NEW Standard Debate in the UPC! "Girls Leggings"!!!

[ForeverBlessed]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p344638.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p233223.jpg

My girls would wear those. We call them footless tights... Elaine would love that first pair... the crazier the better.

They are popular on the upc girls, but first time I saw them was at the local High school. They are worn under mini skirts... our girls wear them under skirts some where around the knees.

My church doesn't have a problem with them, I've seen them on the pulpit in the choir on some of the younger girls.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

My girls would wear those. We call them footless tights... Elaine would love that first pair... the crazier the better.

They are popular on the upc girls, but first time I saw them was at the local High school. They are worn under mini skirts... our girls wear them under skirts some where around the knees.

My church doesn't have a problem with them, I've seen them on the pulpit in the choir on some of the younger girls.

GASP!

[Scott Hutchinson]

what happend ?

See this happened when my pastor went there before He started pastoring ,but the church split over the issue of Hair bows on girls ,and it never recovered from it.

[Scott Hutchinson]

My girls would wear those. We call them footless tights... Elaine would love that first pair... the crazier the better.

They are popular on the upc girls, but first time I saw them was at the local High school. They are worn under mini skirts... our girls wear them under skirts some where around the knees.

My church doesn't have a problem with them, I've seen them on the pulpit in the choir on some of the younger girls.

My girls don't care for such ,but they love their Dixie girls shirts.
My oldest one is into the denim skirt thing you know.
They are into get their hair curled and such.

[Thad]

My girls would wear those. We call them footless tights... Elaine would love that first pair... the crazier the better.

They are popular on the upc girls, but first time I saw them was at the local High school. They are worn under mini skirts... our girls wear them under skirts some where around the knees.

My church doesn't have a problem with them, I've seen them on the pulpit in the choir on some of the younger girls.



Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??? those multi colored ones on the platform??

[Thad]

See this happened when my pastor went there before He started pastoring ,but the church split over the issue of Hair bows on girls ,and it never recovered from it.

scott, how does a church split over hair ribbons?

I'm having trouble buying that one

[Scott Hutchinson]

There is one UPCI church I know of ,that has a team that does human videos and such ,where the women wear leggins under their skirts.

[ForeverBlessed]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??? those multi colored ones on the platform??

I've not seen anyone with those multi-colored ones... but yes, they have worn colored ones under skirts... my daughter being one of them.

My daughter Elaine is known for her "different" outfits. She loves colors and combines colors/fabrics you would never dream of... she is very unique. She has a pair of bright stripped ones. It is just her nature... personality.. not sure I want to change who she is just to be more conservative like me. lol

[ForeverBlessed]

GASP!

mine don't wear mini's... the girls at school wear the mini skirts!!

[Scott Hutchinson]

scott, how does a church split over hair ribbons?

I'm having trouble buying that one

The brother that was the pastor said that it was unnecessary adornment ,and he wasn't going to stand for such ,and contention was started over the issue.
In the same church folks couldn't play ball or throw a ball in the yard with their kids either.

[Thad]

I've not seen anyone with those multi-colored ones... but yes, they have worn colored ones under skirts... my daughter being one of them.

My daughter Elaine is known for her "different" outfits. She loves colors and combines colors/fabrics you would never dream of... she is very unique. She has a pair of bright stripped ones. It is just her nature... personality.. not sure I want to change who she is just to be more conservative like me. lol


IS J.M getting more liberal???????????????????????

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

mine don't wear mini's... the girls at school wear the mini skirts!!

I knew this....

:thumbsup

[ForeverBlessed]

My girls don't care for such ,but they love their Dixie girls shirts.
My oldest one is into the denim skirt thing you know.
They are into get their hair curled and such.

yeah, the girls gotta have the curly hair... if it isn't curled mine is straightening it with the irons. Too much work for me. ;)

Mine are into layers... makes me hot thinking about all the layered shirts. :)

Girls... they are something... wouldn't trade them for all the boys in the world though.

[ForeverBlessed]

I knew this....

:thumbsup

ok.... hey, for some reason I don't see any smilies... or graphics for that matter... wonder what is wrong? I haven't for a few days..been too busy to ask you about it.

[ForeverBlessed]

IS J.M getting more liberal???????????????????????

He's not liberal... I think he calls himself progressive.. yeah, in fact I did hear him mention that in a service recently.

He is just very tolerant of youth... he isn't a hard nosed pastor at all. I like that, because most fads will pass with time and you have kids that stick and not ran off by a bunch of rules. Probably why we have a rockin' youth group with about 50 plus kids between 12-18 that are winning new kids all the time. They are on fire.

[Thad]

The brother that was the pastor said that it was unnecessary adornment ,and he wasn't going to stand for such ,and contention was started over the issue.
In the same church folks couldn't play ball or throw a ball in the yard with their kids either.


couldn't throw a Ball uh?

Yes I have heard this before. preachers preached that this would eventually lead to organized sports.

[Thad]

He's not liberal... I think he calls himself progressive.. yeah, in fact I did hear him mention that in a service recently.

He is just very tolerant of youth... he isn't a hard nosed pastor at all. I like that, because most fads will pass with time and you have kids that stick. Probably why we have a rockin' youth group with about 50 plus kids between 12-18 that are winning new kids all the time



BUt isn't he thought be liberal??

He certainly would be out here

[ForeverBlessed]

The brother that was the pastor said that it was unnecessary adornment ,and he wasn't going to stand for such ,and contention was started over the issue.
In the same church folks couldn't play ball or throw a ball in the yard with their kids either.

I have heard of those that lay down their own personal convictions like hair bows and such. I hate to see that kind of thing happen because adornment isn't something you mandate. I've seen contention because of that kind of stuff... sad really.

I have some personal convictions with adornment...but I got them by the leading of the Spirit. I don't require it of my kids though because they have their own walk with God.

[ForeverBlessed]

BUt isn't he thought be liberal??

He certainly would be out here

well, probably in entertainment or media.. but not basic standards.. I mean, I think he is considered moderate on dress standards.

Anyone who still believes in uncut hair on women is not liberal to me. ;)

[crakjak]

Some folks just like seeing girls calves & ankles I guess??? :hmmm

Beautiful things they are......!:2cents

[Nahum]

WH can I you ask a question ,and I you mean you no disrepect ,do the women in your church wears pajamas?


I really, really hope he cannot answer this one.:popcorn2

[crakjak]

or wholehearted watches "what not to wear"

And the women's legs to make sure they are not wearing leggings! :thad

[Thad]

You guys should show more respect

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

ok.... hey, for some reason I don't see any smilies... or graphics for that matter... wonder what is wrong? I haven't for a few days..been too busy to ask you about it.

You and MFBlume..... Are they turned off in your profile?

[ForeverBlessed]

You and MFBlume..... Are they turned off in your profile?

I checked and I am set to get graphics. I have red X's all over the page... it was that way last week too.

[crakjak]

The brother that was the pastor said that it was unnecessary adornment ,and he wasn't going to stand for such ,and contention was started over the issue.
In the same church folks couldn't play ball or throw a ball in the yard with their kids either.

I understand why it did not last. Just humans being humans.

[Monkeyman]

couldn't throw a Ball uh?

Yes I have heard this before. preachers preached that this would eventually lead to organized sports.
Stupid!

[Monkeyman]

Have you heard that there is a Debate over whether females ought to be allowed to wear Leggings under their skirts ??????


I heard a report that it's the Rage for UPC girls to wear long johns or jogging Pants under their skirts and some folks are in a tizzy over it.

There was even a report of a CA. Con church doing this and brows were raised.


Do you feel this is wrong as it pertains to the doctrine of Duet 22 ????

would you allow it in your church??


your opinions please
My opinion? Stupid.

[Monkeyman]

no panty hose are okay in fact many churches require them on the platform.
Alas, this too is stupid.

[Thad]

is that all you can say ??

everything is stupid ??

[Praxeas]

Have you heard that there is a Debate over whether females ought to be allowed to wear Leggings under their skirts ??????


I heard a report that it's the Rage for UPC girls to wear long johns or jogging Pants under their skirts and some folks are in a tizzy over it.

There was even a report of a CA. Con church doing this and brows were raised.


Do you feel this is wrong as it pertains to the doctrine of Duet 22 ????

would you allow it in your church??

your opinions please
I don't consider long johns or sweats "leggings", but if they can wear stockings why not?

[Thad]

I don't consider long johns or sweats "leggings", but if they can wear stockings why not?



how would you feel if they wore them WITHOUT the skirt ???

[CupCake]

Have you heard that there is a Debate over whether females ought to be allowed to wear Leggings under their skirts ??????


I heard a report that it's the Rage for UPC girls to wear long johns or jogging Pants under their skirts and some folks are in a tizzy over it.

There was even a report of a CA. Con church doing this and brows were raised.


Do you feel this is wrong as it pertains to the doctrine of Duet 22 ????

would you allow it in your church??

your opinions please

Thad~ My honest opinion on this, UPC PEOPLE REALLY HAVE NO LIFE! What next.......:girlnails

[Pressing-On]

Thad~ My honest opinion on this, UPC PEOPLE REALLY HAVE NO LIFE! What next.......:girlnails

I do to! I don't wear leggings. I wear thigh-hi's!!

:bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss

[Praxeas]

how would you feel if they wore them WITHOUT the skirt ???
You know leggings are just coverings for legs right? Like sleeves without the rest of the shirt.... :hypercoffee

[Thad]

Thad~ My honest opinion on this, UPC PEOPLE REALLY HAVE NO LIFE! What next.......:girlnails


that was very sarcasatic

[CupCake]

I do to! I don't wear leggings. I wear thigh-hi's!!

:bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss :bliss

Your such a sinner.....:hypercoffee

[Whole Hearted]

Thad~ My honest opinion on this, UPC PEOPLE REALLY HAVE NO LIFE! What next.......:girlnails

I'm UPC and I have a very good life.:ty

[Pressing-On]

Your such a sinner.....:hypercoffee
You are supposed to say - YOU GO GIRL!!!!

:highfive

[CupCake]

that was very sarcasatic

Sorry but it was pretty stupid, banned leggings, what's next Thad. Why not just our legs so you men won't sin.

[Pressing-On]

Sorry but it was pretty stupid, banned leggings, what's next Thad. Why not just our legs so you men won't sin.

They're going to ban OUR LEGS???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Thad]

Sorry but it was pretty stupid, banned leggings, what's next Thad. Why not just our legs so you men won't sin.

well it is a woman's responsibility not to make a man fall

[Pressing-On]

well it is a woman's responsibility not to make a man fall

And vice versa?

[Thad]

And vice versa?


we are talking about outward appearnace PO

[LaGirl]

i see yall are still at it :popcorn2

[Pressing-On]

we are talking about outward appearnace PO
Of course, Thad, but what about men?

[CupCake]

You are supposed to say - YOU GO GIRL!!!!

:highfive

Yeah you go GIRL, STRAIGHT TO DOUBLE LL TOOTHPICKS~

I've been out school many, many moons now, not sure if that's how we kids said it....;)

[Thad]

Of course, Thad, but what about men?


Men don't have issues with the outer standards and dress codes for the most part

[CupCake]

I'm UPC and I have a very good life.:ty

Way cool~

[Pressing-On]

Yeah you go GIRL, STRAIGHT TO DOUBLE LL TOOTHPICKS~

I've been out school many, many moons now, not sure if that's how we kids said it....;)
:toofunny :toofunny :toofunny

[CupCake]

well it is a woman's responsibility not to make a man fall

Thad are you ten years old or what? You are responsibility for yourself, if you fall it's your own fault stop blaming others for your down fall's~

[Pressing-On]

Men don't have issues with the outer standards and dress codes for the most part

The don't even need that to cause a women to stumble, Thad. But, I do see what you are saying about the outward appearance for a woman.

[Thad]

Thad are you ten years old or what? You are responsibility for yourself, if you fall it's your own fault stop blaming others for your down fall's~


my are we ever full of put downs today. not worth having a conversation with someone who only hurls insults

[Praxeas]

my are we ever full of put downs today. not worth having a conversation with someone who only hurls insults

Bah...just ignore twinkie

[CupCake]

Men don't have issues with the outer standards and dress codes for the most part

Most part is you men don't really have a code, look around you look just like the men in the world. In fact some of you look just like the LDS guy next store.

[CupCake]

my are we ever full of put downs today. not worth having a conversation with someone who only hurls insults

Thad take a hard look at what you are saying. I'm not trying to hurt just being honest here.

[Praxeas]

Most part is you men don't really have a code, look around you look just like the men in the world. In fact some of you look just like the LDS guy next store.
So the hope for women is that they can look like other women in the world?

[rrford]

well it is a woman's responsibility not to make a man fall

It is?????

[CupCake]

Bah...just ignore twinkie

Lol~ Yeah great advice coming from a foil head .....:hypercoffee

[CupCake]

So the hope for women is that they can look like other women in the world?

The women in the church do dress like the women in the world, in fact they look a lot like the Mormon polygamy groups here in UT .


Sorry but your dress does not stand out. Now Amish got it going, they, the men and women do dress unlike this world.

[Praxeas]

Lol~ Yeah great advice coming from a foil head .....:hypercoffee
lol

[Praxeas]

The women in the church do dress like the women in the world, in fact they look a lot like the Mormon polygamy groups here in UT .


Sorry but your dress does not stand out. Now Amish got it going, they, the men and women do dress unlike this world.
Then what is the complaint?

[CupCake]

Then what is the complaint?

The complaint is this, to say legging are worldly and sinful just because the world wear them is crazy. We all wear undies, well guess what, so does the world. YOU REALLY DON'T LOOK ALL THAT DIFFERENT~ Nor does your outward dress separate you from the people of this world, it just a sign for you and your own kind, like the Amish dress thing, nothing more nothing less.

[Rhoni]

well it is a woman's responsibility not to make a man fall

That is the most assinine thing I've ever heard...Adam always blaming Eve for not being man enough to handle his own...emotions;)! Looks like men need hormone replacement therapy as much as us menopausal women!:girlnails

[rrford]

That is the most assinine thing I've ever heard...Adam always blaming Eve for not being man enough to handle his own...emotions;)! Looks like men need hormone replacement therapy as much as us menopausal women!:girlnails

Say, haven't you told me before that you hate it when I use that word? :hypercoffee (And at least I spell it correctly. LOL!)

[Sherri]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I'm assuming the girls are wearing leggings under modest length skirts, not minis. What is the difference in that and just having the bare legs showing? I think the leggings would be more modest. Do the girls really need ONE MORE thing they can't do that they think is cute?

[Scott Hutchinson]

That deal where the women go to sleep ,like when they are sitting up in chairs and stuff is kinda hard to take.

[Thad]

i'm going to leave this alone. no use when your surrounded and ganged up on by a bunch of women. I'm not attacking anyone even though I'm getting attacked

[rgcraig]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p344638.jpg

These are not cute.....lol!

[CupCake]

i'm going to leave this alone. no use when your surrounded and ganged up on by a bunch of women. I'm not attacking anyone even though I'm getting attacked

Thad no one attacking you, your right it be best to go if this is getting you upset. Night ~

[Rhoni]

Say, haven't you told me before that you hate it when I use that word? :hypercoffee (And at least I spell it correctly. LOL!)

Maybe I did, but I'm sorry I said that to you cuz sometimes there is just no better word!:donuts

Blessings, Rhoni

P.S. Sorry about the spelling!

[IBCrazier2]

I personally see the leggings as the same thing tights and hose are. Provided they are under a skirt that is not too short. The sweat pants and such are in my opinion something that may be crossing the line.

That being said, I still think that America as a whole is slipping in the respect department! I think that we should dress up to go to church, especially if you are to be on the platform. I think I have been on the platform in a regular service wearing jeans maybe 3-4 times since I can remember.

[CupCake]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p344638.jpg

These are not cute.....lol!

My daughters wear these type of legging~
http://www.verycool.it/wp-content/images/leggins.jpg

[Scott Hutchinson]

I've got to go cause I'm tempted to post something silly.

[Pressing-On]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p344638.jpg

These are not cute.....lol!

No they are not. They are mainly used to wear with a long shirt and not a dress. That is probably what the issue is about.

Other than a fashion statement I don't see what the purpose is. Pantyhose would be more comfortable. The leggings are annoying because they ride up your leg.

[Pressing-On]

I've got to go cause I'm tempted to post something silly.

It's not 10:00 yet. Come back later! :killinme

[Scott Hutchinson]

I feel a silly spell coming on ,and I might post something I shouldn't.

[CupCake]

The leggings are annoying because they ride up your leg.

Lol~ Honestly I've never had them ride up, just fall down...Is there a secret here I'm missing out on~ Do share~

[CupCake]

I feel a silly spell coming on ,and I might post something I shouldn't.

Sure Scott, your going to try some on....;)

[Pressing-On]

I feel a silly spell coming on ,and I might post something I shouldn't.
We forgive you already as a typical man! :tease :killinme :killinme

[Sweet Pea]

Hi sweet pea
we enjoyed being at your church Friday!

Hi Thad! Glad you enjoyed being in our church. I saw you....... :heeheehee Due to my schedule on Saturday - I didn't get to stay for the whole concert. So I missed your choir, since they were last on the schedule. Heard later that you had the place rockin'. :nod

Now back to the topic at hand.... I was a little surprised at some leg attire that some of the Ultra Con choir was wearing - as well as some of the footwear. :heeheehee Didn't offend me, but I was surprised when I found that that they were from that church... :popcorn2

[Pressing-On]

Lol~ Honestly I've never had them ride up, just fall down...Is there a secret here I'm missing out on~ Do share~

I don't have a secret. I used to exercise in leggings. I didn't wear them for fashion. So, really, it's an 80's thing coming back in. :girlnails :nod

[CupCake]

I don't have a secret. I used to exercise in leggings. I didn't wear them for fashion. So, really, it's an 80's thing coming back in. :girlnails :nod

Ok, I've not wore them in years, but when I did they make there way down around my knees or feet, lol. My daughters wear the new kind love them, a lot warmer.

[Praxeas]

I don't have a secret. I used to exercise in leggings. I didn't wear them for fashion. So, really, it's an 80's thing coming back in. :girlnails :nod
Were you into FlashDance too?

[CupCake]

I got it, men folks are trying to find another way to keep us gals from spending money~....;)

[Pressing-On]

Were you into FlashDance too?



I remember that movie. :blush

[Praxeas]

I bet you were a maniac, maniac then too

[Pressing-On]

I got it, men folks are trying to find another way to keep us gals from spending money~....;)
Since when did that stop anyone! :girlnails

[Pressing-On]

I bet you were a maniac, maniac then too

Are you addressing me, Monsieur Tin Solider hat dude?!!!

[HeavenlyOne]

So the Mae West nekkidness of 1925 was not cultural? some attribute the Great Depression to being the Judgement of God on such wickedness.

No, it wasn't cultural.

[Thad]

Hi Thad! Glad you enjoyed being in our church. I saw you....... :heeheehee Due to my schedule on Saturday - I didn't get to stay for the whole concert. So I missed your choir, since they were last on the schedule. Heard later that you had the place rockin'. :nod

Now back to the topic at hand.... I was a little surprised at some leg attire that some of the Ultra Con choir was wearing - as well as some of the footwear. :heeheehee Didn't offend me, but I was surprised when I found that that they were from that church... :popcorn2

Thanks! we left on a High note for sure!

I sat right next to 3 of them and wow! we are talking straight out of Vouge!

[Sam]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p344638.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/p233223.jpg



Would any of you guys consider those "men's apparel" and would you wear them?

When I was at the Apostolic Bible Institute in St. Paul, MN in 1956/1957 the girls at the school and the girls and ladies at the UPC church there wore snow pants in the winter.

[Thad]

Would any of you guys consider those "men's apparel" and would you wear them?

When I was at the Apostolic Bible Institute in St. Paul, MN in 1956/1957 the girls at the school and the girls and ladies at the UPC church there wore snow pants in the winter.



but with skirts over them

[HeavenlyOne]

but with skirts over them

Would you wear a shirt and tie over your coat? Would you wear underwear over your pants? Would you wear socks over your shoes?

This is what wearing a skirt over snow pants is like.....who wears their clothes on the outside of their outerwear?

Snowpants are a coat for the legs. Your clothes are inside so when you take them off, you are dressed. It's no different than when you take your coat off. You don't dress over your coat.

[LadyCoonskinner]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!

[Praxeas]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!

Are stockings a form of pants?

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!

So mini skirts on the teens are not having your stamp of approval?


:popcorn2

[LadyCoonskinner]

Are stockings a form of pants?

No.

[HeavenlyOne]

Are stockings a form of pants?

I'm puzzled. How does tights without feet make pants?

If those leggings had feet, nobody would say anything about them being pants.

[LadyCoonskinner]

So mini skirts on the teens are not having your stamp of approval?


:popcorn2

That is correct!

[Thad]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!


what if the skirt is really long and they are wearing something for warmth in the middle of a cold snap?

[Neck]

Have you heard that there is a Debate over whether females ought to be allowed to wear Leggings under their skirts ??????


I heard a report that it's the Rage for UPC girls to wear long johns or jogging Pants under their skirts and some folks are in a tizzy over it.

There was even a report of a CA. Con church doing this and brows were raised.


Do you feel this is wrong as it pertains to the doctrine of Duet 22 ????

would you allow it in your church??

your opinions please

I say shed the skit and wear pants... Not a problem and not a heaven and hell issue. No matter how you fold the pages of the bible...

[seguidordejesus]

Guess what, ladies? Your underwear are split into two (potential) legs just like pants....better come up with something else fast!

[Thad]

I say shed the skit and wear pants... Not a problem and not a heaven and hell issue. No matter how you fold the pages of the bible...


I thought you was UPC pentecostal no ???

[LadyCoonskinner]

what if the skirt is really long and they are wearing something for warmth in the middle of a cold snap?

Thad, for the sake of modesty we're not going to go there. The way most wear them is with skirts that are too short, if they wanted to wear them with a long skirt, I don't have a problem with them doing that, but that's not the style.

Just for our church in Salina.........it won't be happening while we're here. Call me hard-nosed and controlling if you want, but that's the way it's gonna be. We have to give an account and I won't be responsible for that.

[HeavenlyOne]

Is it only a sin if it's seen by others?

[seguidordejesus]

Thad, for the sake of modesty we're not going to go there. The way most wear them is with skirts that are too short, if they wanted to wear them with a long skirt, I don't have a problem with them doing that, but that's not the style.

Just for our church in Salina.........it won't be happening while we're here. Call me hard-nosed and controlling if you want, but that's the way it's gonna be. We have to give an account and I won't be responsible for that.

Wow, you'd think Coonskinner actually signed in under the wrong name.:coffee2

[Neck]

I thought you was UPC pentecostal no ???

Born and raised. Dad was UPC. He past in 1978. I went to UPCI big church in WI for 30 years.

Now I am at a non-UPCI church.

Just have had enough of watching so many folks over the years.

Making their salvation about what they can do to be committed to the Lord.

When all along they should have been focused on the better things.

Such as telling their neighbor and coworkers about the goodness of God.

Not talking in a group at church about how proud they are that they wear the uniform.

In my heart I think it best to let folks decide the non-heaven and hell issues.

Nathan Eckstadt

[ILuvFPC]

Thad, for the sake of modesty we're not going to go there. The way most wear them is with skirts that are too short, if they wanted to wear them with a long skirt, I don't have a problem with them doing that, but that's not the style.

Just for our church in Salina.........it won't be happening while we're here. Call me hard-nosed and controlling if you want, but that's the way it's gonna be. We have to give an account and I won't be responsible for that.

why?

[LadyCoonskinner]

Wow, you'd think Coonskinner actually signed in under the wrong name.:coffee2

Well, guess again bud!!!!

Been living with him too long......

Actually he helped me. I couldn't say what I wanted without being Hiroshima'd, so he helped me word what I wanted to say!!!

[Thad]

Thad, for the sake of modesty we're not going to go there. The way most wear them is with skirts that are too short, if they wanted to wear them with a long skirt, I don't have a problem with them doing that, but that's not the style.

Just for our church in Salina.........it won't be happening while we're here. Call me hard-nosed and controlling if you want, but that's the way it's gonna be. We have to give an account and I won't be responsible for that.



okay, we was talking about 2 different things it seems. I didn't know you was referring to the short skirts. I was talking about long skirts worn over those leggies in the cold

[LadyCoonskinner]

why?

Because they don't show and are not immodest.

[Thad]

Born and raised. Dad was UPC. He past in 1978. I went to UPCI big church in WI for 30 years.

Now I am at a non-UPCI church.

Just have had enough of watching so many folks over the years.

Making their salvation about what they can do to be committed to the Lord.

When all along they should have been focused on the better things.

Such as telling their neighbor and coworkers about the goodness of God.

Not talking in a group at church about how proud they are that they wear the uniform.

In my heart I think it best to let folks decide the non-heaven and hell issues.
Nathan Eckstadt

everyone a law unto themsleves ?

[HeavenlyOne]

Because they don't show and are not immodest.

Are you saying that pants can be worn by women as long as they don't show and aren't immodest?

[ILuvFPC]

Because they don't show and are not immodest.

so its okay for women to wear men's apparel as long as nobody can see it? not being contentious, just seems to me if its wrong its wrong regardless if they show or not...

[crakjak]

Born and raised. Dad was UPC. He past in 1978. I went to UPCI big church in WI for 30 years.

Now I am at a non-UPCI church.

Just have had enough of watching so many folks over the years.

Making their salvation about what they can do to be committed to the Lord.

When all along they should have been focused on the better things.

Such as telling their neighbor and coworkers about the goodness of God.

Not talking in a group at church about how proud they are that they wear the uniform.

In my heart I think it best to let folks decide the non-heaven and hell issues.

Nathan Eckstadt


Well said Neck! What many in the UPC don't realize is that there are many churches (other than UPC) that actually focus on the things of the kingdom.

And this is without the distracting junk about one's personal appearance, and many subjective things about lifestyle. If the word of God is taught, not just the candy-sticks, it actually will produce disciples of Jesus Christ.

Whether or not someone else's teenage daughter wears "leggings" or not does not even register on my spiritual radar. This is absolutely not one iota of my concern, why is it so important that on this forum it draws over 350 posts??? I am actually amazed.

[HeavenlyOne]

so its okay for women to wear men's apparel as long as nobody can see it? not being contentious, just seems to me if its wrong its wrong regardless if they show or not...

Leggings are men's apparel???

[Thad]

Well said Neck! What many in the UPC don't realize is that there are many churches (other than UPC) that actually focus on the things of the kingdom.

And this is without the distracting junk about one's personal appearance, and many subjective things about lifestyle. If the word of God is taught, not just the candy-sticks, it actually will produce disciples of Jesus Christ.

Whether or not someone else's teenage daughter wears "leggings" or not does not even register on my spiritual radar. This is absolutely not one iota of my concern, why is it so important that on this forum it draws over 350 posts??? I am actually amazed.



would you be eager to let your sons wear a dress or skirt ?

[HeavenlyOne]

would you be eager to let your sons wear a dress or skirt ?

Why do some people bring this up? A dress and skirt in this culture is strictly a woman's garment. Pants in this culture aren't strictly a man's garment, so the comparison is silly.

Funny though, cause 400 years ago, all men wore skirts and nobody thought that was strange. In fact, when men started wearing pants, it was considered immodest to do so.

In many other countries, men wear skirt-like garments. It's a man's garment they wear, even if the women in the same country also wear a skirt-like garment.

It's 2007. Pants aren't exclusively a man's garment and hasn't been for years. Let's live in the present, not in the past.

[crakjak]

everyone a law unto themsleves ?

We are not under law, in our relationship with God. We are to walk in the spirit, individually and personally in relationship with God. If you will remember the curtain was torn apart, which gave each of us direct access to the Father. We are to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, however religion does not trust the Spirit of God, therefore all kinds of "standards" must be imposed to try to keep folks in a particular "religious tent". Religion is failing, but God will never fail.

What does this look like? I don't know for sure, but there are home church fellowships in the Dallas area with over 30,000 members. God does not fit into any box, he will come where folks are gathered in His Name, whether an organized group or a fellowship. The fellowships appear to resemble the book of Acts church more than much in many organizations.

[ILuvFPC]

Leggings are men's apparel???

maybe i have something different in my mind.. obviously.. maybe i didn't read back far enough.. i was thinking like jogging pants type deal...

[Thad]

Why do some people bring this up? A dress and skirt in this culture is strictly a woman's garment. Pants in this culture aren't strictly a man's garment, so the comparison is silly.


so what garment is striclty a man's ? is there any ?

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Why do some people bring this up? A dress and skirt in this culture is strictly a woman's garment. Pants in this culture aren't strictly a man's garment, so the comparison is silly.

Funny though, cause 400 years ago, all men wore skirts and nobody thought that was strange. In fact, when men started wearing pants, it was considered immodest to do so.

In many other countries, men wear skirt-like garments. It's a man's garment they wear, even if the women in the same country also wear a skirt-like garment.

It's 2007. Pants aren't exclusively a man's garment and hasn't been for years. Let's live in the present, not in the past.

Pants are a man's garment. No matter who wears them.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/rgcraig/411A4FS3N8L.jpg

Trying to put this BACK ON TRACK.... :popcorn2

2nd Attempt

[crakjak]

would you be eager to let your sons wear a dress or skirt ?

What my sons wore as children was my concern and I dealt with it accordingly, as my father guided me. I did not look to the church to dictate these matters at all. Did the church have influence? Only as the teaching of the Word influenced my understanding. I do not attend a church that focuses on these individual and personal matters.

Thad, there are weightier spiritual matters that the church really does need to address. It is ridiculous that this subject is even considered a spiritual concern to the church at large.

And BTW, the folks on this forum are the church, or at least a part of it.

[crakjak]

Pants are a man's garment. No matter who wears them.

Only in you mind.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

It is interesting to watch how the "Similar Threads" (bottom of the page) changes each page!

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Only in you mind.


No, in my heart. I believe that you do not need to put pants on a young girl and you do not need to allow a teen girl to dress like a prostitute. And above teens, ladies can still blush and dress like a lady. :preach

[Thad]

What my sons wore as children was my concern and I dealt with it accordingly, as my father guided me. I did not look to the church to dictate these matters at all. Did the church have influence? Only as the teaching of the Word influenced my understanding. I do not attend a church that focuses on these individual and personal matters.

Thad, there are weightier spiritual matters that the church really does need to address. It is ridiculous that this subject is even considered a spiritual concern to the church at large.

And BTW, the folks on this forum are the church, or at least a part of it.

what weightier spiritual matters ?
one of the last day battles we are going to face is gender distinction. some things are cultural i agree but the LOrd commanded gender distinction to protect us from the spirit of perversion that is taking over the world today. now, i'm not saying that attire is the ONLY way that perversion creps in. the devil has other avenues as well , but it is certainly one way no one can deny that

[HeavenlyOne]

so what garment is striclty a man's ? is there any ?

Is that really the issue? If there isn't any, does that matter? Was there a garment in the Bible that was strictly for men, or did everyone wear the same garment....and did so for thousands of years?

Understand that there is no sin in wearing men's apparel. The sin is in wearing it in an attempt to be seen as a man. This goes along with Deut. 22......the entire chapter.

[crakjak]

No, in my heart. I believe that you do not need to put pants on a young girl and you do not need to allow a teen girl to dress like a prostitute. And above teens, ladies can still blush and dress like a lady. :preach

I have no argument with this, but you said that pants are men's apparel, no matter who wears them. You can preach truth without being dishonest.

[HeavenlyOne]

Pants are a man's garment. No matter who wears them.

Says who? And is that across the globe, or just in the USA?

[HeavenlyOne]

would you be eager to let your sons wear a dress or skirt ?

Thad, about 100 years ago, it was common for little boys to wear dresses.

[HeavenlyOne]

No, in my heart. I believe that you do not need to put pants on a young girl and you do not need to allow a teen girl to dress like a prostitute. And above teens, ladies can still blush and dress like a lady. :preach

Dress in ladies pants and see if people don't think you are a cross dresser! Including other Apostolics!

[HeavenlyOne]

what weightier spiritual matters ?
one of the last day battles we are going to face is gender distinction. some things are cultural i agree but the LOrd commanded gender distinction to protect us from the spirit of perversion that is taking over the world today. now, i'm not saying that attire is the ONLY way that perversion creps in. the devil has other avenues as well , but it is certainly one way no one can deny that

Thad, do you have scripture for that command from God? Please show where He commanded gender distinction and provide Biblical examples of this happening.

[Thad]

Thad, about 100 years ago, it was common for little boys to wear dresses.


I'm not talking about 100 years ago, 400 years ago, 3000 years ago. in our western culture today would you not consider it an abomination for a man to dress up in wig makeup and a dress ?

[HeavenlyOne]

I'm not talking about 100 years ago, 400 years ago, 3000 years ago. in our western culture today would you not consider it an abomination for a man to dress up in wig makeup and a dress ?

Absolutely. And why would I think that? Because he's portraying himself as a woman when he is not. I would think the same of him if he was wearing women's pants and shirt also.

Now, do women do that when wearing pants? I believe some do, and I've seen them, but I'm talking about the norm. Women aren't mistaken for men just because they wear pants.

In our western culture today, women wearing pants isn't a big deal......except among Apostolics and Amish types. The rest of the world doesn't see anything wrong with it.

Thad, would you go to the women's dept and buy a pair of pants? Why not?

[crakjak]

what weightier spiritual matters ?
one of the last day battles we are going to face is gender distinction. some things are cultural i agree but the LOrd commanded gender distinction to protect us from the spirit of perversion that is taking over the world today. now, i'm not saying that attire is the ONLY way that perversion creps in. the devil has other avenues as well , but it is certainly one way no one can deny that

I still disagree that focusing on individual and personal apparel is an effective way to deal with the cultural decay that you describe. If the Word of God, simply taught by the Spirit does not prevent this decay in the church, then I will not be prevented. If folks hearts are turned toward God, they will be "transformed" and will not be "pressed into the mold of the culture."

If you preach a negative gospel, of how powerful the devil, sin and world is, then you will build negative faith and will produce the very thing you do not desire.

PREACH THE LIFE CHANGING GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, AND HE WILL TRANSFORM THE HEARERS. Blessings.

[Thad]

Thad, do you have scripture for that command from God? Please show where He commanded gender distinction and provide Biblical examples of this happening.


we did a study on this. I'm probably wasting my time with folks who do not believe in gender distinction but anyways,
I tim 2:9 woman are to ADORN themselves , that word " adorn" is in reference to a long Robe like garment. Men and women did both wear Robes then but they had their own way of distingushing from male and female.
the phrase " gird up the loins" was in refernce to men. they would tuck it into a belt like holder with a pant like garment underneath. this was something that the women did not wear

Elijah, " girded up his loins when he ran... " can't recall exact scripture on it now

[Thad]

Absolutely. And why would I think that? Because he's portraying himself as a woman when he is not. I would think the same of him if he was wearing women's pants and shirt also.

Now, do women do that when wearing pants? I believe some do, and I've seen them, but I'm talking about the norm. Women aren't mistaken for men just because they wear pants.

In our western culture today, women wearing pants isn't a big deal......except among Apostolics and Amish types. The rest of the world doesn't see anything wrong with it.

Thad, would you go to the women's dept and buy a pair of pants? Why not?

and should a man have the previldge of going into a Man's dept and buying dresses that are made for men only ?? perhaps the dress is made of manly material?? the key word is "PERTAIN". these garments would still pertain to a womans apparrel.

maybe most of the culture does except whatever attire( and lifestyle)but it doesn't mean that God is pleased with it. i

[crakjak]

we did a study on this. I'm probably wasting my time with folks who do not believe in gender distinction but anyways,
I tim 2:9 woman are to ADORN themselves , that word " adorn" is in reference to a long Robe like garment. Men and women did both wear Robes then but they had their own way of distingushing from male and female.
the phrase " gird up the loins" was in refernce to men. they would tuck it into a belt like holder with a pant like garment underneath. this was something that the women did not wear

Elijah, " girded up his loins when he ran... " can't recall exact scripture on it now

The only difference in these descriptions of clothing, was that one was tailored for men and the other tailored for women. That is exactly what HO described about women's and men's pants today. They are similar, yet tailored for the opposite sexes, just as the robes you described above. The same is true all over the world today, so why can't we just be honest and confess that many "apostolics" are holding unbiblical standards. In other words "much ado about nothing".

[Thad]

I still disagree that focusing on individual and personal apparel is an effective way to deal with the cultural decay that you describe. If the Word of God, simply taught by the Spirit does not prevent this decay in the church, then I will not be prevented. If folks hearts are turned toward God, they will be "transformed" and will not be "pressed into the mold of the culture."

If you preach a negative gospel, of how powerful the devil, sin and world is, then you will build negative faith and will produce the very thing you do not desire.

PREACH THE LIFE CHANGING GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, AND HE WILL TRANSFORM THE HEARERS. Blessings.


im no hardliner by any stretch and no offense, but the soft suited willow creek style gospel that panders to sinners so not to offend them is not working out. what we need is a real revival in america period (even in pentecost!) and with i believe will come real conviction including girls not wanting to wear sudective or male clothing and men will take their rightful places as well

[crakjak]

im no hardliner by any stretch and no offense, but the soft suited willow creek style gospel that panders to sinners so not to offend them is not working out. what we need is a real revival in america period (even in pentecost!) and with i believe will come real conviction including girls not wanting to wear sudective or male clothing and men will take their rightful places as well

What would a real revival look like in your view? What would it look like six months later? I believe there is real revival happening in many places in America. There is alot of shallowness in the most visible (tv ministries, etc) but there is much happening that is not so visible.

God is not a failure He will complete what He has begun. Sin, the devil and the world will not hinder His purpose, so no need to wring the hands.

Thanks for a lively exchange, I'm off to bed.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Dress in ladies pants and see if people don't think you are a cross dresser! Including other Apostolics!

There are no ladies pants.

Besides, what is the first thing Butch wants- pair of jeans.....

[HeavenlyOne]

we did a study on this. I'm probably wasting my time with folks who do not believe in gender distinction but anyways,
I tim 2:9 woman are to ADORN themselves , that word " adorn" is in reference to a long Robe like garment. Men and women did both wear Robes then but they had their own way of distingushing from male and female.
the phrase " gird up the loins" was in refernce to men. they would tuck it into a belt like holder with a pant like garment underneath. this was something that the women did not wear

Elijah, " girded up his loins when he ran... " can't recall exact scripture on it now

Thad, I suggest you not listen to people speak on this subject but study it out for yourself. I say this with all sincerety. "Adorn" doesn't refer in any way to a robe-like garment since it's a verb, and a garment is a noun.

There is no Biblical proof to anything you say above, but it instead is the propaganda reported by those who preach the standards gospel.

The girding up of loins wasn't speaking of a pant-like garment since men, except for priests, didn't wear anything underneath their robes, not even underwear. What do you think the job of the gatekeeper was? :D

Women are also told to gird up their loins.

Isa 32:11
Tremble, ye women that are at ease; be troubled, ye careless ones: strip you, and make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins.

The girding of the loins was speaking about putting clothing about oneself. It wasn't uncommon for men to remove their clothing when relaxing. There appears to be a man's way of doing it, as well as a woman's way of doing it by the verse here:

Job 38:3
Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

If girding the loins was only a man's issue, why the command to do so like a man?

Educate yourself, Thad. After two years of 'preaching' this issue on the internet as you are doing, I had to study it for myself instead of repeating things I'd heard all my life. I found out that things weren't Biblical as they were told to me.

[HeavenlyOne]

and should a man have the previldge of going into a Man's dept and buying dresses that are made for men only ?? perhaps the dress is made of manly material?? the key word is "PERTAIN". these garments would still pertain to a womans apparrel.

maybe most of the culture does except whatever attire( and lifestyle)but it doesn't mean that God is pleased with it. i

What culture says that pants pertain to men? The US? The US now writes the Bible for the rest of the culture? Cause that's what you are saying by making statements about the girding of the loins meaning pants and such nonsense. You are saying that dress-like garments are for women and pant-like garments are for men, right? This would have to apply to all cultures all over the globe, and that can't be done.

This also becomes a problem since men for thousands of years wore a dress-like garment and God never said anything different. Why did men change their apparel and why? Did God say they could? How do you Biblically justify wearing pants today, Thad?

Like you said, maybe most of the culture does accept whatever attire (and lifestyle) but that doesn't mean God is pleased with it. This applies to men wearing pants also.

[HeavenlyOne]

im no hardliner by any stretch and no offense, but the soft suited willow creek style gospel that panders to sinners so not to offend them is not working out. what we need is a real revival in america period (even in pentecost!) and with i believe will come real conviction including girls not wanting to wear sudective or male clothing and men will take their rightful places as well

I don't believe women or men should wear seductive clothing, but I see women do that all the time while wearing skirts and dresses and standing in the pulpit too, yet they are excused because they have the uniform on. The only time I've ever heard preaching against tight clothing is in regard to women wearing pants. That's a shame.

Thad, if you buy a pair of women's pants, will people think you are wearing men's apparel, or will they ask why you are wearing women's pants? Be honest.

[HeavenlyOne]

There are no ladies pants.

Besides, what is the first thing Butch wants- pair of jeans.....

Who is Butch? And what does he have to do with women's pants? ;)

You saw my pic with my fish. Do I look manly or like a lesbian to you? Be honest. I won't be offended.

[HeavenlyOne]

I have to wonder how Sodom and Gomorrah got so bad when people were wearing what they should have been wearing in that day. From comments on this thread, perversion is strongly generated by people dressing like the other gender!

Wearing apparel belonging to the other sex isn't wrong in and of itself. Otherwise this means that any woman wearing her husband's suit coat when she's cold would be sinning in doing so.

The true intent of Deut. 22:5 is referring to one gender dressing as the other gender in an attempt to be that gender. This is in line with the other scriptures that have to do with perversion.

If wearing apparel belonging to the other gender was such a sin, that verse wouldn't be alone in the OT, but would be mentioned other times, especially in the NT somewhere. It would be too important to be lost somewhere in the OT lawbooks.

[Thad]

Thad, I suggest you not listen to people speak on this subject but study it out for yourself. I say this with all sincerety. "Adorn" doesn't refer in any way to a robe-like garment since it's a verb, and a garment is a noun.

There is no Biblical proof to anything you say above, but it instead is the propaganda reported by those who preach the standards gospel.

The girding up of loins wasn't speaking of a pant-like garment since men, except for priests, didn't wear anything underneath their robes, not even underwear. What do you think the job of the gatekeeper was? :D

Women are also told to gird up their loins.

Isa 32:11
Tremble, ye women that are at ease; be troubled, ye careless ones: strip you, and make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins.

The girding of the loins was speaking about putting clothing about oneself. It wasn't uncommon for men to remove their clothing when relaxing. There appears to be a man's way of doing it, as well as a woman's way of doing it by the verse here:

Job 38:3
Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

If girding the loins was only a man's issue, why the command to do so like a man?

Educate yourself, Thad. After two years of 'preaching' this issue on the internet as you are doing, I had to study it for myself instead of repeating things I'd heard all my life. I found out that things weren't Biblical as they were told to me.

Do you think I could study it out better then people who prayed for hours every day and were great women and men of God ? why would they tell us these things just to suppress us ? I realize SOME carried things to far they was well meaning.
then there those who have studied this indepth that are degreed such as Bro Seagraves. are you saying he is a false teacher ? i couldn't study it out better then he.

as for the scirptures that you gave, im going to go back over my notes and reply to that later

[Thad]

I don't believe women or men should wear seductive clothing, but I see women do that all the time while wearing skirts and dresses and standing in the pulpit too, yet they are excused because they have the uniform on. The only time I've ever heard preaching against tight clothing is in regard to women wearing pants. That's a shame.

Thad, if you buy a pair of women's pants, will people think you are wearing men's apparel, or will they ask why you are wearing women's pants? Be honest.

I've seen people speak in tongues and prophecy all the while living in adultery. should we do away with tonuges because some are hyprocites?

a pair of overalls looks like a pair of overalls just like a pair of Jeans,etc.
again, the key word is "PERTAINS" and the essence of Duet 22 is Gender distinction. No i would not wear a pair of silk slacks but the garment itself is cut for male apparrel. If not, then a boy could wear a jean skirt it doesn't make any difference

[Fonix]

I cant get past the idea of how tacky, not to mention silly, it looks......to debate the political correctness of it all

LOL~

Ill have to agree with you on that one. Those things are U-G-L-Y. Plus stay away from them if your overweight as they do for larger women what spandex did for them.

[Subdued]

Would you wear a shirt and tie over your coat? Would you wear underwear over your pants? Would you wear socks over your shoes?

This is what wearing a skirt over snow pants is like.....who wears their clothes on the outside of their outerwear?

Snowpants are a coat for the legs. Your clothes are inside so when you take them off, you are dressed. It's no different than when you take your coat off. You don't dress over your coat.

You mean, you don't???

[Hoovie]

I've seen people speak in tongues and prophecy all the while living in adultery. should we do away with tonuges because some are hyprocites?

a pair of overalls looks like a pair of overalls just like a pair of Jeans,etc.
again, the key word is "PERTAINS" and the essence of Duet 22 is Gender distinction. No i would not wear a pair of silk slacks but the garment itself is cut for male apparrel. If not, then a boy could wear a jean skirt it doesn't make any difference

At what point does culture come into play? I was at a meeting last week where there were some Scottish and Irish in traditional dress (Kilts) I did not think they looked feminine.

[MissBrattified]

Welllll...I agree with Renda...they are T-A-C-K-Y!!!!!

However, I think they're kind of cute for little girls or preteens...BUT...if you're over the age of 15 or weigh more than 85 lbs...I'd say avoid them at all costs!!!!!!!

I think they can add a bit of modesty for young girls on a playground or in a park, without sacrificing style...since they're "in" right now.

This is one of those trends that isn't going to stay around very long (I don't think), so I don't think it's worth stressing over.

I don't think they are pants...anymore than pantyhose are pants. Most of the leggings are made with material similar to tights, and they definitely aren't made to be worn alone...too thin for that.

So: TACKY if you're old and/or fatter than a walking stick, and POSSIBLY cute if you're a little kid with a funky sense of style and a propensity to hang upside down on the monkey bars.

It shouldn't be a standards debate at all. Women have been putting on sweatpants and who knows what else under their skirts for years in an attempt to be more modest, and NOTHING looks SILLIER than a skirt over a pair of JOGGING PANTS. YUCK.

[ForeverBlessed]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I'm assuming the girls are wearing leggings under modest length skirts, not minis. What is the difference in that and just having the bare legs showing? I think the leggings would be more modest. Do the girls really need ONE MORE thing they can't do that they think is cute?

Exactly Sherri... clearly logical thinking from someone who obviously has raised a teen girl. There are quite enough rules out there for the girls without adding another just because it isn't something the pastor's wife or adults might wear.

I actually think the leggings are modest and this winter they gave my girls some additional warmth... and hey, they were actually in style and within standard guidelines. They are cute when matched with tops and cute little flats that match.

And to all of you griping about them... they are often called footless tights that can be bought in any department store. Some are called leggings.. but what is the difference.

My daughter wore a pair under a jean skirt to the IN Holiday Youth convention day service... she wasn't alone... others did too.. and you should have seen the groups of girls who stood around with condemning, judgemental attitudes who obviously come from "stricter more holy" churches (or so they thought) Those girls were down right rude to the ones who wore the leggins... I watched as they stood and stared at my daughter from her shoes up to her top with contemp that they were not hiding. I couldn't get over how ugly the girls were in spirit... I stood back and watched them. I told my sister who was with me that they will never see their attitudes as sin... sad... really sad. Elaine asked me at one point what was their problem? I told her it was the leggins.. ;) She was blown away by the actions of others and had no clue.

[Steve Epley]

I have seen some in polyester pants that could be termed as "lust busters!":popcorn2

[ILG]

When we were still in the UPC, my daughter had a friend from school go to camp with her and she asked the question why boys can't wear shorts there but the girls can wear knee length skirts. The only answer I had was "because the boys' legs aren't as good looking!" :D

Sad when there is no better answer for rules than that.

[Steve Epley]

When we were still in the UPC, my daughter had a friend from school go to camp with her and she asked the question why boys can't wear shorts there but the girls can wear knee length skirts. The only answer I had was "because the boys' legs aren't as good looking!" :D

Sad when there is no better answer for rules than that.

Sounds good to me.

[crakjak]

Exactly Sherri... clearly logical thinking from someone who obviously has raised a teen girl. There are quite enough rules out there for the girls without adding another just because it isn't something the pastor's wife or adults might wear.

I actually think the leggings are modest and this winter they gave my girls some additional warmth... and hey, they were actually in style and within standard guidelines. They are cute when matched with tops and cute little flats that match.

And to all of you griping about them... they are often called footless tights that can be bought in any department store. Some are called leggings.. but what is the difference.

My daughter wore a pair under a jean skirt to the IN Holiday Youth convention day service... she wasn't alone... others did too.. and you should have seen the groups of girls who stood around with condemning, judgemental attitudes who obviously come from "stricter more holy" churches (or so they thought) Those girls were down right rude to the ones who wore the leggins... I watched as they stood and stared at my daughter from her shoes up to her top with contemp that they were not hiding. I couldn't get over how ugly the girls were in spirit... I stood back and watched them. I told my sister who was with me that they will never see their attitudes as sin... sad... really sad. Elaine asked me at one point what was their problem? I told her it was the leggins.. ;) She was blown away by the actions of others and had no clue.

"...you compare yourselves among yourselves...you do not well...":preach
Just another ridiculous thing that carnal folks can fuss about. If not "leggings" it would be something else.

[ILG]

Sounds good to me.

For someone who doesn't need a logical answer, it would!!:cool:

[ForeverBlessed]

Welllll...I agree with Renda...they are T-A-C-K-Y!!!!!

However, I think they're kind of cute for little girls or preteens...BUT...if you're over the age of 15 or weigh more than 85 lbs...I'd say avoid them at all costs!!!!!!!
I think they can add a bit of modesty for young girls on a playground or in a park, without sacrificing style...since they're "in" right now.

This is one of those trends that isn't going to stay around very long (I don't think), so I don't think it's worth stressing over.


Why an age limit if worn with a skirt that they would wear without the leggings? It is either bare leg, tights or leggins..

you are right about it being a trend and not lasting long... in fact as I was putting away laundry this weekend and put probably 10 pairs of them away.. thought that now it is warmer... they probably won't be in style next fall.. in my frugal mind thinking of money going down the drain again... but hey they are only teens once.

[LadyRev]

I wear what I wear for what I need or like to do with primary emphasis on modesty and secondary emphasis on not being a stumbling block to someone else.

What I wear (or don't wear) when alone and/or in private is no one's business but mine and my husband's. Its not my pastor's business and thankfully I have one that doesn't try to make it his business.

I won't even talk about one of my former pastor's that used to preach about the type of underwear that women should wear...

[HeavenlyOne]

Do you think I could study it out better then people who prayed for hours every day and were great women and men of God ? why would they tell us these things just to suppress us ? I realize SOME carried things to far they was well meaning.
then there those who have studied this indepth that are degreed such as Bro Seagraves. are you saying he is a false teacher ? i couldn't study it out better then he.

as for the scirptures that you gave, im going to go back over my notes and reply to that later

Thad, it's all in the interpretation. One preacher says one thing, another preacher says something a little different, and another one has yet another take .....all on the same verse. Not all of them can be right, can they?

What you posted isn't scriptural, I don't care who told you what those verses meant. It's clear when you read the scripture that is says nothing that was implied in your post. Yet, over the years when we hear these things over and over, we start to believe it.....and I did just that for over 20 years.

Thanks for your sweet spirit reply.

[HeavenlyOne]

I've seen people speak in tongues and prophecy all the while living in adultery. should we do away with tonuges because some are hyprocites?

Thad, I said nothing about hypocrites. Without them, one cannot have a good church. ;)

a pair of overalls looks like a pair of overalls just like a pair of Jeans,etc.
again, the key word is "PERTAINS" and the essence of Duet 22 is Gender distinction. No i would not wear a pair of silk slacks but the garment itself is cut for male apparrel. If not, then a boy could wear a jean skirt it doesn't make any difference

Thad, you are missing the point. "Pertains" is not the key word in that verse, otherwise there are lots of items of clothing that couldn't be worn by one sex if worn by the other, according to the teaching. That verse isn't speaking of clothing worn from the waist down, yet that's what is taught.

When that verse was written, both men and women wore robes. Now, since they both wore the SAME garment, how can you then speak about pants and that only one gender should wear them?

Thad, every society and culture has items for men and women to wear. Sometimes they are the same garment, sometimes they aren't, but this is 2007, and just because women didn't wear pants in 1907 doesn't mean we take that culture and apply it to today, anymore than we would suggest that since men didn't wear pants 400 years ago, they shouldn't today.

[HeavenlyOne]

You mean, you don't???

NO!!!

That would look tacky, donchathink? LOL!

[HeavenlyOne]

I wear what I wear for what I need or like to do with primary emphasis on modesty and secondary emphasis on not being a stumbling block to someone else.

What I wear (or don't wear) when alone and/or in private is no one's business but mine and my husband's. Its not my pastor's business and thankfully I have one that doesn't try to make it his business.

I won't even talk about one of my former pastor's that used to preach about the type of underwear that women should wear...

The question to you is, did you obey? :D

[LadyRev]

The question to you is, did you obey? :D

The underwear preaching? No, I did not. Thats way out of line IMO. And I mean WAY out of line and over the top!

[Whole Hearted]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!

Praise the Lord Sister

[Whole Hearted]

Absolutely. And why would I think that? Because he's portraying himself as a woman when he is not. I would think the same of him if he was wearing women's pants and shirt also.

Now, do women do that when wearing pants? I believe some do, and I've seen them, but I'm talking about the norm. Women aren't mistaken for men just because they wear pants.

In our western culture today, women wearing pants isn't a big deal......except among Apostolics and Amish types. The rest of the world doesn't see anything wrong with it.



That's right the world doesn't see anything wrong, but God does.

[Whole Hearted]

im no hardliner by any stretch and no offense, but the soft suited willow creek style gospel that panders to sinners so not to offend them is not working out. what we need is a real revival in america period (even in pentecost!) and with i believe will come real conviction including girls not wanting to wear sudective or male clothing and men will take their rightful places as well

:thumbsup :thumbsup

[Whole Hearted]

There are no ladies pants.

Besides, what is the first thing Butch wants- pair of jeans.....

AMEN

[Subdued]

NO!!!

That would look tacky, donchathink? LOL!

Tacky? Perhaps. A bit fascinating, though; wouldn'tcha agree?

[MissBrattified]

I guess to me they're more equivalent to tights. I definitely don't see them as pants.

[LadyRev]

There are no ladies pants.



If there aren't any "ladies" pants, how come my husband wouldn't be caught dead buying and wearing pants from the ladies department? (Playing devils advocate here :D )

[LadyRev]

I guess to me they're more equivalent to tights. I definitely don't see them as pants.


I agree with you!

Kinda like longjohns are underwear...not pants!

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

If there aren't any "ladies" pants, how come my husband wouldn't be caught dead buying and wearing pants from the ladies department? (Playing devils advocate here :D )

LadyRev, do you accept women wearing Levis now?

:coffee2

[HeavenlyOne]

That's right the world doesn't see anything wrong, but God does.

It that across the globe, or just in the US?

I mean, if the Bible says women can't wear pants, then that means any woman around the world can't wear pants, even if their culture allows it.

Sorry, but that thinking is incorrect. Every culture and society has attire for men and women. In this culture, women wear pants as well as men. It's no different than both men and women wearing robes and skirt-like garments for thousands of years.....until about 400 years ago when men decided to change their garment into something that was considered immodest when it first came on the scene.

I have to wonder, if some of you men were alive 500 years ago, if you'd still be wearing those skirt-like garments today, refusing to get with the rest of the culture.

[HeavenlyOne]

Tacky? Perhaps. A bit fascinating, though; wouldn'tcha agree?

I have seen people wearing their clothing on the outside of their outerwear, and it's not fascinating to me, but ridiculous looking......LOL!

Even the Amish don't dress that way!

[HeavenlyOne]

If there aren't any "ladies" pants, how come my husband wouldn't be caught dead buying and wearing pants from the ladies department? (Playing devils advocate here :D )

I have yet to find any man who would shop in the ladies dept for pants, even those who believe there are no such thing as 'ladies pants'. I have to wonder why they don't!

[HeavenlyOne]

LadyRev, do you accept women wearing Levis now?

:coffee2

There are lots of types of pants besides Levi's.

Would you wear a pair of ladies slacks? Like, a cotton/poly blend?

[Thad]

HO
soon as i get with my brother here I'll get back to you on this. he teaches our classes on outward standards in our church.

[HeavenlyOne]

HO
soon as i get with my brother here I'll get back to you on this. he teaches our classes on outward standards in our church.

I'm looking forward to it, Thad. Thanks.

[LadyRev]

LadyRev, do you accept women wearing Levis now?

:coffee2

Sure! Levi makes some awesome skirts! :popcorn2

[MrsMcD]

Sure! Levi makes some awesome skirts! :popcorn2

:slaphappy :slaphappy :slaphappy

Great answer!

[HeavenlyOne]

:slaphappy :slaphappy :slaphappy

Great answer!


I agree!!

They make cool shirts too. I own a couple!

[LadyCoonskinner]

Are you saying that pants can be worn by women as long as they don't show and aren't immodest?

No. I'm saying that if they are wearing them to be seen as in under a short skirt, that's where I draw the line.

I'm talking about the leggings that the girls are wearing under short skirts.

Pants are wrong!!!! Period!!!

[HeavenlyOne]

No. I'm saying that if they are wearing them to be seen as in under a short skirt, that's where I draw the line.

I'm talking about the leggings that the girls are wearing under short skirts.

Pants are wrong!!!! Period!!!

I got ya, and I completely agree with the short skirt issue. I don't think it's modest, myself.

But are leggings, pants?

[Carpenter]

Pants are wrong!!!! Period!!!

Why, and why with such emphasis?

I like pants actually.

[Subdued]

No. I'm saying that if they are wearing them to be seen as in under a short skirt, that's where I draw the line.

I'm talking about the leggings that the girls are wearing under short skirts.

Pants are wrong!!!! Period!!!

Why??

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Why, and why with such emphasis?

I like pants actually.

YOURS need to be to the ankles, Sir.

:preach

[Carpenter]

YOURS need to be to the ankles, Sir.

:preach

Not when my legs are a sweatin' I assure you that.

[HeavenlyOne]

YOURS need to be to the ankles, Sir.

:preach

They aren't called 'pants' if they don't, right?

[Carpenter]

They aren't called 'pants' if they don't, right?

Nah, there are still fellas walking around on the earth that call them either long pants or short pants.

[HeavenlyOne]

Nah, there are still fellas walking around on the earth that call them either long pants or short pants.


I call them pants and highwaters.

[LadyCoonskinner]

Why??

Okay, I'm going to make this personal. I know that with some of you, I'm in a gray area and won't ever get out, but as for me, Pants are wrong.

When I was 9 years old, GOD convicted me of pants. Not my pastor, not my mother, not my SS teacher. GOD did it. As I put them on each morning, my parenst are both backsliders, I began to feel very bad (conviction) and decided that I was going to wear skirts. It wasn't pressure from my pastor or his wife or anyone. It was conviction from God. My mother was pressuring me to wear pants, but no one else was and as a 9 year old girl, I felt the convictin power of God. So no one can tell me, that pants are right. Not trying to be hard-nosed, but this is just how it is.

[crakjak]

:bump What would a real revival look like in your view? What would it look like six months later? I believe there is real revival happening in many places in America. There is alot of shallowness in the most visible (tv ministries, etc) but there is much happening that is not so visible.

God is not a failure He will complete what He has begun. Sin, the devil and the world will not hinder His purpose, so no need to wring the hands.

Thanks for a lively exchange, I'm off to bed.

:bump for Thad.

[Subdued]

Okay, I'm going to make this personal. I know that with some of you, I'm in a gray area and won't ever get out, but as for me, Pants are wrong.

When I was 9 years old, GOD convicted me of pants. Not my pastor, not my mother, not my SS teacher. GOD did it. As I put them on each morning, my parenst are both backsliders, I began to feel very bad (conviction) and decided that I was going to wear skirts. It wasn't pressure from my pastor or his wife or anyone. It was conviction from God. My mother was pressuring me to wear pants, but no one else was and as a 9 year old girl, I felt the convictin power of God. So no one can tell me, that pants are right. Not trying to be hard-nosed, but this is just how it is.

But what if others have not been convicted as you have?

[Coonskinner]

This is Coonskinner. My wife is on the phone.

We believe pants to be men's apparel as per Deut. 22:5.

Leggings are not clearly men's apparel, but the way they are most often worn they are immodest.

We choose not to have them on our platform.

I have pretty much sworn off standards discussions, at least in any specific way, but since you all have drawn my good wife into this one, I have taken the liberty of weighing in.

Have fun.:)

[CupCake]

If your going to follow after Deuteronomy 22:5, why don't you follow and obey it all? Even tho Duet 22:5 has nothing to do with women wearing pants!

Deuteronomy 22:5 Ah, but you say what about this verse...

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. Deuteronomy 22:5

Well quite simply, there are four reasons why I have difficulty with the no-pants interpretation from this passage...

1. The passage doesn't clearly prohibit pants on women but there are very clear prohibitions for eating pork, not keeping Friday/Saturday (Sabbath) holy, not wearing mixed apparel of linen and wool etc., so even if there was (which there isn't), it still wouldn't mean it is for us today if it isn't taught to Gentiles in the new covenant.


2. If Deuteronomy 22:5 is to be seen as a law to be obeyed today, then a consistent interpretation would mean the prohibited mixed threads, Kosher foods and other laws in the same chapter should also be followed. Why are anti-pants teachers overlooking these others?

3. If the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle, it should also be applicable to prohibit other male garments on women such as t-shirts, boots, underwear, scarves, gloves, sneakers, etc. Why is this principle not followed to its natural implications?

4. Lastly, if the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle for today (and the previous three points are overlooked), then it remains to be proved that pants are men's clothing. Culturally they were on women in China long before the Western men left off wearing tights (which by the same principle should be called men's apparel!) and hence fail on historical grounds
as well.

[CupCake]

I have not read this thread in it's entirety (? sp), but I want to add my -2 :2cents cents worth........

I absolutely hate those things, and the girls and ladies in our church WILL NOT be wearing them and be used on our platform!!!!!!

To me it is a form of pants and I will not have it!!!!!

Yes, my righteous indignation is stirred up!!!

A lot I here, I wonder what would Jesus say~:groan

[commonsense]

Would any of you guys consider those "men's apparel" and would you wear them?

When I was at the Apostolic Bible Institute in St. Paul, MN in 1956/1957 the girls at the school and the girls and ladies at the UPC church there wore snow pants in the winter.


This is repetitous, but I'll say it again.........grew up UPC; in the north!!!, and in the winter there were many winter activities----ice skating, tobaggoning, sleigh rides, hay rides, whatever...we wore slacks, snowpants, whatever was warm and appropriate to the activity. Afterwards when we went to the home of a wonderful saintly church family for refreshments ...all of the girls, ladies went in the restroom to change into their skirts..(.it was considered ----normal----or to quote me "commonsense" )
It was not questioned, it wasn't a pulpit topic, it was appropriate attire for the activity!!!!!
Does this mean that saints in the 50's and 60's were better christians ? since they could serve God, be blessed, filled with the Holy Ghost and still wear appropriate winter sports clothing__________:lol

[Carpenter]

This is Coonskinner. My wife is on the phone.

We believe pants to be men's apparel as per Deut. 22:5.

Leggings are not clearly men's apparel, but the way they are most often worn they are immodest.

We choose not to have them on our platform.

I have pretty much sworn off standards discussions, at least in any specific way, but since you all have drawn my good wife into this one, I have taken the liberty of weighing in.

Have fun.:)

You know what Cooney, no one has ever responded to the point I made in the past on a couple of different occasions, and contrary to maybe what you think, there is a validity in the principal.

IF pants...all pants that a woman would wear would violate the principals found in Deut, then why wouldn't a man be allowed, encouraged, or even considerate to going into the woman's department to select his pants? Wouldn't that double his chances of finding the correct fitting pair?

Why wouldn't YOU wear a pair of slacks from the woman's department that maybe had flowers on them or a nice paisley pattern, with the fuller cut in the seat in hips, they just might fit you better...ya never know. :D

[Carpenter]

Okay, I'm going to make this personal. I know that with some of you, I'm in a gray area and won't ever get out, but as for me, Pants are wrong.

When I was 9 years old, GOD convicted me of pants. Not my pastor, not my mother, not my SS teacher. GOD did it. As I put them on each morning, my parenst are both backsliders, I began to feel very bad (conviction) and decided that I was going to wear skirts. It wasn't pressure from my pastor or his wife or anyone. It was conviction from God. My mother was pressuring me to wear pants, but no one else was and as a 9 year old girl, I felt the convictin power of God. So no one can tell me, that pants are right. Not trying to be hard-nosed, but this is just how it is.

I am just curious why God would convict a woman of wearing pants but not ALL other women? All this time I thought he was no respector of persons?


...just giving you the biz sister...just giving you the biz... :winkgrin

[rgcraig]

This is Coonskinner. My wife is on the phone.

We believe pants to be men's apparel as per Deut. 22:5.

Leggings are not clearly men's apparel, but the way they are most often worn they are immodest.

We choose not to have them on our platform.

I have pretty much sworn off standards discussions, at least in any specific way, but since you all have drawn my good wife into this one, I have taken the liberty of weighing in.

Have fun.:)

I was going to ask where we are on this now, but I'm going to take this as THE FINAL ANSWER!!!!

P.S. and they do look tacky on anyone other than little girls!

[commonsense]

Exactly Sherri... clearly logical thinking from someone who obviously has raised a teen girl. There are quite enough rules out there for the girls without adding another just because it isn't something the pastor's wife or adults might wear.

I actually think the leggings are modest and this winter they gave my girls some additional warmth... and hey, they were actually in style and within standard guidelines. They are cute when matched with tops and cute little flats that match.

And to all of you griping about them... they are often called footless tights that can be bought in any department store. Some are called leggings.. but what is the difference.

My daughter wore a pair under a jean skirt to the IN Holiday Youth convention day service... she wasn't alone... others did too.. and you should have seen the groups of girls who stood around with condemning, judgemental attitudes who obviously come from "stricter more holy" churches (or so they thought) Those girls were down right rude to the ones who wore the leggins... I watched as they stood and stared at my daughter from her shoes up to her top with contemp that they were not hiding. I couldn't get over how ugly the girls were in spirit... I stood back and watched them. I told my sister who was with me that they will never see their attitudes as sin... sad... really sad. Elaine asked me at one point what was their problem? I told her it was the leggins.. ;) She was blown away by the actions of others and had no clue.

Unfortunately I too have seen this attitude from those that were the keepers of the "standards".
(John 13:35.....love one to another)

Nothing against standards. Each of must live for God according to our local church, pastor, and the scripture. The trick is to do this in spite of the >>holiness fashion police<< peer pressure .:girlnails

[Carpenter]

Unfortunately I too have seen this attitude from those that were the keepers of the "standards".
(John 13:35.....love one to another)

Nothing against standards. Each of must live for God according to our local church, pastor, and the scripture. The trick is to do this in spite of the >>holiness fashion police<< peer pressure .:girlnails

I believe that in no other area and with such great magnitude in the Apostolic movement has conviction been so often confused with the effects of peer pressure in the area of standards.

[CupCake]

I was going to ask where we are on this now, but I'm going to take this as THE FINAL ANSWER!!!!

P.S. and they do look tacky on anyone other than little girls!

Well I would not wear them due to age, comes a time when you got say I'm no longer 20...;) I think they look good on the younger girls and teenagers to the upper late 20's. But hey if you can pull if off after 30 more power to you go for it~....:hypercoffee


Hey this reminds me of back in the early eights how all the UPC pastor were getting uptight about the young and older gals wearing them oversize tops that hit below the hips.....:girlnails

[Thad]

If your going to follow after Deuteronomy 22:5, why don't you follow and obey it all? Even tho Duet 22:5 has nothing to do with women wearing pants!

Deuteronomy 22:5 Ah, but you say what about this verse...

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. Deuteronomy 22:5

Well quite simply, there are four reasons why I have difficulty with the no-pants interpretation from this passage...

1. The passage doesn't clearly prohibit pants on women but there are very clear prohibitions for eating pork, not keeping Friday/Saturday (Sabbath) holy, not wearing mixed apparel of linen and wool etc., so even if there was (which there isn't), it still wouldn't mean it is for us today if it isn't taught to Gentiles in the new covenant.


2. If Deuteronomy 22:5 is to be seen as a law to be obeyed today, then a consistent interpretation would mean the prohibited mixed threads, Kosher foods and other laws in the same chapter should also be followed. Why are anti-pants teachers overlooking these others?

3. If the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle, it should also be applicable to prohibit other male garments on women such as t-shirts, boots, underwear, scarves, gloves, sneakers, etc. Why is this principle not followed to its natural implications?

4. Lastly, if the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle for today (and the previous three points are overlooked), then it remains to be proved that pants are men's clothing. Culturally they were on women in China long before the Western men left off wearing tights (which by the same principle should be called men's apparel!) and hence fail on historical grounds
as well.


Duet 22:5 is a Moral Law the others are civil and ceremonial laws for the Israeli people.
moral laws such as the 10 commandments AND scriptures that realte to God's moral standards never change. cross dressing and gender distiction is one of them. God is trying to protect us from self destruction. isn't that easy to see or not ?

[Thad]

:bump

:bump for Thad.


crajak, im not sure what your point is. what will revival look like in 6 months ?? what does that have to do with the topic at hand ?

[CupCake]

Duet 22:5 is a Moral Law the others are civil and ceremonial laws for the Israeli people.
moral laws such as the 10 commandments AND scriptures that realte to God's moral standards never change. cross dressing and gender distiction is one of them. God is trying to protect us from self destruction. isn't that easy to see or not ?

Yes I see, so why do many follow only half the law? The bible clear you have a choice follow the whole law or fallow after grace. I pick grace, Gods perfect agape(Jesus), over the law of Jews ~

[Thad]

Yes I see, so why do many follow only half the law? The bible clear you have a choice follow the whole law or fallow after grace. I pick grace, Gods perfect agape(Jesus), over the law of Jews ~

the ceremonial was done away with at calvary. God's grace does not excuse immoral behavior sorry

[CupCake]

the ceremonial was done away with at calvary. God's grace does not excuse immoral behavior sorry

Thad wearing legging is not immoral~ Still one cannot just hold part of the law, they must hold to all of it. Law or Grace we have a choice

[Thad]

Thad wearing legging is not immoral~ Still one cannot just hold part of the law, they must hold to all of it. Law or Grace we have a choice


im not talking about leggings here.

the 10 commandments are God's law. I guess your throwing that away too because it's old testament law right?

[Coonskinner]

I know it will be pointless to point this out, but Deut. 22:5 is moral law.

That did not change with the New Covenant, any more than the 10 Commandments did.

When something is an abomination unto the Lord, it always is.

[CupCake]

im not talking about leggings here.

the 10 commandments are God's law. I guess your throwing that away too because it's old testament law right?

Since we are in Christ when He died on the cross we died with Him and when He rose from the dead we rose with Him. Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. (Romans 6:4-6)

Spiritual maturity comes from denying our self and allowing Jesus Christ to live through us. But we can only achieve this kind of maturity by grace through faith. I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain. (Galatians 2:20-21)

Faith comes by revelation. Faith happens when you hear a word from God and you realize that it applies to you personally. Faith is accomplished when your actions prove that you believe the word. Actions of faith prove that God’s grace is at work in your life. When a person comes into the revelation that Jesus died on the cross for him or her personally they accept God’s salvation. When a person comes into the revelation that they were crucified with Christ on the cross they will walk in the grace of being able to give their life fully to Christ. When a person comes into the revelation that they rose from the dead with Christ then they will walk in the Spiritual maturity and power of the resurrected Christ.

You are one of the people that Jesus suffered and died for in order to demonstrate His love for you. The message of the cross seems foolish to those who are physically minded but for us who are sensitive to the Holy Spirit we know it is part of God’s perfect plan. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." (1 Corinthians 1:18-19)

May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God. (Galatians 6:14-16)

We are no longer under the laws of Jews

[CupCake]

Deut. 22:5 is moral law.

.

Nor does it have anything to do with pants! God is not shallow~

[Coonskinner]

Nice cutting and pasting, but it didn't deal with the point brought up by Thad.

[Thad]

Earth to cupcake earth to cupcake!!!

of course we are no longer under the Laws of the Jews, The CEREMONIAL laws that is !! but certainly you believe we still under the moral Law!
LOrd Please help that to sink into her head !!

[Coonskinner]

Nor does it have anything to do with pants! God is not shallow~

And poke salad isn't apple butter, either, but it still doesn't doesn't make you make sense.

[Thad]

I know it will be pointless to point this out, but Deut. 22:5 is moral law.

That did not change with the New Covenant, any more than the 10 Commandments did.

When something is an abomination unto the Lord, it always is.


that's exactly what I was trying to get thru but evidently had no luck! lol

[Coonskinner]

Earth to cupcake earth to cupcake!!!

of course we are no longer under the Laws of the Jews, The CEREMONIAL laws that is !! but certainly you believe we still under the moral Law!
LOrd Please help that to sink into her head !!

I know with God, all things are possible, but some things really stretch our faith.

[OGIA]

Faith comes by revelation.Huh? :hmmm

I thought maybe revelation came from faith?

[Thad]

I know with God, all things are possible, but some things really stretch our faith.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!

[Whole Hearted]

No. I'm saying that if they are wearing them to be seen as in under a short skirt, that's where I draw the line.

I'm talking about the leggings that the girls are wearing under short skirts.

Pants are wrong!!!! Period!!!

AMEN

[Carpenter]

I know it will be pointless to point this out, but Deut. 22:5 is moral law.

That did not change with the New Covenant, any more than the 10 Commandments did.

When something is an abomination unto the Lord, it always is.

Well of course it is, however, who has defined that pants are not articles of female clothing?

Also, I know women...Apostolic, Holy Ghost filled women that would rather be seen dead than to wear a pair of pants...however they wear the personification and attitude of a man...which I believe is the spirit of what the law is talking about and hence are as guilty of an abomination as their counterparts wearing flowery capris.

[Carpenter]

You know what Cooney, no one has ever responded to the point I made in the past on a couple of different occasions, and contrary to maybe what you think, there is a validity in the principal.

IF pants...all pants that a woman would wear would violate the principals found in Deut, then why wouldn't a man be allowed, encouraged, or even considerate to going into the woman's department to select his pants? Wouldn't that double his chances of finding the correct fitting pair?

Why wouldn't YOU wear a pair of slacks from the woman's department that maybe had flowers on them or a nice paisley pattern, with the fuller cut in the seat in hips, they just might fit you better...ya never know. :D


I suppose this is too deep a question... :dunno

[Carpenter]

I know with God, all things are possible, but some things really stretch our faith.

Sometimes I have observed a stretch so that faith can be justified. :slaphappy

[Hoovie]

I think skirts in American culture are more feminine and quite often more modest than slacks/pants on women. But a hard and fast rule that pants are always mens attire, and skirts are always womens attire has some difficulties - especially in regards to the worlds diverse cultures.

Now these leggings thingys worn under skirts... who cares?

[HeavenlyOne]

Okay, I'm going to make this personal. I know that with some of you, I'm in a gray area and won't ever get out, but as for me, Pants are wrong.

When I was 9 years old, GOD convicted me of pants. Not my pastor, not my mother, not my SS teacher. GOD did it. As I put them on each morning, my parenst are both backsliders, I began to feel very bad (conviction) and decided that I was going to wear skirts. It wasn't pressure from my pastor or his wife or anyone. It was conviction from God. My mother was pressuring me to wear pants, but no one else was and as a 9 year old girl, I felt the convictin power of God. So no one can tell me, that pants are right. Not trying to be hard-nosed, but this is just how it is.

LCS, do you believe that God can give personal convictions to an individual but not to another?

I'm just trying to figure out how you feel that since God convicted you personally, that means what you are convicted of goes for everyone else.

Perhaps there was a reason why God convicted you personally, especially at such a young age. Only God knows if you would have been a kind of person who would have been immodest, promiscuous, and perhaps pregnant by 16 because of your dress behavior.

No, that doesn't happen to every woman who wears pants or dresses immodestly, but I'm just throwing out a possibility.

I know people who are convicted against board games, cards, dice, and even eating white bread, but that doesn't mean that those things are wrong for everyone, right?

Just trying to understand you better. I respect your beliefs, so please don't take offense or think I'm trying to change them.

[crakjak]

im no hardliner by any stretch and no offense, but the soft suited willow creek style gospel that panders to sinners so not to offend them is not working out. what we need is a real revival in america period (even in pentecost!) and with i believe will come real conviction including girls not wanting to wear sudective or male clothing and men will take their rightful places as well

In the bump, I was referring to this post. And I asked what would real revival look like, in your view? And what would the results of that revival look like six months later? Just curious as to what would constitute real revival to you, it is not a trap or trick question.

[HeavenlyOne]

Duet 22:5 is a Moral Law the others are civil and ceremonial laws for the Israeli people.
moral laws such as the 10 commandments AND scriptures that realte to God's moral standards never change. cross dressing and gender distiction is one of them. God is trying to protect us from self destruction. isn't that easy to see or not ?

But why isn't the 'moral law' as you call it in Deut 22:5 mentioned elsewhere in scripture like the other laws you cover above?

BTW, remembering the Sabbath has sure changed a lot since Biblical days! In fact, it's no longer followed like it was commanded. It was to be a day of rest, but who does that anymore?

[jshorts]

Heavenly One,

No one can deny you look like a lady in your avitar. What's funny is if you were wearing a pair of pants there are people who would say you look like a man. There more to looking like a lady than what she wear from the waist down.



LCS, do you believe that God can give personal convictions to an individual but not to another?

I'm just trying to figure out how you feel that since God convicted you personally, that means what you are convicted of goes for everyone else.

Perhaps there was a reason why God convicted you personally, especially at such a young age. Only God knows if you would have been a kind of person who would have been immodest, promiscuous, and perhaps pregnant by 16 because of your dress behavior.

No, that doesn't happen to every woman who wears pants or dresses immodestly, but I'm just throwing out a possibility.

I know people who are convicted against board games, cards, dice, and even eating white bread, but that doesn't mean that those things are wrong for everyone, right?

Just trying to understand you better. I respect your beliefs, so please don't take offense or think I'm trying to change them.

[HeavenlyOne]

Heavenly One,

No one can deny you look like a lady in your avitar. What's funny is if you were wearing a pair of pants there are people who would say you look like a man. There more to looking like a lady than what she wear from the waist down.

Thanks for your kind comments.

What gets me is how people think the Bible defines men's and women's apparel as being whatever is worn from the waist down and that the Bible was written at a time when both men and women wore robes. So how is that verse speaking about women wearing pants when NOBODY wore pants in those days?

History also shows that women in the 4th century were the first to wear pants, and that men started wearing them 400 years ago, they were not only considered immodest for men, but they were also considered women's apparel!

My, how times have changed....

[Pressing-On]

Exactly Sherri... clearly logical thinking from someone who obviously has raised a teen girl. There are quite enough rules out there for the girls without adding another just because it isn't something the pastor's wife or adults might wear.

I actually think the leggings are modest and this winter they gave my girls some additional warmth... and hey, they were actually in style and within standard guidelines. They are cute when matched with tops and cute little flats that match.

And to all of you griping about them... they are often called footless tights that can be bought in any department store. Some are called leggings.. but what is the difference.

My daughter wore a pair under a jean skirt to the IN Holiday Youth convention day service... she wasn't alone... others did too.. and you should have seen the groups of girls who stood around with condemning, judgemental attitudes who obviously come from "stricter more holy" churches (or so they thought) Those girls were down right rude to the ones who wore the leggins... I watched as they stood and stared at my daughter from her shoes up to her top with contemp that they were not hiding. I couldn't get over how ugly the girls were in spirit... I stood back and watched them. I told my sister who was with me that they will never see their attitudes as sin... sad... really sad. Elaine asked me at one point what was their problem? I told her it was the leggins.. ;) She was blown away by the actions of others and had no clue.
Foreverblessed,
I read this post this morning and had it on my mind today.

What IF your daughters were wrong in wearing the leggings? What IF they were wrong?

How in the world could they be brought closer to the Lord when apparently they are condemned already?

I know kids will be kids and girls will be girls, but WHEN are we going to teach our young people to "look beyond the fault and see the need"? Have we focused so much on clothing that it is all we see anymore?

We, who have "the love shed abroad in our hearts BY THE HOLY GHOST" should be the very ones to extend love and SHOULD be taking things to God in prayer, with sincerity, in order to see how marvelous He is to love and answer our prayers to work in the lives of those that we are SUPPOSE to love!

I wonder how many beautiful miracles we would see if we would take it to the Lord in prayer.

Soapbox! lol!

[CupCake]

Nice cutting and pasting, but it didn't deal with the point brought up by Thad.

Hebrew for the word translated 'garment

Let's look at the Hebrew word that 'garment' is translated from: 8071 simlah (sim-law'); Strong says: "perhaps by permutation for the feminine of 5566 (through the idea of a cover assuming the shape of the object beneath); a dress."

Strong uses above (dress), saying that the word in this passage teaches that the dress is female attire. They overlook the fact that Strong goes on to say... "especially a mantle: apparel, cloth (-es, -ing), garment, raiment. comp.


Strong says the majority of times it is translated raiment, clothes and garment (as it is here in Deuteronomy 22:5 in the KJV). Not once is it translated into the English word 'dress'. Rather similar to when we say men and women's dress sense, we are not talking about only female attire. The word means clothes, not dresses!

Some pastor teach the passage is specifically prohibiting women wearing men's armour, but whether it's apparel or armour there is no teaching here that pants are for men only.

LAST, DUET 22: 5 IS NOT ABOUT PANTS. You really do teach another gospel~ Nice try Coon !

[Thad]

In the bump, I was referring to this post. And I asked what would real revival look like, in your view? And what would the results of that revival look like six months later? Just curious as to what would constitute real revival to you, it is not a trap or trick question.



holy ghost out pouring like day of pentecost, A great national awakening & repentance, azusa street, back to holiness, godly living and modest apparal.Even by the world' standards, many comment that the dress of today's youth has stooped to an all time new low
the true unpresented move of God can go on for Years

[CupCake]

Thanks for your kind comments.

What gets me is how people think the Bible defines men's and women's apparel as being whatever is worn from the waist down and that the Bible was written at a time when both men and women wore robes. So how is that verse speaking about women wearing pants when NOBODY wore pants in those days?

History also shows that women in the 4th century were the first to wear pants, and that men started wearing them 400 years ago, they were not only considered immodest for men, but they were also considered women's apparel!

My, how times have changed....

Amen HeavenlyOne~

There are many more Bible verses for men wearing skirts than women wearing them! The Bible speaks of men's skirts twelve times: (Dt 22:30, Dt 27:20, Ru 3:9, 1 Sa 15:27, 1 Sa 24:4, 1 Sa 24:5, 1 Sa 24:11, 1 Sa 24:11, Eze 16:8, Hag 2:12, Hag 2:12, and Zec 8:23).

[Thad]

But why isn't the 'moral law' as you call it in Deut 22:5 mentioned elsewhere in scripture like the other laws you cover above?

BTW, remembering the Sabbath has sure changed a lot since Biblical days! In fact, it's no longer followed like it was commanded. It was to be a day of rest, but who does that anymore?


what other laws did i cover? the 10 commandments ?

as far as the sabbath, that's a no-brainer and you know that. Jesus said he was the Lord of the sabbath who fulfilled it. Paul said judge No man according to days . so we know that the sabbath is the one exception of the 10 that has been done away with for the gentiles unless you are a sabbath believer ??

the holy ghost IS our rest !

[Thad]

Amen HeavenlyOne~

There are many more Bible verses for men wearing skirts than women wearing them! The Bible speaks of men's skirts twelve times: (Dt 22:30, Dt 27:20, Ru 3:9, 1 Sa 15:27, 1 Sa 24:4, 1 Sa 24:5, 1 Sa 24:11, 1 Sa 24:11, Eze 16:8, Hag 2:12, Hag 2:12, and Zec 8:23).



gender distinction is accoding to culture. even in scotland, the men only wear a kilt for ceremonial purposes Not for everyday attire. a cultural norm for a special day.

[jshorts]

When do we decided something has been in our culture long enough to accept it as the norm?

The cultural line of reasoning falls flat because it is impossible to put cultural norms into a specific time frame.

Gender distinction takes more into consideration than clothing.

gender distinction is accoding to culture. even in scotland, the men only wear a kilt for ceremonial purposes Not for everyday attire. a cultural norm for a special day.

[Thad]

When do we decided something has been in our culture long enough to accept it as the norm?

The cultural line of reasoning falls flat because it is impossible to put cultural norms into a specific time frame.

Gender distinction takes more into consideration than clothing.


when is the last time you saw a man prancing around in a dress?
do you endorse that ???

[Bishop1]

MY - MY - MY !

THE NEXT THING WILL BE

"NO HOSERY AT ALL !

They Have Been Getting Away With

NEKID ELBOWS So Long

And Before You Know It

they'll even come to Church

WITH

N E K I D

LEGS !





Bishop1
:beatdeadhorse

[jshorts]

You're either missing the point or evading the question. How long does something have to be a part of culture before it is acceptable? Years ago some believed wearing certain colors would send you to hell. Open toe shoes would send you to hell. Very few people believe that nonsense now. It is part of culture. THe question again, how long does something have to be ingrained in culture before it is accepted by apostolics.

To answer your question. A man prancing around in a dress violates Biblical PRINCPLE of gender separation.

when is the last time you saw a man prancing around in a dress?
do you endorse that ???

[Coonskinner]

Well of course it is, however, who has defined that pants are not articles of female clothing?

Also, I know women...Apostolic, Holy Ghost filled women that would rather be seen dead than to wear a pair of pants...however they wear the personification and attitude of a man...which I believe is the spirit of what the law is talking about and hence are as guilty of an abomination as their counterparts wearing flowery capris.

One is as bad as the other, and I always teach it that way.

You can keep the letter of the law and violate the spirit of the law.

I teach the principle first, and then the application of the principle.

[Coonskinner]

You know what Cooney, no one has ever responded to the point I made in the past on a couple of different occasions, and contrary to maybe what you think, there is a validity in the principal.

IF pants...all pants that a woman would wear would violate the principals found in Deut, then why wouldn't a man be allowed, encouraged, or even considerate to going into the woman's department to select his pants? Wouldn't that double his chances of finding the correct fitting pair?

Why wouldn't YOU wear a pair of slacks from the woman's department that maybe had flowers on them or a nice paisley pattern, with the fuller cut in the seat in hips, they just might fit you better...ya never know. :D

Carp,

I have answered questions like this in the past, and have just about sworn off debating the specifics of standards with anybody anymore, because it is tiresome and frankly, boring, especially among those of us who have been doing this for a while.

In our culture, pants were exclusively men's apparel until there began to be a societal shift during WWII.

Then, with the rise of feminism, the separation between genders got even more fuzzy.

At some point, the Church has a responsibility to draw a line against the encroachment of an ever more degenerate and ungodly culture, and its pressure to erase godly principles.

The move toward women wearing pants is nothing more than a unisex movement, and besides that, the majority of women's pants are immodest.

The Church has drawn a line and applied that principle in this manner.

I don't think you were serious about the question, really, as you know many reasons why I or any other man wouldn't wear a pair of pants made for a woman.

It just looked like another "Gotcha!"

I don't think so.:coffee2

[philjones]

One is as bad as the other, and I always teach it that way.

You can keep the letter of the law and violate the spirit of the law.

I teach the principle first, and then the application of the principle.

Surely you jest! You MUST have a rule book printed in bold 16 point Times New Roman font that you pass out as the repentant sinner approaches the altar. There is no place in the Apostolic Pentecostal church for teaching of Godly principles with subsequent guidance on application of those principles in the lives of new converts or seasoned saints!:preach












Tongue in cheek if any of you were wondering!:2cents

[Trouvere]

I have never had a pastor preach about what kind of underclothes you can and can't wear.That is so absurd.I have had them teach against colored hose.
But as for the mini skirt with the leggings I think its immodest for older girls and women.If the leggings are as tight as those posed then they are too revealing.The bible teaches modesty and that is not modest.I don't however think the young ladies all need to run around dressed like I would dress either.I have a ten year old and seventeen year old and both have their own ideas but I can count on them to obey conviction and I count that a blessing.Thank God for the Holy Ghost on the inside teaching us and leading us.

[ILG]

I think skirts in American culture are more feminine and quite often more modest than slacks/pants on women. But a hard and fast rule that pants are always mens attire, and skirts are always womens attire has some difficulties - especially in regards to the worlds diverse cultures.

Now these leggings thingys worn under skirts... who cares?

If everybody in the UPC had your attitude, I might very well still be in skirts daily.

[Coonskinner]

If everybody in the UPC had your attitude, I might very well still be in skirts daily.

Would you elaborate on this, please?