woman wearing pants

[Pearl]

It doesn't say pants per se - I think it's more to be general principles.

Probably means pretending to be what you're not by cross-dressing.

 

[Soverign Grace]

Probably means pretending to be what you're not by cross-dressing.

I read that satan is behind the unisex fashions - probably because God specifically was against it.

 

[Pearl]

I read that satan is behind the unisex fashions - probably because God specifically was against it.

But the 'fashions' in biblical times were quite 'unisex' as they all wore long robes and sandals.

 

[Nancy]

lets see if this will stir anyone.. does this scripture below say women are not to wear pants. your pentecostals and some baptist live and breath this.. i am not necessarily asking this out ofnot knowing.. but curious as to what prof yea or nay


The 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.Deuteronomy 22:5

Well, if a woman wore clothes specifically made for a man, under the Law of the OT, it was an abomination but then, even men back then did not wear pants. Imo, as long as a woman dresses modestly, so her clothing does not solicit illicit sexual interest, is that not acceptable to God? What about Scottish Kilts? lol.
Also, the Hebrew dress back in OT days was only distinguishable as a mans or a woman's dress by ornamentation, or decorations. Not to mention that there are very many pant suits and slacks that are designed FOR woman and...if a man were to wear them, he'd look pretty weird. Perhaps Deuteronomy was speaking to the men's Armor?
PLease, don't take away my jeans! Oh yes, btw-their woman's jeans

 

[Nancy]

and i agree so where does denominations get this doctrine from .

Their own skewed and legalistic and possibly misogynist made up and twisted scripture, doctrines of men?

 

[amadeus]

lets see if this will stir anyone.. does this scripture below say women are not to wear pants. your pentecostals and some baptist live and breath this.. i am not necessarily asking this out ofnot knowing.. but curious as to what prof yea or nay


The 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.Deuteronomy 22:5

It really is very dependent on what the woman has in her heart. If it appears as being evil to herself or to others that matter to her and God then according to her faith, let it be...

"Abstain from all appearance of evil." I Thess 5:22

 

[amadeus]

They are pretty standard now for women. Some women don't even own any skirts.

My wife has owned only skirts or dresses since we began serving God together in 1976. It is her personal conviction rather than being in accord with the way of any church group... Before we were married she owned and wore other things, but to please me, she chose to get rid of the pants... that was before we started serving God. She asked my opinion and I gave it honestly never pressing her. She complied because she was not against it and wanted to please me. When we came to God she was convicted on it and remains so to this day.

On my part I always wear long sleeved shirts even in hot summer time. I haven't owned a short sleeved shirt or a pair of short pants for more than 40 years.

 

[amadeus]

(Like for example, women didn't use to get tattoos widely, but now 59%--70% or more of parlor clients in North America are female; hard to deny it's become - as well as a manly thing - a very womanly thing to do.)

Very womanly perhaps, even if according to what I understand of scripture, tattoos would not be very Christ-like.

 

[Grams]

Well............. slacks seem to be very comfy for me in these day's.....!!!!

BUT......... back as a child in my time the 1940's ...... I did not see lady's in slacks......

in the 1950's I started to see this and my Mom did not want me to use them.
One day I went shopping and came home with the slacks on ,, so I could not take them
back...............BUT my Mom would not allow me to wear them ever again........

 

[amadeus]

Frankly, in North America, if a preacher's wife or daughter goes to visit church families she will more likely than not be wearing blue jeans, etc.

But why should the preacher's wife and daughter be held to a standard different than other sisters? I mean I understand why they are, but why should they be? Does respect, or the lack thereof, have something to do with it?

 

[Grams]

Now in these day's I am in jeans most of the time..... Except when we go to church.....

 

[amadeus]

and i agree so where does denominations get this doctrine from .

Much of it is likely left from other days and times and ways as indicated already in the various posts here. While my wife and I still dress in a manner many might consider old-fashioned, we don't hold it against others that they think and act differently. We do not like to see an unnecessary display of flesh on the part of either man or woman. People may say they have the right to dress as they wish, but a person who is really following Christ, should also be thinking what feelings may be aroused in others. To God it matters and so it should to us as well.

 

[Mayflower]

I agree that the NT verse in Romans 1:26 speaks of homosexuals (including trans) and not clothes.

I do think the verse in Leviticus 19:19 regarding clothes is just about clothes here (and sowing seeds, and breeding livestock), as Leviticus 18:22 deals with homosexual/transgender statutes: "22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

That's interesting. If women were supposed to wear a dress, then who would this be talking too. Are these Jewish statutes, or for all Christians? I would have to study the chapters, but how do you know chapter 19 is not a continuation of chapter 18? Talking about the same concept?

 

[Mayflower]

Much of it is likely left from other days and times and ways as indicated already in the various posts here. While my wife and I still dress in a manner many might consider old-fashioned, we don't hold it against others that they think and act differently. We do not like to see an unnecessary display of flesh on the part of either man or woman. People may say they have the right to dress as they wish, but a person who is really following Christ, should also be thinking what feelings may be aroused in others. To God it matters and so it should to us as well.

I am glad for my slacks! It is actually pretty hard to find an appropriate dress these days that is not too arousing. One reason why I don't look for them.

 

[amadeus]

@Mayflower Romans 14 is all about Christian liberty...

I do beg to differ in that to me that chapter speaks of allowing others to do what they will and leave any judgment to God. It does NOT allow me as an individual to do whatever pleases me. I need to stay in communication with God and be certain that what I do pleases Him, no matter what anyone else does. If, on the other hand, a person asks me what they should wear or how he should act in a certain situation, I will as God directs likely advise them to listen to God one on one basis rather than interpreting scriptures for themselves. What does God mean in what is written in scripture matters without exception, more than what any man in own mind has decided that it means.

"To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice." John 10:3-4

 

[VictoryinJesus]

lets see if this will stir anyone.. does this scripture below say women are not to wear pants. your pentecostals and some baptist live and breath this.. i am not necessarily asking this out ofnot knowing.. but curious as to what prof yea or nay


The 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.Deuteronomy 22:5

A question would be: what about the garment of the bride? ...and the bridegroom? (Imo) it transcends gender. Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

@Mayflower spoke of how God does not look on the outward but that which is inward:1 Peter 3:3-4 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; [4] But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

Let it not be that which is outward ...but that hidden man of the heart.

 

[Pearl]

I am glad for my slacks! It is actually pretty hard to find an appropriate dress these days that is not too arousing. One reason why I don't look for them.

I used to love wearing mini dresses back in the day (not too short though) and loved wearing the longer length dresses when they were in fashion but I just don't suit knee length. Short or long for me but although I have some short above the knee ones I wear with black tights I am usually in jeans or black trousers. Bring back longer dresses!!

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

1 Peter 3:3-4 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; [4] But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

^ comparing the two: “as a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments” ...He is the bridegroom...“let it be the hidden man of the heart” which is an ornament of a meek and quiet spirit(that which is not corruptible)...the ornament being His of a meek and quiet spirit...His ornament, the bridegrooms...being in the sight of God of great price. The woman’s covering...the ornament of meekness and a quiet spirit...in the sight of God of great price “as a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments”.

 

[4Jesus]

That's interesting. If women were supposed to wear a dress, then who would this be talking too. Are these Jewish statutes, or for all Christians? I would have to study the chapters, but how do you know chapter 19 is not a continuation of chapter 18? Talking about the same concept?

Hi Mayflower, how are you today?

I think that the verse in the first post of this thread is talking about what a man/woman should wear. I followed up with that regarding how it's an old statute, and doesn't apply to today, much like how we shouldn't wear clothes made of mixed material (I believe the Amish hold to this even today).

They are old testament statutes, and do not apply to Christians, though I would think at least most are common sense things. For instance, should a man or woman be a transgender, no, based upon the new covenant teachings. However, would it be ok for a man or a woman to wear clothes of the opposite gender (like a woman wearing a suit, or a man wearing a dress as a joke) while not being homosexual/transgender in sexual preference - my opinion is that it is ok and won't keep us out of Heaven. It's not for me, personally, but would it exclude entrance to Heaven, probably not.

As to how do I know that Leviticus chapter 18 and chapter 19 are not a continuation of the same concept, and I'm not a Bible scholar here, so just my opinion, is that they are of the same concept of statutes that Jews in the OT adhered to, as there were many different types of statutes discussed, from sexual statues, to foods to eat, to type of clothes to wear, to stealing and dealing honestly with neighbors, and commerce.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Hi Mayflower, how are you today?

I think that the verse in the first post of this thread is talking about what a man/woman should wear. I followed up with that regarding how it's an old statute, and doesn't apply to today, much like how we shouldn't wear clothes made of mixed material (I believe the Amish hold to this even today).

They are old testament statutes, and do not apply to Christians, though I would think at least most are common sense things. For instance, should a man or woman be a transgender, no, based upon the new covenant teachings. However, would it be ok for a man or a woman to wear clothes of the opposite gender (like a woman wearing a suit, or a man wearing a dress as a joke) while not being homosexual/transgender in sexual preference - my opinion is that it is ok and won't keep us out of Heaven. It's not for me, personally, but would it exclude entrance to Heaven, probably not.

As to how do I know that Leviticus chapter 18 and chapter 19 are not a continuation of the same concept, and I'm not a Bible scholar here, so just my opinion, is that they are of the same concept of statutes that Jews in the OT adhered to, as there were many different types of statutes discussed, from sexual statues, to foods to eat, to type of clothes to wear, to stealing and dealing honestly with neighbors, and commerce.

It is a lot isn’t it. My mother was just talking about this the other day...going back to her childhood and how she had an aunt who always wore skirts to her ankles...but when knee length skirts were introduced ...the aunt would tell the girls they were all tramps who would never amount to anything; based off the length of their skirts.