Did Jesus Wear Pants?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Costeon

But all this really doesn't matter because Gentiles were never commanded to dress like Jews--however they dressed. We are commanded not to dress like the opposite sex and to be modest, in costliness and coverage.

It does matter, because we are piling up pages in a thread, so either it matters or we being right about it matters. Anyway you slice it it looks like it matters.

Amen on the later you are correct.

So, trousers marched down throughout time as male wear.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

And Adam knew Eve his wife...

That is what I read.

[Aquila]

Excellent article by Dr. Claude Mariottini:

Transvestism in Ancient Israel
https://claudemariottini.com/2009/01...ncient-israel/

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

And Adam knew Eve his wife...

[Aquila]

Interesting article:

THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF PANTS
Who Made Pants a Male Garment?
http://studyholiness.com/doc/Histori...n_of_Pants.pdf

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Interesting article:

THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF PANTS
Who Made Pants a Male Garment?
http://studyholiness.com/doc/Histori...n_of_Pants.pdf

Woman barbarians wore pants?

What?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Excellent article by Dr. Claude Mariottini:

Transvestism in Ancient Israel
https://claudemariottini.com/2009/01...ncient-israel/

That sure was a lot of conjecture.

Let's see www.Ihatewomanwearingdresses.com

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Umm Sister Amanah posted this and please answer this. And breeches are more then undergarments..

Ancient Pants

The wearing of pants in Western culture probably arose with the equestrian warrior cultures of Asia minor. The Sythians of the area encompassed by today's Ukraine, Bulgaria, and Romania wore loose pants tucked into boots. A portrait of a warrior wearing pants appears on a cup found in a burial site from 770 BC.

The Greek historian Herodotus mentions the Sythians waring pants. Herodotus also mentions that the Amazons (female warriors of Greek mythology) as clad in trousers. An Amazon depicted on a vessel in 470 BC is obviously wearing pants.

Pants were adapted from the Sythians by the Persians (of modern Iran) by the 5th century BC.

The Celts, a nomadic people of Central Europe, wore pants, though documentation is sketchy at best. The style, copied from Sythians and Persians, spread through Central Europe around the third century BC.

Ancient Greeks and Romans equated the wearing of trousers with savagery and referred to those early trouser clad people as barbarians. When the Romans conquered Celtic Briton in the first century AD, they called the Irish "wild people." But as cultures mixed, Roman soldiers took to wearing a form of pants called braccae that resembled a pair of tight Capris, and were much more appropriate for cold weather climates than togas.

Braccae is the Latin root of the word breeches, a type of knee length trouser. Braccae, however, had adjustable hems and could be worn knee length or ankle length.

The Thorsberg Trousers pictured on the right are a relic from the 4th century AC and were found in Denmark.

Damendorf Man, a bog body found in 1900, perished between 140 - 380 AD. A pair of neatly folded pants was found near the corpse.

https://bellatory.com/fashion-indust...estern-Culture

So, the Bible says that "breeches" are "from the loins unto the thigh shall they reach" and now you want to extend that to the knee and ankle?

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

So, the Bible says that "breeches" are "from the loins unto the thigh shall they reach" and now you want to extend that to the knee and ankle?

I was clear it was anything in the design long or short was made for men. We have scripture of God initiating the making of them. And then cultures through histories, even keeping the same name for them. So we don't have to worry about where the design came from, it came directly from God (and got scripture to prove it..) , and we see through history they were always intended for men. So they weren't just undergarments, as y'all tried to claim, you and Costeon were saying "these are just male undergarments like boxers." Well according to history that isn't true.

Y'all can deny hard evidence all you want, but should I follow your opinion or what is clearly seen from scripture and history?

Hey maybe I should share with you this ground breaking piece of evidence. Any 5 year old can read it. This is the universal sign for bathroom.. Hey and it even says Feman for female, but she still put a dress on. Good for her!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

I was clear it was anything in the design. We have scripture of God initiating the making of them. And then cultures through histories, even keeping the same name for them. So we don't have to worry about where the design came from God , and we see through history they were always intended for men. So they weren't just undergarments.

Y'all can deny hard evidence all you want, but should I follow your opinion or what is clearly seen from scripture and history?

Hey maybe I should share with you this ground breaking piece of evidence. Any 5 year old can read it. This is the universal sign for bathroom.. Hey and it even says Feman for female, but she still put a dress on. Good for her!

Hey, Skippy, I am not arguing with you about pants or dresses. They have already been universally designated for men or women, respectively.

I am saying that it doesn’t matter who decided to call “breeches” capris or knee shorts. The Bible tells me the length was specific- covering the loins and reaching to the thigh. You can stretch them as long as you want and call them breeches all day long. However, the Bible, not an Enclyclopedia determined the length. If we would stick with this truth, we wouldn’t get confused and have so many silly posts that answer nada.