More on Skirts

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Again am argument from silence. I could argue that they indeed wore hose under their tunics as men did during the colder months.

Its obvious you can and will argue for anything without a shred of evidence. You have agreed the three Hebrew young men were wearing pants therefore you agree godly men wore pants. STILL WAITING for your Biblical evidence that godly women wore pants.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Ah, someone else who doesn't understand that pink ladies jeans aren't for them. Lol

Ohhh, that was an impressive remark.

STILL WAITING for your evidence

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Women's pants are women's pants. Any honest soul can see it. No dad would put his boy in girls pants. Because they pertain to females.

Great, then you should have NO problem demonstrating where, in God's word, godly women wore pants.

(Pro 21:2 KJV) Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
(Pro 14:12 KJV) There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

This is why righteousness MUST be based on God's word. Not "feelings or opinion". It must be based on the Bible.

STILL WAITING for Biblical evidence of godly women wearing pants.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Trump is a draft dodging coward. I did my 8 years.

8 years in the ARMY
Aint
Ready
for the
Marines
Yet

LOL


J/K

Thank you for your service.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The real reason America is going down the tubes is because Apostolics are majoring in minors. Untold numbers will burn in hell over this unnecessary and unethical Taliban style fundamentalist doctrine that has no grasp on basic common sense.

The word of God is minor to you? I suppose it is true. When a person resorts to ad-hominem attacks, it is because they have nothing to offer. STILL WAITING...

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

However, only one side is appealing to the Law and not Grace. Only one side is appealing to the Letter and not the Spirit.

More Bolshevik bologna. You cannot separate the Word of God from the Spirit of God. Once again:
(2Pe 1:21 KJV) For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

The Word of God IS the same as the Spirit of God; therefore, they can NEVER contradict one another. Jesus said:
(Joh 4:24 KJV) God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Whenever you try to separate the Bible from the Spirit you will fall into error.
(Pro 21:2 KJV) Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
(Pro 14:12 KJV) There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Jeremiah said, under the anointing of the Holy Ghost:
(Jer 31:31 KJV) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
(Jer 31:32 KJV) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
(Jer 31:33 KJV) But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Jesus said:
(Mat 5:17 KJV) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Paul said:
(1Co 10:11 KJV) Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Aquila would rather ignore the Word than embrace it. By doing this he is rejecting the Holy Ghost and the what God desires for each of us - to write His Law on our hearts. Thus, he rejects the Spirit in favor of sloppy agape and touchy feely religion that is powerless. Peter spoke about those who "promise liberty" while rejecting God's Word":
(2Pe 2:17 KJV) These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
(2Pe 2:18 KJV) For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
(2Pe 2:19 KJV) While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
(2Pe 2:20 KJV) For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
(2Pe 2:21 KJV) For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
(2Pe 2:22 KJV) But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Jason B

I'm guessing all you UCs really hate T-shirts.

Even got one that says "unisex size M".

Oh, the perversion. What's this world coming to? Men and women both running around in the same garments!

Ohhh what's the world coming to?

Prayer kicked of school.
People trying to remove any reference to God in any way or form from the public eye.
"Christians" rejecting the word of God in favor of an anything goes mentality.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Its obvious you can and will argue for anything without a shred of evidence. You have agreed the three Hebrew young men were wearing pants therefore you agree godly men wore pants. STILL WAITING for your Biblical evidence that godly women wore pants.

Beyond the three Hebrews in captivity there isn't any biblical "evidence" that anyone else wore pants, be they male or female. That's just factual data.

Now, you can take the three Hebrews and demand that their wearing pants somehow means that EVERY MALE wore pants and that NO FEMALES did... or you can agree with me. We don't know. For all either of us know, both males and females were wearing hosen under their tunics in the winter months, making their style of dress and use of bifurcated garments rather equal. Either way, we'd both be making a leap of logic and arguing from silence.

I'm not saying this to bash you. I'm just trying to be analytical.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Great, then you should have NO problem demonstrating where, in God's word, godly women wore pants.

(Pro 21:2 KJV) Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
(Pro 14:12 KJV) There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

This is why righteousness MUST be based on God's word. Not "feelings or opinion". It must be based on the Bible.

STILL WAITING for Biblical evidence of godly women wearing pants.

Pliny,

Here's what concerns me about the logic of the argument you are using, maybe you can help clarify.

Let's ask about "skirts".

Do we see any biblical example of a woman wearing a skirt?

What do we find?

We find these references:

“A man shall not take his father’s wife, nor discover his father’s skirt.” Deuteronomy 22:30 (KJV)

“And it came to pass afterward, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s skirt.” 1 Samuel 24:5 (KJV)

"Thus saith the Lord of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you." Zachariah 8:23 (KJV)

Ah, see... if I were to use the method of argumentation that you're employing regarding pants, I could argue that we only have examples of men wearing skirts. Therefore, in the Bible we see that only men wore skirts, and so they pertain to a man.

Can you give me an example of a godly woman wearing a skirt???

Do you see the similarity between this and the argumentation that you're using in the debate? You're arguing from silence. That's really not a strong argument. If we were being graded by debate moderators you'd not gain much ground with them with this approach.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

8 years in the ARMY
Aint
Ready
for the
Marines
Yet

LOL


J/K

Thank you for your service.

Love it.