Will a man go to hell for wearing a dress?

[Theophilus]

Well, will he?

[Ronzo]

UGH!

[WordPreacher]

Well, will he?

Isn't a man wearing a dress considered a cross dresser? Of course, it would send him to hell.

[Whole Hearted]

yes

[mfblume]

What about Kilts in Scotland?

[Theophilus]

Polls up, vote away!

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Ministerial Dress in the Pulpit (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=143)
Will a woman go to hell for NOT wearing black stockings? (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=4853)

[berkeley]

there is no option for men in cultures that wear "dress" like apparel...

[StillStanding]

What about guys who wear dresses in a comedy play?

[Sheltiedad]

Dress
(1.) Materials used. The earliest and simplest an apron of fig-leaves sewed together (Gen. 3:7); then skins of animals (3:21). Elijah's dress was probably the skin of a sheep (2 Kings 1:8). The Hebrews were early acquainted with the art of weaving hair into cloth (Ex. 26:7; 35:6), which formed the sackcloth of mourners. This was the material of John the Baptist's robe (Matt. 3:4). Wool was also woven into garments (Lev. 13:47; Deut. 22:11; Ezek. 34:3; Job 31:20; Prov. 27:26). The Israelites probably learned the art of weaving linen when they were in Egypt (1 Chr. 4:21). Fine linen was used in the vestments of the high priest (Ex. 28:5), as well as by the rich (Gen. 41:42; Prov. 31:22; Luke 16:19). The use of mixed material, as wool and flax, was forbidden (Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:11).

(2.) Colour. The prevailing colour was the natural white of the material used, which was sometimes rendered purer by the fuller's art (Ps. 104:1, 2; Isa. 63:3; Mark 9:3). The Hebrews were acquainted with the art of dyeing (Gen. 37:3, 23). Various modes of ornamentation were adopted in the process of weaving (Ex. 28:6; 26:1, 31; 35:25), and by needle-work (Judg. 5:30; Ps. 45:13). Dyed robes were imported from foreign countries, particularly from Phoenicia (Zeph. 1:8). Purple and scarlet robes were the marks of the wealthy (Luke 16:19; 2 Sam. 1:24).

(3.) Form. The robes of men and women were not very much different in form from each other. (a) The "coat" (kethoneth), of wool, cotton, or linen, was worn by both sexes. It was a closely-fitting garment, resembling in use and form our shirt (John 19:23). It was kept close to the body by a girdle (John 21:7). A person wearing this "coat" alone was described as naked (1 Sam. 19:24; Isa. 20:2; 2 Kings 6:30; John 21:7); deprived of it he would be absolutely naked. (b) A linen cloth or wrapper (sadin) of fine linen, used somewhat as a night-shirt (Mark 14:51). It is mentioned in Judg. 14:12, 13, and rendered there "sheets." (c) An upper tunic (meil), longer than the "coat" (1 Sam. 2:19; 24:4; 28:14). In 1 Sam. 28:14 it is the mantle in which Samuel was enveloped; in 1 Sam. 24:4 it is the "robe" under which Saul slept. The disciples were forbidden to wear two "coats" (Matt. 10:10; Luke 9:3). (d) The usual outer garment consisted of a piece of woollen cloth like a Scotch plaid, either wrapped round the body or thrown over the shoulders like a shawl, with the ends hanging down in front, or it might be thrown over the head so as to conceal the face (2 Sam. 15:30; Esther 6:12). It was confined to the waist by a girdle, and the fold formed by the overlapping of the robe served as a pocket (2 Kings 4:39; Ps. 79:12; Hag. 2:12; Prov. 17:23; 21:14). Female dress. The "coat" was common to both sexes (Cant. 5:3). But peculiar to females were (1) the "veil" or "wimple," a kind of shawl (Ruth 3:15; rendered "mantle," R.V., Isa. 3:22); (2) the "mantle," also a species of shawl (Isa. 3:22); (3) a "veil," probably a light summer dress (Gen. 24:65); (4) a "stomacher," a holiday dress (Isa. 3:24). The outer garment terminated in an ample fringe or border, which concealed the feet (Isa. 47:2; Jer. 13:22). The dress of the Persians is described in Dan. 3:21. The reference to the art of sewing are few, inasmuch as the garments generally came forth from the loom ready for being worn, and all that was required in the making of clothes devolved on the women of a family (Prov. 31:22; Acts 9:39). Extravagance in dress is referred to in Jer. 4:30; Ezek. 16:10; Zeph. 1:8 (R.V., "foreign apparel"); 1 Tim. 2:9; 1 Pet. 3:3. Rending the robes was expressive of grief (Gen. 37:29, 34), fear (1 Kings 21:27), indignation (2 Kings 5:7), or despair (Judg. 11:35; Esther 4:1). Shaking the garments, or shaking the dust from off them, was a sign of renunciation (Acts 18:6); wrapping them round the head, of awe (1 Kings 19:13) or grief (2 Sam. 15:30; casting them off, of excitement (Acts 22:23); laying hold of them, of supplication (1 Sam. 15:27). In the case of travelling, the outer garments were girded up (1 Kings 18:46). They were thrown aside also when they would impede action (Mark 10:50; John 13:4; Acts 7:58).

Taken from Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary

[mfblume]

there is no option for men in cultures that wear "dress" like apparel...

Right. For cultures where it is "men's apparel" to wear a kilt, there must be an option.

[Theophilus]

there is no option for men in cultures that wear "dress" like apparel...

Looks like purgatory for them then.

[Theophilus]

Right. For cultures where it is "men's apparel" to wear a kilt, we need an option.

They can fall into the 'not knowing it is a dress' category.

Are kilts really Godly? C'mon. :killinme

[mfblume]

They can fall into the 'not knowing it is a dress' category.

Are kilts really Godly? C'mon. :killinme

The point is whether or not a culture considers something "man's apparel" and is modest.

Put it this way: If a culture deems something to be men's apparel, and it is nothing similar to pants, is it wrong for men there to wear them?

I'd like to see answers from everyone on that one.

[berkeley]

The point is whether or not a culture considers something "man's apparel" and is modest.

Put it this way: If a culture deems something to be men's apparel, and it is nothing similar to pants, is it wrong for men there to wear them?
Don't expect a straight answer!:lol

[mfblume]

Don't expect a straight answer!:lol

It will be interesting. I think it deserves it's own thread.

[COOPER]

What about guys who wear dresses in a comedy play?
Hmmmn!

[Evang.Benincasa]

Will a man lose his soul for wearing a dress? Liberals are more interested in this issue due to one thing that is always in the forefront of their minds.
The liberal is always focused on clothes, no matter what they say that is what is their focal point of their discussion when these issues arise.

Now is the issue just a dress or just a pair of slacks? Not at all, but what would compel a man to wear women's apparel? You see this is the real focus.
What is in the person what's the spirit that is inside them that causes them to dress the way they dress? You or I would not get our tongues pierced but there are those who do those sorts of things. So men dressing like women are disturbed. In the DSM-1 it would be under the category of abnormal.

Men who wear dresses are wearing dresses due to a spiritual problem and not for a fashion statement.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[COOPER]

Will a man lose his soul for wearing a dress? Liberals are more interested in this issue due to one thing that is always in the forefront of their minds.
The liberal is always focused on clothes, no matter what they say that is what is their focal point of their discussion when these issues arise.

Now is the issue just a dress or just a pair of slacks? Not at all, but what would compel a man to wear women's apparel? You see this is the real focus.
What is in the person what's the spirit that is inside them that causes them to dress the way they dress? You or I would not get our tongues pierced but there are those who do those sorts of things. So men dressing like women are disturbed. In the DSM-1 it would be under the category of abnormal.

Men who wear dresses are wearing dresses due to a spiritual problem and not for a fashion statement.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com
If I found my self naked and there was a only a womans dress to cover me......hmm

I will remain naked as to not offend Ben-in-casa! J/K

Of course I'd put the dress on!!!!!

[berkeley]

It will be interesting. I think it deserves it's own thread.

If they answer "yes", they will insert foot in mouth. Women's pants on women is accepted in our culture. :)

[Rico]

Will a man lose his soul for wearing a dress? Liberals are more interested in this issue due to one thing that is always in the forefront of their minds.
The liberal is always focused on clothes, no matter what they say that is what is their focal point of their discussion when these issues arise.

Now is the issue just a dress or just a pair of slacks? Not at all, but what would compel a man to wear women's apparel? You see this is the real focus.
What is in the person what's the spirit that is inside them that causes them to dress the way they dress? You or I would not get our tongues pierced but there are those who do those sorts of things. So men dressing like women are disturbed. In the DSM-1 it would be under the category of abnormal.

Men who wear dresses are wearing dresses due to a spiritual problem and not for a fashion statement.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Is that why a conservative started this thread, because liberals are more interested in this issue? Y'all are the ones that scream from your pulpits that people are going to hell for wearing this or that, but you have the nerve to say it's the liberals more interested in this issue? Yeah, right.

[WordPreacher]

Is that why a conservative started this thread, because liberals are more interested in this issue? Y'all are the ones that scream from your pulpits that people are going to hell for wearing this or that, but you have the nerve to say it's the liberals more interested in this issue? Yeah, right.

Preach it Pastor Rico!!!!!

[COOPER]

The point is whether or not a culture considers something "man's apparel" and is modest.

Put it this way: If a culture deems something to be men's apparel, and it is nothing similar to pants, is it wrong for men there to wear them?

I'd like to see answers from everyone on that one.
If I were in among-st Scottish friends celebrating the customs I would dawn A KILT!!!!!

A man will not go to hell over a Kilt!

Watch me dance as I blow me Bags!! I ya da dee!!!

[WordPreacher]

If I were in among-st Scottish friends celebrating the customs I would dawn A KILT!!!!!

A man will not go to hell over a Kilt!

Watch me dance as I blow me Bags!! I ya da dee!!!

Of course not, because it is their custom.

[Rico]

If I were in among-st Scottish friends celebrating the customs I would dawn A KILT!!!!!

A man will not go to hell over a Kilt!

Watch me dance as I blow me Bags!! I ya da dee!!!

What if you were among people that didn't wear any clothes at all? Would you follow their customs? Just a question.

[berkeley]

What if you were among people that didn't wear any clothes at all? Would you follow their customs? Just a question.

I think someone should go to the nude beaches, to be a witness... if no one volunteers... I'll go :lol

j/k

j/k

[mfblume]

Liberals are more interested in this issue due to one thing that is always in the forefront of their minds.
The liberal is always focused on clothes, no matter what they say that is what is their focal point of their discussion when these issues arise.

Now that is the pot calling the kettle black.

[berkeley]

Now that is the pot calling the kettle black.

:lol

[mfblume]

What if you were among people that didn't wear any clothes at all? Would you follow their customs? Just a question.

Modesty is always required no matter what sort of apparel people consider to be which.

[WordPreacher]

Modesty is always required no matter what sort of apparel people consider to be which.

A lot of Apostolics are not modest with their mouths though.

[Sheltiedad]

I think someone should go to the nude beaches, to be a witness... if no one volunteers... I'll go :lol

j/k

j/k

Ewww, it's all wrinkled old leathery people... not like in the movies... save your self a trip.

[Rico]

Modesty is always required no matter what sort of apparel people consider to be which.

I recently saw a program on some natives from some other country. Their idea of modesty was for the women to wear these long grass skirts and no tops. The men were completely naked except for sheaths they used to cover their members. That's it. Other than that, they were completely naked. It would seem that even when using culture as the argument to define modesty there are traps.

[berkeley]

Ewww, it's all wrinkled old leathery people... not like in the movies... save your self a trip.

:vomit

[COOPER]

What if you were among people that didn't wear any clothes at all? Would you follow their customs? Just a question.
Did not like the way I answered with the Kilt, so you had to go there?
:lol

[Sheltiedad]

Kilt... regimental!

[COOPER]

What do the UPC churches in Scotland Teach about Kilts?

[Rico]

Did not like the way I answered with the Kilt, so you had to go there?
:lol

Oh, not the case at all. I wouldn't have a problem trying a kilt, if I ever go to Scotland. I'd have underwear on though, for sure!

[COOPER]

Oh, not the case at all. I wouldn't have a problem trying a kilt, if I ever go to Scotland. I'd have underwear on though, for sure!

I would probably were Shorts myself!


http://www.newlife-UPC.co.uk/index.html upc in Scotland?

[mfblume]

A lot of Apostolics are not modest with their mouths though.

VERY TRUE!!!!! Bravo.

[mfblume]

I recently saw a program on some natives from some other country. Their idea of modesty was for the women to wear these long grass skirts and no tops. The men were completely naked except for sheaths they used to cover their members. That's it. Other than that, they were completely naked. It would seem that even when using culture as the argument to define modesty there are traps.

Yes, to an extent. There are certianly ungodly cultures.

[mfblume]

Ewww, it's all wrinkled old leathery people... not like in the movies... save your self a trip.

Ewww. How do you know?? LOL

[WordPreacher]

VERY TRUE!!!!! Bravo.

WOW!!! You agreed with me.

[Evang.Benincasa]

If I were in among-st Scottish friends celebrating the customs I would dawn A KILT!!!!!

A man will not go to hell over a Kilt!

Watch me dance as I blow me Bags!! I ya da dee!!!

Man you're so angry.

[Evang.Benincasa]

If I found my self naked and there was a only a womans dress to cover me......hmm

I will remain naked as to not offend Ben-in-casa! J/K

Of course I'd put the dress on!!!!!

Brother you are so bitter, hey you need to take care of that.

[COOPER]

Man you're so angry.

Come Bro.....Joke back some....we are fellowshipp'n!

[Sheltiedad]

Cooper, when you talk, it doesn't matter what you say to some people... it is like Charlie Brown's teacher, they just hear, "Bitter, bitter, hate, hate"... it doesn't matter if you are talking about going to Baskin Robbins. lol.

[COOPER]

Brother you are so bitter, hey you need to take care of that.

We are hav'n fun hanging out on AFF....


Evangelist Ben!!!! is In the CASA!!!!

Give it up for our word preach'n Brutha~!

Peace....

[COOPER]

Cooper, when you talk, it doesn't matter what you say to some people... it is like Charlie Brown's teacher, they just hear, "Bitter, bitter, hate, hate"... it doesn't matter if you are talking about going to Baskin Robbins. lol.

I like his Name.....Ben-in-Casa it's cool.

My sons name is Ben and he is home now chill'n in the Casa.

[Sheltiedad]

Benmeister, the benster, Benerama... makin' copies, Benaroni...

[COOPER]

Benmeister, the benster, Benerama... makin' copies, Benaroni...
My sons name is Benjamin ....we say; he be-jamin mon!

[COOPER]

Hey I emailed that Scotland UPC and asked about Kilts.

I gave them a link to AFF.

[chseeads]

What about guys who wear dresses in a comedy play?


Madea done gone split da pit.......

[COOPER]

Brother you are so bitter, hey you need to take care of that.

I am just hav'n fun fellowshipp'n with you on the web.

May your next service be blessed in Jesus name!


Preach it real good and remember the Coop!

[Rico]

I almost named my son Benjamin and planned on naming any others we had Benjamin, but we ended up with 3 girls in a row and I wasn't about to make another one. :D

[Evang.Benincasa]

Is that why a conservative started this thread, because liberals are more interested in this issue? Y'all are the ones that scream from your pulpits that people are going to hell for wearing this or that,

Brother Rico, do you think there's any problem with a man wearing long sleeves and long pants, and a woman wearing a dress? Is there a problem with young people dressing conservatively both young sisters and young men?
Should they be warned not to do it? How about if these same people told you that Jesus told them to dress that way would you say to them that they were deluded?

I was in a revival where a woman took off her jewelry and wiped off her make-up and threw her jewelry on the platform while the entire church was shouting and running the pews in the Holy Ghost. Later she told us that Jesus told her to remove the jewelry and the make-up and never use those things again, and that she should never cut her hair again. She had no prior knowledge of the Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness movement, but she did what she did. Should someone have taken her into the church office and straighten her out?






but you have the nerve to say it's the liberals more interested in this issue? Yeah, right.

It's the truth Bro, I have never seen more people who have a problem with these issue than the libs. It makes them hotter than hornets.

I have sat and watch them make some flip out comments over a pulpit on the subject of holiness standards, and say things about sister's wearing no make up and no slacks that were digs that were flipped. I had one of my old biker buddies with me at a restaurant and a Charismatic Liberal preacher grabbed my shirt sleeve and yanked it up and said "why don't you let your tattoos show, that's bondage if you can't wear short sleeves and show your past." I thought my old buddy was going to lose it (he wasn't in the church) and said to me "where did that come from!" I had to take a little bit of time to explain to him that religion causes brain damage in some people. So, I have seen it and heard it and read their material against Holiness standards. So Brother Rico they are always harping on the clothes. :)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Pragmatist]

If it is culturally appropriate, there is nothing wrong with a man wearing a dress. The Bible does not give specifics for men and women, nor is 1950s America God's standard.

[Rico]

Brother Rico, do you think there's any problem with a man wearing long sleeves and long pants, and a woman wearing a dress? Is there a problem with young people dressing conservatively both young sisters and young men?
Should they be warned not to do it? How about if these same people told you that Jesus told them to dress that way would you say to them that they were deluded?

I was in a revival where a woman took off her jewelry and wiped off her make-up and threw her jewelry on the platform while the entire church was shouting and running the pews in the Holy Ghost. Later she told us that Jesus told her to remove the jewelry and the make-up and never use those things again, and that she should never cut her hair again. She had no prior knowledge of the Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness movement, but she did what she did. Should someone have taken her into the church office and straighten her out?







It's the truth Bro, I have never seen more people who have a problem with these issue than the libs. It makes them hotter than hornets.

I have sat and watch them make some flip out comments over a pulpit on the subject of holiness standards, and say things about sister's wearing no make up and no slacks that were digs that were flipped. I had one of my old biker buddies with me at a restaurant and a Charismatic Liberal preacher grabbed my shirt sleeve and yanked it up and said "why don't you let your tattoos show, that's bondage if you can't wear short sleeves and show your past." I thought my old buddy was going to lose it (he wasn't in the church) and said to me "where did that come from!" I had to take a little bit of time to explain to him that religion causes brain damage in some people. So, I have seen it and heard it and read their material against Holiness standards. So Brother Rico they are always harping on the clothes. :)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Brother, of course I don't have a problem with people wanting to dress in long sleeves and all the other dress code things. The issue is when pastors get it into their heads that it's their job to tell people how to dress and then take scripture completely out of context to go about doing it. I told someone else today that I feel it's an abuse of power. I have never, and never will be, against someone having personal convictions given to them by God. I have some myself. But I don't go around trying to tell people they have to live by my convictions and I certainly don't go around twisting the Word of God to justify demanding that people live by those convictions. If God tells a woman to take off her make up and only wear dresses then, by all means, I am all for her obeying the voice of the Lord. Just because He wants that from one person does not mean He wants it from everybody.

How would you feel if someone got into a pulpit and started telling you you were going to Hell for being on the internet? How about if they used the "I will set no evil thing before my eyes" scripture? Wouldn't you feel like they were twisting the scripture and abusing their power as a preacher? Or would you just obey and do what he said just because he said it and after all, he is the preacher?

[Evang.Benincasa]

If it is culturally appropriate, there is nothing wrong with a man wearing a dress. The Bible does not give specifics for men and women, nor is 1950s America God's standard.

Hey down in Fort Lauderdale it's acceptable. Come on down there are teenagers who dress uni sex. There are transvestites who are very accepted down here. There are women down here who look manlier than any man.

Also men who look like women and walk a talk like women.

Now let's talk about culturally appropriate who deems culture man or the Bible?


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Pragmatist]

Hey down in Fort Lauderdale it's acceptable. Come on down there are teenagers who dress uni sex. There are transvestites who are very accepted down here. There are women down here who look manlier than any man.

Also men who look like women and walk a talk like women.

Now let's talk about culturally appropriate who deems culture man or the Bible?


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Man determines culture. If the Bible determined culture, it would have to be very specific about each item we wear and it is not.

FYI- My father-in-law lives in India and wears a skirt at times. He is not a transvestite in his culture.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Brother, of course I don't have a problem with people wanting to dress in long sleeves and all the other dress code things. The issue is when pastors get it into their heads that it's their job to tell people how to dress and then take scripture completely out of context to go about doing it.

Take the scripture out of context? That's your perception just as a Trinitarian sees the Trinity and a Dispensationalists sees a Pre-Tribulational Rapture, you see what you see because that's where you want to be.
It's like wanting a Christmas Tree, you and I know that there is no Bible for it, but yet you will have people fight you tooth and nail over it. The same goes for wedding rings; people will fight like wolves over one piece of jewelry when there is no scripture for it. Why? Because it's about agenda, it's about what people want whether it's in the Bible or not. It's the preacher’s job to preach to the people that they should get a prayer life and grow up and if that's accomplished then it will be Jesus who will take care of the rest.


I told someone else today that I feel it's an abuse of power. I have never, and never will be, against someone having personal convictions given to them by God. I have some myself. But I don't go around trying to tell people they have to live by my convictions and I certainly don't go around twisting the Word of God to justify demanding that people live by those convictions.

Wait a minute Bro, if someone is in a church they have a duty to study it out for themselves. No body is told anything that they have to do. When I was in the world no Apostolic Pentecostal ever came to my door in the Bronx New York and told me that I couldn't dress a certain way. It's up to the people to study for themselves. Usually people blow off standards because they never believed in them from the start. It was a costume to them just like clown outfit is to Bozo. My wife studied out her convictions on holiness in the original languages and came to her conclusions through the word and prayer. The same goes for myself and everything that I believe. My daughters are compelled to study and as they grow we will TEACH, not yell, not scream or by any beatings. I want them to love Jesus like I love Jesus and not hate Him because they think He is the cause of religious misery.



If God tells a woman to take off her make up and only wear dresses then, by all means, I am all for her obeying the voice of the Lord. Just because He wants that from one person does not mean He wants it from everybody.


What if GOD does want that of every person? What if a preacher preached and the Holy Ghost moved in all his revivals and every revival people were baptized in Jesus name and received the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues and the people all said that God told them to change the way they looked?

Would you still be cool with that?



How would you feel if someone got into a pulpit and started telling you you were going to Hell for being on the internet? How about if they used the "I will set no evil thing before my eyes" scripture? Wouldn't you feel like they were twisting the scripture and abusing their power as a preacher? Or would you just obey and do what he said just because he said it and after all, he is the preacher?

Brother Rico I have changed my beliefs on issues when I was given a good argument no matter how it was presented I have no problem when I see it in the word or when I hear a good argument against or for it.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

Take the scripture out of context? That's your perception just as a Trinitarian sees the Trinity and a Dispensationalists sees a Pre-Tribulational Rapture, you see what you see because that's where you want to be.
It's like wanting a Christmas Tree, you and I know that there is no Bible for it, but yet you will have people fight you tooth and nail over it. The same goes for wedding rings; people will fight like wolves over one piece of jewelry when there is no scripture for it. Why? Because it's about agenda, it's about what people want whether it's in the Bible or not. It's the preacher’s job to preach to the people that they should get a prayer life and grow up and if that's accomplished then it will be Jesus who will take care of the rest.

The exact same thing could be said about the dress code crowd. They see what they see because that's what they want to see.

Wait a minute Bro, if someone is in a church they have a duty to study it out for themselves. No body is told anything that they have to do. When I was in the world no Apostolic Pentecostal ever came to my door in the Bronx New York and told me that I couldn't dress a certain way. It's up to the people to study for themselves. Usually people blow off standards because they never believed in them from the start. It was a costume to them just like clown outfit is to Bozo. My wife studied out her convictions on holiness in the original languages and came to her conclusions through the word and prayer. The same goes for myself and everything that I believe. My daughters are compelled to study and as they grow we will TEACH, not yell, not scream or by any beatings. I want them to love Jesus like I love Jesus and not hate Him because they think He is the cause of religious misery.


My Puerto Rican foot. I've been there, heard the preaching, believed the lies, and found out different. You have come entirely too late to try to convince me people aren't told what to do over pulpits. If that is what you believe then you need to get your head out of the sand, Brother.




What if GOD does want that of every person? What if a preacher preached and the Holy Ghost moved in all his revivals and every revival people were baptized in Jesus name and received the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues and the people all said that God told them to change the way they looked?

Would you still be cool with that?

What if? What if you're wrong? Also, I seriously doubt entire revivals are caused by dress code preaching.



Brother Rico I have changed my beliefs on issues when I was given a good argument no matter how it was presented I have no problem when I see it in the word or when I hear a good argument against or for it.


At least you are willing to admit that your beliefs have changed. If they've been changed before then that would mean they could be changed again. This is a journey, and we learn as we go. What we think is God's way today could change on down the road a bit.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com


Answers are in blue.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Man determines culture. If the Bible determined culture, it would have to be very specific about each item we wear and it is not.

FYI- My father-in-law lives in India and wears a skirt at times. He is not a transvestite in his culture.

In India they also walk around naked so ask your father-in-law about that one.

The Apostles commanded the Gentiles coming into the church to get rid of their culture.

Act 15:20

"But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."

Different cultures dress the way they dress because of pagan practices and throw over from their religion. India is mostly tribal people, and their practice pagan. If they come into Christianity they are to discard those pagan practices.

What about other tribal cultures should they be allowed to keep their nudity, female circumcision, body piercing, body branding, and other totally pagan practices.

This could open a whole can of worms.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[berkeley]

In India they also walk around naked so ask your father-in-law about that one.

The Apostles commanded the Gentiles coming into the church to get rid of their culture.

Act 15:20

"But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."

Different cultures dress the way they dress because of pagan practices and throw over from their religion. India is mostly tribal people, and their practice pagan. If they come into Christianity they are to discard those pagan practices.

What about other tribal cultures should they be allowed to keep their nudity, female circumcision, body piercing, body branding, and other totally pagan practices.

This could open a whole can of worms.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com
Almost thou persuadest me :hmmm

:lol

[Evang.Benincasa]

The exact same thing could be said about the dress code crowd. They see what they see because that's what they want to see.

I don't think you're understanding what I was trying to say. Let me put it like this, there are scriptures speaking of attire and therefore those who are against standards have to disprove what is written. They then are always harping on clothes and missing why the holiness standards were there in the first place.




My Puerto Rican foot. I've been there, heard the preaching, believed the lies, and found out different.

You see Brother Rico, I heard the same things but instead of coping an attitude I went and studied everything out, and did not go to try to protect a doctrine I wanted to see if it was truth. I found that what those old Brothers taught was legitimate.



You have come entirely too late to try to convince me people aren't told what to do over pulpits.

Sorry but people are people and they won't do anything they don't want to do. Do you think that you have some kind of corner on the market and that everyone else is just duped? Let me see, so you're saying that everyone who believes in Holiness Standards are bunch of stupid dopes who are pounded into submission to do things they know are wrong? Is that what you're saying?


If that is what you believe then you need to get your head out of the sand, Brother.

Brother Rico, you are trying to say that everyone who is in a holiness Pentecostal church are doing something against their will and are under bondage of misery? Talk about having your head in the sand.


What if? What if you're wrong? Also, I seriously doubt entire revivals are caused by dress code preaching.

I never said the preacher was preaching dress codes he preached One God and Jesus name baptism and the Holy Ghost with tongues. Brother Rico what if you're wrong what if you missed it. What if you have such an attitude against this subject that you couldn't believe even if Jesus preached it and David played it on his harp to you.



At least you are willing to admit that your beliefs have changed.

Concerning Eschatology yes, but as far as concerning holiness standards I have come to learn more as time goes on. I see it more clearly as the years go on. I have found that the old Brothers and Sisters who held to their convictions did so because they not only had a spiritual conviction but a Bible conviction.





If they've been changed before then that would mean they could be changed again.

Yes, indeed but not because I had been offended or had a hard time with a religious movement. I want to see the facts and take time to look it over and research it out. When it comes to troubleshooting a machine you go through a process of elimination and then when you find the problem you deal with it. The same goes with doctrines you look into all the points and eliminate the false and hold to the truth.



This is a journey, and we learn as we go.

Absolutely correct, just don't go backwards in that journey and end up worse than when you started.


What we think is God's way today could change on down the road a bit.


Entirely true, but we don't go all the way down this road (while we were studying and praying) and end up in Sciencetology.


Lord bless you Brother Rico

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

I don't think you're understanding what I was trying to say. Let me put it like this, there are scriptures speaking of attire and therefore those who are against standards have to disprove what is written. They then are always harping on clothes and missing why the holiness standards were there in the first place.


None of which says a woman has to wear a dress and men have to wear pants. This is has been covered to death, Brother.





You see Brother Rico, I heard the same things but instead of coping an attitude I went and studied everything out, and did not go to try to protect a doctrine I wanted to see if it was truth. I found that what those old Brothers taught was legitimate.


I've got some news for you. I bought the lies, hook, line, and sinker for almost 10 years. Don't assume that just because I am against these lies being preached from pulpits all across America that it means I have a bad attitude. I've studied these issues out for myself. It's funny how people in your camp always resort to saying those opposed just have a bad attitude or are in rebellion. It's become par for the course.



Sorry but people are people and they won't do anything they don't want to do. Do you think that you have some kind of corner on the market and that everyone else is just duped? Let me see, so you're saying that everyone who believes in Holiness Standards are bunch of stupid dopes who are pounded into submission to do things they know are wrong? Is that what you're saying?


When did I say that? Apparently, you either do not read everything I say or just choose to read what you want to read.



Brother Rico, you are trying to say that everyone who is in a holiness Pentecostal church are doing something against their will and are under bondage of misery? Talk about having your head in the sand.


Hogwash! I have never said such a thing so stop making false accusations against me.



I never said the preacher was preaching dress codes he preached One God and Jesus name baptism and the Holy Ghost with tongues. Brother Rico what if you're wrong what if you missed it. What if you have such an attitude against this subject that you couldn't believe even if Jesus preached it and David played it on his harp to you.


"What if" is the best you can come up with? Anyone can use a what if argument. Since Jesus didn't preach this and David never played it on his harp then I have nothing to worry about. See, I am just dumb enough to believe that God is more than capable of showing me any error in my thinking. He's done it before and can do it again. And can you believe He's actually done this without having to use a redfaced preacher telling me how hot hell is going to be? What a concept. God actually leading His people and showing them which way to go. Amazing!




Concerning Eschatology yes, but as far as concerning holiness standards I have come to learn more as time goes on. I see it more clearly as the years go on. I have found that the old Brothers and Sisters who held to their convictions did so because they not only had a spiritual conviction but a Bible conviction.


Good for you. I have neither a spiritual nor a biblical conviction that says it's ok for the pastor to tell me or my wife and daughters how to dress. I have searched high and low through the scriptures, looking for it, but it just isn't there because it doesn't exist. Feel free to twist whatever scripture you want to make it say what you want it to say. Don't let me stop you.






Yes, indeed but not because I had been offended or had a hard time with a religious movement. I want to see the facts and take time to look it over and research it out. When it comes to troubleshooting a machine you go through a process of elimination and then when you find the problem you deal with it. The same goes with doctrines you look into all the points and eliminate the false and hold to the truth.



Exactly. That is why I can no longer go along with clothesline preaching.




Absolutely correct, just don't go backwards in that journey and end up worse than when you started.


Again, why the assumption that I am headed the wrong way?



Entirely true, but we don't go all the way down this road (while we were studying and praying) and end up in Sciencetology.



What does Sciencetology have to do with anything?


Lord bless you Brother Rico

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com


Answers are in blue

[Rico]

Brother, it's been fun but Stand Off is on and I don't want to miss it. I will catcha later. :)

[Hoovie]

Too many choices in this poll - but none that simply say "NO!" That is how I would vote.

[Evang.Benincasa]

None of which says a woman has to wear a dress and men have to wear pants. This is has been covered to death, Brother.

Brother the scripture is sure saying that a man cannot wear that which a woman wears and a woman cannot wear what a man wears. In the Greek it is very clear when placed with what is written in Timothy. I have yet to see anyone come up with anything refuting it, but that doesn't matter because when people have their mind made up not to go forward they won't. So much for making people do something.


I've got some news for you. I bought the lies, hook, line, and sinker for almost 10 years. Don't assume that just because I am against these lies being preached from pulpits all across America that it means I have a bad attitude. I've studied these issues out for myself. It's funny how people in your camp always resort to saying those opposed just have a bad attitude or are in rebellion. It's become par for the course.

Brother Rico so you studied this out and found out that God really doesn't care if people are dressed unisex? Is that what you found in your research?

Why do I think (just me personally, not all of America's Apostolics just me) that you have an attitude because you are so flipped over the subject.

It's your use of adjetives Brother Rico, like the use of the word "LIES".

What about Leviticus 18, can you point out to me how many things within that chapter are no longer for the Apostolic Church?





When did I say that? Apparently, you either do not read everything I say or just choose to read what you want to read.

Then Brother Rico what are you trying to say then?

My Puerto Rican foot. I've been there, heard the preaching, believed the lies, and found out different. You have come entirely too late to try to convince me people aren't told what to do over pulpits. If that is what you believe then you need to get your head out of the sand, Brother.

Brother Rico what you're saying above is that we are being lied to but you've been set free and we still have our heads in the sand. Brother Rico so what do you have that we should look into? You think we should all look like we been shot out of a canon? So when Jesus said the Pharisees looked beautiful what was He talking about? Their legs?




Hogwash! I have never said such a thing so stop making false accusations against me.

Did you say that we are being lied to? So if we are being lied to then you're saying that we are deceived and you're enlightened. I hope your ministry does real well. :)



"What if" is the best you can come up with? Anyone can use a what if argument. Since Jesus didn't preach this and David never played it on his harp then I have nothing to worry about.

David did play it on his harp.

Psa 1:1-6

"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the LAW of the LORD; and in his LAW doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish."

The word for LAW is TORAH and Deuteronomy 22:5 is part of the TORAH.

Jesus was the LOGOS made flesh (not divine but human) and that LOGOS is the rational discourse of God and that discourse is all of the TORAH.

Paul an the rest of the apostles didn't use New Testment books they used a TORAH.




See, I am just dumb enough to believe that God is more than capable of showing me any error in my thinking.

Brother Rico wow that's pretty good so I guess we don't have to worry about you Bro, you must be bringing some powerful revelation forward and all us conservatives are just sitting around trying to think of what we can preach against. Are the people lining up at your door yet?


He's done it before and can do it again. And can you believe He's actually done this without having to use a redfaced preacher telling me how hot hell is going to be? What a concept. God actually leading His people and showing them which way to go. Amazing!

Hold on, wait a minute, are you saying that GOD presents information without a preacher? Let me put it this way, can a man sit by himself and have no one around and come to revelation without ministry? Is that what you're saying?





Good for you. I have neither a spiritual nor a biblical conviction that says it's ok for the pastor to tell me or my wife and daughters how to dress. I have searched high and low through the scriptures, looking for it, but it just isn't there because it doesn't exist.

It doesn't exist for you because you don't want it. You refuse because you have decided that all us in Holiness Pentecostal churches are spiritual Neanderthals.


Feel free to twist whatever scripture you want to make it say what you want it to say. Don't let me stop you.

What's to twist Brother Rico, the word is the word, pretty hard to twist one verse of Deuteronomy 22:5 and even harder to get 1st Timothy 2:9 wrong.
Hey, Brother Rico Mormons believe that we all come from the planet Kolob so I guess people will believe whatever they very well please.

So let me get this straight it's wrong for people to preach standards but it's not wrong for you to say that these people are liars who believe in standards?


Exactly. That is why I can no longer go along with clothesline preaching.

Brother Rico, when someone is done with something they're done. :beatdeadhorse





Again, why the assumption that I am headed the wrong way?

But it's all right to say that the Holiness Pentecostals are in the Dark Ages just as long as no one putting you there. Way to go Bro.






What does Sciencetology have to do with anything?



You said what we think is God's way today may change in the future, I would tend to agree, but I added just as long as you don't end up going so far down the road that you end up in some flipped out religion.

Brother Rico it's like building a chopper you start out with good intentions but as you go along you might end up with something that you can't even ride.


Lord bless you my Brother.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Hoovie]

Sorry Ben, that post was too long for me to glean.... Do you oppose kilts for Scottish?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Sorry Ben, that post was too long for me to glean.... Do you oppose kilts for Scottish?

Wait a minute Brother Hoover, you just started a thread saying that this forum was dead and then you complain about my post.

Brother Hoover I will answer you when you read my post in its entirety.

Thank you very much.


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Hoovie]

Wait a minute Brother Hoover, you just started a thread saying that this forum was dead and then you complain about my post.

Brother Hoover I will answer you when you read my post in its entirety.

Thank you very much.


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

LOL! Good point! Be back in a minute!!:IAM:IAM:IAM:IAM

[Hoovie]

Yoohooo! Did it.


Answer if you wish - It's all good. I am relaxing and chatting.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Yoohooo! Did it.


Answer if you wish - It's all good. I am relaxing and chatting.

You read my post? What did you think? You are not even going to give me any feedback?

[Hoovie]

You read my post? What did you think? You are not even going to give me any feedback?

#1. You are a gifted writer

#2. I like the plural Eldership concept.

#3. Nice to meet you. I am Oneness Pentecostal and "holiness" myself.

#4. I would be interested in knowing more about the "Puerto Rican foot"

[Evang.Benincasa]

Yoohooo! Did it.


Answer if you wish - It's all good. I am relaxing and chatting.

The "kilt" means to "tuck it up" or even to "grid up with a belt" so we could argue the point that it's a man's garment. When we look at the man's garment with the ancient Hebrews the priest wore breeches, and their garment. These breeches were supposed to go down over the knee.

Job was told to "grid himself up like a man" and with that if a man was to do that he best have breeches on.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Hoovie]

The "kilt" means to "tuck it up" or even to "grid up with a belt" so we could argue the point that it's a man's garment. When we look at the man's garment with the ancient Hebrews the priest wore breeches, and their garment. These breeches were supposed to go down over the knee.

Job was told to "grid himself up like a man" and with that if a man was to do that he best have breeches on.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com


Good cause I was in the theater play once, and I was an Egyptian servant in one scene - had to wear this kilt type thingy....

[Rico]

Brother the scripture is sure saying that a man cannot wear that which a woman wears and a woman cannot wear what a man wears. In the Greek it is very clear when placed with what is written in Timothy. I have yet to see anyone come up with anything refuting it, but that doesn't matter because when people have their mind made up not to go forward they won't. So much for making people do something.


Brother, you know good and well that there is such a thing as women's pants. Stop playing dumb. It doesn't look good on you.



Brother Rico so you studied this out and found out that God really doesn't care if people are dressed unisex? Is that what you found in your research?

You're funny, NOT!

Why do I think (just me personally, not all of America's Apostolics just me) that you have an attitude because you are so flipped over the subject.


To be honest with you, I don't really care what you think about my attitude. If you are looking for an attitude try reading back some of your posts.

It's your use of adjetives Brother Rico, like the use of the word "LIES".


If someone gets into a pulpit and preaches something that isn't true, what do you call it? I call it preaching lies.

What about Leviticus 18, can you point out to me how many things within that chapter are no longer for the Apostolic Church?


I don't have time right now to study Lev 18. I will, however ask you what you use to decide which part of the law you will obey and which part you ignore. How about the suit in your avatar? Is it mixed fabrics. If so, then that is an abomination. But wait, it's ok to ignore that part of the law but harp on another.





Then Brother Rico what are you trying to say then?


I said what I meant and meant what I said.



Brother Rico what you're saying above is that we are being lied to but you've been set free and we still have our heads in the sand. Brother Rico so what do you have that we should look into? You think we should all look like we been shot out of a canon? So when Jesus said the Pharisees looked beautiful what was He talking about? Their legs?


Anyone that gets into a pulpit and preaches that Deut 22:5 is talking about women wearing dresses and men wearing pants is preaching a bold faced lie, in my opinion.





Did you say that we are being lied to? So if we are being lied to then you're saying that we are deceived and you're enlightened. I hope your ministry does real well. :)


Thank you. And good luck with yours as well.




David did play it on his harp.

Psa 1:1-6

"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the LAW of the LORD; and in his LAW doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish."

The word for LAW is TORAH and Deuteronomy 22:5 is part of the TORAH.

Jesus was the LOGOS made flesh (not divine but human) and that LOGOS is the rational discourse of God and that discourse is all of the TORAH.

Paul an the rest of the apostles didn't use New Testment books they used a TORAH.


And what did Paul have to say to those who thought it proper to continue in the law?




Brother Rico wow that's pretty good so I guess we don't have to worry about you Bro, you must be bringing some powerful revelation forward and all us conservatives are just sitting around trying to think of what we can preach against. Are the people lining up at your door yet?


Spare me the sarcasm, Brother. It doesn't become you, nor does it further your argument.



Hold on, wait a minute, are you saying that GOD presents information without a preacher? Let me put it this way, can a man sit by himself and have no one around and come to revelation without ministry? Is that what you're saying?



Again, stop putting words into my mouth. I know full well that the ministry plays a role in the life of a believer, but they are not the exclusive way that God deals with people. God can speak to me just like He speaks to anyone else. In fact, He has many times in my life. Sometimes through the preaching, mainly through His Word, and recently more through dreams. If you have a problem with that take it up with God beccause neither you nor any other power hungry preacher will ever be able to take that away from me.






It doesn't exist for you because you don't want it. You refuse because you have decided that all us in Holiness Pentecostal churches are spiritual Neanderthals.


Never said that either. I would really appreciate it if you'd stop with the idiotic accusations. If you don't then this conversation is over.



What's to twist Brother Rico, the word is the word, pretty hard to twist one verse of Deuteronomy 22:5 and even harder to get 1st Timothy 2:9 wrong.
Hey, Brother Rico Mormons believe that we all come from the planet Kolob so I guess people will believe whatever they very well please.

So let me get this straight it's wrong for people to preach standards but it's not wrong for you to say that these people are liars who believe in standards?


For the last time, if anyone gets into a pulpit and preaches something that is not found in the Word then that means they are preaching lies, in my opinion. If preaching lies makes someone a liar then a liar is what they are.



Brother Rico, when someone is done with something they're done. :beatdeadhorse






But it's all right to say that the Holiness Pentecostals are in the Dark Ages just as long as no one putting you there. Way to go Bro.



Again, never said anyone was in the dark ages. This is really getting old, Benincasa.







You said what we think is God's way today may change in the future, I would tend to agree, but I added just as long as you don't end up going so far down the road that you end up in some flipped out religion.


Why would I end up in some flipped out religion? I still believe the Gospel, Brother. That's not going to change. It's a settled issue for me.

Brother Rico it's like building a chopper you start out with good intentions but as you go along you might end up with something that you can't even ride.


Lord bless you my Brother.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com



Answers are in blue. Brother, I am getting tired of you saying I said things I never said. It's getting old and isn't productive. Every now and then I like getting into a one on one with people of other mindsets, but I am not going to continue if you keep saying I've said things I've never said just to try and make me look bad. I haven't said anything that is too hard for anyone of average intelligence to understand so stop trying to twist what I say into something I am not saying. Maybe God lets you get away with that with His Word, but I ain't God. ;)

[Evang.Benincasa]

#1. You are a gifted writer

#2. I like the plural Eldership concept.

#3. Nice to meet you. I am Oneness Pentecostal and "holiness" myself.

#4. I would be interested in knowing more about the "Puerto Rican foot"

I believe the "Puerto Rican Foot" is something that's employed when one does not agree with a Puerto Rican.


Nice to meet you to. :)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Good cause I was in the theater play once, and I was an Egyptian servant in one scene - had to wear this kilt type thingy....

That's called naked.

[Emma Bontrager]

Wait a minute Brother Hoover, you just started a thread saying that this forum was dead and then you complain about my post.

Brother Hoover I will answer you when you read my post in its entirety.



Some people are never happy. :girlpopcorn

[Hoovie]

That's called naked.


OK now I AM confused.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Brother, you know good and well that there is such a thing as women's pants. Stop playing dumb. It doesn't look good on you.

Not before 1850 and even then they were considered an under garment.
Deal with it, there are no such thing as women's pants.




You're funny, NOT!

Not really trying to be funny, so in your research you found that God wants the sexes to dress and look the same? kind of a George Orwell 1984 look?


To be honest with you, I don't really care what you think about my attitude. If you are looking for an attitude try reading back some of your posts.

So you admit that I'm right. A little hesitant but your coming around.



If someone gets into a pulpit and preaches something that isn't true, what do you call it? I call it preaching lies.

Brother Rico this is what I originally said to you.

Sorry but people are people and they won't do anything they don't want to do. Do you think that you have some kind of corner on the market and that everyone else is just duped? Let me see, so you're saying that everyone who believes in Holiness Standards are bunch of stupid dopes who are pounded into submission to do things they know are wrong? Is that what you're saying?


Then you said:

When did I say that? Apparently, you either do not read everything I say or just choose to read what you want to read.

So I guess I was correct, you believe that we who are in Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are a bunch of dopes believing LIES, but you are on some other level then us cavemen who know the lies but refuse to come out of the cave where you are.



I don't have time right now to study Lev 18.

Study? How about flipping the to the page and skim it. I think about the few first verses should tell you the whole story.


I will, however ask you what you use to decide which part of the law you will obey and which part you ignore. How about the suit in your avatar? Is it mixed fabrics.

No it's a 100% cotton, so is the shirt and undershirt, it cuts down on sweat.



If so, then that is an abomination. But wait, it's ok to ignore that part of the law but harp on another.

If you feel that way then go to Leviticus 18 and tell me how those laws are no longer applicable to us today, or do you pick and choose.



I said what I meant and meant what I said.

Ok, then what you're saying is that Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are full of liars and the decieved?



Anyone that gets into a pulpit and preaches that Deut 22:5 is talking about women wearing dresses and men wearing pants is preaching a bold faced lie, in my opinion.

It has to be your opinion Brother Rico because you have no proof to refute what has been presented. In other words you believe that men and women can look the same and God has no problem with it.



Thank you. And good luck with yours as well.

Now how can you say that if I'm a liar? So you wish liars good luck so they can continue to lie to people?


And what did Paul have to say to those who thought it proper to continue in the law?

Good go and read Leviticus 18 Brother Rico, I see you have a perfect understanding of the scriptures but Apostolic Pentecostals are liars.
How does it feel being so scholarly and enlightened?



Spare me the sarcasm, Brother. It doesn't become you, nor does it further your argument.

Hey why can't I use some sarcasm look at what I have to compete with, it's not everyday you get to deal with such enlightened gurus. Hey let me know when you complete that reading of Leviticus 18 will you be doing that in Hebrew or Chaldean?


Again, stop putting words into my mouth.

Not me you did that all on your own.




I know full well that the ministry plays a role in the life of a believer, but they are not the exclusive way that God deals with people. God can speak to me just like He speaks to anyone else. In fact, He has many times in my life. Sometimes through the preaching, mainly through His Word, and recently more through dreams. If you have a problem with that take it up with God beccause neither you nor any other power hungry preacher will ever be able to take that away from me.

So let me ask you this how do you know which ones are the liars?
Are the ones who argee with you truth tellers?



Never said that either. I would really appreciate it if you'd stop with the idiotic accusations. If you don't then this conversation is over.

Don't worry Brother I'm pretty much done.


For the last time, if anyone gets into a pulpit and preaches something that is not found in the Word then that means they are preaching lies, in my opinion. If preaching lies makes someone a liar then a liar is what they are.

When a man thinks it's a great task to review a chapter in the Bible (Leviticus 18) especially when you can just click on the verse I had typed, you loose the right to call any preacher a liar.




Again, never said anyone was in the dark ages. This is really getting old, Benincasa.

No you just said we are liars so that means the people who are listening to us are in the ones who are being lied to therefore they are in the Dark Ages. Tell you what, after you study out Leviticus 18 maybe you can flip on the History Channel and watch all about the Dark Ages. :)




Why would I end up in some flipped out religion? I still believe the Gospel, Brother. That's not going to change. It's a settled issue for me.

Hey you are walking in the light the Holiness Brothers and Sisters and myself are still under you in the food chain. :bow


Answers are in blue. Brother, I am getting tired of you saying I said things I never said.

Brother Rico, are you saying things you never meant or words you never typed? I will agree there may not be words you have typed, but your meaning was loud and clear.




It's getting old and isn't productive. Every now and then I like getting into a one on one with people of other mindsets, but I am not going to continue if you keep saying I've said things I've never said just to try and make me look bad.

I leave this one alone.




I haven't said anything that is too hard for anyone of average intelligence to understand so stop trying to twist what I say into something I am not saying.

Woo hoo! I'm just an suit wearing Pennycostal one sock lower than the other, and worn out knees. Sorry I'm ain't intellajectual fer yah.

So you really think that men and women can look the same?




Maybe God lets you get away with that with His Word, but I ain't God. ;)

No you're not God, you just think your smarter than He is. ;)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

Not before 1850 and even then they were considered an under garment.
Deal with it, there are no such thing as women's pants.





Not really trying to be funny, so in your research you found that God wants the sexes to dress and look the same? kind of a George Orwell 1984 look?



So you admit that I'm right. A little hesitant but your coming around.




Brother Rico this is what I originally said to you.



Then you said:



So I guess I was correct, you believe that we who are in Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are a bunch of dopes believing LIES, but you are on some other level then us cavemen who know the lies but refuse to come out of the cave where you are.




Study? How about flipping the to the page and skim it. I think about the few first verses should tell you the whole story.



No it's a 100% cotton, so is the shirt and undershirt, it cuts down on sweat.




If you feel that way then go to Leviticus 18 and tell me how those laws are no longer applicable to us today, or do you pick and choose.




Ok, then what you're saying is that Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are full of liars and the decieved?




It has to be your opinion Brother Rico because you have no proof to refute what has been presented. In other words you believe that men and women can look the same and God has no problem with it.




Now how can you say that if I'm a liar? So you wish liars good luck so they can continue to lie to people?



Good go and read Leviticus 18 Brother Rico, I see you have a perfect understanding of the scriptures but Apostolic Pentecostals are liars.
How does it feel being so scholarly and enlightened?




Hey why can't I use some sarcasm look at what I have to compete with, it's not everyday you get to deal with such enlightened gurus. Hey let me know when you complete that reading of Leviticus 18 will you be doing that in Hebrew or Chaldean?



Not me you did that all on your own.





So let me ask you this how do you know which ones are the liars?
Are the ones who argee with you truth tellers?




Don't worry Brother I'm pretty much done.



When a man thinks it's a great task to review a chapter in the Bible (Leviticus 18) especially when you can just click on the verse I had typed, you loose the right to call any preacher a liar.





No you just said we are liars so that means the people who are listening to us are in the ones who are being lied to therefore they are in the Dark Ages. Tell you what, after you study out Leviticus 18 maybe you can flip on the History Channel and watch all about the Dark Ages. :)





Hey you are walking in the light the Holiness Brothers and Sisters and myself are still under you in the food chain. :bow



Brother Rico, are you saying things you never meant or words you never typed? I will agree there may not be words you have typed, but your meaning was loud and clear.





I leave this one alone.





Woo hoo! I'm just an suit wearing Pennycostal one sock lower than the other, and worn out knees. Sorry I'm ain't intellajectual fer yah.

So you really think that men and women can look the same?





No you're not God, you just think your smarter than He is. ;)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Brother, as soon as you're ready to go buy your pants in the woman's department I will be willing to continue this discussion with you. But see, I already know you won't be doing that because you don't believe in wearing women's clothes. But, wait a minute, pants are men's apparrel so you should be fine. Just remember they will most likely fit you a bit higher up cause a woman's waist is a bit higher than a man's. Plus, they may not fit very well around your hips cause they are designed for a woman's curves. And lastly, they will most definitely be tighter in the crotch area cause they use less material in that area. Oh, I almost forgot. They button from the other side than what you are used to . Other than that there's no difference in men's pants and women's pants so you should be ok getting your pants there. Lemme know when you go and be sure to take a lot of pictures. Have fun shopping! ;)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Brother, as soon as you're ready to go buy your pants in the woman's department I will be willing to continue this discussion with you. But see, I already know you won't be doing that because you don't believe in wearing women's clothes. But, wait a minute, pants are men's apparrel so you should be fine. Just remember they will most likely fit you a bit higher up cause a woman's waist is a bit higher than a man's. Plus, they may not fit very well around your hips cause they are designed for a woman's curves. And lastly, they will most definitely be tighter in the crotch area cause they use less material in that area. Oh, I almost forgot. They button from the other side than what you are used to . Other than that there's no difference in men's pants and women's pants so you should be ok getting your pants there. Lemme know when you go and be sure to take a lot of pictures. Have fun shopping! ;)

So you believe that men and women can dress the same?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

So you believe that men and women can dress the same?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

See? There you go again. I DID NOT SAY THAT! Men should wear men's pants and women should wear women's pants. Soon as you are willing to buy your pants in the women's department I will believe that you believe that pants are only for men. I'm done. Have fun.

[Evang.Benincasa]

See? There you go again. I DID NOT SAY THAT! Men should wear men's pants and women should wear women's pants. Soon as you are willing to buy your pants in the women's department I will believe that you believe that pants are only for men. I'm done. Have fun.

So women's pants must be bought in a certain location to make them female?
:killinme

Yeap stick a fork in it Bro, you're done.

Love you Brother Rico.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

So women's pants must be bought in a certain location to make them female?
:killinme

Yeap stick a fork in it Bro, you're done.

Love you Brother Rico.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Ok. Now you are making even less sense than you normally do. Where else can someone get women's pants if not the women's department, except for yard sales, catalogs, and the internet? Even the Goodwill stores separate the women's pants from the men's pants.


Now, if you will excuse me I am going to go take a shower and go watch some cable tv downstairs. It's much more entertaining than this conversation has become. Have fun.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Ok. Now you are making even less sense than you normally do. Where else can someone get women's pants if not the women's department, except for yard sales, catalogs, and the internet? Even the Goodwill stores separate the women's pants from the men's pants.

So if you stand in the women's department of the store what would that mean?:killinme

Brother Rico do you believe that a men and women can look the same?


Now, if you will excuse me I am going to go take a shower and go watch some cable tv downstairs. It's much more entertaining than this conversation has become. Have fun.

Shouldn’t you take the shower after watching the television?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[berkeley]

Shouldn’t you take the shower after watching the television?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Ain't that the truth. I haven't been able to watch anything on television as of late. Even the news is disgusting me.

[Rico]

So if you stand in the women's department of the store what would that mean?:killinme

Brother Rico do you believe that a men and women can look the same?



Shouldn’t you take the shower after watching the television?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Bottom line-there is a difference in men's pants and women's pants. They are cut differently. Therefore, a woman that wears women's pants is not wearing men's appparrel. If you are asking me do I think there is such a thing as unisex clothing then yes, it does exist but that doesn't mean women are wearing that which pertaineth to a man just because she has pants on.

Take a look at the picture of these pants. Notice the roundness of the hip aread, the lack of material in the crotch area, and the higher waist? That's because they are women's pants. Now, if there is no such thing as women's pants then it should be perfectly fine for you to order these pants and wear them. But you wouldn't, would you? Why wouldn't you? Answer that question.


http://www.fashionplaza.info/img/pants.jpg

[Rico]

How about these? Would you wear these?


http://hempocracy.com/library/SLACKSWOMENSHWS2N.jpg

[Rico]

How about these pants? Will you put them on?

http://seeminglynew.com/library/Size14womenscasual12041.jpg

[Rico]

And these?


http://img.classiccloseouts.com/images_104/attributes_m/2AN12503.jpg

[Rico]

And these?


http://www.beallsflorida.com/graphics/products/thumbnails/160-6420-2705-yy-yyy.jpg




Come on! Talk is cheap. If pants are men's apparel then which of these are you willing to wear, Benincasa? Put your money where your mouth is, Bro.

[HeavenlyOne]

I'm shocked that the answer to my question has eluded some.

So here it is again.........

If a man is wearing a woman's pantsuit, do you consider him to be a crossdresser or would you ok him to be on your platform instead?

[Theophilus]

Are we blind to the unisex agenda? The femi-nazi movement?

Why aren't they selling manly dresses at JC Penny?

They've pushed "women's" pants for a reason, right along with everything else.

Surely there are no principalities and powers at work here...just fast fashion. It's all innocence. :sly

[Rico]

Are we blind to the unisex agenda? The femi-nazi movement?

Why aren't they selling manly dresses at JC Penny?

They've pushed "women's" pants for a reason, right along with everything else.

Surely there are no principalities and powers at work here...just fast fashion. It's all innocence. :sly


It's a conspiracy I tell ya! :D

[Theophilus]

I'm shocked that the answer to my question has eluded some.

So here it is again.........

If a man is wearing a woman's pantsuit, do you consider him to be a crossdresser or would you ok him to be on your platform instead?

A woman's pantsuit is nothing more than men's clothing tailor made to fit.

Why don't they have men's dresses on the hanger?? Because we aren't trying to be, or look like women save for a few homo-transinfestites.

What does this say for women? Mass inferiority complex? Gender insecurity?
What drove the evolution herein?

[Theophilus]

It's a conspiracy I tell ya! :D

Keep your pants on girls! Who knows what's next!:girlpopcorn

[stmatthew]

I wonder how many women would feel a little taken back should their Male Pastor show up on Sunday morning wearing a nice conservative dress like this one???

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/hiphopgift_1953_3111734

[Rico]

Keep your pants on girls! Who knows what's next!:girlpopcorn

I am sure whatever it is it will be evil and violate non-existant scripture against women wearing pants. :haloplug

[Theophilus]

I am sure whatever it is it will be evil and violate non-existant scripture against women wearing pants. :haloplug

Right! Just like the non existant scriptures against crack.

Annnnd, it will be embraced and accepted by those that love after the latest trends that the world hands down for acceptence. No worries...they will just be keepin' it REAL for J.E.S.U.S.

[HeavenlyOne]

I wonder how many women would feel a little taken back should their Male Pastor show up on Sunday morning wearing a nice conservative dress like this one???

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/hiphopgift_1953_3111734

Probably about the same reaction as if he were wearing any of these instead...

http://www.blair.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?pcats=99999,100000,100621&categoryId=100621&catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=24320&langId=-1&cm_mmc=Performics-_-Yahoo!%20Shopping%20Product%20Submit-_-NULL-_-DDI%20Link

[Rico]

Right! Just like the non existant scriptures against crack.

Annnnd, it will be embraced and accepted by those that love after the latest trends that the world hands down for acceptence. No worries...they will just be keepin' it REAL for J.E.S.U.S.


Crack can kill you. At the very least it will completely take over your life. Women wearing pants won't kill them. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! Nice try though!:D Also, I didn't realize that men's pants were originally designed by Holy Ghost filled apostolics. Oh, wait a minute! They weren't were they? They were designed by.........gasp..........the world. How dare they think they can take away robes from God's people! I think y'all should take a stand and go back to wearing robes. It's the only way to be sure you are doing it the way they did it back when the Bible was written. Why take the chance on being influenced by a world where men are wearing pants every day? But then...............oh my................that would mean than both men and women in the church would have to wear robes. How on earth would we be able to tell them apart? Could it be that there would be robes designed for men and robes designed for women so we could tell the difference? Nah! That would be too much like pants that are designed for men and pants that are designed for women!

[Theophilus]

Crack can kill you. At the very least it will completely take over your life. Women wearing pants won't kill them. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! Nice try though!:D Also, I didn't realize that men's pants were originally designed by Holy Ghost filled apostolics. Oh, wait a minute! They weren't were they? They were designed by.........gasp..........the world. How dare they think they can take away robes from God's people! I think y'all should take a stand and go back to wearing robes. It's the only way to be sure you are doing it the way they did it back when the Bible was written. Why take the chance on being influenced by a world where men are wearing pants every day? But then...............oh my................that would mean than both men and women in the church would have to wear robes. How on earth would we be able to tell them apart? Could it be that there would be robes designed for men and robes designed for women so we could tell the difference? Nah! That would be too much like pants that are designed for men and pants that are designed for women!



The point is there are principles fulfilled in modest contemporary gender distinctive clothing that you won't find in the agenda that is being pushed though what is left of society today. We do not have scripture for everything, so application of Biblical Principle must apply.

But unfortunately for the liberal crowd, their worship for the things of this world doesn't stop with the latest fashion in clothing, it goes on into other things as a package deal.

It will ultimately kill as sure as crack, and certainly take hold of their life, howbeit much more slowly and seductively. Like a Benny Hinn crusade. :search ;)

[HeavenlyOne]

I love it when men compare women wearing pants to smoking crack, but see nothing wrong with wearing cloth necklaces to church! LOL!

[Praxeas]

What about Kilts in Scotland?
they aren't dresses

[Subdued]

Not before 1850 and even then they were considered an under garment.
Deal with it, there are no such thing as women's pants.





Not really trying to be funny, so in your research you found that God wants the sexes to dress and look the same? kind of a George Orwell 1984 look?



So you admit that I'm right. A little hesitant but your coming around.




Brother Rico this is what I originally said to you.



Then you said:



So I guess I was correct, you believe that we who are in Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are a bunch of dopes believing LIES, but you are on some other level then us cavemen who know the lies but refuse to come out of the cave where you are.




Study? How about flipping the to the page and skim it. I think about the few first verses should tell you the whole story.



No it's a 100% cotton, so is the shirt and undershirt, it cuts down on sweat.




If you feel that way then go to Leviticus 18 and tell me how those laws are no longer applicable to us today, or do you pick and choose.




Ok, then what you're saying is that Apostolic Pentecostal Holiness Churches are full of liars and the decieved?




It has to be your opinion Brother Rico because you have no proof to refute what has been presented. In other words you believe that men and women can look the same and God has no problem with it.




Now how can you say that if I'm a liar? So you wish liars good luck so they can continue to lie to people?



Good go and read Leviticus 18 Brother Rico, I see you have a perfect understanding of the scriptures but Apostolic Pentecostals are liars.
How does it feel being so scholarly and enlightened?




Hey why can't I use some sarcasm look at what I have to compete with, it's not everyday you get to deal with such enlightened gurus. Hey let me know when you complete that reading of Leviticus 18 will you be doing that in Hebrew or Chaldean?



Not me you did that all on your own.





So let me ask you this how do you know which ones are the liars?
Are the ones who argee with you truth tellers?




Don't worry Brother I'm pretty much done.



When a man thinks it's a great task to review a chapter in the Bible (Leviticus 18) especially when you can just click on the verse I had typed, you loose the right to call any preacher a liar.





No you just said we are liars so that means the people who are listening to us are in the ones who are being lied to therefore they are in the Dark Ages. Tell you what, after you study out Leviticus 18 maybe you can flip on the History Channel and watch all about the Dark Ages. :)





Hey you are walking in the light the Holiness Brothers and Sisters and myself are still under you in the food chain. :bow



Brother Rico, are you saying things you never meant or words you never typed? I will agree there may not be words you have typed, but your meaning was loud and clear.





I leave this one alone.





Woo hoo! I'm just an suit wearing Pennycostal one sock lower than the other, and worn out knees. Sorry I'm ain't intellajectual fer yah.

So you really think that men and women can look the same?





No you're not God, you just think your smarter than He is. ;)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com (http://www.OnTimeJournal.com)


Are you aware of the fact that the clothing you wear today is what a worldly culture decided years ago would be men's and women's clothes? Do you realize that it was culture and the world that decided to CHANGE fashion to what it has become; and that includes the clothing that you currently wear? The only clothing that GOD designed (as far as we know) for men and women were made of animal skins and He never specified a distinction if, in fact, there was one.

We have no way of knowing who specifically changed clothing ("fashion"), from what God designed, to the robes that both men AND women wore in biblical days. Apparently, though, fashion did changed.

Eventually, the world's fashion changed from robes to something else; and as time marched on, fashion styles changed.

May I ask why it is that you have chosen the fashion of approximately 100 years ago to wear today rather than something that God Himself designed for humans to wear? After all, you're wearing something that this world has chosen to be fashionable and it's available for the rest of this sinful world to wear, too.

Does the clothing you've chosen to wear bring about holiness? Does it REFLECT the holiness that's inside? If so, how can that be, considering my sinful neighbor down the street probably wears the exact same clothing that you wear.

Is it the fact that you are dressed modestly? Because THAT I can understand since the Bible - God's Word - instructs us to dress modestly.

There is no "holy" clothing. There IS, however, MODEST clothing, and THAT is what the Bible speaks of.

Regarding Deut 22:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Deut+22%3A5) referring to women wearing long/flowing garments... since this verse is talking about men who wore armor and warriors, etc.; then it would certainly make sense that it would refer to the women's garments ONLY as being long/flowing because soldiers/warriors wore SHORT "skirts" for safety and efficiency in fighting. The REST of the men wore long/flowing garments... robes... like the women... not much distinction there.

[Subdued]

So if you stand in the women's department of the store what would that mean?:killinme

Brother Rico do you believe that a men and women can look the same?



Shouldn’t you take the shower after watching the television?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com (http://www.OnTimeJournal.com)

Are you trying to say that it's clothing that makes men & women look different?

[Subdued]

I'm shocked that the answer to my question has eluded some.

So here it is again.........

If a man is wearing a woman's pantsuit, do you consider him to be a crossdresser or would you ok him to be on your platform instead?

:bump

Hoping for an answer.

[Evang.Benincasa]

I am sure whatever it is it will be evil and violate non-existant scripture against women wearing pants. :haloplug

Only non-existent in your mind professor Rico. :)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Probably about the same reaction as if he were wearing any of these instead...

http://www.blair.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?pcats=99999,100000,100621&categoryId=100621&catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=24320&langId=-1&cm_mmc=Performics-_-Yahoo!%20Shopping%20Product%20Submit-_-NULL-_-DDI%20Link

HO guy's do wear those get ups and you know what they call them?

:killinme

[StillStanding]

HO guy's do wear those get ups and you know what they call them?

:killinme

Cross dressers!!!

[Subdued]

HO guy's do wear those get ups and you know what they call them?

:killinme

I think that's the point, EB.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Crack can kill you.



Brother Rico there is a prohibition against excess of substance that will cause death (alcoholic wine) so since you don't have an outright scripture against herbal chemical substances how would you approach a prohibition against this?


At the very least it will completely take over your life.

Just like alcoholic fermented wine, but in the scriptures we are taught moderation concerning this substance, we are also taught moderation when consuming food but it looks like some around us disregard that prohibition.


Women wearing pants won't kill them. Talk about comparing apples and oranges! Nice try though!:D

It was a very good try and Theo did a good job you just don't know how to deal with what he presented so you go right to invalidating his info and run right into your mantra.


Also, I didn't realize that men's pants were originally designed by Holy Ghost filled apostolics. Oh, wait a minute! They weren't were they? They were designed by.........gasp..........the world.

The above is to prove what? Does it not say that God created EVERYTHING?



How dare they think they can take away robes from God's people!

Brother Rico you have no clue what they wore in ancient Israel or the Roman Empire. To you they wore bathrobes bed sheets and flip-flops. You're the run of the mill American Christian who watches King of Kings during Easter and all you see is people walking around in bed sheets and Jesus carrying the cross with a bloody bed sheet draped over him.

First time I ever had this discussion with someone that said to me "they did were robes Brother" I thought that was the most ridiculous statement I ever heard. I was new in the church and had a Bible Wizard come to me with dis-information to try to prove the pastor wrong and himself correct.

As he made this statement I asked him if everyone in early Judaism were unisex in attire? His jaw dropped and he remain silent. Brother Rico turn off your television because all you use it for is entertainment, you need to get to the woodshed and start chopping on what you believe.

If you're going to continue on your path against standards at least go and strengthen your argument and do some real study. If you don't you may end up having this conversation off this forum with someone face to face and have them corner you and embarrass you.



I think y'all should take a stand and go back to wearing robes.

Brother Rico you believe that men and women, boys and girls should look the same. After all GOD looks at the heart. Brother Rico you believe in Uni-sex attire that’s the bottom line. Where in the Bible do you find the teaching for your doctrine of uni-sex attire? Oh wait a minute you believe in gender locations that are found inside buildings, like men rooms and ladies rooms, and that if something is purchased in the women's department that's what makes it gender appropriate. When the cleaning lady goes into the men's room does she become a man? I guess you may also believe if a man gets a sex change they become a woman?




It's the only way to be sure you are doing it the way they did it back when the Bible was written. Why take the chance on being influenced by a world where men are wearing pants every day? But then...............oh my................that would mean than both men and women in the church would have to wear robes. How on earth would we be able to tell them apart?

How do you tell them apart when both have cut hair and pants? Where do you live? You ever get out of your house? Hey Brother I like you, so I will cool it, but Brother you are coming from an agenda motivated mind. So even if an ancient parchment were found tomorrow saying that Jesus Christ said that men were to wear pants and women are to wear long dresses, you still wouldn't listen.

Both wear pants and have short cut hair looks the same to me Brother?




Could it be that there would be robes designed for men and robes designed for women so we could tell the difference?

You mean they had his or her monograms? :killinme



Nah! That would be too much like pants that are designed for men and pants that are designed for women!


Designed??? Oooohhhhhh yeah buddy, I bet there is a lot of design going into that one. So if a girl puts on here brother's Wranglers you would fall out?

Whatever.

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Cross dressers!!!

Cross Dresser not accordiing to some. :killinme

[Evang.Benincasa]

Bottom line-there is a difference in men's pants and women's pants.

Oh really professor? Why don't you teach us were eager to learn. :)


They are cut differently. Therefore, a woman that wears women's pants is not wearing men's appparrel.

Really so were do you get the information for this teaching Brother Rico?


If you are asking me do I think there is such a thing as unisex clothing then yes, it does exist but that doesn't mean women are wearing that which pertaineth to a man just because she has pants on.

Where do you get the scriptural backing for what you are saying that woman should be wearing pants that pertaineth to only a woman?


Take a look at the picture of these pants. Notice the roundness of the hip aread, the lack of material in the crotch area, and the higher waist?

You need to get out of the hosue more Brother they're pants, nothing more nothing less. If someone can describe what you just did my daughters won't be wearing them.


That's because they are women's pants.

Says who?


Now, if there is no such thing as women's pants then it should be perfectly fine for you to order these pants and wear them.

Now that you said that can and do women ever wear men's pants? They do Rico so your teaching is flawed.


But you wouldn't, would you? Why wouldn't you? Answer that question.


http://www.fashionplaza.info/img/pants.jpg

They are feminized pants they are still men's pants come down to Fort Lauderdale there are stores that cater to the homosexual population and there clothes are feminized, you or I wouldn't wear those clothes either, but they are manufactured for homosexuals.

Your teaching is flawed. :IAM

Love you Brother

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Pragmatist]

In India they also walk around naked so ask your father-in-law about that one.

The Apostles commanded the Gentiles coming into the church to get rid of their culture.



Sorry, I choose to believe my husband who lived there over you and he denies the walking around naked.

The Gentiles were not commanded to get rid of their culture; they were instructed to abstain from the things in their culture that were wrong.

[HeavenlyOne]

HO guy's do wear those get ups and you know what they call them?

:killinme

Please, enlighten me.

I'm thinking if a pastor called you up and wanted to preach for you and showed up in one of those outfits, you wouldn't allow him to preach even though he's wearing, according to you, men's apparel. Am I right?

[HeavenlyOne]

Cross dressers!!!

Impossible. Those are pants, therefore, a man wearing them wouldn't be cross-dressing, but instead would be allowed on the platform!

I think that's the point, EB.

Think he's going to admit it? Nah.......

[HeavenlyOne]

Cross Dresser not accordiing to some. :killinme

You think a man wearing a woman's pantsuit is cross dressing?

How so? The man would be wearing men's apparel!!!

[Theophilus]

I love it when men compare women wearing pants to smoking crack, but see nothing wrong with wearing cloth necklaces to church! LOL!

I don't believe in wearing ties for a couple of reasons...

...one I would think would be fairly obvious to even the most intimidated unintellegent in Pentecost. ( I refer to the poor men here, as at least most women have better sense than to tie a fancy noose around their neck. ) :huh

Wasn't it you and I that had a conversion the other day about your poor assumption record. :blah

Furthermore, your reading comprehension also seems to be in tandem with your assumptions, there is a link there somewhere, but I digress. :confused:

I didn't compare crack to women's imitating men's clothing. The context was clearly that of a lack of specific Biblical reference that liberal's always cite to side step successful application of Biblical Principle. :covereyes

Be Blessed H.O. :)

You know that also stands for high output, right? ;)

[H2H]

I am not voting

[Theophilus]

I am not voting

Cut to the heart?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Sorry, I choose to believe my husband who lived there over you and he denies the walking around naked.

The Gentiles were not commanded to get rid of their culture; they were instructed to abstain from the things in their culture that were wrong.

Ladies and Gentlemen how in the name of reason can someone respond to the above? Is it worth it? Will anyone care? Say the above three times and click your heels together.

"They were not commanded to get rid of there culture, they were just commanded to get rid of their culture that was wrong?"

Can this be the reason why America is hurdling towards New Age, OSHO movement, Islam, and atheism?

Pragmatist amazing label I think it fits you well.

Lord bless you real good. :)

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

Brother Rico there is a prohibition against excess of substance that will cause death (alcoholic wine) so since you don't have an outright scripture against herbal chemical substances how would you approach a prohibition against this?



Just like alcoholic fermented wine, but in the scriptures we are taught moderation concerning this substance, we are also taught moderation when consuming food but it looks like some around us disregard that prohibition.



It was a very good try and Theo did a good job you just don't know how to deal with what he presented so you go right to invalidating his info and run right into your mantra.



The above is to prove what? Does it not say that God created EVERYTHING?




Brother Rico you have no clue what they wore in ancient Israel or the Roman Empire. To you they wore bathrobes bed sheets and flip-flops. You're the run of the mill American Christian who watches King of Kings during Easter and all you see is people walking around in bed sheets and Jesus carrying the cross with a bloody bed sheet draped over him.

First time I ever had this discussion with someone that said to me "they did were robes Brother" I thought that was the most ridiculous statement I ever heard. I was new in the church and had a Bible Wizard come to me with dis-information to try to prove the pastor wrong and himself correct.

As he made this statement I asked him if everyone in early Judaism were unisex in attire? His jaw dropped and he remain silent. Brother Rico turn off your television because all you use it for is entertainment, you need to get to the woodshed and start chopping on what you believe.

If you're going to continue on your path against standards at least go and strengthen your argument and do some real study. If you don't you may end up having this conversation off this forum with someone face to face and have them corner you and embarrass you.




Brother Rico you believe that men and women, boys and girls should look the same. After all GOD looks at the heart. Brother Rico you believe in Uni-sex attire that’s the bottom line. Where in the Bible do you find the teaching for your doctrine of uni-sex attire? Oh wait a minute you believe in gender locations that are found inside buildings, like men rooms and ladies rooms, and that if something is purchased in the women's department that's what makes it gender appropriate. When the cleaning lady goes into the men's room does she become a man? I guess you may also believe if a man gets a sex change they become a woman?





How do you tell them apart when both have cut hair and pants? Where do you live? You ever get out of your house? Hey Brother I like you, so I will cool it, but Brother you are coming from an agenda motivated mind. So even if an ancient parchment were found tomorrow saying that Jesus Christ said that men were to wear pants and women are to wear long dresses, you still wouldn't listen.

Both wear pants and have short cut hair looks the same to me Brother?





You mean they had his or her monograms? :killinme





Designed??? Oooohhhhhh yeah buddy, I bet there is a lot of design going into that one. So if a girl puts on here brother's Wranglers you would fall out?

Whatever.

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com


As soon as you answer my questions to you last night on all those pants I posted I will answer this post. Until then, this conversation with you is over. It's time to put your money where your mouth is, Brother.

[Rico]

Oh really professor? Why don't you teach us were eager to learn. :)



Really so were do you get the information for this teaching Brother Rico?



Where do you get the scriptural backing for what you are saying that woman should be wearing pants that pertaineth to only a woman?



You need to get out of the hosue more Brother they're pants, nothing more nothing less. If someone can describe what you just did my daughters won't be wearing them.



Says who?



Now that you said that can and do women ever wear men's pants? They do Rico so your teaching is flawed.



They are feminized pants they are still men's pants come down to Fort Lauderdale there are stores that cater to the homosexual population and there clothes are feminized, you or I wouldn't wear those clothes either, but they are manufactured for homosexuals.

Your teaching is flawed. :IAM

Love you Brother

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Hogwash! Check with any designer and they will tell you that women's pants are cut differently than men's pants. The waist is higher, they have more material in the hip area for a woman's curves, less material in the crotch area, and they button from the other side. That is a fact, not supposition on my part. Maybe if you'd go ahead and start buying your clothes from the women's department, since all they are are men's pants anyway, you'd see that for yourself.

[Evang.Benincasa]

As soon as you answer my questions to you last night on all those pants I posted I will answer this post. Until then, this conversation with you is over. It's time to put your money where your mouth is, Brother.

Brother Rico pants are pants my Brother, period. You believe in unisex attire... period.

You couldn't tell a pair of female jeans from male jeans (unless it's DNA).

Would I wear pants made of silk or with flowers on them? No, why?

The same reason I wouldn't wear leather pants with studs on them.

Would you wear a pair of leather pants? :poloroid

[Rico]

Brother Rico pants are pants my Brother, period. You believe in unisex attire... period.

You couldn't tell a pair of female jeans from male jeans (unless it's DNA).

Would I wear pants made of silk or with flowers on them? No, why?

The same reason I wouldn't wear leather pants with studs on them.

Would you wear a pair of leather pants? :poloroid

I don't own any leather pants but wouldn't have a problem with it, especially if I owned a motorcycle. As for telling the difference between women's pants and men's pants I'd know right away that I had a pair of women's pants on. If the high waist didn't tip me off the lack of material in the crotch area or the different way they button would. Anyway, I have a headache today and am not going to spend the rest of today going back and forth with you over this issue. If you want to pretend there's no difference in men's pants and women's pants then knock yourself out, but I know better. Have a nice day.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Hogwash! Check with any designer and they will tell you that women's pants are cut differently than men's pants.

So their cut for that prostitute look? So their is modesty down the drian.
Brother Rico is this how your church is set up?


The waist is higher, they have more material in the hip area for a woman's curves, less material in the crotch area,

As the teenagers down here say.."that's more information than I need."

Modesty out the window Hoss, and what surprises me is that you're not phased as you type that description.



and they button from the other side.

On all of them? You're a legalist. :killinme


That is a fact, not supposition on my part. Maybe if you'd go ahead and start buying your clothes from the women's department, since all they are are men's pants anyway, you'd see that for yourself.

They have a store here in the city that cater to GOTH they have suits and jackets but I would'nt wear that either. Brother Rico your doctrine is kind of lacking in the reality department.

Love you Bro.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournaal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

How about these? Would you wear these?


http://hempocracy.com/library/SLACKSWOMENSHWS2N.jpg

I wouldn't wear puke green.

[Evang.Benincasa]

How about these pants? Will you put them on?

http://seeminglynew.com/library/Size14womenscasual12041.jpg

Would you wear LEATHER Rico? :)

[Rico]

So their cut for that prostitute look? So their is modesty down the drian.
Brother Rico is this how your church is set up?



As the teenagers down here say.."that's more information than I need."

Modesty out the window Hoss, and what surprises me is that you're not phased as you type that description.




On all of them? You're a legalist. :killinme



They have a store here in the city that cater to GOTH they have suits and jackets but I would'nt wear that either. Brother Rico your doctrine is kind of lacking in the reality department.

Love you Bro.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournaal.com

Mine is lacking? I don't think so, Ben. You are so in denial of facts it isn't even funny. It is a fact that women's pants are cut differently than men's pants. A fact you conveniently deny as you rant and rave over women's pants being unisex clothing and say I should be embarassed over pointing out the differences. Duet 22:5 is dealing with women wearing war garb, another fact you conveniently deny. That's what you do, deny, deny, deny, as if denying enough times will make your position the correct one. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am all for someone having personal convictions. If your wife has a conviction on wearing pants then more power to her. She should do no less than obey God. Just because she has it does not make it gospel, however, and certainly doesn't give you or any other preacher the right to get into a pulpit and try to tell my wife she has to dress that way, especially when the Word of God gets so twisted in the process.

[Rico]

Would you wear LEATHER Rico? :)

I already answered that question, Benincasa. Leather pants would not bother me at all, especially if I had a motorcycle.

[Rico]

I wouldn't wear puke green.

What if they were black?

[Rico]

Brother Ben, I gotta run, Bro. We are going to have to take this up another time. Catcha later, Bro. I will be praying that God delivers you from that spirit of denial :)

[Evang.Benincasa]

I already answered that question, Benincasa. Leather pants would not bother me at all, especially if I had a motorcycle.

Especially if you had a motorcycle? Brother Rico I'm not talking about Biker pants. :lol

You better not wear tham britches down here captian. :killinme

[Evang.Benincasa]

Mine is lacking?

Your doctrine might work in Dog Patch Indiana, but not in the rest of America.




I don't think so, Ben. You are so in denial of facts it isn't even funny.

Give me something to write on man! Brother Rico you're not saying anything.
You are presenting me some strange legalistic dogma that says if you staple frills on the bottom of a pair of Wranglers they become women's garments.

Think about it! Take a pair of your work pants and sew lace on them and eureka! You have women's apparel!





It is a fact that women's pants are cut differently than men's pants.

They look the same Brother, and since your group also believes that a women can buzz her hair to her scalp she will look no different than a man.


A fact you conveniently deny as you rant and rave over women's pants being unisex clothing and say I should be embarassed over pointing out the differences.

Brother Rico anyone else would consider what you are trying to explain to be immodest. So that throws modesty out that window. You see outside of Brigadoon (where you seem to be living) women are not dressed modestly wearing what you have described to us. Why because they didn't have Jesus in mind when they created them. You're a believer in unisex wear for men and women, plain and simple.



Duet 22:5 is dealing with women wearing war garb, another fact you conveniently deny.

Maybe if you spent more time considering what you're saying instead of wanting mindless television you would understand that the mentioning of ARMOR, WEAPONS, WORKMEN'S TOOLS indicates that a woman was NOT to go near anything that resembled MANLYNESS. When you consider that the man is admonished NOT to put on anything that is SOFT LONG AND FLOWING DOWN, you can see that GOD doesn't want a man to resemble anything that is FEMININE. What you're preaching is something that blurs the lines, down to a micro.


That's what you do, deny, deny, deny, as if denying enough times will make your position the correct one.

Brother Rico, you and your crew make no sense when it comes to explaining the scriptures. You see conservatives have scriptures. The no-standards-crew has no scriptures, but the ones that the conservatives use. So, the no-standards-crew has to disprove the scriptures, and therefore make an absolute mess in doing so. Also they use a ton of philosophy, speculation, conjecture, and every other weezer tactic in the book. Until it sounds so convoluted that even atheists are rolling on the floor at witnessing the discussions.


I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am all for someone having personal convictions. If your wife has a conviction on wearing pants then more power to her. She should do no less than obey God.

Brother Rico! Brother, you wrote that we who believe that Deuteronomy 22:5 is talking about women looking like women and men looking like men, preaching this were LIES. Now why would God agree with a bunch of liars? Either were in error or we are in the book. What about people who have personal convictions against taking their children to the doctors (infants to 18 yr.) when life threatening illness comes. These people are amazingly faithful and have deep spiritual convictions, and proclaim that God has spoken to them not to ever go to a doctor. What say ye?



Just because she has it does not make it gospel,

You just said that the women are saying that GOD told them?
Personal convictions are supposed to be prompted by the Holy Ghost, so what kind of craziness is this teaching? At least I can tell those people who say GOD told them to do this or that chapter and verse. That God told me stuff can get out of hand real quick.



however, and certainly doesn't give you or any other preacher the right to get into a pulpit and try to tell my wife she has to dress that way, especially when the Word of God gets so twisted in the process.

Listen Brother real carefully to what I have to say.

Your wife is YOUR WIFE, and my WIFE is MY WIFE, and you're totally correct when you say that no preacher has the right to tell your wife anything.

The scriptures say WIVES SUBMIT YOURSELF TO YOUR OWN HUSBANDS IN EVERYTHING.

My job is not to dictate to anyone's wife.

The preachers preach to the Brothers and the Brothers take care of their own wives and families. That is plain and simple. Think of it, wouldn't that be usurping the authority of the husband?

If a man cannot take care of his own home he is in more trouble than getting his wardrobe together.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

Your doctrine might work in Dog Patch Indiana, but not in the rest of America.


Just because where you live is full of homos doesn't mean it's that way everywhere, Benincasa. It's funny that women all over America are wearing pants, but my doctrine only works in "Dog Patch". Funny.





Give me something to write on man! Brother Rico you're not saying anything.
You are presenting me some strange legalistic dogma that says if you staple frills on the bottom of a pair of Wranglers they become women's garments.



Give you something to write on? You can't even properly explain something so simple as Deut 22:5. :lol

Think about it! Take a pair of your work pants and sew lace on them and eureka! You have women's apparel!



Hogwash! They would still just be men's pants with lace on them, because they were designed for men and cut for men.






They look the same Brother, and since your group also believes that a women can buzz her hair to her scalp she will look no different than a man.



As usual, putting words into my mouth. I believe what the Bible says about long hair on women, You will never be able to prove that long equals uncut, but that's a topic for another thread.



Brother Rico anyone else would consider what you are trying to explain to be immodest. So that throws modesty out that window. You see outside of Brigadoon (where you seem to be living) women are not dressed modestly wearing what you have described to us. Why because they didn't have Jesus in mind when they created them. You're a believer in unisex wear for men and women, plain and simple.


Amazing. What I am saying is so immodest, but admin has yet to step in and correct my posts, give me an infraction, or anything of the sort.




Maybe if you spent more time considering what you're saying instead of wanting mindless television you would understand that the mentioning of ARMOR, WEAPONS, WORKMEN'S TOOLS indicates that a woman was NOT to go near anything that resembled MANLYNESS. When you consider that the man is admonished NOT to put on anything that is SOFT LONG AND FLOWING DOWN, you can see that GOD doesn't want a man to resemble anything that is FEMININE. What you're preaching is something that blurs the lines, down to a micro.



Maybe if you'd spend more time actually looking for the truth, rather than just repeating the same tired party line, you'd understand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with a woman wearing women's pants in God's eyes.



Brother Rico, you and your crew make no sense when it comes to explaining the scriptures. You see conservatives have scriptures. The no-standards-crew has no scriptures, but the ones that the conservatives use. So, the no-standards-crew has to disprove the scriptures, and therefore make an absolute mess in doing so. Also they use a ton of philosophy, speculation, conjecture, and every other weezer tactic in the book. Until it sounds so convoluted that even atheists are rolling on the floor at witnessing the discussions.



You are very confused. The "no standards" crew does not go about trying to disprove scripture. They go about trying to correct your crew's mishandling of the Word of God.



Brother Rico! Brother, you wrote that we who believe that Deuteronomy 22:5 is talking about women looking like women and men looking like men, preaching this were LIES. Now why would God agree with a bunch of liars? Either were in error or we are in the book. What about people who have personal convictions against taking their children to the doctors (infants to 18 yr.) when life threatening illness comes. These people are amazingly faithful and have deep spiritual convictions, and proclaim that God has spoken to them not to ever go to a doctor. What say ye?


Once again, you are putting words into my mouth, so I will not respond to this area. As soon as you can comment on what I actually said I will respond to you.




You just said that the women are saying that GOD told them?
Personal convictions are supposed to be prompted by the Holy Ghost, so what kind of craziness is this teaching? At least I can tell those people who say GOD told them to do this or that chapter and verse. That God told me stuff can get out of hand real quick.



Obviously, based on how long these dress code lies have been getting preached in America.




Listen Brother real carefully to what I have to say.

Your wife is YOUR WIFE, and my WIFE is MY WIFE, and you're totally correct when you say that no preacher has the right to tell your wife anything.

The scriptures say WIVES SUBMIT YOURSELF TO YOUR OWN HUSBANDS IN EVERYTHING.

My job is not to dictate to anyone's wife.

The preachers preach to the Brothers and the Brothers take care of their own wives and families. That is plain and simple. Think of it, wouldn't that be usurping the authority of the husband?

If a man cannot take care of his own home he is in more trouble than getting his wardrobe together.



So now the preachers are only preaching to the men in the congregation? Wonderful. Remind me to stay completely away from any church you decide to pastor.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com



Answers are in blue.

[BrotherEastman]

To answer the question "will a man go to hell for wearing dresses?"

I HOPE NOT! But who am I to judge?

[Subdued]

Brother Rico pants are pants my Brother, period. You believe in unisex attire... period.

You couldn't tell a pair of female jeans from male jeans (unless it's DNA).

Would I wear pants made of silk or with flowers on them? No, why?

The same reason I wouldn't wear leather pants with studs on them.

Would you wear a pair of leather pants? :poloroid

You have obviously never tried on a pair of women's pants. You'd know the difference IMMEDIATELY. They're quite different... you'd be quite uncomfortable in them... I think.

[Rico]

You have obviously never tried on a pair of women's pants. You'd know the difference IMMEDIATELY. They're quite different... you'd be quite uncomfortable in them... I think.

Good luck getting him to admit there is a difference in how women's pants are cut and men's pants. ;)

[Subdued]

So their cut for that prostitute look? So their is modesty down the drian.

HUH???

Modesty out the window Hoss, and what surprises me is that you're not phased as you type that description.

If pants are immodest for WOMEN, then pants are immodest for MEN. If not, why not????

[Evang.Benincasa]

You have obviously never tried on a pair of women's pants. You'd know the difference IMMEDIATELY. They're quite different... you'd be quite uncomfortable in them... I think.

So if they make unisex public restrooms will you also be in favor of that?

Lord help us.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Rico]

So if they make unisex public restrooms will you also be in favor of that?

Lord help us.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

See? This is what he argues. Women's pants are unisex clothing. What a joke! :lol Brother, ain't it hard to breathe under all that sand?

[berkeley]

So if they make unisex public restrooms will you also be in favor of that?

Lord help us.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

They already exist. :)

[Subdued]

So if they make unisex public restrooms will you also be in favor of that?

Lord help us.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com (http://www.OnTimeJournal.com)

That's an odd question to ask. What does THAT have to do with clothing? No, I would not want to run the chance of accidentally seeing the opposite sex exposed.

[Subdued]

Good luck getting him to admit there is a difference in how women's pants are cut and men's pants. ;)

EB, go & try on a pair of women's blue jeans - just plain ole, regular blue jeans. Post & let us know how they fit.

[Subdued]

They already exist. :)

True; doesn't mean I want to use them. LOL I'd rather not.

[Evang.Benincasa]

That's an odd question to ask. What does THAT have to do with clothing? No, I would not want to run the chance of accidentally seeing the opposite sex exposed.

Pants are identical when you look at them on people. Please give this up.

[Subdued]

Pants are identical when you look at them on people. Please give this up.

So is that your new argument?

[Rico]

Pants are identical when you look at them on people. Please give this up.

Denial, denial, denial, denial. Yer funny! :lol Brother, you can put a pair of women's pants and men's pants side by side on a table and be able to tell the difference. Seriously, try it the next time you go shopping. Forget putting them on, just put them side by side and make a comparison.

[Subdued]

Are you aware of the fact that the clothing you wear today is what a worldly culture decided years ago would be men's and women's clothes? Do you realize that it was culture and the world that decided to CHANGE fashion to what it has become; and that includes the clothing that you currently wear? The only clothing that GOD designed (as far as we know) for men and women were made of animal skins and He never specified a distinction if, in fact, there was one.

We have no way of knowing who specifically changed clothing ("fashion"), from what God designed, to the robes that both men AND women wore in biblical days. Apparently, though, fashion did changed.

Eventually, the world's fashion changed from robes to something else; and as time marched on, fashion styles changed.

May I ask why it is that you have chosen the fashion of approximately 100 years ago to wear today rather than something that God Himself designed for humans to wear? After all, you're wearing something that this world has chosen to be fashionable and it's available for the rest of this sinful world to wear, too.

Does the clothing you've chosen to wear bring about holiness? Does it REFLECT the holiness that's inside? If so, how can that be, considering my sinful neighbor down the street probably wears the exact same clothing that you wear.

Is it the fact that you are dressed modestly? Because THAT I can understand since the Bible - God's Word - instructs us to dress modestly.

There is no "holy" clothing. There IS, however, MODEST clothing, and THAT is what the Bible speaks of.

Regarding Deut 22:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Deut+22%3A5) referring to women wearing long/flowing garments... since this verse is talking about men who wore armor and warriors, etc.; then it would certainly make sense that it would refer to the women's garments ONLY as being long/flowing because soldiers/warriors wore SHORT "skirts" for safety and efficiency in fighting. The REST of the men wore long/flowing garments... robes... like the women... not much distinction there.

Bump

[Subdued]

Denial, denial, denial, denial. Yer funny! :lol Brother, you can put a pair of women's pants and men's pants side by side on a table and be able to tell the difference. Seriously, try it the next time you go shopping. Forget putting them on, just put them side by side and make a comparison.

Nah! I'd like for him to try them on & then report back here... With HONESTY & TRUTH.

[Sheltiedad]

Would my dress match my shoes?

[Evang.Benincasa]

So is that your new argument?

What are you bored tonight? No new argument, matter of fact it's what I've been saying over and over. You all believe that men and women should dress identical. No separation of the sexes, looking for some kind of Orwellian 1984 looks. Women with a Shanade O’Connor look wearing a pair of Wranglers and a tank top T-shirt with hairy armpits. Sounds like Pentecost is heading towards the church of the cerebral hemorrhage.

Jesus save us from this untoward generation.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Denial, denial, denial, denial. Yer funny! :lol Brother, you can put a pair of women's pants and men's pants side by side on a table and be able to tell the difference.

What a bunch of legalists is this what you guys teach in Sunday school?

"Now boys and girls today we will be learning about Noah and the flood, but first we have two pairs of pants on the table and we want you to guess which one is the female and the which one is the male? Remember how God told Noah to get two of every UNCLEAN animal?"





Seriously, try it the next time you go shopping. Forget putting them on, just put them side by side and make a comparison.

What sizes should I try before I compare? As the body weight increases do the pants keep their distinction of difference?

Lord help us.


In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[H2H]

Would my dress match my shoes?

LOL!!

[H2H]

What are you bored tonight? No new argument, matter of fact it's what I've been saying over and over. You all believe that men and women should dress identical. No separation of the sexes, looking for some kind of Orwellian 1984 looks. Women with a Shanade O’Connor look wearing a pair of Wranglers and a tank top T-shirt with hairy armpits. Sounds like Pentecost is heading towards the church of the cerebral hemorrhage.

Jesus save us from this untoward generation.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com



Now will there be some of these to preview at General Conference???:lol

[HeavenlyOne]

So if they make unisex public restrooms will you also be in favor of that?

Lord help us.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

You preach against unisex bathrooms too??

Hey, when ya gotta go, ya gotta go, and I am known for occupying the men's bathroom when I've had to go and the women's is occupied!

[HeavenlyOne]

Pants are identical when you look at them on people. Please give this up.

You know, I see a lot of people everyday, but I honestly couldn't tell you what their pants looked like and how they fit or if they looked like something the opposite sex would wear.

I like to look people in the eye, not at their nother places. :poloroid

[HeavenlyOne]

What are you bored tonight? No new argument, matter of fact it's what I've been saying over and over. You all believe that men and women should dress identical. No separation of the sexes, looking for some kind of Orwellian 1984 looks. Women with a Shanade O’Connor look wearing a pair of Wranglers and a tank top T-shirt with hairy armpits. Sounds like Pentecost is heading towards the church of the cerebral hemorrhage.

Jesus save us from this untoward generation.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Care to tell us how different the men and women dressed during the time of Moses?

Use scriptures, please.

[H2H]

Ben goes into a frenzy on these types of threads, does he not?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Ben goes into a frenzy on these types of threads, does he not?

"There is a special place in Hell for those who remain silent." - DANTE

[Subdued]

Care to tell us how different the men and women dressed during the time of Moses?

Use scriptures, please.

I'd like to know, too.

[Sheltiedad]

Bump in case others didn't see it... this is the definition of "dress" from Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary... it includes robes as a type of "dress".

Dress
(1.) Materials used. The earliest and simplest an apron of fig-leaves sewed together (Gen. 3:7); then skins of animals (3:21). Elijah's dress was probably the skin of a sheep (2 Kings 1:8). The Hebrews were early acquainted with the art of weaving hair into cloth (Ex. 26:7; 35:6), which formed the sackcloth of mourners. This was the material of John the Baptist's robe (Matt. 3:4). Wool was also woven into garments (Lev. 13:47; Deut. 22:11; Ezek. 34:3; Job 31:20; Prov. 27:26). The Israelites probably learned the art of weaving linen when they were in Egypt (1 Chr. 4:21). Fine linen was used in the vestments of the high priest (Ex. 28:5), as well as by the rich (Gen. 41:42; Prov. 31:22; Luke 16:19). The use of mixed material, as wool and flax, was forbidden (Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:11).

(2.) Colour. The prevailing colour was the natural white of the material used, which was sometimes rendered purer by the fuller's art (Ps. 104:1, 2; Isa. 63:3; Mark 9:3). The Hebrews were acquainted with the art of dyeing (Gen. 37:3, 23). Various modes of ornamentation were adopted in the process of weaving (Ex. 28:6; 26:1, 31; 35:25), and by needle-work (Judg. 5:30; Ps. 45:13). Dyed robes were imported from foreign countries, particularly from Phoenicia (Zeph. 1:8). Purple and scarlet robes were the marks of the wealthy (Luke 16:19; 2 Sam. 1:24).

(3.) Form. The robes of men and women were not very much different in form from each other. (a) The "coat" (kethoneth), of wool, cotton, or linen, was worn by both sexes. It was a closely-fitting garment, resembling in use and form our shirt (John 19:23). It was kept close to the body by a girdle (John 21:7). A person wearing this "coat" alone was described as naked (1 Sam. 19:24; Isa. 20:2; 2 Kings 6:30; John 21:7); deprived of it he would be absolutely naked. (b) A linen cloth or wrapper (sadin) of fine linen, used somewhat as a night-shirt (Mark 14:51). It is mentioned in Judg. 14:12, 13, and rendered there "sheets." (c) An upper tunic (meil), longer than the "coat" (1 Sam. 2:19; 24:4; 28:14). In 1 Sam. 28:14 it is the mantle in which Samuel was enveloped; in 1 Sam. 24:4 it is the "robe" under which Saul slept. The disciples were forbidden to wear two "coats" (Matt. 10:10; Luke 9:3). (d) The usual outer garment consisted of a piece of woollen cloth like a Scotch plaid, either wrapped round the body or thrown over the shoulders like a shawl, with the ends hanging down in front, or it might be thrown over the head so as to conceal the face (2 Sam. 15:30; Esther 6:12). It was confined to the waist by a girdle, and the fold formed by the overlapping of the robe served as a pocket (2 Kings 4:39; Ps. 79:12; Hag. 2:12; Prov. 17:23; 21:14). Female dress. The "coat" was common to both sexes (Cant. 5:3). But peculiar to females were (1) the "veil" or "wimple," a kind of shawl (Ruth 3:15; rendered "mantle," R.V., Isa. 3:22); (2) the "mantle," also a species of shawl (Isa. 3:22); (3) a "veil," probably a light summer dress (Gen. 24:65); (4) a "stomacher," a holiday dress (Isa. 3:24). The outer garment terminated in an ample fringe or border, which concealed the feet (Isa. 47:2; Jer. 13:22). The dress of the Persians is described in Dan. 3:21. The reference to the art of sewing are few, inasmuch as the garments generally came forth from the loom ready for being worn, and all that was required in the making of clothes devolved on the women of a family (Prov. 31:22; Acts 9:39). Extravagance in dress is referred to in Jer. 4:30; Ezek. 16:10; Zeph. 1:8 (R.V., "foreign apparel"); 1 Tim. 2:9; 1 Pet. 3:3. Rending the robes was expressive of grief (Gen. 37:29, 34), fear (1 Kings 21:27), indignation (2 Kings 5:7), or despair (Judg. 11:35; Esther 4:1). Shaking the garments, or shaking the dust from off them, was a sign of renunciation (Acts 18:6); wrapping them round the head, of awe (1 Kings 19:13) or grief (2 Sam. 15:30; casting them off, of excitement (Acts 22:23); laying hold of them, of supplication (1 Sam. 15:27). In the case of travelling, the outer garments were girded up (1 Kings 18:46). They were thrown aside also when they would impede action (Mark 10:50; John 13:4; Acts 7:58).

Taken from Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary

[Glenda B]

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e1/lockedheart83/DSC01418.jpg

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e1/lockedheart83/thegroup.jpg

I don't know if this will work or not, but it's a picture of a young man in my community who was raised up around UPC with lots of family in they UPC and since becoming of age and leaving home he is dressing UP. Check him out if these links work.

[berkeley]

eww

[H2H]

"There is a special place in Hell for those who remain silent." - DANTE

LOL!!! It's the truff!

[HeavenlyOne]

I'd like to know, too.

Looks like we better not hold our breath.

[Sister Alvear]

Millions sit in darkness and have no idea who Jesus is and we fuss over what a dress or a pair of pants are.
You remember when the disciples wanted to call fire down from heaven and destroy those that were not of their little group...Jesus reacted quite differently...
Why don't we sincerly teach those under our authority what we feel the Bible says and TRUST the convicting power of Jesus to do it's work also? (just a thought)
Yes, I am one of those what some call an Ultra con...whatever that is supposed to mean but no I do not sit on my bench condemning....I only ask for God to have mercy on us all...Sometimes I fear we major on minors and minor on majors...

[bbodarc]

Sometimes I fear we major on minors and minor on majors...

Yes indeed...