Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeBandy
ok I am going to ask you an honest question.. I am trying to understand your logic. Why do you ignore Exodus 28:1-2? This specifically states who this chapter is written to. I guess in a way I understand the "made for a man" view you have since Aaron and the priest were males. Then you ignore verses 3-41 and suddenly verse 42 out of the same context, same book, same chapter a steadfast doctrine is created. You ignore several verses of apparel litigation and cherrypick one verse. Why is not verse 40 a doctrine?? Then again in verse 43 we are reminded who these instructions are for. Then you state "any garment made like this is for a man". Can you explain what you mean by "made like this" specifically? |
I think the whole debate is stupid.
Deuteronomy 22:5 is clearly about cross-dressing, gender bending, perversion, and gender confusion, and even homosexual desire. All these perversions where common place in the pagan peoples around Israel. Even the Sodomite temple prostitutes who were later in the very temple of God were cross-dressing and conducting their gender bending pagan rituals and seducing worshipers to have sex with them. It makes perfect sense for God to forbid such things.
Those who say that this text is about pants are dumbing down the seriousness of this text, the severity of the sin in question, and its current relevance in our own gender confused culture. It's not about pants on a woman, it's not about if T-shirts permitted on women. It's not about what culture wore what, when, and why. It's not about women dawning weapons or body armor. It's about a sickening sexual perversion, an abomination.
Threaded Mode
