Men also did not wear pant's in that day, that did not come along till almost 1200 ad. They wore robes. There were diff robes that men and women wore....Men and women wear diff typs of pants today, It may sound corny but its true
not according to Steven Anderson since he is rewriting history
__________________
.
Isn't having a smoking section in a restaurant like having a peeing section in the swimming pool?
Men also did not wear pant's in that day, that did not come along till almost 1200 ad. They wore robes. There were diff robes that men and women wore....Men and women wear diff typs of pants today, It may sound corny but its true
Men did wear pants in that day! They were called breeches where we get our word britches. When you read the Bible, you will only find that MEN wore them, and there was a distinct difference in the way men and women dressed. It's not about "pants" being modest or immodest, that fact is, it is a mans garment and it always has been. That's why Paul wrote "that women adorn themselves in modest apparel" Loose, long garments!
Even dresses and skirts and blouses can be very, very, immodest! One writer on the internet said..."As in all things, lust is usually in the eyes of the beholder ... and a long skirt wouldn't deter a spirit of lust!" Correct, but, it also would not encourage it either!!!!
Many short skirts, long slits, low neck lines and tight skirts, shirts and blouses DO entice and excite lust! That's why Paul wrote MODEST apparel!
I have a very beautiful wife and daughters! Mt 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. I would be a fool to allow them to dress in such a way that enticed men to enter the bedroom of their minds for them to sleep with!
What did that say..."committed adultery with her " WOW, If the woman wears that which would cause a man to lust after her and he commits adultery in his heart he is doing it WITH her. SHE IS JUST AS GUILTY AS HE IS!!!!!!
__________________ Preachin' the Book, Blood, and The Blessed Hope
**************************************** 2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
Modesty has to begin in the heart first. God wants a meek and quiet spirit. No article of clothing is as valuable a meek and quiet spirit (1 Peter 3:4) nor can it make one have a meek and quiet spirit. The clothes we wear must not be such that they take our own focus off the things of God. If you're in church and you're clothes make you feel uncomfortable it makes it hard to do what you're supposed to do - that's why I don't wear bicycle shorts for example at least not in church - that and I don't like people staring at me. So comfort is important but you don't want to be too comfortable. Modesty is avoiding extremes - moderation and modesty are similiar words actually.
Unless you're a homeless person don't go to church dressed like one thinking that's somehow showing humility and modesty. The same can be said for dressing too fancy.
Think about it. You're in God's house, the church. Nothing you wear can really impress him, so just dress decently and reasonably.
__________________
Chosen in him before the foundation of the world.
Men did wear pants in that day! They were called breeches where we get our word britches. When you read the Bible, you will only find that MEN wore them, and there was a distinct difference in the way men and women dressed. It's not about "pants" being modest or immodest, that fact is, it is a mans garment and it always has been. That's why Paul wrote "that women adorn themselves in modest apparel" Loose, long garments!
Even dresses and skirts and blouses can be very, very, immodest! One writer on the internet said..."As in all things, lust is usually in the eyes of the beholder ... and a long skirt wouldn't deter a spirit of lust!" Correct, but, it also would not encourage it either!!!!
Many short skirts, long slits, low neck lines and tight skirts, shirts and blouses DO entice and excite lust! That's why Paul wrote MODEST apparel!
I have a very beautiful wife and daughters! Mt 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. I would be a fool to allow them to dress in such a way that enticed men to enter the bedroom of their minds for them to sleep with!
What did that say..."committed adultery with her " WOW, If the woman wears that which would cause a man to lust after her and he commits adultery in his heart he is doing it WITH her. SHE IS JUST AS GUILTY AS HE IS!!!!!!
Considering the sheer specificity of Deut 22:5 and the precise nature of those things that are forbidden, Deut 22:5 is most likely ceremonial law rather than moral law, which would mean that it would have little, if any, implications for Christians today. Many believe, however, that this verse still applies to us today because this verse states that violators of this law are an abomination to God and that which was an abomination to God in the Old Testament would also be an abomination to God in the New Testament. However, the usage of the word abomination in Deut 22:5 does not necessarily make it a timeless moral law because any violation of God’s mandates is an abomination to Him, whether it is a violation of ceremonial law or moral law. Furthermore, Deut 22:5 is placed squarely in the middle of, and is completely surrounded by, ceremonial laws. If it is indeed a principle to be literally followed today, why would God choose to bury this verse in the middle of what are clearly ceremonial laws?
The second argument against Christian women wearing pants is that pants have historically been worn by and associated with men and are therefore men’s clothing. One problem with this view is that it is not a consistently applied principle among those that advocate it. Many of the articles of clothing have histories of originating with a certain sex. Consider t-shirts – these too were invented for men and originally worn exclusively by men. The t-shirt was introduced to America during WWI when American soldiers noticed European soldiers wearing them. By WWII, the t-shirt became standard issue in the American military and was quickly introduced into American fashion.6 Not only were t-shirts originally invented for men, but they were invented specifically for the military. Considering this in light of the true meaning of Deut 22:5, which seems to be forbidding women from wearing the habiliments of a soldier, it would logically follow that a woman wearing a t-shirt would be in much greater violation of this verse than a woman wearing pants. Furthermore, there is no distinction between men’s and women’s t-shirts.
Men did wear pants in that day! They were called breeches where we get our word britches. . . .
you mean underwear?
__________________
2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
__________________ Preachin' the Book, Blood, and The Blessed Hope
**************************************** 2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
Exodus 28:42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:
Deuteronomy 22:5 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.
The views and opinions expressed on this web site are not necessarily those of the Fighting Fundamental Forums management. This is an open and unmoderated forum. The content of each post is the sole responsibility of the poster. Participants are expected to follow the simple rules of the forum. Within these wide parameters various views are welcome to be expressed freely.
The college names used on the FundamentalForums.com web site are trademarks of their respective schools. The forums are not officially sanctioned by any of the institutions represented.