Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

[StMark]

Originally Posted by bkstokes

That is right Mark! If they had more proof they would use it.

I like a woman in a dress. However, if you research the matter sincerely you will find that it is misapplication. The question must be asked: HOW DID THEY APPLY IT THEN?

The difference in dress consisted on different undergarments, the belts (or material used to tie at the waist), and the hem of the robe.

Pants that women wear are different from men -- frankly most men could not wear by how they are cut.

Now they will respond -- YOUR GOING TO HELL -- Its an abomination!

BUt you are talking about ancient civilization stokes. You don't think that Duet 22 applies to whatever time frame you are in ? I know that 99% of the women now wear pants but again I ask, isn't this as a result of the breakdown of society ( for the worse, not better!)

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by StMark

BUt you are talking about ancient civilization stokes. You don't think that Duet 22 applies to whatever time frame you are in ? I know that 99% of the women now wear pants but again I ask, isn't this as a result of the breakdown of society ( for the worse, not better!)

I was taught in heremeneutics that in order to properly apply the Bible one needed to properly interpret it in its original time and setting.

Most scholars believe that this verse was explicitly geared towards women who actively looked to be like a man. What we today would call a Butch. In this case, I do think a woman is displeasing God. She is intentionally trying to confuse the sex barrier. However, 99% of the women are not trying to confuse the sex barrier nor are they wearing men's clothing. It is clothing fashioned for them and their bodies.

[SonsOfTheOil]

modest pants? or immodest skirts hmmmmm. seems like in the Kingdom its the ideal of modesty that is the concern of God. not you cant wear this or that but...is it modest. but we do like to pick things out to pick and choose dont we

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by SonsOfTheOil

modest pants? or immodest skirts hmmmmm. seems like in the Kingdom its the ideal of modesty that is the concern of God. not you cant wear this or that but...is it modest. but we do like to pick things out to pick and choose dont we

Why is that hard to believe? It isn't about picking or choosing. It's about being modest. The OT tells women they should not dress to look like men and vice versa. People want to say that means pants. Well in the time it was written men and women dressed very similar. The differences being maybe color, somewhat the cut, and ornamentation. The other things they were told were about what they could mix or wear together. Everyone wants to state that women can not wear pants but they have no problem mixing cotton and linen, rayon and polyester, wool and silk, etc etc.
So because men started wearing pants first it makes it strictly a man's garment? Women started wearing pants and they decided it was time to cut pants FOR women. I am not going to the ladies section to buy my pants, just will not fit me right. Besides if we go back a hundered years or so the women should have their skirts covering their ankles. Who of you believe that is necessary?
Talk of something else silly. I have known of preachers that wore a girdle when they preached to help them look better. Something that a little time excercising could have taken care of but instead of that they wore a girdle. IT WAS A MAN'S GIRDLE. So it made it okay? 90% of the world look at girdles as being something a woman would wear. So were they wrong and going to hell for trying to hold their stomach in while preaching because they wore this 'ladies garment'?
It seems foolish and stupid to me that we try to hold ladies to this archiac mindset. Men can be progressive and grow but not the ladies.