a one time occurance either. They did it just about every service. I think it was part of their grooming routine. LOL!!


Try cleaning a church, you would be surprised at some of the things you find, including toenails. YUCK!!!!

[CC1]

Visitor probably thought they went to a re-enactment of the State of the Union address.

ROFLMBO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:happydance

[crakjak]

:blah:blah :toofunny

On the contrary, we had these views before TV.

BTW, noone watching the show seemed to think we were on a "slippery slope" on this issue.

Do your Amish friends consider you already down the slippery slope?

We have way too many issues in our world to focus on what folks wear, teach modesty and let the Holy Spirit define it for folks. Too much focus on non-issues and not enough on the "Good News!" IMO

[Cindy]

You need to post a picture.

I will try to remember to do that Sunday. I am thinking of wearing my black hat. It's very elegant. As I am vertically challenged hats make me appear taller. And if I wear my glasses, smarter.








I think.

[Cindy]

Maw-vel-us - dawlin'

:toofunny:toofunny

Oh my Saturday Night Live right?
Monty Python's Flying Circus is back on BBC in Amercia here.
I like British comedies but they are rather risque.

[Cindy]

Do your Amish friends consider you already down the slippery slope?

We have way too many issues in our world to focus on what folks wear, teach modesty and let the Holy Spirit define it for folks. Too much focus on non-issues and not enough on the "Good News!" IMO

And we all know what the Word says about the feet of them that bring the "Good News". I love that scripture.

We should only seek modesty that is pleasing to God. As we are bombarded by immodesty in the world.

[Hoovie]

Do your Amish friends consider you already down the slippery slope?

We have way too many issues in our world to focus on what folks wear, teach modesty and let the Holy Spirit define it for folks. Too much focus on non-issues and not enough on the "Good News!" IMO

I hit the slopes when I got a car!

To the rest of your post - Amen!

[RandyWayne]

Oh my Saturday Night Live right?
Monty Python's Flying Circus is back on BBC in Amercia here.
I like British comedies but they are rather risque.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n3LL338aGA

[Pressing-On]

Oh my Saturday Night Live right?
Monty Python's Flying Circus is back on BBC in Amercia here.
I like British comedies but they are rather risque.

LOL! No, I was just saying it myself. :toofunny

[Cindy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n3LL338aGA

Ohhh I like it. I really like the silly walks skit.

[Pressing-On]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n3LL338aGA

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

LOL! No, I was just saying it myself. :toofunny

The hat I will be wearing Sunday was a gift from Brother Larry's wife. Now there is an elegant, fashionable, and stylish lady, and so sweet.

[Cindy]

LOL! No, I was just saying it myself. :toofunny

Back in the day the 80's I think there was a guy on SNL that always said that. So funny with that accent.

[Pressing-On]

The hat I will be wearing Sunday was a gift from Brother Larry's wife. Now there is an elegant, fashionable, and stylish lady, and so sweet.
Awww, how sweet of her!

Well, I better get out of here.

Hasta luego lugarto!!!

[crakjak]

I hit the slopes when I got a car!

To the rest of your post - Amen!

LOL! about the car.
I enjoy your post and appreciate your strong family focus, parents engaged in their children's lives makes for a great future, for both children and parents. Investing in the next generation is our most important purpose. Our grown children are such a blessing, the Lord has been so faithful, looking forward to grandkids in the next couple of years or so.

[Pressing-On]

Back in the day the 80's I think there was a guy on SNL that always said that. So funny with that accent.
Really, I don't remember. Do you remember the skit that Gilda did when she was mad at her mother? She kept her body stiff as a board and fell on the bed, ran into the wall, the bedroom door, etc. :killinme

Another when Gilda and the other girls, that were the originals, were having a slumber party and talking about how their parents were intimate. They couldn't believe it and they would say, "Oh my gosh. That is so sickening!!!" They were real loud and kept saying it over and over. :toofunny:toofunny

[Cindy]

Really, I don't remember. Do you remember the skit that Gilda did when she was mad at her mother? She kept her body stiff as a board and fell on the bed, ran into the wall, the bedroom door, etc. :killinme

Another when Gilda and the other girls, that were the originals, were having a slumber party and talking about how their parents were intimate. They couldn't believe it and they would say, "Oh my gosh. That is so sickening!!!" They were real loud and kept saying it over and over. :toofunny:toofunny

Yep, I think she got it from one of my kids.

They were hilarious.

:toofunny :toofunny

[crakjak]

And we all know what the Word says about the feet of them that bring the "Good News". I love that scripture.

We should only seek modesty that is pleasing to God. As we are bombarded by immodesty in the world.

Amen!

What is most pleasing to God is relationship with Him, to know Him, to fellowship with Him. What then naturally flow out of us will be pleasing to Him, our overt focus on outward appearance is not His focus.

[Pressing-On]

Yep, I think she got it from one of my kids.

They were hilarious.

:toofunny :toofunny

Comedians are not as funny as they used to be. The newer ones have really shallow humor. The Marx Brothers has some really great lines. You have to be listening. I love them and Bob Hope - He could throw in some really good comedy.

Jim Carey would be awesome if he wasn't so trashy with some of his lines and actions. Adam Sandler is just pure "white trash". :killinme

[Cindy]

Amen!

What is most pleasing to God is relationship with Him, to know Him, to fellowship with Him. What then naturally flow out of us will be pleasing to Him, our overt focus on outward appearance is not His focus.

Yes, I thought about this the other day. What does He see when He looks at my heart.

[Pressing-On]

Yes, I thought about this other day. What does He see when He looks at my heart.

He probably keeps looking at your hats. J/K!!! :toofunny

Why am I still awake? :killinme

[Cindy]

Comedians are not as funny as they used to be. The newer ones have really shallow humor. The Marx Brothers has some really great lines. You have to be listening. I love them and Bob Hope - He could throw in some really good comedy.

Jim Carey would be awesome if he wasn't so trashy with some of his lines and actions. Adam Sandler is just pure "white trash". :killinme

Ain't that the truth. I like Jay Leno's old routines.

[Cindy]

He probably keeps looking at your hats. J/K!!! :toofunny

Why am I still awake? :killinme

:girlytantrum :toofunny :toofunny

Cuz you're having fun. :gaga

[Pressing-On]

Ain't that the truth. I like Jay Leno's old routines.

I've never watched him. Seen some clips.

Lord, I'm going to bed!! I'm so tired!!! I have to get up early in case our air conditioner guy decides he wants to take time out of his day to stop by and fix our air conditioner!!!!!!!!!! :tissue

[Pressing-On]

:girlytantrum :toofunny :toofunny

Cuz you're having fun. :gaga

Oh that was it!!! :toofunny

I can't believe I have been posting off and on all just about all day today!!! I'm a loser!!!!!

Don't comment on that! :toofunny

[Cindy]

I've never watched him. Seen some clips.

Lord, I'm going to bed!! I'm so tired!!! I have to get up early in case our air conditioner guy decides he wants to take time out of his day to stop by and fix our air conditioner!!!!!!!!!! :tissue

No a/c? How are y'all standing it? I usually go out to my car and sit in it with the a/c on when power gets knocked out here. Can't afford that much anymore with gas prices being what they are.

[Pressing-On]

No a/c? How are y'all standing it? I usually go out to my car and sit in it with the a/c on when power gets knocked out here. Can't afford that much anymore with gas prices being what they are.

Actually, we had a cool front come through these last couple of days. They fixed it in October and it's freezing up again. It's still under warranty, so that's a good thing. I'm just afraid they aren't going to call tomorrow!!!!! :tissue

[Cindy]

Actually, we had a cool front come through these last couple of days. They fixed it in October and it's freezing up again. It's still under warranty, so that's a good thing. I'm just afraid they aren't going to call tomorrow!!!!! :tissue

Am gonna pray for y'all tonight.

[AbundantGrace]

I got tickled when I read the title of this thread concerning the age-old Pants On Women Sin! lol...

After my wife and I came out of UPC a number of years ago and she began wearing pants, we were reminded of Deuteronomy 22:5. I had preached from that text myself in the past. Of course, that was prior to our coming to a much clearer revelation of the freedom from that Old Law which Jesus gave us through the power of the Cross and by the Grace of God. I'll never forget a dear lady who called me and gave me the reminder of the 22 & 5 Rule and asked how could I no longer preach that women should live according to that scripture?

Well, first of all, Christ set us free through the work of the Cross, which is made very clear to us in the New Testament. But even beyond that, how can we preach that WOMEN should obey Deuteronomy 22:5 and even go so far as to make it into a "MAN-MADE SALVATION ISSUE" and then neglect to live according to the rest of the chapter or the book for that matter.

For those who are preaching that women should live according to 22:5, please allow me to ask a couple of questions.

1) For those of you who farm or garden - Do you plant more than one kind of seed in your crop or in your garden? I certainly hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:9 says plainly, Don't Do It!!! If you do, your fruit will be defiled! There may be some getting under conviction even now!

2) For all of you fashion experts - Surely you've never worn any sort of a garment that was made out of a wool and linen blend of material? :reaction Again, I hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:11 again plainly says, Don't Do It!!! We may need to check our clothing tags. It may be time for some closet cleaning!

3) And of course, this could go on and on, but for time's sake, I'll simply utilize only one more example. Still going along the clothes line - I pray that all of your cloaks do have tassels on all four corners, because Deuteronomy 22:12 says that you must have tassels on all four corners of the cloaks that you wear.

Now, of course, I'm being a little sarcastic in my scenarios, but the point is correct nonetheless. If we are going to preach 22:5 TO WOMEN (they always seem to get the brunt of the man-made rules) and bind them to that one lone scripture and in MANY churches even make it a Heaven or Hell issue, then how can we just neglect all of the rest of the Chapter?

Can somebody please explain that? (And please don't say "Because it's in the UPCI Manual") Yes, I've actually heard that from quite a number of my UPC Preacher friends. And I've even heard from some non-UPC Preacher friends who believe that, that that's the way their parents did it, so...

Paul taught us to dress modesty, but he never preached Deuteronomy 22:5 as a dress code for women or men for that matter, at least not as far as we know. So why do some?

Just a few questions I have...

Thanks for the opportunity to share...

[Pressing-On]

At some point we have to stop preaching it is not a salvational issue, but forcing it on people. I have a problem with that.

PO,

Re-read your post. Did you leave out a word or put in one too many? Is this really what you meant to say?

Well, I thought it made sense. Yes, I do mean that. It's confusing.

CC1,
It just occurred to me when I woke up this morning that you thought I wanted to preach this as "salvational".

That is not what I meant. In good conscience how could I even prove that and stand on it as Biblical? I would prefer to not address the issue at all and allow the Holy Ghost to bring it's own conviction.

On the Deut 22:5 - What I think is being overlooked in this passage is one really small word with a huge meaning. I've posted this before, but I'll do that again. The word "wear" in this particular passage is only used one time in the NT. It is not the normal usage of what we would term as wear - putting on articles of clothing.

It means "to become, "to exist, that is, be or become". It is certainly a gender distinction but it does not have to do as much with clothing as it does what is going on in the heart and mind. Much larger issue here, IMO.

Hope that clarifies.

[rgcraig]

I got tickled when I read the title of this thread concerning the age-old Pants On Women Sin! lol...

After my wife and I came out of UPC a number of years ago and she began wearing pants, we were reminded of Deuteronomy 22:5. I had preached from that text myself in the past. Of course, that was prior to our coming to a much clearer revelation of the freedom from that Old Law which Jesus gave us through the power of the Cross and by the Grace of God. I'll never forget a dear lady who called me and gave me the reminder of the 22 & 5 Rule and asked how could I no longer preach that women should live according to that scripture?

Well, first of all, Christ set us free through the work of the Cross, which is made very clear to us in the New Testament. But even beyond that, how can we preach that WOMEN should obey Deuteronomy 22:5 and even go so far as to make it into a "MAN-MADE SALVATION ISSUE" and then neglect to live according to the rest of the chapter or the book for that matter.

For those who are preaching that women should live according to 22:5, please allow me to ask a couple of questions.

1) For those of you who farm or garden - Do you plant more than one kind of seed in your crop or in your garden? I certainly hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:9 says plainly, Don't Do It!!! If you do, your fruit will be defiled! There may be some getting under conviction even now!

2) For all of you fashion experts - Surely you've never worn any sort of a garment that was made out of a wool and linen blend of material? :reaction Again, I hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:11 again plainly says, Don't Do It!!! We may need to check our clothing tags. It may be time for some closet cleaning!

3) And of course, this could go on and on, but for time's sake, I'll simply utilize only one more example. Still going along the clothes line - I pray that all of your cloaks do have tassels on all four corners, because Deuteronomy 22:12 says that you must have tassels on all four corners of the cloaks that you wear.

Now, of course, I'm being a little sarcastic in my scenarios, but the point is correct nonetheless. If we are going to preach 22:5 TO WOMEN (they always seem to get the brunt of the man-made rules) and bind them to that one lone scripture and in MANY churches even make it a Heaven or Hell issue, then how can we just neglect all of the rest of the Chapter?

Can somebody please explain that? (And please don't say "Because it's in the UPCI Manual") Yes, I've actually heard that from quite a number of my UPC Preacher friends. And I've even heard from some non-UPC Preacher friends who believe that, that that's the way their parents did it, so...

Paul taught us to dress modesty, but he never preached Deuteronomy 22:5 as a dress code for women or men for that matter, at least not as far as we know. So why do some?

Just a few questions I have...

Thanks for the opportunity to share...

CC1,
It just occurred to me when I woke up this morning that you thought I wanted to preach this as "salvational".

That is not what I meant. In good conscience how could I even prove that and stand on it as Biblical? I would prefer to not address the issue at all and allow the Holy Ghost to bring it's own conviction.

On the Deut 22:5 - What I think is being overlooked in this passage is one really small word with a huge meaning. I've posted this before, but I'll do that again. The word "wear" in this particular passage is only used one time in the NT. It is not the normal usage of what we would term as wear - putting on articles of clothing.

It means "to become, "to exist, that is, be or become". It is certainly a gender distinction but it does not have to do as much with clothing as it does what is going on in the heart and mind. Much larger issue here, IMO.

Hope that clarifies.
End of argument to me.

[Amos]

CC1,
It just occurred to me when I woke up this morning that you thought I wanted to preach this as "salvational".

That is not what I meant. In good conscience how could I even prove that and stand on it as Biblical? I would prefer to not address the issue at all and allow the Holy Ghost to bring it's own conviction.

On the Deut 22:5 - What I think is being overlooked in this passage is one really small word with a huge meaning. I've posted this before, but I'll do that again. The word "wear" in this particular passage is only used one time in the NT. It is not the normal usage of what we would term as wear - putting on articles of clothing.

It means "to become, "to exist, that is, be or become". It is certainly a gender distinction but it does not have to do as much with clothing as it does what is going on in the heart and mind. Much larger issue here, IMO.

Hope that clarifies.


It is, however, undeniable that how we dress is a signifigant part of what we are, and what people see of us.

If you doubt that, look at every people group or sub-culture--all have their "signature look."

This is part of being human.

And as for the brilliant deductions about plowing with ox and ass, mixing fabrics, etc. I won't even bother to go through the difference between an abomination to the Lord, and what He said would be an abomination unto Israel.

[Cindy]

It is, however, undeniable that how we dress is a signifigant part of what we are, and what people see of us.

If you doubt that, look at every people group or sub-culture--all have their "signature look."

This is part of being human.

And as for the brilliant deductions about plowing with ox and ass, mixing fabrics, etc. I won't even bother to go through the difference between an abomination to the Lord, and what He said would be an abomination unto Israel.

I decided I don't want to take the chance to be considered an abomination to the Lord.

[Pressing-On]

It is, however, undeniable that how we dress is a signifigant part of what we are, and what people see of us.

If you doubt that, look at every people group or sub-culture--all have their "signature look."

This is part of being human.

And as for the brilliant deductions about plowing with ox and ass, mixing fabrics, etc. I won't even bother to go through the difference between an abomination to the Lord, and what He said would be an abomination unto Israel.

That is true, if not taken in extreme to make a point.

Because of my past experience in coming into the church, I will always view this another way. I was forced to comply in a little home mission church in the worst way. No one ever allowed the Lord to work in me.

I think it would be much more powerful to sit back and watch God do the changes. We wouldn't have confusion then.

Don't get me wrong, I think we dress, for the most part, in a more excellent way than most in society.

I think my only contention would be preaching it is not salvational, but making it a requirement or you are viewed as backslid. That doesn't make sense to me and leaves us looking weak on what we really believe the Bible is telling us.

I think basically any church, AOG for example, that lose their consecration and commitment are going to be lacking in the gifts and a move of God. I don't think it started with their clothing issues, JMO.

And if we are having splits, which we have, I don't think it started with t.v.'s, dress standards. I remember when we used to fellowship and have singings, ladies prayer meetings, family prayer. Many churches still do this, but many don't - not like they used to. So, it didn't begin with clothing issues, but a heart issue.

[Amos]

That is true, if not taken in extreme to make a point.

Because of my past experience in coming into the church, I will always view this another way. I was forced to comply in a little home mission church in the worst way. No one ever allowed the Lord to work in me.

I think it would be much more powerful to sit back and watch God do the changes. We wouldn't have confusion then.

Don't get me wrong, I think we dress, for the most part, in a more excellent way than most in society.

I think my only contention would be preaching it is not salvational, but making it a requirement or you are viewed as backslid. That doesn't make sense to me and leaves us looking weak on what we really believe the Bible is telling us.

I think basically any church, AOG for example, that lose their consecration and commitment are going to be lacking in the gifts and a move of God. I don't think it started with their clothing issues, JMO.

And if we are having splits, which we have, I don't think it started with t.v.'s, dress standards. I remember when we used to fellowship and have singings, ladies prayer meetings, family prayer. Many churches still do this, but many don't - not like they used to. So, it didn't begin with clothing issues, but a heart issue.

Everything begins as a heart issue--everything.

But it always winds up working its way to the outside.

The problem is that we can't see one another's hearts; all we can look at is those indicators that are visible.

By the time it gets to the point that we can see it, things are usually pretty far gone. Thus the need for discernment.

[Amos]

I decided I don't want to take the chance to be considered an abomination to the Lord.


There are some who want to fall on the safe side of the line; others don't mind taking chances.

Like you, I am one of the cautious ones.

[Pressing-On]

Everything begins as a heart issue--everything.

But it always winds up working its way to the outside.

The problem is that we can't see one another's hearts; all we can look at is those indicators that are visible.

By the time it gets to the point that we can see it, things are usually pretty far gone. Thus the need for discernment.

Right, always begins in the heart, although I'm not sure that everything becomes apparent in all things. Some things remain hidden. So, yes, discernment would be valuable.

[Pressing-On]

There are some who want to fall on the safe side of the line; others don't mind taking chances.

Like you, I am one of the cautious ones.

I appreciate the being cautious.

There are concrete things that I can stand on. I do know who He is because He tells me this (Isaiah 9) and, IMO, Acts 2:38 is the message. I can depend on that. I can also depend on modesty, but adding things to the modesty is taking steps which belong to God and the individual person.

Do you think it is a bit confusing to preach that standards are not salvational, but we must do them? If you can't be lost by not doing them, then why preach it?

Understand that I'm not changing anything in my life, just trying to understand this element.

[bkstokes]

My philosophy is if people want to live that why fine, but don't make into a test of spirituality. MANY believe that the stricter one is with type of stuff, then the holier you are. It is written that His blood is what sanctifies, not standards.

Apart from this,

Mark I think it is time that this issue go away. I disdain the fact that this would be oneness pentecostals calling card. A man I know, sincerely saw little difference between pentecostals and the FLDS (talking about dress). I didn't even try to go into the differences because really it is the same mentality (unscriptural subjection of women). One can really make the Bible say pretty much near anything (twisting and turning it) -- Look at the crazy posts that have been going on in the forum of late.

[StillStanding]

My philosophy is if people want to live that why fine, but don't make into a test of spirituality. MANY believe that the stricter one is with type of stuff, then the holier you are. It is written that His blood is what sanctifies, not standards.

Apart from this,

Mark I think it is time that this issue go away. I disdain the fact that this would be oneness pentecostals calling card. A man I know, sincerely saw little difference between pentecostals and the FLDS (talking about dress). I didn't even try to go into the differences because really it is the same mentality (unscriptural subjection of women). One can really make the Bible say pretty much near anything (twisting and turning it) -- Look at the crazy posts that have been going on in the forum of late.

Good post! :thumbsup

[bkstokes]

I decided I don't want to take the chance to be considered an abomination to the Lord.

I appreciate you sincere desire to be pleasing to the Lord. Nevertheless, we must ask the question -- what was the difference in dress in those days. If you go to your local Christian book store you may easily find many books on Biblical customs. The difference between the way a man dressed and the way a woman dressed was primarily ornamental. Both men and wome wore robe like attire. The difference consisted of the material used in the belts and the woman's robe had a fancier hem (sp?) to the robe. Don't believe me go check it out.

Here is a link that has some interesting points about seperate dress.

http://209.239.56.130/theopenheart/askoldtimer/womenpants.htm

[Cindy]

I appreciate you sincere desire to be pleasing to the Lord. Nevertheless, we must ask the question -- what was the difference in dress in those days. If you go to your local Christian book store you may easily find many books on Biblical customs. The difference between the way a man dressed and the way a woman dressed was primarily ornamental. Both men and wome wore robe like attire. The difference consisted of the material used in the belts and the woman's robe had a fancier hem (sp?) to the robe. Don't believe me go check it out.

Here is a link that has some interesting points about seperate dress.

http://209.239.56.130/theopenheart/askoldtimer/womenpants.htm

My response had nothing to do with what I wear or don't wear but that my spirit be right with God, should have clarified I guess. If it doesn't come from the heart it doesn't matter.

[StillStanding]

For the record, I find it perfectly acceptable if a women chooses to wear only dresses. I admire their personal conviction and sacrifice.

The problem arises when they judge others by their own personal convictions. They separate themselves from other women of like faith that may not have the same convictions.

[Pressing-On]

I appreciate you sincere desire to be pleasing to the Lord. Nevertheless, we must ask the question -- what was the difference in dress in those days. If you go to your local Christian book store you may easily find many books on Biblical customs. The difference between the way a man dressed and the way a woman dressed was primarily ornamental. Both men and wome wore robe like attire. The difference consisted of the material used in the belts and the woman's robe had a fancier hem (sp?) to the robe. Don't believe me go check it out.

Here is a link that has some interesting points about seperate dress.

http://209.239.56.130/theopenheart/askoldtimer/womenpants.htm

It's more than that. It's finding our place and following the convictions we feel that God has placed in our own individual lives.

We can't even look back at the OT for this.

The world is in chaos, the church world is in chaos.

We just need to find where God wants us. I will also say when a person finds that place, for them, and it happens to be the UPC, we need to leave them and their convictions alone.

It's one thing to debate here, as we often do, but if someone feels that is what they need in their life to stand before God, we need to leave that alone.

Not everyone can live the same way. Not every person will have the same convictions. Some are stronger by personal choice.

We need to respect each person's decision and consecration.

[Pressing-On]

For the record, I find it perfectly acceptable if a women chooses to wear only dresses. I admire their personal conviction and sacrifice.

The problem arises when they judge others by their own personal convictions. They separate themselves from other women of like faith that may not have the same convictions.

Pianoman,
Well said. I totally agree with you here. :thumbsup

[Cindy]

My philosophy is if people want to live that why fine, but don't make into a test of spirituality. MANY believe that the stricter one is with type of stuff, then the holier you are. It is written that His blood is what sanctifies, not standards.

Apart from this,

Mark I think it is time that this issue go away. I disdain the fact that this would be oneness pentecostals calling card. A man I know, sincerely saw little difference between pentecostals and the FLDS (talking about dress). I didn't even try to go into the differences because really it is the same mentality (unscriptural subjection of women). One can really make the Bible say pretty much near anything (twisting and turning it) -- Look at the crazy posts that have been going on in the forum of late.

I don't think I have ever looked like the FLDS women.

[Cindy]

It's more than that. It's finding our place and following the convictions we feel that God has placed in our own individual lives.

We can't even look back at the OT for this.

The world is in chaos, the church world is in chaos.

We just need to find where God wants us. I will also say when a person finds that place, for them, and it happens to be the UPC, we need to leave them and their convictions alone.

It's one thing to debate here, as we often do, but if someone feels that is what they need in their life to stand before God, we need to leave that alone.

Not everyone can live the same way. Not every person will have the same convictions. Some are stronger by personal choice.

We need to respect each person's decision and consecration.


Amen!

[Cindy]

For the record, I find it perfectly acceptable if a women chooses to wear only dresses. I admire their personal conviction and sacrifice.

The problem arises when they judge others by their own personal convictions. They separate themselves from other women of like faith that may not have the same convictions.

Good post PM, I agree. And vice versa on the judging thing.

[Pressing-On]

I don't think I have ever looked like the FLDS women.

I think I might have in the 80's. :toofunny

[Cindy]

I actually think the ex "standard" bearer's judge and comment on people that keep "standards" more than other christians or the world. They just don't like to admit it.

[GraceAmazing]

For the record, I find it perfectly acceptable if a women chooses to wear only dresses. I admire their personal conviction and sacrifice.

The problem arises when they judge others by their own personal convictions. They separate themselves from other women of like faith that may not have the same convictions.

Beautifully said. Totally agree.

[Cindy]

I think I might have in the 80's. :toofunny

ugh, with the hair? I have never had enough hair to do that. For which I should probably be grateful............:toofunny

[Pressing-On]

ugh, with the hair? I have never had enough hair to do that. For which I should probably be grateful............:toofunny

Well, not the dresses, that's for sure, but some of the hairstyles, maybe so. :toofunny

My daughter refuses to own a denim skirt. :toofunny

[Pressing-On]

I actually think the ex "standard" bearer's judge and comment on people that keep "standards" more than other christians or the world. They just don't like to admit it.
I do have to agree with this. When things failed, point to the standards.

[SDG]

Its only an issue for a small segment of OP believers, Mennonites, Amish, FLDs, utracon Baptists, etc.

The rest of the Body of Christ has move beyond this petty issue.

[Cindy]

Its only an issue for a small segment of OP believers, Mennonites, Amish, FLDs, utracon Baptists, etc.

The rest of the Body of Christ has move beyond this petty issue.

Yeah, right. And you live on what planet?

[My Own Eyes]

would you advocate that every man is a law to himself????

I Think my screen name very clearly answers this question for me :D

[Pressing-On]

Its only an issue for a small segment of OP believers, Mennonites, Amish, FLDs, utracon Baptists, etc.

The rest of the Body of Christ has move beyond this petty issue.
Oh my gosh - He has arrived!!!!! I feel a smart aleck attack hitting me!!!

:toofunny

[Pressing-On]

I Think my screen name very clearly answers this question for me :D

Aww, that is so cute, honey.

[SDG]

Yeah, right. And you live on what planet?

I don't see the rest of the Body of Christ debating this non-issue. When's the last time you have seen a mainstream org or denomination debate this ...

It's an issue to just a few of us.

Time to move on to true Holiness.

[Pressing-On]

Well, now that we are taking a derogatory downturn - I'm out.

[Baron1710]

Its only an issue for a small segment of OP believers, Mennonites, Amish, FLDs, utracon Baptists, etc.

The rest of the Body of Christ has move beyond this petty issue.

It's hard for me to believe that I once thought this was an important issue. This is such a non-issue, I would never raise my daughter to think that she has to wear a dress to please God. For those that do hold to this, does that apply in your home as well?

[Cindy]

I don't see the rest of the Body of Christ debating this non-issue. When's last time you have seen a mainstream org or denomination debate this ...

It's an issue to just a few of us.

Time to move on the true Holiness.

Sheesh Daniel, get over it. I didn't know anyone debated this til I came to AFF. I have some issues but what I or anyone else wears is not one of them.

Be nice to your elder anyway, that would be true Holiness right?

[My Own Eyes]

CC1,
When I worked behind the cosmetic counter - Barton Creek mall - Austin (lol) I found that most women wished they didn't have to fool with all of that but society forces it on them.

That aggravates me to no end.

Most of the men I've dated didn't really care if I wore it or not. My first husband, before I got in church, told me once - "I wish you would stop dressing, everyday, like we are going to the opera!!!" :toofunny:toofunny

I have no problem with makeup at all, but most of the time don't mess with it. I get just as irritated at the "Women are ugly without makeup" crowd as I do with the "No makeup, you Jezebel!" crowd.

I work in a casual environment, and one day a few summers ago I was wearing flip-flops, and my boss make a smart alleck comment "If you are going to make us look at your toes, you could at least put polish on them"

I turned and gave him "the look" (The one that would make my husband run away at breakneck speed) and said "Excuse me? Do you were polish on your toes?"

To which my male boss of course answered "no"

to which I continued "So, are you implying that my toes in their natural state are somehow deficient, and are in need of polish to make them sufficiently viewable?"

(says he)..."uhhhhh....ummmmm..."

(I continue) "And that your toes are someone completely acceptable in their natural state, simply because you WERE BORN A MAN, AND I A WOMAN???"

At which point he got a really scared look on his face and started backing away. Would you believe he has never again made any reference to toe-nail polish or makeup of any kind, ever again? :heeheehee

[Amos]

I don't see the rest of the Body of Christ debating this non-issue. When's the last time you have seen a mainstream org or denomination debate this ...

It's an issue to just a few of us.

Time to move on to true Holiness.

Yeah...they've moved on to debating weightier matters, like whether to ordain homosexuals.

[Pressing-On]

I have no problem with makeup at all, but most of the time don't mess with it. I get just as irritated at the "Women are ugly without makeup" crowd as I do with the "No makeup, you Jezebel!" crowd.

I work in a casual environment, and one day a few summers ago I was wearing flip-flops, and my boss make a smart alleck comment "If you are going to make us look at your toes, you could at least put polish on them"

I turned and gave him "the look" (The one that would make my husband run away at breakneck speed) and said "Excuse me? Do you were polish on your toes?"

To which my male boss of course answered "no"

to which I continued "So, are you implying that my toes in their natural state are somehow deficient, and are in need of polish to make them sufficiently viewable?"

(says he)..."uhhhhh....ummmmm..."

(I continue) "And that your toes are someone completely acceptable in their natural state, simply because you WERE BORN A MAN, AND I A WOMAN???"

At which point he got a really scared look on his face and started backing away. Would you believe he has never again made any reference to toe-nail polish or makeup of any kind, ever again? :heeheehee
You make a good point. You see the world pushes a standard on women too! And that one is far more egregious to women than what the UPC is doing, IMO.

[bkstokes]

It's hard for me to believe that I once thought this was an important issue. This is such a non-issue, I would never raise my daughter to think that she has to wear a dress to please God. For those that do hold to this, does that apply in your home as well?

I have 2 daughters and they are young. They get their hair cut and were kids clothing -- like pink pants -- something my boys would never wear. Trust me my daughters could not be mistaken for boys.

If I were I woman, I would not want to dress that way. So I do not and will not place on my daughters what I think are unneeded traditions of men.

To all those who practice it, please understand I am not trying to demean your beliefs. I just have experience first hand how traditions of men can damage people's faith.

[Pressing-On]

Yeah...they've moved on to debating weightier matters, like whether to ordain homosexuals.

Okay, that was a good one!! :toofunny:toofunny

[SDG]

Yeah...they've moved on to debating weightier matters, like whether to ordain homosexuals.

Both extrabiblical teachings.

[Baron1710]

I have 2 daughters and they are young. They get their hair cut and were kids clothing -- like pink pants -- something my boys would never wear. Trust me my daughters could not be mistaken for boys.

If I were I woman, I would not want to dress that way. So I do not and will not place on my daughters what I think are unneeded traditions of men.

To all those who practice it, please understand I am not trying to demean your beliefs. I just have experience first hand how traditions of men can damage people's faith.

I have a 10 year old daughter and believe me she would never be mistaken for a boy!!! And my son would never wear her clothes, if he did we would have a meeting behind the wood shed.

[My Own Eyes]

You make a good point. You see the world pushes a standard on women too! And that one is far more egregious to women than what the UPC is doing, IMO.

Yes, I had this problem alot with my Mom, who was in the UPC a short time (3 years), and left about 3 years before I did.

Okay, that was a good one!! :toofunny:toofunny

Even though I am way liberal on the gay marriage / gay ministry thing. I do have to give Amos props for being funny :)

[MrsMcD]

I was raised in a UPC pastor's home so of course wearing pants was a huge sin. I wasn't even allowed to wear pajamas as child.

The older I got and the more I studied my bible, I realized that some things couldn't be found in scripture. I also realized that some scriptures were misinterpreted. I choose to live my life according to scripture. Judge not -- lest you be judged.

I think one important thing to note is when people have a prayer life, they drop the judgmental attitude and the self righteousness. If someone comes up to you complaining about sister so and so wearing pants, ask that person how her/his prayer life is. That will shut her/him up.

[Pressing-On]

Yes, I had this problem alot with my Mom, who was in the UPC a short time (3 years), and left about 3 years before I did.

I'm not certain you got my point. I am saying that the world puts more pressure on women to conform to the cosmetic counter, salons, etc. than what the UPC puts on women.

I am torn between both as I've lived on both sides for equal time now.

I don't like a spiritual barometer to be placed on my life in the way of outward dress. I want someone to see that coming from my heart. I did have a woman stop me in the parking lot at Hastings a few months ago saying, "You have the most sincere smile of anyone I have met in years and I know. I've been a teacher in the public school system for 30 years."

Now, that absolutely made my day! I love talking to people. I just happened to smile at her as I passed. She was so kind to say that.

On the other end, I absolutely (my favorite word, BTW, lol) hated the pressure of always having my make-up just right, my hair just right. Making sure I was fixed up before I left the house. That was more intense pressure for me than the standards of the UPC. I'm not saying I don't still feel that way about being dressed, but the make-up issue was just overwhelming to me.

My only contention is preaching the standards as NOT being salvational, yet if you don't conform you are lost. It doesn't make sense.

So, you see, women are experiencing pressure on BOTH sides. It's not just coming from one direction.

[Pressing-On]

I was raised in a UPC pastor's home so of course wearing pants was a huge sin. I wasn't even allowed to wear pajamas as child.

The older I got and the more I studied my bible, I realized that some things couldn't be found in scripture. I also realized that some scriptures were misinterpreted. I choose to live my life according to scripture. Judge not -- lest you be judged.

I think one important thing to note is when people have a prayer life, they drop the judgmental attitude and the self righteousness. If someone comes up to you complaining about sister so and so wearing pants, ask that person how her/his prayer life is. That will shut her/him up.
Excellent post!!! :thumbsup

[My Own Eyes]

I'm not certain you got my point. I am saying that the world puts more pressure on women to conform to the cosmetic counter, salons, etc. than what the UPC puts on women.

I am torn between both as I've lived on both sides for equal time now.

I don't like a spiritual barometer to be placed on my life in the way of outward dress. I want someone to see that coming from my heart. I did have a woman stop me in the parking lot at Hastings a few months ago saying, "You have the most sincere smile of anyone I have met in years and I know. I've been a teacher in the public school system for 30 years."

Now, that absolutely made my day! I love talking to people. I just happened to smile at her as I passed. She was so kind to say that.

On the other end, I absolutely (my favorite word, BTW, lol) hated the pressure of always having my make-up just right, my hair just right. Making sure I was fixed up before I left the house. That was more intense pressure for me than the standards of the UPC. I'm not saying I don't still feel that way about being dressed, but the make-up issue was just overwhelming to me.

My only contention is preaching the standards as NOT being salvational, yet if you don't conform you are lost. It doesn't make sense.

So, you see, women are experiencing pressure on BOTH sides. It's not just coming from one direction.

I think this might be one of those things that can't bridge the current upc / ex-upc divide.

Whereas I don't deny that the world (or at the least certain aspects of it) puts pressure on women to have a certain appearance. I, personally, felt an equal amount of pressure in the UPC, when it came to standards.

However, though I no longer follow standards, I will be honest, and confess that prior to my experience in the UPC church, when I felt the pressure from the world to conform to its standards of beauty I would usually bow to its wishes. I think being in the UPC, really taught me how to put all that in perspective. So now, post-UPC, I feel like I am able to ignore that pressure, and just be me.

[My Own Eyes]

So, you see, women are experiencing pressure on BOTH sides. It's not just coming from one direction.

PO, I just caught this last line. Which means we do actually agree :)

[Pressing-On]

I think this might be one of those things that can't bridge the current upc / ex-upc divide.

Whereas I don't deny that the world (or at the least certain aspects of it) puts pressure on women to have a certain appearance. I, personally, felt an equal amount of pressure in the UPC, when it came to standards.

However, though I no longer follow standards, I will be honest, and confess that prior to my experience in the UPC church, when I felt the pressure from the world to conform to its standards of beauty I would usually bow to its wishes. I think being in the UPC, really taught me how to put all that in perspective. So now, post-UPC, I feel like I am able to ignore that pressure, and just be me.
Excellent post, girl! Yes, we do bow to that pressure and yes, the UPC has taught us to ignore that pressure!

I'm happy the conversation has brought this out. It is an important element in the discussion to me. I used to sell Lancome and you know I had drawers full of everythang!!! :toofunny So, sick of all of that!!!! I still use base, but the other stuff - they can have it.

I also like my Burt's Bees lip salve. lol

[Pressing-On]

PO, I just caught this last line. Which means we do actually agree :)
Amen and thanks for catching that. It is important!

[StMark]

I got tickled when I read the title of this thread concerning the age-old Pants On Women Sin! lol...

After my wife and I came out of UPC a number of years ago and she began wearing pants, we were reminded of Deuteronomy 22:5. I had preached from that text myself in the past. Of course, that was prior to our coming to a much clearer revelation of the freedom from that Old Law which Jesus gave us through the power of the Cross and by the Grace of God. I'll never forget a dear lady who called me and gave me the reminder of the 22 & 5 Rule and asked how could I no longer preach that women should live according to that scripture?

Well, first of all, Christ set us free through the work of the Cross, which is made very clear to us in the New Testament. But even beyond that, how can we preach that WOMEN should obey Deuteronomy 22:5 and even go so far as to make it into a "MAN-MADE SALVATION ISSUE" and then neglect to live according to the rest of the chapter or the book for that matter.

For those who are preaching that women should live according to 22:5, please allow me to ask a couple of questions.

1) For those of you who farm or garden - Do you plant more than one kind of seed in your crop or in your garden? I certainly hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:9 says plainly, Don't Do It!!! If you do, your fruit will be defiled! There may be some getting under conviction even now!

2) For all of you fashion experts - Surely you've never worn any sort of a garment that was made out of a wool and linen blend of material? :reaction Again, I hope not, because Deuteronomy 22:11 again plainly says, Don't Do It!!! We may need to check our clothing tags. It may be time for some closet cleaning!

3) And of course, this could go on and on, but for time's sake, I'll simply utilize only one more example. Still going along the clothes line - I pray that all of your cloaks do have tassels on all four corners, because Deuteronomy 22:12 says that you must have tassels on all four corners of the cloaks that you wear.

Now, of course, I'm being a little sarcastic in my scenarios, but the point is correct nonetheless. If we are going to preach 22:5 TO WOMEN (they always seem to get the brunt of the man-made rules) and bind them to that one lone scripture and in MANY churches even make it a Heaven or Hell issue, then how can we just neglect all of the rest of the Chapter?

Can somebody please explain that? (And please don't say "Because it's in the UPCI Manual") Yes, I've actually heard that from quite a number of my UPC Preacher friends. And I've even heard from some non-UPC Preacher friends who believe that, that that's the way their parents did it, so...

Paul taught us to dress modesty, but he never preached Deuteronomy 22:5 as a dress code for women or men for that matter, at least not as far as we know. So why do some?

Just a few questions I have...

Thanks for the opportunity to share...


If we can Do away with Duet 22 then whose to say we can do away with the scripture in Lev. that says that lying with man and man is an abomination???

Isn't there a difference between the civil laws of Israel and moral laws that are timeless ??


.

[StMark]

My philosophy is if people want to live that why fine, but don't make into a test of spirituality. MANY believe that the stricter one is with type of stuff, then the holier you are. It is written that His blood is what sanctifies, not standards.

Apart from this,

Mark I think it is time that this issue go away. I disdain the fact that this would be oneness pentecostals calling card. A man I know, sincerely saw little difference between pentecostals and the FLDS (talking about dress). I didn't even try to go into the differences because really it is the same mentality (unscriptural subjection of women). One can really make the Bible say pretty much near anything (twisting and turning it) -- Look at the crazy posts that have been going on in the forum of late.


And I will admit, that is a BIG concern for me! I hate being compared to the FLDS and UPC is starting to get hit with that comment a lot. something we cringe at whether we admit it or not.

I just heard recently that a group of Cons were at some conference somewhere and many in the community thought that the FLDS had come to town. seriously

Stokes,As for wanting this topic to go away, It's still up for debate in the UPC and yes, I like to "stoke" the fire :happydance

[StMark]

Yeah...they've moved on to debating weightier matters, like whether to ordain homosexuals.


and this ought to give all the XPentecostals pause for thought.

I just read today where TD Jakes is meeting with soul force (gay christian group) to see if they have common ground.

20 years ago he was still preaching standards in Apalchia

[Sam]

In my opinion, it is none of my business how a brother or sister dresses. That is between them and their Lord. I am not their judge ----God is.

[bkstokes]

In my opinion, it is none of my business how a brother or sister dresses. That is between them and their Lord. I am not their judge ----God is.

Very True Sam

But many have taught levels of holiness according to dress standards.

[StMark]

You folks are edvidently afraid to touch those last posts I just posted
# 201/ 203

some things make you wonder .....

[SDG]

You folks are edvidently afraid to touch those last posts I just posted
# 201/ 203

some things make you wonder .....

That's because your one pre-text tells us that we must accept that pants are solely men's apparel ... which they are not ....

There is a verse that tells a woman to marry her rapist in Deut 22 ... do we obey that too?

[Cindy]

and this ought to give all the XPentecostals pause for thought.

I just read today where TD Jakes is meeting with soul force (gay christian group) to see if they have common ground.

20 years ago he was still preaching standards in Apalchia

Where did you read this?

[StMark]

That's because your one pre-text tells us that we must accept that pants are solely men's apparel ... which they are not ....

There is a verse that tells a woman to marry her rapist in Deut 22 ... do we obey that too?


Dan, aren't we suppose to Rightly divide the Old testament ?

Civil Law, Ceremonial Law, Moral Law ??? If we do away with all of the OT then that would have to include the 10 commandments

[Baron1710]

If we can Do away with Duet 22 then whose to say we can do away with the scripture in Lev. that says that lying with man and man is an abomination???

Isn't there a difference between the civil laws of Israel and moral laws that are timeless ??
.

Well to start with we are rejecting your interpretation not Scripture. No I do not believe there is a difference between moral law and civil law James tells us its all one law.

and this ought to give all the XPentecostals pause for thought.

I just read today where TD Jakes is meeting with soul force (gay christian group) to see if they have common ground.

20 years ago he was still preaching standards in Apalchia

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH here we all go down the slippery slope...just a silly argument that doesn't deserve a response.

[bkstokes]

If we can Do away with Duet 22 then whose to say we can do away with the scripture in Lev. that says that lying with man and man is an abomination???

Isn't there a difference between the civil laws of Israel and moral laws that are timeless ??


.

It is proper interpretation of Scripture. How did Isreal apply this teaching that was given to them. They both wore robes. The differences were that the women dressed in a more ortamental style -- but it was still the same basic robe. The same is true today -- women wear pants like men and they have differences. The principle was not to confuse the sexes.

My wife does not do away with that principle. My wife does not seek to look like a man.

[StMark]

Where did you read this?



http://gcmwatch.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/is-td-jakes-going-gay-christian-friendly/

[My Own Eyes]

and this ought to give all the XPentecostals pause for thought.

I just read today where TD Jakes is meeting with soul force (gay christian group) to see if they have common ground.

20 years ago he was still preaching standards in Apalchia

The thought that I have when I pause is "Yay! for Him" :)

[SDG]

Dan, aren't we suppose to Rightly divide the Old testament ?

Civil Law, Ceremonial Law, Moral Law ??? If we do away with all of the OT then that would have to include the 10 commandments

Are you for real, Mark ... now we must obey all OT commandments ...???

Think about what you just said.

I understand that your tradition and/or conviction is important to you ...

Subjugating women to a a Norman Rockwell painting that you mistake for God's Holiness is not bible .... it's extrabiblical.

You have no bible for your pants position ... none ... there .... it is not God's Word, Mark. It's in your head.

[bkstokes]

and this ought to give all the XPentecostals pause for thought.

I just read today where TD Jakes is meeting with soul force (gay christian group) to see if they have common ground.

20 years ago he was still preaching standards in Apalchia

This can't be proved as a cause and effect relationship and I doubt that there is a strong correlation. It may be that both of these things have/are happening but I think the latter deals with the issue of the heart.

[SDG]

It is proper interpretation of Scripture. How did Isreal apply this teaching that was given to them. They both wore robes. The differences were that the women dressed in a more ortamental style -- but it was still the same basic robe. The same is true today -- women wear pants like men and they have differences. The principle was not to confuse the sexes.

My wife does not do away with that principle. My wife does not seek to look like a man.


When one examines the fact that in OT times they both wore the same basic garb w/ gender distinctions ... the ultracon argument falls apart.

[StMark]

Are you for real, Mark ... now we must obey all OT commandments ...???

Think about what you just said.

I understand that your tradition and/or conviction is important to you ...

Subjugating women to a a Norman Rockwell painting that you mistake for God's Holiness is not bible .... it's extrabiblical.

You have no bible for your pants position ... none ... there it is not God's Word.



No Dan, I'm only trying to have a discussion and instead you and the others always have to lower yourself to putdowns. Why ????

[SDG]

No Dan, I'm only trying to have a discussion and instead you and the others always have to lower yourself to putdowns. Why ????

Bro ... where's the put down ...

I could find it insulting that somehow you've equated that those who don't obey Deut 22 as you have interpreted matters well just be gay or support homosexuality ...

There's enough in your posts to support this implication ...

And I'm not having a cow.

[StMark]

Bro ... where's the put down ...

I could find it insulting that somehow you've equated that those who don't obey Deut 22 as you have interpreted matters well just be gay or support homosexuality ...

There's enough in your posts to support this implication ...

And I'm not having a cow.



No Amos said that and I said that should give us pause for thought

[SDG]

If we use your approach to accepting your interpretation to Deut. 22 then we must stone children who are disrespectful to their parents.

Sorry Mark ... there has to be a better way to substantiate your tradition.

[SDG]

No Amos said that and I said that should give us pause for thought


No sir ... you piggybacked w/ the slippery slope homosexual comparisons ... See your TD Jakes quote and your laying down w/ another man post.

Want me to quote you?

That's a one-side discussion if you ask me ... where you get to paint those who disagree w/ you in flaming pink.

[StMark]

No sir ... you piggybacked w/ the slippery slope comparisons ... See your TD Jakes quote and your laying down w/ another man post.

Want me to quote you?

NO Dan, Did I Bring that comment up or did Amos???

I'm by no means saying that Everyone who has changed their standards
have changed on that issue, but I am seeing more and more who came from traditional Pentecostal background which I will admit is disturbing to me.

The comparison of those 2 scriptures was strictly a question, not a putdown

[SDG]

NO Dan, Did I Bring that comment up or did Amos???

I'm by no means saying that Everyone who has changed their standards
have changed on that issue, but I am seeing more and more who came from traditional Pentecostal background which I will admit is disturbing to me.

The comparison of those 2 scriptures was strictly a question, not a putdown

But one is not related to the other ... both are extrabiblical positions ... rejected by most of the Body of Christ.

to make the linkage is faulty reasoning ... and simply hysterics used to maintain a fictional paradigm of God's Holiness. Manipulation at it's best ...

Just how the term charismatic is used to marginalize those who diverge.

[dizzyde]

:girlpopcorn

[HeavenlyOne]

There are some who want to fall on the safe side of the line; others don't mind taking chances.

Like you, I am one of the cautious ones.

If wearing women's pants makes a man look feminine, how does wearing those same women's pants make a woman look masculine?

There's more to looking like the other gender than what one is wearing below the waist.

[SDG]

If wearing women's pants makes a man look feminine, how does wearing those same women's pants make a woman look masculine?

There's more to looking like the other gender than what one is wearing below the waist.

Um, er *heehaw*

[HeavenlyOne]

If we can Do away with Duet 22 then whose to say we can do away with the scripture in Lev. that says that lying with man and man is an abomination???

Isn't there a difference between the civil laws of Israel and moral laws that are timeless ??


.

Mark, you have to do away with the belief that Deut 22:5 is about women wearing pants. It's not. Not even close. Nobody is doing away with that scripture because it still applies to everyone today.

[StMark]

Mark, you have to do away with the belief that Deut 22:5 is about women wearing pants. It's not. Not even close. Nobody is doing away with that scripture because it still applies to everyone today.


Okay, now we are making a little progress.

If a man wore a dress made ONLY for women, say the fabric is made from burlap and has litte spikes coming out of it to make it more masculine, wouldn't it still "PERTAIN" to a female's garment since it's a Dress ???

HO, when did pants AND a dress both become a woman's garment but only pants are for men ??

[jaxfam6]

It's more than that. It's finding our place and following the convictions we feel that God has placed in our own individual lives.

We can't even look back at the OT for this.

The world is in chaos, the church world is in chaos.

We just need to find where God wants us. I will also say when a person finds that place, for them, and it happens to be the UPC, we need to leave them and their convictions alone.

It's one thing to debate here, as we often do, but if someone feels that is what they need in their life to stand before God, we need to leave that alone.

Not everyone can live the same way. Not every person will have the same convictions. Some are stronger by personal choice.

We need to respect each person's decision and consecration.


and can we hear a resounding AMEN

[jaxfam6]

Okay, now we are making a little progress.

If a man wore a dress made ONLY for women, say the fabric is made from burlap and has litte spikes coming out of it to make it more masculine, wouldn't it still "PERTAIN" to a female's garment since it's a Dress ???

HO, when did pants AND a dress both become a woman's garment but only pants are for men ??

What about Scottland's kilts or even Greece? those are not dresses but are a man's garment, and looks very much like a skirt. Grant it many do not wear them now days but still was made for men.

[StMark]

Pressing on,


Read my opinoin post. The reason for this thread was not to put down peoples' individual convictions. The discussion is about the future of the UPC in regards to this teaching

[StMark]

What about Scottland's kilts or even Greece? those are not dresses but are a man's garment, and looks very much like a skirt. Grant it many do not wear them now days but still was made for men.

Those are worn for ceremonial purposes only or for some types of cultural festivities that celebrate their past.

[jaxfam6]

I hate this thread. Every time I read something where peole have responded to StMark they simply use Mark and that is my first name also and I have to stop and remind myself I did not start this. Besides as many differences as Dan and I have on some of our beliefs this is not one of them.
Isn't there a post on AFF somewhere that someone stated about one of the Targum's that had been written so that the OT could be understood by those that did not understand Hebrew, back all those years ago, show that the scripture got translated as women not wearing the fringe like the men and men not shaving to look like a woman? Just one of the old translations from before all our times but since we have the Holy Ghost living in us now days I am sure we have a better understanding of it all now.

[StMark]

I hate this thread. Every time I read something where peole have responded to StMark they simply use Mark and that is my first name also and I have to stop and remind myself I did not start this. Besides as many differences as Dan and I have on some of our beliefs this is not one of them.
Isn't there a post on AFF somewhere that someone stated about one of the Targum's that had been written so that the OT could be understood by those that did not understand Hebrew, back all those years ago, show that the scripture got translated as women not wearing the fringe like the men and men not shaving to look like a woman? Just one of the old translations from before all our times but since we have the Holy Ghost living in us now days I am sure we have a better understanding of it all now.

How are they using me ??? I'm just trying to understand your point.

which Dan are you talking about?

why do you hate this thread?

[jaxfam6]

Those are worn for ceremonial purposes only or for some types of cultural festivities that celebrate their past.

Have you been to Scotland lately? not all wear them for ceremonial.
They are making a big come back these days in daily dress and fashion over there. As I stated though not all wear them all the time but there is a trend towards more men wearing them all the time.

[ForeverBlessed]

Hi Mark.... I see you are still concerned with "pants". :blah You kill me my friend. :toofunny

I heard a UPC preacher make a comment just the other day about the problem we are having with "feminine" young men in the church today... "Have you seen all the women's pants these young guys are wearing??".

I thought I was gonna lose it. Sadly I was the only one who saw the humor of that statement.... I felt a little bad for it... I was in a church service, I had to be good. As much as some might not like to admit it... there is quite a difference in men's and women's pants.

Sad to say, many of this younger generation of men has adopted a very feminine leaning in their dress. I think it is even in some of their hair styles. I saw one young man at a recent youth rally with the tightest, low riding pair of girly jeans and even a purse/bag slung over his shoulder... long shaggy hair... I guess he was hip... I think some of these boys need taken out back.... whup something into them.

I hate to see effeminacy in a man, and masculinity in a woman... that spirit is exactly what Deut 22:5 was addressing.

[StMark]

Have you been to Scotland lately? not all wear them for ceremonial.
They are making a big come back these days in daily dress and fashion over there. As I stated though not all wear them all the time but there is a trend towards more men wearing them all the time.



That is the culture. I don't believe that if we had the opportunity to go to Arabia, we sould try to change them from wearing robes because it's the culture. UNLESS the culture was ungodly. In heathen cultures, we have to instruct them in a better and more biblical way.
In our western culture, Men do not wear dresses period. women are wearing whatever they want. the lines have been blurred.

[jaxfam6]

I hate this thread. Every time I read something where peole have responded to StMark they simply use Mark and that is my first name also and I have to stop and remind myself I did not start this. Besides as many differences as Dan and I have on some of our beliefs this is not one of them.
Isn't there a post on AFF somewhere that someone stated about one of the Targum's that had been written so that the OT could be understood by those that did not understand Hebrew, back all those years ago, show that the scripture got translated as women not wearing the fringe like the men and men not shaving to look like a woman? Just one of the old translations from before all our times but since we have the Holy Ghost living in us now days I am sure we have a better understanding of it all now.

How are they using me ??? I'm just trying to understand your point.

which Dan are you talking about?

why do you hate this thread?


Do not really hate it. Just a figure of speach. My first name is Mark ALSO and ever time I see them respond to YOU they are using just the Mark part and since it is my name I of course have to REMEMBER it is not ME they are talking to. Not that it is a big deal.
DANIEL A is the Dan I was talking about.

[jaxfam6]

Hi Mark.... I see you are still concerned with "pants". :blah You kill me my friend. :toofunny

I heard a UPC preacher make a comment just the other day about the problem we are having with "feminine" young men in the church today... "Have you seen all the women's pants these young guys are wearing??".

I thought I was gonna lose it. Sadly I was the only one who saw the humor of that statement.... I felt a little bad for it... I was in a church service, I had to be good. As much as some might not like to admit it... there is quite a difference in men's and women's pants.

Sad to say, many of this younger generation of men has adopted a very feminine leaning in their dress. I think it is even in some of their hair styles. I saw one young man at a recent youth rally with the tightest, low riding pair of girly jeans and even a purse/bag slung over his shoulder... long shaggy hair... I guess he was hip... I think some of these boys need taken out back.... whup something into them.

I hate to see effeminacy in a man, and masculinity in a woman... that spirit is exactly what Deut 22:5 was addressing.

Exactly

[StMark]

Hi Mark.... I see you are still concerned with "pants". :blah You kill me my friend. :toofunny

I heard a UPC preacher make a comment just the other day about the problem we are having with "feminine" young men in the church today... "Have you seen all the women's pants these young guys are wearing??".

I thought I was gonna lose it. Sadly I was the only one who saw the humor of that statement.... I felt a little bad for it... I was in a church service, I had to be good. As much as some might not like to admit it... there is quite a difference in men's and women's pants.

Sad to say, many of this younger generation of men has adopted a very feminine leaning in their dress. I think it is even in some of their hair styles. I saw one young man at a recent youth rally with the tightest, low riding pair of girly jeans and even a purse/bag slung over his shoulder... long shaggy hair... I guess he was hip... I think some of these boys need taken out back.... whup something into them.

I hate to see effeminacy in a man, and masculinity in a woman... that spirit is exactly what Deut 22:5 was addressing.

Foreverblessed, been a long time! I wasn't even sure if you was here anymore or not. I saw your name on the admin. list but thought perhaps it was in name only.

my point of starting this thread was to discuss the direction of the UPC. I do think that eventually pants will not be an issue and I don't quite know what to think of it.

I have several societal concerns. If anyone cannot admit that we are digressing spiritually and socially, then they choose to be blind. but WHY?? and HOW did we get to this point ??? I tend to believe that it was the little foxes that have spoiled the vine. why are men becoming more women like? the women are ruling are society now. that's why. Feminism has taken root, that's why.

[StMark]

Do not really hate it. Just a figure of speach. My first name is Mark ALSO and ever time I see them respond to YOU they are using just the Mark part and since it is my name I of course have to REMEMBER it is not ME they are talking to. Not that it is a big deal.
DANIEL A is the Dan I was talking about.


okay. I thought you was talking about Dan C.


Thanks

[jaxfam6]

okay. I thought you was talking about Dan C.


Thanks

Dan C'ing??? why would I be talking about dancing? this is about pants on women and the UPC

=)
j/k

[ForeverBlessed]

Foreverblessed, been a long time! I wasn't even sure if you was here anymore or not. I saw your name on the admin. list but thought perhaps it was in name only.

my point of starting this thread was to discuss the direction of the UPC. I do think that eventually pants will not be an issue and I don't quite know what to think of it.

I have several societal concerns. If anyone cannot admit that we are digressing spiritually and socially, then they choose to be blind. but WHY?? and HOW did we get to this point ??? I tend to believe that it was the little foxes that have spoiled the vine. why are men becoming more women like? the women are ruling are society now. that's why. Feminism has taken root, that's why.

I saw your first post... I know why you started it. I don't think it will be long before pants are acceptable for women in the UPC. Personally, that is fine with me.... couldn't be soon enough. I have a very talented 16 old who would love to sing. She loves God and the Apostolic faith but will never be used unless she submits to "platform" standards. Someday she might... but quite honestly feel she will go where she is used when she is an adult.. even if it is outside UPC.

The backslidings of the church today has nothing to do with clothing StMark..nothing at all. It is the condition of the heart, the love for God has grown cold... people are not dedicated to the things of God because he is not first in their lives.

[Steve Epley]

There is nothing wrong with a woman wearing pants IF she doesn't mind being an abomination. :bliss:bliss
And whoever worketh an abomination.....Rev.21:27

[Hoovie]

Foreverblessed, been a long time! I wasn't even sure if you was here anymore or not. I saw your name on the admin. list but thought perhaps it was in name only.

my point of starting this thread was to discuss the direction of the UPC. I do think that eventually pants will not be an issue and I don't quite know what to think of it.

I have several societal concerns. If anyone cannot admit that we are digressing spiritually and socially, then they choose to be blind. but WHY?? and HOW did we get to this point ??? I tend to believe that it was the little foxes that have spoiled the vine. why are men becoming more women like? the women are ruling are society now. that's why. Feminism has taken root, that's why.


This may be right in part, but I really don't think it is that simple, nor do I think a banket statement can be made regarding the church digressing... My family IS NOT.

:)

[HeavenlyOne]

Hi Mark.... I see you are still concerned with "pants". :blah You kill me my friend. :toofunny

I heard a UPC preacher make a comment just the other day about the problem we are having with "feminine" young men in the church today... "Have you seen all the women's pants these young guys are wearing??".

I thought I was gonna lose it. Sadly I was the only one who saw the humor of that statement.... I felt a little bad for it... I was in a church service, I had to be good. As much as some might not like to admit it... there is quite a difference in men's and women's pants.

Sad to say, many of this younger generation of men has adopted a very feminine leaning in their dress. I think it is even in some of their hair styles. I saw one young man at a recent youth rally with the tightest, low riding pair of girly jeans and even a purse/bag slung over his shoulder... long shaggy hair... I guess he was hip... I think some of these boys need taken out back.... whup something into them.

I hate to see effeminacy in a man, and masculinity in a woman... that spirit is exactly what Deut 22:5 was addressing.

It's funny that you post this, because I have to really look at pants when I buy them to make sure they don't look too masculine, as there are 'trousers' that are made for women but look like they are for men. I'm sure you've seen the kind I'm talking about.

Dockers makes a women's pant that looks like the men's, even the pockets in the back. I won't buy those kind, nor any other kind that look like they are men's pants.

There is a difference in how they look.

[StMark]

I saw your first post... I know why you started it. I don't think it will be long before pants are acceptable for women in the UPC. Personally, that is fine with me.... couldn't be soon enough. I have a very talented 16 old who would love to sing. She loves God and the Apostolic faith but will never be used unless she submits to "platform" standards. Someday she might... but quite honestly feel she will go where she is used when she is an adult.. even if it is outside UPC.

The backslidings of the church today has nothing to do with clothing StMark..nothing at all. It is the condition of the heart, the love for God has grown cold... people are not dedicated to the things of God because he is not first in their lives.


You mean you allow you 16 yr old who is under your roof to wear pants?
your father would have a fit FB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[HeavenlyOne]

Foreverblessed, been a long time! I wasn't even sure if you was here anymore or not. I saw your name on the admin. list but thought perhaps it was in name only.

my point of starting this thread was to discuss the direction of the UPC. I do think that eventually pants will not be an issue and I don't quite know what to think of it.

I have several societal concerns. If anyone cannot admit that we are digressing spiritually and socially, then they choose to be blind. but WHY?? and HOW did we get to this point ??? I tend to believe that it was the little foxes that have spoiled the vine. why are men becoming more women like? the women are ruling are society now. that's why. Feminism has taken root, that's why.


My friend, this has been happening for a long time now. It has nothing to do with women wearing pants nor with churches becoming more 'liberal'.

Look at the preachers and pastors who have fallen, for instance. They are not only men, but of the ones I know of, they are men thought to be conservative. The problem is the hearts of men and women, not what they are wearing at the moment.

[StMark]

There is nothing wrong with a woman wearing pants IF she doesn't mind being an abomination. :bliss:bliss
And whoever worketh an abomination.....Rev.21:27


Okay, now most of you folks who are liberal and believe women can wear pants and men can wear dresses also respect Bro Epley as well, yet he believes this is an abomination. Do you think that perhaps he has a point and might be right or is totally wrong?

[HeavenlyOne]

I saw your first post... I know why you started it. I don't think it will be long before pants are acceptable for women in the UPC. Personally, that is fine with me.... couldn't be soon enough. I have a very talented 16 old who would love to sing. She loves God and the Apostolic faith but will never be used unless she submits to "platform" standards. Someday she might... but quite honestly feel she will go where she is used when she is an adult.. even if it is outside UPC.

The backslidings of the church today has nothing to do with clothing StMark..nothing at all. It is the condition of the heart, the love for God has grown cold... people are not dedicated to the things of God because he is not first in their lives.

Excellent. I just posted the same thing.