It is NOT a sin for any woman to wear a pair of pants. What a crazy belief.

[Winston]

Yep, we did and do.  What's your point?  "Let's make sure we live so everyone knows it!"

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Matthew 5:16

See your good works not your dresses

So as long as a Christian woman is doing good works, a string bikini becomes acceptable? 


Oh the desperation....

Who said string bikini?  He said "not your dresses".  This sounds like typical legalistic hype. Portray your opponent as extreme and laugh at him.

 

[ALAYMAN]

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]First of all, good to 'see you'.  [/quote]

Likewise.  And it's good to be seen.

In my day,

When pterodactyls roamed the earth, and fire was a recent advent?

we couldn't play cards or attend movies, which also seem acceptable among the fundamentalists of today!

Compromisers.


<big grin>

I believe the principle of a woman not being 'manly' in appearance can be found in the NT as well.

Tell it to Janet Reno, or Joyce Meyers.

BUT, simply wearing pants doesn't qualify, IMHO.

The whole discussion lends itself to subjectivity, not worth dividing over with brethren.

 

[brianb]

I wonder if any one like Frag has good reading comprehension. Deuteronomy 22:5 doesn't just say the mere act is an abomination but the persons doing it are an abomination. All that do so are an abomination (which basically means that God hates those do such things) - at least that is what the law teaches and I believe every one is under the law to some degree unless they have been saved and are under grace and this grace teaches them to keep this commandment which is a command against transvestitism and not what Frag is saying. If Frag was correct in his interpretation then most women should be afraid of God's judgement on them - this is a serious matter. And the Bible also says there are other things that the Lord hates and are an abomination unto him - Proverbs 6:16-19.

 

[JrChurch]

2 Corinthians 4:6,7    For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.  But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

2 Corinthians 4:10  Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.

We are to be a separate and holy people who manifest Jesus Christ in our earthen vessels.  We should be concentrating on the treasure and not on ourselves.

 

[brianb]

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.

Thank you.  At least your honest.  But what you are saying is that you will allow the culture to set the standard...what is acceptable in the world is what should be acceptable for the Christian.

The culture is not to set our standards - Bible principles are to set our standards in all areas of our life -- even dress!

Could you then show us in the Bible where pants or slacks are only men's wear?  You say they are because of the cultural influence, not because the Bible even deals with the issue of pants on women.  You contradicted yourself...oooppps!

Pants are a relatively new invention for people in Western society just under 2000 years ago. Most likely people who lived in the coldest climates such as Eskimos also made something to cover their legs that would resemble pants out of animal skins before that but pants in early western society by whatever name they gave them are relatively recent. Also the pants they had then are not the same as the pants we have today. It was men of the world who gave us pants; God gave Adam and Eve coats or tunics of animal skins - so God must either favor coats or he is indifferent to what men wear outside of gender distinctions and modesty - We know God must have made those coats modest and with some difference between them but they were both coats. And that is all they wore. God didn't give Adam a pair of pants and Eve a skirt to go with their coats.

 

[AresMan]

Yep, we did and do.  What's your point?  "Let's make sure we live so everyone knows it!"

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Matthew 5:16

See your good works not your dresses

So as long as a Christian woman is doing good works, a string bikini becomes acceptable? 


Oh the desperation....

So, pants and a string bikini are equivalent.

Got it.

 

[Inhisdebt]

There is a ditch line on both sides of the road. IFB, SOL Church with the non preaching on any biblical instruction on dress (regardless of your personal take) to make sure no one is rubbed the wrong way and the offerings are good. Here is the other ditchline - in attendance sitting next to my wife.
  Lady in her early 40's wearing a mini - mini skirt. She is headed for the choir loft 2 minutes before show time and about the 4 step up, the skirt goes up high with the step and the bright pink thong is gleaming for all to see. The old guy in the row in front of us got punched by his wife for looking - best laugh I have had in a long time. Now the big rift is about getting the Choir robes to prevent this ???
  So my two cents on the pants debate - Modesty reigns on all dress - Even at my work, there are minimum skirt lengths and rules over exposure of breasts - no jeans and business suit type slacks for women - no visible tatoos and only ear rings, no face scrapnel. If a work place sees this as professional attire when representing the emplotyer, should not a church choir at least have the same standards when representing the King of Kings??

 

[Winston]

 

[Top]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

 

[T-Bone]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Yeah it is hard to tell that those are slacks for women :...can you imagine if a guy wore those...everybody knows what they would be thinking, and it would not be that he is a "manly man". 8)

 

[Top]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Yeah it is hard to tell that those are slacks for women :...can you imagine if a guy wore those...everybody knows what they would be thinking, and it would not be that he is a "manly man". 8)

Very hard to tell.  This is why we have no REEEEEVIIIIIVille!  God is not going ot heal our land if we keep on letting our women wear such things!  Arrrggg!  Here comes the locusts!

"If my Americans will stop wearing pants, go to Thursday night soooul train winning, seek my word out-of-context, then I shall hear from yo, and heal your America...or whatever land you are living in"

2 Opinions 7:14

 

[Winston]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Yeah it is hard to tell that those are slacks for women :...can you imagine if a guy wore those...everybody knows what they would be thinking, and it would not be that he is a "manly man". 8)

that he is John travolta in Saturday night fever?

 

[T-Bone]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Yeah it is hard to tell that those are slacks for women :...can you imagine if a guy wore those...everybody knows what they would be thinking, and it would not be that he is a "manly man". 8)

that he is John travolta in Saturday night fever?

I rest my case!

 

[brianb]

There is a ditch line on both sides of the road. IFB, SOL Church with the non preaching on any biblical instruction on dress (regardless of your personal take) to make sure no one is rubbed the wrong way and the offerings are good. Here is the other ditchline - in attendance sitting next to my wife.
  Lady in her early 40's wearing a mini - mini skirt. She is headed for the choir loft 2 minutes before show time and about the 4 step up, the skirt goes up high with the step and the bright pink thong is gleaming for all to see. The old guy in the row in front of us got punched by his wife for looking - best laugh I have had in a long time. Now the big rift is about getting the Choir robes to prevent this ???
  So my two cents on the pants debate - Modesty reigns on all dress - Even at my work, there are minimum skirt lengths and rules over exposure of breasts - no jeans and business suit type slacks for women - no visible tatoos and only ear rings, no face scrapnel. If a work place sees this as professional attire when representing the emplotyer, should not a church choir at least have the same standards when representing the King of Kings??

20 years ago people would have thought you were making that story up.

 

[brianb]

I've noticed that there are few responses from women in this thread. Where are they? At the other FFF?

 

[brianb]

I wonder how the IFBx view compares with the UPC view
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/united_pentecostal_church.html

 

[Raine]

I've noticed that there are few responses from women in this thread. Where are they? At the other FFF?

We're over in the ladies' forum talking about guns, hunting, and recipes. Looks like the men have the dresses covered.  ???

 

[BALAAM]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Are you sure that this isn't Frag?

 

[T-Bone]

Oh, this is such a sin!

Evil wicked pants on women!

Are you sure that this isn't Frag?

Okay...where is the windex?

 

[JrChurch]

We're over in the ladies' forum talking about guns, hunting, and recipes. Looks like the men have the dresses covered.  ???

That made me laugh!!!