This is one reason I hate the robes. I will never wear one. They are for sissies. (Ha!) It's a personal conviction that I hate to see trampled on a regular basis. I sure hope I am not so offended that I don't make heaven!!
Is that possible?
BTW, welcome to AFF, and just so ya know: don't believe a word I say. That's common knowledge around here.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I have often wondered how men's and women's apparel is defined.
Do we define it historically? Whatever was appropriate in the past would be correct for today. If this is so, why did it ever become correct for men to cease the wearing of robes. Futhermore, tights, the precursor to panty hoes were first worn by men.
Do we define it culturally? If that is the case, cultural norms have and do change.
Do we define it Biblically? I find it curious that God never deliniates men's and women's apparell. And the New Testament is curiously silent on the whole issue. Why would God overlook such a vital guidline?
Even when God clothed Adam and Eve, he did not explain the differences in the cut or construction of the garments. If fact he made them both tunics, or robes. No difference was noted by the author of Genesis. Why?
Just some thoughts. How do you define what is men's and women's apparel, and how do you know that is the correct method to be used?
Perhaps I can be of assistance. (Ignore what I just said about what I say! ) The WWPF has that one figured out. From their articles of faith:
Quote:
Pants, for example, scripturally and historically are equivalent to “girding up the loins like a man” (Job 38:3), something women did not do (Deuteronomy 22:5).
See? Pants. It's Bible.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Perhaps I can be of assistance. (Ignore what I just said about what I say! ) The WWPF has that one figured out. From their articles of faith:
Quote:
Pants, for example, scripturally and historically are equivalent to “girding up the loins like a man” (Job 38:3), something women did not do (Deuteronomy 22:5).
3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
That scripture has nothing to say about WOMEN not doing it. It would be the same as saying to a person "take it like a man" today. In other words stoping being a baby and act like a man.
5The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
This has nothing to do with pants. Women act and dress like women, men act and dress like men. Believe me I am not going to look good in pants designed for a woman's body.
SO if the above quote insides Timmy's is correct and "gird you loins" is only for men then what do we do with these scripture? Exodus 12
3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house:
11And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD's passover.
sounds like EVERYONE was to gird their loins, men, women, and children.
Isaiah 32
11 Tremble, ye women that are at ease; be troubled, ye careless ones: strip you, and make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins.
Now this one specifically states women.
[QUOTE=On The Wheel;766785]I have often wondered how men's and women's apparel is defined.
Do we define it historically? Whatever was appropriate in the past would be correct for today. If this is so, why did it ever become correct for men to cease the wearing of robes. Futhermore, tights, the precursor to panty hoes were first worn by men.
Do we define it culturally? If that is the case, cultural norms have and do change.
Do we define it Biblically? I find it curious that God never deliniates men's and women's apparell. And the New Testament is curiously silent on the whole issue. Why would God overlook such a vital guidline?
Even when God clothed Adam and Eve, he did not explain the differences in the cut or construction of the garments. If fact he made them both tunics, or robes. No difference was noted by the author of Genesis. Why?
Just some thoughts. How do you define what is men's and women's apparel, and how do you know that is the correct method to be used?QUOTE]
Great points. Most would say a mixture of historically and culturally. Biblical definition would be for more black and white issues that would transcend time and culture. For instance, homosexuality, no matter how much accepted in modern culture, will never be permissible according to Scripture.
The problem then, is that the church's position on issues goes according to the whims of the world. So if in 100 years, mankind walks around stark naked. Would it then be modest to worship in string bikinis, because after all, that's modest. Far-fetched? But I think you have to take logic the full distance to see how it plays out.
In the final analysis, I think culture is our biggest indicator. Traditions aren't bad though... and it's sometimes traditions that helps us preserve culture.
3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
That scripture has nothing to say about WOMEN not doing it. It would be the same as saying to a person "take it like a man" today. In other words stoping being a baby and act like a man.
5The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
This has nothing to do with pants. Women act and dress like women, men act and dress like men. Believe me I am not going to look good in pants designed for a woman's body.
SO if the above quote insides Timmy's is correct and "gird you loins" is only for men then what do we do with these scripture? Exodus 12
3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house:
11And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD's passover.
sounds like EVERYONE was to gird their loins, men, women, and children.
Isaiah 32
11 Tremble, ye women that are at ease; be troubled, ye careless ones: strip you, and make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins.
Now this one specifically states women.
Just to provide a challenge:
It's well understood "girding up the loins" was a euphemism of going to battle. The robes would be tucked, from the bottom, into the waist belt. So this is a masculine thing, and the Scripture about "girding up the loins" is a masculine statement. The reference in Isaiah is about God's judgement, and his shame upon Israel. Not the best depiction for a quintessential truth. Much of OT was written in a man's time, with man words, feelings, etc... Most certainly, women weren't the ones who carried staffs in their hand.
So, regardless of the global argument here, refuting these scriptures as applying to men and women isn't really accurate. God evidently cares about distinction. However, I don't think it's accurate to "read into" the Text that girding up the loins means pants, and that these are garments God has made sacred for only a man.
It's well understood "girding up the loins" was a euphemism of going to battle. Do not agree with this. I think it was more about working, which going to battle would be work but I don't think it was the only thing it was used for.
The robes would be tucked, from the bottom, into the waist belt. So this is a masculine thing, and the Scripture about "girding up the loins" is a masculine statement. The reference in Isaiah is about God's judgement, and his shame upon Israel. I know this would be brought up. Still can not say it is only a man thing. The women were the ones being talked to. So it is only okay for a woman to gird her loins if she is being judged by God?
Not the best depiction for a quintessential truth. Much of OT was written in a man's time, with man words, feelings, etc... Most certainly, women weren't the ones who carried staffs in their hand. Not all men carried a staff and I am not sure a women who was traversing the desert would NOT have one in hers.
So, regardless of the global argument here, refuting these scriptures as applying to men and women isn't really accurate. God evidently cares about distinction. However, I don't think it's accurate to "read into" the Text that girding up the loins means pants, and that these are garments God has made sacred for only a man. Here I would have to say I agree.
Is that possible? 
) The WWPF has that one figured out. From their 
Linear Mode
