Question for Bible teachers and students (Aquila, that means you aren't being addressed here):
It is true that
Deut 22:5 does not specifically identify pants, dresses, robes, hose, turbans, or any other specific items of clothing. So what is the hermeneutic for doctrine here?
What I mean is, we have a
command that is nonspecific. To get to specific applications, we need either a
necessary inference, or we are left with
approved examples.
Can it be shown by necessary inference from
Deut 22:5 that pants are only men's attire? I'm not sure that can be done.
So then, what about approved examples? What is the hermeneutic here? "That which has no approved example is forbidden"? I think that would be too broad (no pun intended), for then it could be argued "there are no approved examples of using the internet" or some other silly thing. So it must be narrower than that. If it is "approved example renders the exampled behavior beyond reproach", then all that could be said is it is permissible for men to wear breeches. But the negative corollary (women are not permitted) would not thereby be necessarily true.
So, what is the doctrinal hermeneutic being used here?
Threaded Mode
