Should men wear pants only?

Men should look as masculine as possible while being modest too. This is in direct opposition to women who should look as feminine as possible and be modest.

It is satan who has sought to blur the lines and he has acheived this as evidenced by the many threads here claiming that it does not matter what we wear.

 

All those kilt-wearers in "Braveheart" looked masculine to me.

Karen

 

I haven't seen anything here that would lead me to believe that anyone disagrees with your first paragraph. But where are the biblical commands for masculnity and femininity?? The command for modesty is clear. And who gets to define what is feminine and masculine?? That is, and always has been, a cultural definition. There is no reason to believe that was feminine the Bible times was not what was feminine 100 years ago or 50 years or today.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself, I think we need to stick with what Scripture says. If your conscience leads you to a certain standard, then by all means apply it and evalute it in light of Scripture. But do not try to force that standard on others whose conscience is different in light of Scripture. Let's attack the real enemies, not these false enemies.

 

Speaking as a descendant of some of those kilt-wearers, I thank you. I wore combat fatigues for over 20 myself.

 

Pastor Larry,
Yes, I understand that the words masculine and feminine are not there. But, Deuteronomy 22:5 says that it is an abomination for women to wear men's clothing and vice versa. I personally do not believe that God changed His mind as to what is an abomination and what is not.

I think that the feminists were the first to put pants on and the Christian women followed right behind them. I do see this is a problem that is lacking in Christianity, because the distinctions in gender have been blurred.

Not only by the women wearing the pants literally, but figuratively leaving their homes as well for careers and such. I believe it all goes together.


I know there are some ladies who wear pants and are not feminists, I truly believe that. But, I think the wearing of men's clothing began as rebellion.

I know this about hair but: Revelation 9:7-8 "And their faces were as the FACES OF MEN, And they had HAIR AS THE HAIR OF WOMEN..."


The locusts that came from the pit of hell have men's faces and women's hair.

 

I don't think so either. But Deut 22:5 does not refer to women wearing pants. It refers to transvestism. That is a horse of a different color. To use that to support women not wearing pants is an abuse of Scripture on two levels: 1) That is not talking about women wearing pants; 2) We are not under the Law of Israel because we are in the church, not Israel.

But you cannot prove this. The evidence in fact leans against it. Whoever might have started women wearing pants, the meaning that they are invested with now is a far different meaning. To say that feminists were the first to do it is irrelevant. It just doesn't matter.

Some people run off and get married as a sign of rebellion. But you are not forbidding marriage for all. In teh same way, do not accuse everyone of the same motives for a particular act.

Again, this is irrelevant. John is a giving a description, not a command. There is no valid theological or exegetical basis for taking this Scripture and making it out to be about gender distinctions. That is an improper use of Scripture.

 

In the US, women began wearing pants as a matter of course during WWII. The men went to war and many women went to work in factories to build the munitions of war. It was a change made of practicality, not a change to rebel against their husbands.

 

Gina, I think for a man, he needs to be masculine as possible and stay away from girly colors. (lol) I wouldn't necessarily say it was a sin if a man had on a pretty purple shirt, because I have seen them on a man and it was totally masculine. I think fabrics that are clingy are wrong and he shouldn't wear clothes too tight. I don't see anything wrong with a man in a tank top in appropriate circumstances (he's at home working in the yard). I see nothing wrong with a man wearing Bermuda or dress shorts. I've never seen men's legs that were worth lusting over! lol I think it's RIDICULOUS for church leaders to expect little boys to play in 100 degree heat with pants on.

hsmom3

 

I don't think so either. But Deut 22:5 does not refer to women wearing pants. It refers to transvestism. That is a horse of a different color. To use that to support women not wearing pants is an abuse of Scripture on two levels: 1) That is not talking about women wearing pants; 2) We are not under the Law of Israel because we are in the church, not Israel.

But you cannot prove this. The evidence in fact leans against it. Whoever might have started women wearing pants, the meaning that they are invested with now is a far different meaning. To say that feminists were the first to do it is irrelevant. It just doesn't matter.

Some people run off and get married as a sign of rebellion. But you are not forbidding marriage for all. In teh same way, do not accuse everyone of the same motives for a particular act.

Again, this is irrelevant. John is a giving a description, not a command. There is no valid theological or exegetical basis for taking this Scripture and making it out to be about gender distinctions. That is an improper use of Scripture. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]So, according to you it is ok for a woman to wear clothing intended for men and for men to wear clothing intended for women?

It absolutely does matter that the early cross-dressers were feminists. That IS the crux of the matter. I do not believe for one second that godly Christian women were the first ones to wear men's clothing.

That is absolutely ridiculous to claim that one should not marry because of someone elses circumstances. God ordained marriage. But, He never ordained men to be effeminate. In fact the effeminate men WILL NOT inherit the kingdom of God.

John is giving a description, yes but a description of what? A demon from hell who has a a man's face and women's hair. I think that is very siginifcant. Satan has done a great job in getting most people used to unisex clothing and appearances.

 

In the US, women began wearing pants as a matter of course during WWII. The men went to war and many women went to work in factories to build the munitions of war. It was a change made of practicality, not a change to rebel against their husbands. </font>[/QUOTE]So, you are saying that the fruits we see from the past generation or two are good?

 

It seems to me that in biblical times, men wore long loose gowns, and I am not sure when that changed, but some in the Middle East and Africa still wear those garments.

In England, women started to wear trousers....they always wore pants (undergarments)..during the war when they had to "man" the factories.....I guess they got used to the practicality of wearing trousers in the real world.

Cheers,

Jim

Oops! I just noticed Swaimj's post. We must be on the same wave length.......Not sure that is good Swaimj..given my reputation

 

These clothing threads make me laugh. They focus on what the rules should be, rather than why the rules should be in place. It's the Christian version of "building fences around Torah".

 

I am sorry about that, please accept my apologies.

 

No Reeses, but I just made some rice crispie treats. Would you like some of those? I guess the men's clothing issue is not as interesting...

 

I went straight into the living room and told my wife that one.

BTW, you might want to rethink that fashion advice aspect of your ministry though.

Gina, I understand the seeming double standard. But, really it is more of a difference between the natures of men and women. There are lots of exceptions, of course, and varying degrees, but a much higher percent of men have more difficulty in this matter than women. Therefore, more threads with men blaming women for their sin.

Lust is internal, enticement is external.

 

I guess that is why it says that it is good for a man not to touch a woman in 1 Cor 7. She is enticed by his touch.

And that is why it says women are to dress modestly in 1 Tim 2 because men are enticed by what they see.