Conservative Camp Meeting, Ventura, CA.06/22-06/26

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

Elder Epley, you genuinely and sincerely believe that when a woman wears pants she is "worse than an infidel" and an "abomination?" Really? I mean, beyond you don't see it as proper, or becoming... beyond you don't see it as modest -- you honestly believe Deut was referring to pants??? I respect you a lot, I'm just somewhat astonished that you would truly believe pants are abominable.

Only among ex-Pentecostals and liberal Pentecostals are pants not seen in man's domain. Is it a conspiracy that all the rest rooms are identified by sexes by a skirt and pants? I guess the cons run all the businesses and public rest rooms. It is that simple. YES pants are an abomination. Better be fire proof.

[Truthseeker]

Elder Epley

I notice you haven't addressed the points presented.

[On The Wheel]

Originally Posted by jaxfam6

I take it that was a mistake???

Yes. Thanks for catching that.

[On The Wheel]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Only among ex-Pentecostals and liberal Pentecostals are pants not seen in man's domain. Is it a conspiracy that all the rest rooms are identified by sexes by a skirt and pants? I guess the cons run all the businesses and public rest rooms. It is that simple. YES pants are an abomination. Better be fire proof.

I appreciate the response, but there are still some open questions on the table concerning who defines apparel.

The orginal Ten Commandments were written on tablets of stone. Pretty permanent. But they don't define what is men's and women's apparel.

The New Covenant is written upon the fleshy tables of our heart. Pretty personal. But it doesn't even address the issues of distiction between men's and women's apparel.

When I get to heaven I will be more than happy to have my life judged by the information containted within those two sacred places.

I don't think I will worry overly much about being judged by the information written on the doors of public restrooms. Personally, I think if God wanted to dispense truths of salvific import, he could find a better place to reveal them than those said doors. But, I am open to pursuasion otherwise.

By the way, only certain brands of pentecostals and the groups like the Amish keep alive the myth that pants are for men only. I drop my teen age daughter off at school each morning (she always wears a skirt). I can count on one hand the number of times I have seen another girl wearing a skirt this year, and we live in a very conservative area. I have been awakened to the realization that the culture has changed and bifurcated garments can be worn by both genders.

Why not? After all, both men and women wore robes in the OT and no one saw any problems with that.

[On The Wheel]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Elder Epley

I notice you haven't addressed the points presented.

Yes, but we are thankful for the response. I wonder where some of the others are? It is possible that they have, like Elvis, left the building.

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Only among ex-Pentecostals and liberal Pentecostals are pants not seen in man's domain. Is it a conspiracy that all the rest rooms are identified by sexes by a skirt and pants? I guess the cons run all the businesses and public rest rooms. It is that simple. YES pants are an abomination. Better be fire proof.

You know I noticed that. I even saw a restroom sign uncovered in pompeii and even they had men in pants and women in skirts.

[On The Wheel]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

or they just got tired of the same non-stop attacks on their beliefs? After a while it can get old and they either avoid those topics or leave,

It is sad when the search for truth is spun as an attack on beliefs. Believe me, I have no ax to grind and have no desire to destroy anyone's beliefs. Anyone visiting our church or my family would find us as conservative in outward appearance as most right leaning UPCI churches.

However, we will all answer to God for our adherance to scripture, not dogma. The world is going to hell fast. It needs a church that preaches pure truth that sets men free, not man-made traditionalism. Sin and evil, as scripture defines them, must be challenged.

I suppose I grow weary with fighting battles, expending resources, and seeing casualties pile up on battlefields that may not be of primary importance.

[On The Wheel]

Originally Posted by jaxfam6

You know I noticed that. I even saw a restroom sign uncovered in pompeii and even they had men in pants and women in skirts.

In certain ancient and not some not so ancient cultures the signs on the restroom doors would be pornographic, because nakedness was the general attire of the day. What would define men's and women's apparel in those cultures? As a pastor, I might just be happy to get some clothes on them!

I wonder if we could appeal to bathroom signs of biblical authority to answer our modesty questions also.

[TJJJ]

Okay!

So we have the pants crowd and the no pants crowd!

Let me ask the pants on women crowd a question. Do you then feel it is okay for a man to wear a skirt or dress? Is that an okay thing?

So far your logic is only slanted towards pants being on a woman, you do not address the other side, a dress being on a man!

What are your thoughts on a man showing up to church with his dress on, pantyhose on, maybe his high heels on....

Would you or your pastor let him sing in your choir and lead worship?

Just asking, just asking!

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Elder Epley

I notice you haven't addressed the points presented.

I debated this subject VOLUMES with Newman and others until I am tired of debating it. EVERYONE seems to understand pants identify men with the exception of backslid Pentecostal people.