Quote:
Originally Posted by Godsdrummer
Growing up I always heard it preached like this, "once an abomination always and abomination". In other words they were making certain sins an abomination and others not.
|
Really, well they were wrong. I know people who are wrong, but there wrongness doesn't cause me to swing in another direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godsdrummer
The whole argument against pants on women is based on personal conviction against pants on women, and not sound historical backing of the clothing design of that day.
|
You know why we have a small idea how they dressed in Roman and Greek cultures? Because they had imagery. You know how we really have no specifics on the Hebrews, Israelis, or Judeans? Because they only left a written record, not a artistic record. You know what they are showing you in the Bible dictionaries, and artworks concerning Moses and Jesus? The middle age to present? Arab, and Yemeni bedouin attire. That's like saying a biker in chaps looks just like a cow puncher from the early 1800s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godsdrummer
We don't look down on Arabs that wear robes today as wearing women's dresses, if a robe is made for a man it is a mans apparel.
|
Arab military doesn't wear those medieval bedouin robes. Also, the whole dress thing on Arabs is actually part of their religion. Most Masjids want people to come to juma prayer with those dresses. There is no "we" in your statement. Because myself and others understand that the Arab muslim needs to repent and stop wearing 300 dollar shoes with the backs crushed down because they treat them like sandals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godsdrummer
The same thing should be said for women's pants.
|
There is no such thing as women pants. They is no such thing as same gender marriage. I guess in about 40 years everyone in Church Land will be arguing over allowing same gender marriage into the pews.
Threaded Mode
