T
Top
Guest
The more I think of this cult-like movement, the more I thank God I'm out of it.
It is NOT a sin for any woman to wear a pair of pants. What a crazy belief.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Half a pair, now that's another story.
I have been a member of 8 very conservative IFB churches and have never heard anyone say it is a sin for a woman to wear pants. Apparently, there are plenty of you out there who have heard it.
I
Inhisdebt
Guest
"It was a real blessing to see the men not wearing their wives dresses here on work day"
From a Tony Hutson sermon - reminded me of Foghorn Leghorn the way he repeated it as the amens got louder..
It's out there, not as strong as 20yrs ago but still a big issue for some - most often in heavy pastoral authority churches.
From a Tony Hutson sermon - reminded me of Foghorn Leghorn the way he repeated it as the amens got louder..
It's out there, not as strong as 20yrs ago but still a big issue for some - most often in heavy pastoral authority churches.
T
Top
Guest
JrChurch said:
I've been a member of two and they said it was. There are plenty of people within the IFB Church who believe such things.
Have you ever heard of Fairhaven? Listen to one of his sermons and you'll hear it for the first time.
J
jimmudcatgrant
Guest
First, that isn't a cult-like movement, it's a legalistic movement. It was big 25 years ago in this area, but only a handful of large churches think that way anymore in my area. Just like the pharisees, the IFB used traditions to justify legalism-that women weren't to wear men's clothing per Deuteronomy 22:5 (KJV)Top said:
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 law was for Israel and had to do with what we would call cross dressing today or the reversing of sexual roles, imo, not just that a women's clothes resembles that of a man. I'm not sure who started it, but in the name of separation, it was adopted by a lot of IFB churches in the day. Not all, however, as some refused to go along with it as it didn't make sense. Church members believe whatever their preacher tells them for the most part, and you are considered divisive (a BIG sin in legalistic societies) if you didn't. It's the same today. We have replaced legalism with the emergent church, the social gospel, etc., etc. People always go too far one way or the other.
I grew up in a church that taught this, and attended another IFB church that taught it for several years.
I also know several people who used to believe it, but no longer do. Most are still Christians and loving and serving God, despite them or their wives wearing pants.
I do wear dresses and skirts about 90% of the time, because I am more comfortable in them, but I do not think it's a sin to wear pants or that how I wear makes me any sort of a better Christian than a woman in jeans or shorts and a tank top. Then again, I'm one of those weird old-school types anyway - certain people would look at me and assume I'm one of those legalists because I do lean heavily toward dresses and jean skirts and usually wear a headcovering during worship.
I also know several people who used to believe it, but no longer do. Most are still Christians and loving and serving God, despite them or their wives wearing pants.
I do wear dresses and skirts about 90% of the time, because I am more comfortable in them, but I do not think it's a sin to wear pants or that how I wear makes me any sort of a better Christian than a woman in jeans or shorts and a tank top. Then again, I'm one of those weird old-school types anyway - certain people would look at me and assume I'm one of those legalists because I do lean heavily toward dresses and jean skirts and usually wear a headcovering during worship.
T
The Real Bob
Guest
T-Bone said:Yeah...that is worth considering. :
ROFLOL! Ouch!
T
The Real Bob
Guest
Frag said:
Well, it's pretty hard to argue with that kind of logic.
Apparently Mick changed his name to Frag. So the denbate is over.
ROFLOL!
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,144
- Points
- 113
Would you allow a man to teach Sunday School with a suit made of wool and linen mixed together?
8)
8)
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,144
- Points
- 113
Frag said:
That would be consistent with your belief.
If you do that, call me and i'll come and watch!
Timothy said:
The bigger question is would frag even let a woman teach a Sunday school class regardless of what she was wearing?
;D
J
jbh28
Guest
When people say it's a "sin" for a women to wear pants, it's usually because the leadership has failed to teach the biblical truth. What can happen over time is application of biblical truth will replace the actual biblical truth. It is biblical for men to dress like men and women to dress like women. So how do we apply that today in 2012 America? Someone asked if a man could wear a dress. Is a dress typically believed to be a man's garment? No, of course not. Is a pair of pants typically believed to be a woman garment? Yes, of course. Pants are an item of clothing that both men and women wear. So it's fine for a woman to wear pants. Now, many years ago women only wore dresses and never pants. But that's not the case today. Anyone that teaches that today is elevating application to a biblical truth level.