Women in pants

maybe by your definition, but that wreaks too much of a private interpretation.

 

Count me in that number!

Why bother changing the channel because of something inappropiate when all you have to do is NOT let "IT" into your home!:smilewinkgrin:

 

I plan to eventually get around to posting to a few responses on this thread.

Just "keep your britches on" in the meantime.

Ed

 

So in the church it is all about you but in the world its all about them?

Gal. 6:10, "So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith."

Jn. 13:35, "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

 

Lol

You sound like me, Anne. I purchase ONE dress for Sunday...just got one in the online outlet store at Coldwater Creek. This will be worn only on Sundays, hung up during the week in the spring and summer months...hoping to get six to seven months wear out of a $29.00 dress!

My favorite outfit for cleaning out the coop are my farmer's overalls. I LOVE them. I dig out the chicken shavings every month and deposit them into my compost pile. Anyone who advocates dresses only has clearly never been covered with chicken poo!

Spring gardening in the early spring is really messy here...LOTS of mud, etc....I like to get right into the garden and can frankly look like Charlie Brown's "pigpen" by the end of the afternoon! MUCH more modest to be kneeling and digging in farmer's overalls than a dress, LOL!

Wearing dresses, not wearing dresses, in my opinion, is a liberty issue.

We are to be known for the love we have for one another, not by the dresses we wear.

 

A very loud AMEN from this corner. It is sad that so may evidence a lack of love for the brethren by their judgmental, holier-than-thou spirit.

 

Ever notice those who preach such things the loudest are guilty of the same things they preach against.

Romans 2 teaches the same thing.

 

I totally agree. It has been my experience that those who focus so much on the outward clothing lack the inward clothing of love and humility and meekness.

 

Speakinga TV...My last then-living living great-GM refused to have a TV in her home, calling it an instrument of the devil.(But she had radios!) her relatives mentioned this to her pastor, who said, "Leave this to me".

One day soon after, he paid GM a visit, and as he was preparing to leave, he said, "Be sure to catch out TV program. I preach a different sermon on it than I preach before the live congregation" GM said she had no TV and why. The pastor explained to her that, same as any other tool such as a knife, or radio, a TV could be used for evil or for good...for instance, many a shut-in who couldn't attend church could still participate in church services thru TV.

Soon, GM had a TV, which greatly added to her enjoyment of her final years on earth.

Oh, yeah...men wore something like dresses or skirts for thousands of years with no prob. Men & women dressed MUCH more-alike in mosta the world than they do now. Why the big hick-hack over womens' pants now? Seemsta me this is just another distraction from the devil attempting to alienate the brethren within the church!

 

Maybe he was attracted to your "perfume"?:laugh: (sorry, couldn't resist)

What else do you expect from a majority of heathens in NY? But if you did maintain this godly appearance before them, wouldn't it be easier to win a few?:godisgood:

 

Even if I've worked in them a few days?:tongue3:

 

How twisted your mind must be.
No! It's ALL about HIM! at church. Out in the world it's all about getting THEM to HIM!

Yep, at least you have used the Bible.:smilewinkgrin: Since you used Scripture, now explain what your use means?

Yep, and I love all women whether they wear pants or not, but to avoid temptation, I do choose not to stick around very long if they are immodestly dressed.

A modest dress is always more modest than any pants on women.:thumbs:

 

I Opinions 3:8

So slacks equal immodesty? Once again, that's man's opinion, not God's. If that's your definition of modesty, that's fine for you, but I don't appreciate being labled "immodest" simply because I do not adhere to some silly man-made rule. That is casting judgement on me, and that's God's job, not anybody else's.

 

Just a few verses down from the passage forbidding a woman to wear "that which pertaineth to a man": is

Deuteronomy 22

11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.​

I had a pastor friend who had this "no slacks for women" rule in the church he pastored.​

I showed him this verse just 6 verses down verse 5 which he based the rule upon and asked him if he had the ushers check that everyone attending was also wearing non-blended apparel (all wool or all cotton).​

He called me a trouble-maker.​

HankD​

 

HA! You trouble maker you! :tongue3:

My closet is full of blends . . .

 

Funny thing, they now have mirrors in department stores so a woman can see what a man is looking at when she walks by in a pair of pants.:tongue3:

 

Nice dodge, but the dress, appropiate dress, would have a greater impact than a woman witnessing in a pair of pants.:thumbsup: