should women wear dresses/skirts all the time

OK, I'll bite...

eaten any lobster or shrimp lately. That is a abomination (Lev 11 or therabouts).

 

Not necessarily. I think the above situation is ridiculous (at least on the surface) but being ridiculous is not the same as being legalistic. It was only legalistic if they told her the act of wearing pants, in and of itself, made her not right with God.

 

Again, it never says this is an abomination to God, but to the Jews. Huge difference. Does God change? BTW, this was an honest question - What does Deut. 22:5 mean? What are its applications today?

 

It only becomes your 'rule' if you decide to join the church. Are they preaching a gospel [another] that salvation requires not wearing pants? If not, and they are indeed preaching salvation by faith alone, then I would not consider them legalistic.

 

My two-cents worth, Barbara R.

We go to a church where the Pastor believes women wear dresses all the time, shirt and tie for men at church, KJVO, no CCM, etc. He is aware of the differences that he and I have regarding the Christian life. For example, My wife wears slacks (not to church), and I am KJV-preferred (not KJVO).

I have been tremendously blessed by the Pastor's preaching and ministry. No church has ever come close to being the blessing that this church, and this pastor, has been to me. For example, I have gone out to leave for work around 6:00 AM and found a note of encouragement from him on the windshield of my car, indicating that he is praying for me regarding a certain situation. After he concludes his sermons, even those where he has thrown in some of things that we disagree on, I have been tremendously appreciative of the fact that I have heard that sermon, on that day, and in that church. There are numerous other examples that I can relate; however, I believe you are getting my point.

Bottom line--if you believe God is leading you away from this church, and you believe it would be spiritually more uplifting in another fellowship, then you should 'run'. If you are not being led to leave, then you will not be happy any where else than under the ministry of this church.

 

Those kind of churches are rare. I hope you will never give him trouble and let his conviction be his alone even though you disagree. Seek ways to encourage him as he has you. Let him know how much he blesses you.

It's like the old saying, "If you find a perfect church don't join it because you will ruin it."

I think disagreement can be very healthy if people take it in the right spirit. "on sharpens iron..."

 

Legalism is adding something to salvation. I am not a legalist b/c the fact that I wear dresses is not what gets me into Heaven. I will be in Heaven b/c of what Jesus Christ did for me on the cross!!!!

 

Many have posted good definitions to legalism; however, in my experience people frequently use it not when discussing justification/salvation, but when dealing with Christian liberty, or should I say, restricting Christian liberty.

scooter

 

Despite what some have said, this is not a "liberty" issue. Liberty is about those things of which Scripture does not speak directly to.

Deut. 22 has nothing to do with pants on women. Let us be consistent here.

1. If pants are strictly for men, then women cannot wear them.
2. If button up dress shirts are strictly for men, then women cannot wear them either.

Would anyone here actually say that women cannot wear button up shirts? Those are after all a man's article of clothing.

If one were to say that a woman's button up shirt is distinguishable from a man's, and that it is okay then, then I will make the same point about pants.

My wife's pants are cut to fit the feminine body, not mine. They are as distinguishable to my pants as her blouses are to my shirts.

The Lord didn't show anyone anything about this. That is a cop out. You people who people pants is wrong are indeed wrong. Again, don't blame God for your own bad theology and lack of ability to exegete.

Women can and do look feminine in pants. Some women can go out of their way to look like tramps, lesbos, etc. Just because some abuse something, doesn't make it wrong.

 

On the other hand, what does it matter if a law practice is or isn't an abomination to God?

If the guiding principle in one's life is the Law that one is under a curse.

Galatians 3
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

It is a commandment given to Israel in the flesh to prevent the eroticism of cross-dressing or transvesticism practised by the Canaanites all around them.

When this commandment was given to Israel, everyone wore robes with the possible exception of the "breeches" of the Levites.

The commandment therefore in all probabilty was a negative mitzvah against clothing that had previously been worn by the opposite sex for the erotic practice of cross-dressing.

But we are not Israel and we are not in the flesh nor under the Law of Moses as a guiding principle of life, but walk by faith being led of the Spirit.

Personally, the Spirit of God has never led me to do any of the works of the flesh.

Any classification of "porneia" commonly translated "fornication" in the KJV is a work of the flesh.

IMO, women wearing slacks is no more the erotic (porneia) practice of cross-dressing than the kilts that Scottish or Irish men wear which look like "skirts" or arabs and their robes which look like "dresses".

The practice of women wearing slacks is a cultural practice here in the states and not erotic just as kilts and long flowing robes are cultural for men elsewhere.

My opinion of course (except for the Scriptures).

HankD

 

This topic debate on Deut. 22:5 and dressing code.

Why not you ride on the time machine travel to Moses' time in year around 1300 B.C. And to see yourself what women and men wear?

I am sure none of men in Moses' time, wear pants. I am no doubt that all men wore dress robe almost same as women wore during Moses' time.

I am not sure what the exactly to see the difference between men and women, what they wore during Moses' time.

Also, more than 100 years ago, none of men in the church wear tie. 50 years ago about 90 to 95% of men attend church, wear tie. Now in year 2004 A.D. about 60% of men attend church, wear tie.

Hey! What about men wear hat in year between 1920's to 1950's? During in that period, there was about 90% of men wear hat while walking on the sidewalk in New York City. Today, about 5% of men wear hat, while walking on the sidewalks in New York City.

See? My point.

The culture and society have been changing through the history. Culture and soceity will be continue changing in the next generation, and go, go on...

Same with English Bible "KJV" have been changing for nearly 400 years. I am sure English Bible will be continuing changing in the next 500 years to 1000 years IF Christ not yet come.

I admit telling you, I do not wear tie while attend church. Is it wrong for NOT to wear tie? What about 150 years ago, none of man wear tie while attned church?

Other word, SHOULD we keep all 400 laws of the Old Testament, also to continue daily offering animal sacrifices today?

Diane is right, that verse tells us, God does not interesting outside, appearance, height of person, only interesting inside person's heart- speak of toward David became anointed to became King.

I would NOT be surprise in the next 200 to 300, the U.S. President would not wear tie, while having meeting, or giving speech in any meetings, or conference.

What about George Washington wore wig or long hair in 1790's A.D.?

I do not against women wear pants, SAME as I do not against women wear dressing, long as both love the Lord, and serving the Lord.

I rather to see women wear loose pant, not tight pant, easy for men to having lust looking at women's butt.

Also, I rather to see women wear dressing or skirt longer over the knee. Because, if they wear skirt shorter above their knee, easier for men to looking at them with lust.

Hey, what about sports??? Should women go skiing in the snow? Should women playing basketball?

I am not against what women playing sports like skiing, basketball, etc. Let them play and have fun.

We cannot force women, what to wear, or to leave church.

Making the rules is not for neccesscary of salvation.

OR... what if a woman feels convict from the Holy Spirit, while wear clothe on, better to obey the Holy Spirit. We cannot asking to woman, why stopping wear dressing/pant. We have to leave them alone. Just be friendly with them, show love to them each other.

I am telling you, that I am against legalism. Because they easy turn people off, and never come to church. I have seen many cases happened often. We better be careful with people.

Remember, ALL baptist churches have different standards. We cannot expect, every baptist churches have the same kind of standard.

But, when we get into heaven, there are no strandard. We all dressing SAME.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

One day Mr. Deacon took Mr. Pastor to Wal-Mart to get sized up for some pants. (It was near Christmas). As they were looking at some comfortable jeans so Mr. Pastor could work in his garden next spring they wondered into the women's section seemly unaware. That's when Mr. Deacon saw the perfect pair of jeans.
"Look, here is a pair that looks great!!"
"No No No deacon boy," Mr. Pastor said, "Those are women's jeans. I can't ware those!!!"
"Didn't you teach us that women are to only ware dresses? Then why would you say these are women's jeans?"

See Barbara we must be careful not to get legalistic in our theology. I promote that men should dress like men and women like women. That is Biblical. I don't think that anyone would mistake you to be a man because you were in pants. Didn't Jesus speak out against adding to His law. And if the movie's are to be believed, didn't Jesus ware what could be considered a dress? Hey; how about those Romans and the Scott's. I know I saw a judge some time back in a robe.

It is so tempting to say "You can't do that!!" when Jesus had a message that is way too simple. repent and be baptized for the remission of sin.

Now that I have said all I said. Please remember that we are our brothers keeper and would not want to be an offence to those whom Christ died for. If you are in a church that insist on a certain dress code, submit to that. Or if God is calling you into a ministry elsewhere then go.

Let me give you an example of what I mean. I belong to a church that thinks consuming alcohol is a sin. I do not believe that. Jesus made "the best" wine at a party. I know it was alcoholic wine because of the head waiters comments. "...you have saved the best for last." He would know the difference between juice and wine. But I don't drink any kind of alcoholic drink so as to not offend my brother.

In His Grace,
Michael
Friendship Baptist Church - Piqua, Oh

 

WHAT?
If you are going to adhere to part of The Law, you must adhere to ALL of The Law. If you mean to say that it is a personal conviction, then that is your opinion. If you are "picking and choosing" which parts of The Law you desire to enforce, then you need to read what the Apostle Paul said about doing that.

Dr. Bob, do you have a link to one of the previous discussions of this Biblical Passage? I think it would be appropriate in this current thread. HankD posted an excellent reply, but you also had a really good one a while ago.

 

Daniel David touched on something I have often wondered about. When this subject is discussed nobody seems to mention any other item of clothing other than pants, dresses and skirts. I wear jackets so does my husband, I wear knitted pull-overs, so does my husband (I think that's what you call them, we Australians call them jumpers),and as Daniel David mentioned, buttoned up shirts. Mine are 'different' just as my pants are 'different'. Why the pre-occupation with pants. Of course modesty plays a part, but I've seen some skirts and dresses worn that are anything but modest. Interesting topic.

God bless,

 

Many of the hyper fundamentalists believe that pants "show the shape of the thigh" and are usually tight and therefore "seduce" men into thinking thoughts they shouldn't. I've never believed that, as my parents worked in the clothing industry owning a clothing store, and there were many styles of pants for women that weren't "revealing".

 

I don't wear pants to church. I also don't chew gum in church.

When I am NOT at church, I wear pants (womens) and I chew gum.

It's a matter of respect - not legalism.

My Pastor believes women should not wear pants. I do not wear them to church out of respect for him.

He knows I wear pants other places (I hide that fact from no one) but he has yet to kick me out of church because of it (been there almost 30 years)...

Just my two cents worth,
§ue

 

Yes, it was the same for my mother and their business partners who owned 1/2 of Christian Brothers Western Stores. The pastor of Faith didn't approve of pants, but knew that the store sold them to women in the church. My mother wore them, as did the partners wife. My mother wears them to this day.
Now, when we were at Fellowship Baptist College, Pastor Coyle would tell the women they couldn't wear pants under any circumstances if they were students, but my wife was required to wear them at the Burger King in Pekin. Brother Scarberry threatened to have her expelled several times, and then both of us, because I would not "force" her to wear a skirt instead or find another job. But, it soon passed over when they couldn't prove their position scripturally. Pastor Coyle, having been a student during my time there in the 1980's knew my position well. But, that is another story for another time.

 

When I look at you, what do I think I see?

If you're a woman with hair so short and mannish clothes so I have to wait till I see the front of you, well, maybe you should consider growing your hair or changing clothes.

If you're a man "in touch with his feminine side" and you wear dresses and/or makeup, well, I think that's pretty well a hands down, universally accepted in the church violation of scripture.

In regards to women wearing dresses only in church I say this, if you wear it during the week, and it's clean, tasteful, and modest, there's nothing wrong with wearing it in church. To say otherwise is, in my mind, hypocritical.

Church services, by no means, should not be a dress down occaision. Quite the contrary. You should be dressed well. I'll even go so far as to say you should wear your best. God's house is a special place. Does it deserve any less than an employer's office? Remember though, someone else's best may not be as rich or fine as yours.

Clean, tasteful, and modest. For either gender that is all that is required.