Women wearing pants are in sin

There are those that look at Deuteronomy 22:5, and say that this verse substantiates that thought train.

 

I feel most uncomfortable wearing trousers (pants mean underwear in UK )because the above quote convicts me that I should not.Recently the company that I work for had a change of ownership, and we are asked to wear trousers...... I have done this to comply, but am most unhappy about this. I may rebel !!!

 

Deuteronomy 22:11(NASB)
11 “You shall not wear a material mixed of wool and linen together.

I wonder if those that wish to place the weight of the Law of Moses, beyond simply the Ten Commandments and what was written to Gentile Christians in Acts 15:23-29, on the necks of Christians also refuse to wear clothing of mixed materials.

Ken

 

» Women wearing pants are in sin

It's virtually guaranteed that if a clothing maker introduced a new brand called Sin and advertised them with a slogan such as "Have a comfortable day-- get into a pair of Sins!" that they would sell big.

 

ChristianCynic
The truth is you are right.
John

 

I think the point is also that a guy shouldn't look like a gal and vice versa.

And this from someone who just about lives in jeans....sigh....

 

Yes like the mixture of rayon and cotton, or how about poly cotton. If wearing pants is a sin, then wearing two differttn fabrics(even if one fabric is 100% whatever, but the your other piece of clothing is 100% of something else, then it would still be a sin). So why don't the dress only peoeple follow this.

These same people who take theses verses out of context, have never bothered to look and see what clothing men wore and didn't wear to make sure they are following thier verse without sinning. So just like wiht anyother study of scripture, you have to ask the same questions, why was this written, to who was it written, what were the circumstances.

Why did Moses write this?
What were the clothing men wore?
What was different between the men's clothing and the women's clothing?
And most important to me is why would I insist on following the law when I have Jesus,and the N.T. says that whoever insists on gaining any righteousness from the law iss bound by the law, and there is no sacrifice(salvation in Jesus) for you. You must obtain your salvation by the demands of the law.

If you have some personal conviction to do or not do something, you can not say everyone else(women in this instance) must follow your convivtion or they are sinning. That is not biblical, and is itself a sin. Nonoe sins becasue they do not obey someone elses conviction.

 

Actually, you can take the scripture however you choose to fit in it to your lifestyle. Some wear dresses out of conviction under the verse "the woman shalt not wear that which pertaineth to a man, Duet 22:5, (bytheway it wasn't Moses' Law I think it was God's). Some wear dresses because of personal preference.

If you only take the verse in the New Testament about dressing modestly defined by Webster's as having or showing regard for the decencies of behavior, speech, dress, etc.

Let's discuss decency for a moment shall we! God does not want mankind's gender to be confused this is discussed in Romans 1:24-27 women changing the natural use into that which is against nature and men leaving the natural use of the woman. If you choose to disregard the instruction of Duet 22:5 and put on that which resembles the attire of a man then you have the outward appearance of what Romans chap 1 describes. If you read the rest of the text in 1Tim 2:10 it says "But (which becometh women professing godliness) Can you say that pants on a woman professes godliness?

[ November 24, 2002, 10:20 PM: Message edited by: Walls ]

 

Mickes, you won't find it in the scriptures!

 

I posted an article I found on line once when we were discussing this in the womens forum, here is an exert.

There were three basic articles that were worn by both genders during the Biblical era. The first piece of clothing was called the tunic or the inner garment, and was most commonly made from linen. This would compare to our modern day underwear and was worn next to the skin. This article varied from individual to individual, depending on their station in life. The simplest form of the tunic had no sleeves and was knee-lengthT.his would have been worn be the poorer people and sometimes was their only article of clothing when it was warm. However, this would not do for the upper-class. Their tunics were usually long-sleeved, reaching the ankles and could only be appropriately worn by itself around the house, never out in public. When a person had no garment on except for the tunic, they were often considered to be naked.

The next layer of clothing was called the outer garment, which appropriately was worn on the outside. This article was a piece of square cloth that was wrapped around the body or tied over the shoulders. The two corners that hung over the shoulders were called "skirts" or "wings".(6) According to Jewish law, each corner was to be fringed, together with a blue cord to remind them of the commandments as was instructed, "...you are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel. You will have these tassels to look at and so you will remember all the commands of the Lord..." (Numbers 15:38-39).This garment was very important because it served for many purposes outside of normal clothing. It was used to carry large bundles, to make pledges with, to form the road for Christ on Palm Sunday, and as a blanket by the common man. Thus, when in Deuteronomy 24:12-13 states, "If the man is poor, do not go to sleep with his pledge in your possession. Return his cloak to him by sunset so that he may sleep in it",(7) it is of great importance that this is followed. To keep the outer garment from a poor man over night was considered inhumane and was condemned by the law.

The third main article of attire was called the girdle. Each individual generally had two, one worn on the inside over the tunic and the other was worn over the outer garment to allow free movement. There were two types of girdles, depending on your status in life. The most common type was about six inches across, made of leather, and fastened together on the ends with clasps. The second type, which was more valuable, was made of linen, silk, or embroidered material. It could be wrapped around the waist two to three times and was only about a hands width across. The girdle also served a number of purposes, as did the outer garment. A girdle was made by folding the material in half and then sewing the ends together, thus forming a type of pouch. This pouch could be used as a change purse, which was safe and convenient. It also was used to fasten swords and other objects to the body.(8) Sometimes the girdle would be removed for comfort around the house or when the hands were free to hold the ends of the outer garment. However, it was always worn during business interactions, so that the limbs would not be hindered and the upper garment would not fall off.(9)

Although both genders shared these common articles of similar form and fashion, there were several important differences in dress. The one very distinguishing difference between men and women was that women wore veils of various lengths and types when in public. All women wore them except for maidservants and women of low positions in life. Their clothes were generally of a finer quality and longer in length then the males, which was not exactly unfair, as they were responsible for making their families clothes as well as their own. The women also would embroider clothing, as is mentioned in Judges 5:30, "...colorful garments embroidered, highly embroidered...".(10) They also braided their hair, wore make-up, and jewelry which all set them apart from the men in appearance. The picture to the right displays what some Jewish women may have looked like in their garments and veils.........

...........The rich were not the only individuals to wear clothing of a different nature. There were garments that were specifically for priests, and priests alone, and were actually sanctioned by God in Exodus 28 and 29.. All of the priests wore linen drawers((breeches KJV, trousersNKJV,undergarments NRSV)), which reached from the waist to the thighs (Exodus 28:42).((Today we call them underware)) The next article was a white linen tunic with a checkered pattern, made of one piece with sleeves and reaching the ankles (Exodus 28:39-40, 29:5). Over that came a girdle, four fingers wide, and colorfully embroidered (Exodus 29:39).

All of the priests wore linen drawers((breeches KJV, trousersNKJV,undergarments NRSV)), which reached from the waist to the thighs (Exodus 28:42).((Today we call them underware)) The next article was a white linen tunic with a checkered pattern, made of one piece with sleeves and reaching the ankles (Exodus 28:39-40, 29:5).

The verse people use to say women can not wear pants is Ex.28:42, whent ehy see the word 'breeches' in KJV they believe it is todays modern pants. They do not take it in context as to what this garmet is,and who was to wear it(priests only, who were men), and what the modern counterpart of this article of clothing is,,, underware. So when people use this to say weomen can not wear pants, they mistake the meaning and take verses out of context, and are in effect saying women can not wear underware.
So women can not wear what pretaineth to a man, and use this ver(ex.38:42) to tell what that is that pretains to amn, and say women can not wear pants, then you can not also wear underware.
Take the bible out of context and you gert all messed up. The argument of saying it is a sin for women to wear pants doesn't hold water when you look at whats in the bible and take verses in context. Taking verses out of context you make the bible say anything you want, and many have done, it is very dangerous as it always results in error. If you want to wear dresses only then do so, but don't tell others they are sinning if they wear pants, it just isn't biblical.
Wearing pants is in no way worldly, show that from scripture. It is personal opinion only not scripture and personal opinion should never be taught as if it is scripture, that is adding to scripture.

I cut parts of this article which I orginally posted in the womens forum, and if you want to read the entire thing I bumped ip up so you wouldn't have to look for it. The post is called Clothing in Bible Times.

 

Well, a woman in a short miniskirt sure wouldn't be accused of wearing the attire of a
man.

[ November 24, 2002, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]

 

I want someone to show where in the bible where 'that which pretains to a man' is pants, without taking verses out of context. There are no modern day pants in the bible. Do not add to scripture.

 

What sets Deuteronomy 22:5 apart from the other verses offered in this thread are the words, "for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God."

If something was an abomination to God then, it is still an abomination to God today. God never changes.

Ex 28:42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach: (KJV)

These linen breeches are mentioned a total of 5 times in the Word of God. All five times they are being worn by a man.

I Timothy 2:9 tells us what God expect godly women to wear: "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel , with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"(KJV)

The word "apparel" is actually two Greek words. Kata which means "to put down," and stole which means "a long fitting gown."

God's biblical gender distictive is that men wear "breeches" and women wear "long fitting gowns or robes" (dresses, skirts, etc...)

Four biblical principles must be considered before we decide what to wear.

1. Does it appear evil? 1Thes 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. (KJV)

2. Does it declare your holiness?
1 Peter 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. (KJV)

3. Is it modest?
1 Tim 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. (KJV)

4. Is it gender distinct? Deut 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. (KJV)

We must also remember:
1. God is concerned about the way we dress in both the OT and the NT. Men as well as women need to be concerned.

2. God not only looks on the heart; He looks on the outward man as well.

3. Christians who refrain from certain clothing because of these biblical principles should not think this makes them more spiritual than other Christians.

4. God's Word must always be our guide. Not our conscience or the crowd around us. It makes no difference what others do or say, we must obey God.

 

Katie, we can't use that logic. If that's the logic we go by, then there's a hoop more things we shouldn't discuss, simply because they're not found in the Bible. Mini-skirts, for example, are not specifically mentioned in the Bible, but I think we can all agree that they violate the principle of modesty. We find certain principles that govern our conduct in all things.

The principles regarding modesty and the separation between the sexes are there; beyond the principles, there's nothing more (as in, pants vs. dresses, halter tops vs. veils, etc.).

In this, Katie, I agree with you: We don't let OUR conviction decide what other people do or don't do. I would add: Don't let OUR conviction be a stumbling block to others.

[ November 24, 2002, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: Don ]

 

Have you ever studied what the words MODEST APPAREL actually mean? Modest means neat and in order and apparel means a LONG LOOSE FLOWING GARMENT. 1 Timothy 2:9-15 teaches us about our appearance and attitude towards men. A long loose flowing garment is a dress.
Why wouldn't I want to appear as feminine as possible? If men do not wear dresses then they are for women. I am a woman and dresses are the clothing that clearly distingueshes me from a man. Wouldn't I want to accentuate the fact that I am DIFFERENT FROM A MAN, NOT THE SAME AS THE LYING FEMINISTS WOULD TEACH US. I am not the same and I want to look as much like a woman as I possibly can. Dresses do this in a wonderful way. The message they send is: I am so glad that God created me to be a woman, I am glad I am different from men. I am glad he chose to make me this way. And it is nice to allow men to have clothing that is just for them.

[ November 25, 2002, 12:02 AM: Message edited by: Headcoveredlady ]

 

I agree with Katie!

Sherrie

 

The Webster's Dictionary defines 'apparel' as "clothes; clothing; or embroidery on certain church vestments". No other definition is even hinted at.

And for the record, even after I survived being kicked by a horse and, at 5'8" emerged from the hospital at 117 pounds, so you were in danger of cutting yourself on my bones in passing, I have NEVER been mistaken for a guy one time. I have cleaned house gutters, painted the house, camped with the kids, trained horses, delivered horses, and spent part of a honeymoon on a geological trek, all in jeans. And I was always a lady and never treated as anything else.

Being a women is a whole lot more than what you wear.

I love being in a dress and looking nice. But I'm a lady no matter what I am wearing. I love being a female, too.

By the way, the only time the word 'pant' or 'pants' is used in the Bible is in reference to the tongue hanging out while breathing hard. I checked two concordances to make sure.

 

Dear Helen,
I used Vines Expository Dictionary for the meanings of the words.

HCL