Women: to wear or not to wear pants?

Hi Krispy,

I'd love to have a discussion about this because I'm curious about where this comes from.

I hope this would be a profitable and edifying discussion for searching the will of God in this matter and not just out of curiosity.

Here is one encouraging and beautiful testimony with open and searching heart for the Lord's work - [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=15724&forum=35&start=40&viewmode=flat&order=0]Testimony 1[/url]

And here is also other testimony for the Glory of God - [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=16212&forum=44&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0]Testimony 2[/url]

Also other wonderful testimony - [url=http://moriefamily.com/03%20Testimony.htm]Testimony 3[/url] (Standards for the Home Part)

Does anyone have this conviction?

Yes, my church has the conviction that women should wear dresses and skirts (not pants).

I would like also to share the personal testimony of my mother (with her permission):

I will tell you a little background about her. One year after my conversion, she became Christian also. Her life was completely transformed.
She is dressmaker, she is doing this all her life, from a little girl until now. Now, I don't know is this practice in US, not that here is so common practice, people are buying clothes from stores, but there are someone for example coming to my mother, with desire of specific model in their heads, and she is making this dress or skirt( and pants in the past).

Very soon after her conversion, the Lord convicted her about wearing pants and quickly she stopped wearing pants. And almost every women in our church don't wear pants, mostly long skirts.
And this is very rear to be seen among Christians today, most churches would consider you legalistic.

Now, not so long after that, she stopped sewing short skirts and other unmodest dresses (very open etc). Of course that cost her a lot, because maybe 30-40% of requests were such. But she took stand for that, and when costumers were coming she testified to them why she is not sewing such dresses and she did share her testimony about how the Lord enter her life and transformed her thinking and action. Most of her costumers were going out our house with bibles and gospel tracts.

After that she had a bit struggle sewing a pants (for women), and she decided also not to sew pants, since she is not wearing them. Of course that caused decreasing of her customers and of course significant smaller income, but she took stand for that, it cost her , but obedience costs everywhere and anytime. But the Lord blessed her in so many other ways. Now she is continuing to sew wonderful modest dresses and skirts for the glory of God.

May the Lord bless your heart,
Kire

Deut 22:5 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. (KJV)

This would usually be the verse that these churches use to justify this teaching.

Now, there are cultures around the world throughout history where women have worn pants, historically, and they were not considereded men's clothing. It is our own western mentality that women's clothing = dress and men's = pants.

In fact, when the time that this verse was written, both men and women wore virtually the same things. They wore an undergarment, a robe and a tunic. Women would sometimes wear veils or head coverings. But besides accents and colors we're lead to the impression that the form of the clothing that they took was virtually identical, and not in any way related to what we would consider women's clothing today.

In fact, I think the verse isn't meant to discourage the wearing of cloths as much as it is about adopting the nature, attitudes and position of the other sex. I don't think that anyone in this forum would disagree that men of God should act like... men! And that women of God should act like, well, women.

Now acting like a woman doesn't mean that you're always feint or you can't carry your weight... no actually the opposite. Wasn't it Rebekah who watered 10 camels? Have you ever stopped to think how much a camel drinks (she had to lift that much water out of the well).

The verse is intended to discourage unnatural gender roles.

Wearing pants is cultural. When the bible was written, even men wore dresses... well robes. The writer of this verse didn't have pants in mind, he most likely wasn't wearing anything that would be associated with pants in the modern sense of the idea.

Does anyone have this conviction? I'd love to have a discussion about this because I'm curious about where this comes from.

I think we all agree that modesty if of utmost importance. Is it that they consider pants immodest? Certainly skin tight jeans and stuff are out of the question for a Christian woman, but what about pant suits, loose fitting pants, capris, etc?

I don't think it bad for a Church to support modesty, and even say that some things are inmodest. I think if they truly out obeying God and because this what has put each of the women then I think it is a wonderful thing. If they Love God then they would understand that your wife dosn't have the same convictions. It might be good, to know why all wear the dress?

Does anyone have this conviction?
yes I do, I think in alot ways plants are inmodest. We just like wearing them. I guess my rule is if make even one guy stumble then I shouldn't wear it. after going to colllege and looking at all the plants the women were weraing God convicted me, that I need to wear dress.
I think we don't how bad they can be sometimes. I know I was blind to fact. 100 years ago there would of been no promble. We got so far away from wearing dress, now its wride to think about wearing them all the time. But I think it is a very good thing.
So yes I could see saying that plants are inmodest.

charlene

Months ago I heard a wordly commentator making program and investigation why today women are not dressing like women. And he was asking women, why they wear pants. It was quite interesting to hear how one man who is not Christian and not know the bible to make such comments. And where the Church stands in all of this?
Average fellow from the world years ago I believe was dressing more modesty than average Christian today. I remember my grandmother and other older women giving comments of sort, 'Son is it not shame today women to be dressed like men?'
The standard has fallen so low.

I decided to not wear pants most of the time for modesty reasons. However, I still wear pants when I do martial arts. I tried to do a high kick in a really loo
se skirt, and it didn't turn out to be as loose as I thought it was. *kabam* on the floor. haha. But dude, every time I go out some man approaches me so I figure I need to be able to defend myself. I do wear skirts biking and skating or working. There are several skirts that I've seen designed for girls who like horseback riding. But in everything else I wear long skirts. Much below my knee at least.
But I'm totally cool with chicks who wear pants regularly. It's a matter of the heart. Nowadays it is just so normal to wear pants. Loose fitting pants, capris, and pantsuits can be very modest. But in my very humble opinion, there is nothing more modest and feminine than a long skirt. But some women don't find them as comfortable or practical as I do. And I can see that...
I do have a habit of gawking at both men and women who wear tight clothes though. I'd be really sad if that offended someone (I gawk at a lot of things... lol). I mean, I personally think its immodest. I wouldn't think that someone who did it was a heathen though. But if I was close with them I'd probably ask them if they ever considered whether their clothes were modest or not.
As to where it comes from, basically tradition. I mean women didn't start wearing pants until well, I don't know but pretty recently. You look at a bathroom sign and the woman has a skirt on and the man has pants. When women domineer their husband people even now say "she wears the pants in the family".
So... just in case some ladies are on here that love long skirts, there is this really neat site: hannahlise.com. I've ordered a ton from them. They're great.

Edit: I wanted to mention that I don't go to a church that does that. All the females wear pants except me.

Had anyone ever run into this? Does anyone have this conviction? I'd love to have a discussion about this because I'm curious about where this comes from.

Actually, it just depends on the times you live more than anything. Modesty is very important. How to achieve modesty is a matter of debate and preference. I was raised that make-up was a sin. ;-)

When I was a child I went to summer camp with our Pentecostal churches. They were ultra-holiness. And I mean ultra-holiness. In years past literally everything that could be considered fun was a sin. No kidding here. Softball was a sin so it could not be played at camps. Instruments in churches were considered sin- even a pitch pipe before the days of Finney. It may be astonishing to some to know that there was a time when men were expected to wear a wig to preach? Later wearing a tie was a sin and then not wearing one was a sin.

I could go on for hours on this stuff. They were known here in Missouri as holiness or hell preachers. High heels were sounding brass and tinkling symbols. TV was of the devil (of course). Couples were not allowed to show PDA. Anyone know that phrase? Public Display of Affection. If they wanted to hold hands they had to hold onto a stick between them. But in 1979 I went to this camp and swimming was allowed- just [u]not[/u] co-ed. This was a good thing. A large fence surrounded the pool. None could see in. We as boys still had to swim in full length pants and a t-shirt. Ever go recreational swimming in jeans and a shirt? Been there- done that.

The problem with these radical concepts that were quite silly really is that people cast them off almost completey and we went the other direction. Almost all of the holiness or hell preachers backslid but maybe one. Why? They said they could not live their own standard. Coffee is a sin so the older ladies warmed hot water and put cream and sugar in lest they offend God. Etc. etc. My great great grandma is said that none ever saw above her ankle or her wrist. She was an Methodist street preacher in Cole Camp, MO in the early 1900's. But this is NOT holiness. Holiness is conformity to the person of Jesus Christ.

I mention all these things with tremendous respect for those who held sincerely these convictions. In my time I have seen basketball goals set up in the sanctuary for ball before and after church and men wearing shorts to service. Many times women get their groove on to come to the house of God- especially if it is a youth event. I never understood such things? Men and women sin- but devils [i]tempt[/i] to sin. I think that is a good line.

People have sense enough to know whether they are man or woman if they are [i]dividing the worship[/i] in the house of God. If you dress in ANY way that seeks to attract attention to yourself whether in modesty or not I cannot help but believe it is sin. Will God share the glory in His house? Women tell me there is little more seductive than a [i]sharp dressed man[/i]. A man in a sharp suit. Totally covered- but alluring all the more. Same with a woman. I have heard men say that a woman dressed nice is more enticing than one dressed as a street walker. I believe he is right. Cheap is cheap is cheap is cheap.

So, for my 2 cents, I would say for all of us that we should never dress in a way that seeks to entice. This is not a statement about what you are wearing- but of your intentions in wearing it.

I'm all for people following their convictions, but when it becomes a thing where they look down their noses at people who may not share their convictions... thats sin

Amen.

Wow, what a terrific thread. I have really had my eyes opened to some things I had not considered.

I think Robert hit on something that will always be hard to deal with. What causes one to stumble may not even be noticed by another.

I remember having to read The Razor’s Edge by W. Somerset Maugham back in school. While riding in the back seat of a car, a lady is set aflame so to speak by watching the muscle movement in the hand and arm of the man in the front seat.

Should we also wear long sleeves and gloves?

Of course I’m not serious, but I have realized that what I don’t consider a big deal may very well be a huge stumbling block to another.

Well, I'm not sure I'll say much that hasn't been said already. But I'll give it a whirl.

As you may know from past threads, that my family and I also home church. All of the ladies both wear dresses and cover their heads. This is not because of rules and regulations, but biblical convictions.

Now, we are a very diverse group. Many families come from very conservative churches: Old order Amish, old order Mennonite, Beachy Amish, Conservative Mennonite. These women from their testimonies are very modest and feel there's no need to change. Half of us come from more mainstream churches: Missionary and Nazarene. My wife and I were punk (or gothic, today) for quite some time. One sister that came from a Nazarene church was a high-school cheerleader. I would say, from their testimony, the change is based on biblical modesty, gender distinction (Deut.), separation from the world, and a lack of desire to attract men's eyes. As an aside, none of the women wear makeup or jewelry. I would be surprised if any would ever dye their hair. Again they would say this is based on biblical conviction. They would also say that, in the garden, God covered Adam and Eve's nakedness. Of course, how much that was we don't know. I'm sure it was more than their genitals.

I'll speak of my family now. It seems the leading of the LORD in our lives, toward the world, is basically disconnectedness. On issues of dress, my wife began to understand what men will lust after--flesh, hair and form. She started to understand that other adornments serve to lure or draw men's eyes to the areas that men will lust after. Of course, this wasn't news to me, I am a liberated porn addict--Praise and glory to our GOD! Women have been conditioned in our culture that beauty is everything--the more revealing the better. Men have been conditioned that if it's beautiful it's sexually gratifying, therefore lust after and even pursue it.

Women will say, if he's lusting it's his problem. It's a stumbling block issue. It's just as wrong to lust as it is to be the lure, the object of lust. Please note, I said lure, whether conscious or unconscious, if your baiting the hook there's a measure of guilt. In Matthew it says that if a man lusts after a woman even in his heart he's committed adultery with her. In 1 Cor., Ephesians, Galatians and Revelation it says that adulterer's will not inherit God's kingdom and be partakers in Hell. How much more is she a partaker who allows the man to stumble because of her. Lk 17:1-2 "Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." Romans 14:13 "Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way."

I've unfortunately had plenty of opportunity to lust after women. All by my own choice of course. Porn makes it real easy to lust. However, I've also had plenty of opportunity from women who unwittingly lured my eyes. Probably these women would have been offended if I would have told them my secret sin. I'm sure they wouldn't have desired to be the cause of that reaction.

Sisters, I do hope that this post hasn't offended you. It's just my experience and that from one man. However, ask yourselves--Are there hidden or unconscious motives for your dress? Is there some thrill of appealing the eyes of men? Do you like to be "noticed"? Please, be aware if you are causing a man to stumble.

KRISPY--don't know if any of my rambling has helped. Hope at least it exposes you to another point of view. GOD BLESS!

Hello...

As a young man (recently married), I might interject that loose fitting pants might actually be MORE modest than certain types of dresses.

I have been to churches where the women were treated with contempt because of the specific "moral" standards set by the local church. As a teen, I decided to become a "voting" junior member of our local church. During the same meeting with Church elders, a lady was openly questioned about an incident in which she wore jeans a few years prior. She couldn't even remember the incident. This woman was known in the congregation for her wonderful love for Jesus. Ironically, she was rejected because of those pants -- and I became a junior member even before I was truly saved (and was still quite the agnostic).

At what point should a congregation create specific rules for dress? The Bible is unclear in this aspect. There are many New Covenant verses pertaining to modesty -- but none including specifics. Why? Perhaps that matter is best left between the individual and her relationship with God. I don't care if you wear a Shi'ite Muslim type of veiled covering from head to foot -- there will always be someone who doesn't feel that your outfit is perfectly modest.

The problem with modesty is that no two people can typically agree on a "set of rules." One individual might believe that their clothing is modest -- while another individual is already rolling his/her eyes at the outfit. Of course, there are definite breaches to common understandings of modesty. Some practices are almost universally agreed upon concerning certain practice such as tight jeans and pants or short skirts/dresses/shorts. But the specifics concerning whether or not a dress is "too short" because it exposes someone's ankle can be debated.

I feel the liberty to wear cargo shorts. In the hot south Texas sun, the temperature can reach excruciating levels with stifling humidity. The shorts allow me to walk outdoors in relative comfort. I feel the liberty to wear them to school, the grocery store -- and even work (on occassion). I don't feel that it is a sin for me to wear them -- but I would never wear them as an purposed obstacle to others. Herein lies a problem: Some believers claim that they are an "obstacle" or a "stumbling block" when in reality they are merely a particular preference.

My newlywed wife was a public school teacher. My wife is completely devout in her faith and relationship with Christ. She is a very modest individual with a background in Spanish holiness churches (filled with rules and regulations concerning hair, dress, etc...). Yet my wife does not feel any guilt nor conviction for wearing nice, loose fitting pants to work. She is now a college professor. She more than meets the requirements for dress, and is often commended for her attire. Still, she has encountered believers who would chide her for her dress while also questioning her relationship with God. I have literally encountered women that rolled their eyes and stared at her pants while my wife shared her testimony.

Personally, I would not attend a church that held such specific rules and regulations for attire. It is good and necessary for a Church to call for Biblical modesty. However, since the Word is not specific, neither should our rules for involvement contain specific peculiarities for dress. It is easy to take the church out of the world -- but it is much more difficult to take the world out of the church.

:-)

I was wondering if any of y'all are familiar with the Duggar family (16 children) in Arkansas. I've watched several programs about them on TLC (and Discovery Health) and I just love them!! Their testimony and their love for God are so obvious.

Anyway, the mother and girls have very long hair, and wear dresses/skirts almost all the time . . . when the girls do things like play ball with their brothers, or go horseback riding, they wear jeans or pants under their dresses. They wear minimal jewelry and almost no makeup (that I can tell). Anyway, whenever I see a program about them, I realize how sweet and fresh the girls seem . . . the fashions/makeup/hairstyles that most American girls wear are garish in comparison. And it makes me wish our culture went back to simplicity of style, and clear-cut gender distinctions that it used to have.

By the way, the Duggars are Southern Baptist.

I was wondering if any of y'all are familiar with the Duggar family (16 children) in Arkansas. I've watched several programs about them on TLC (and Discovery Health) and I just love them!! Their testimony and their love for God are so obvious.

Roniya wrote:

I know them! They are a precious family. Their love for Christ shines from their countenances. Here is their family website: http://www.duggarfamily.com/

Wow, Joy, do you mean you know them personally? I wish I could meet them. I go to their website all the time. I'm amazed that the TV programs that have been made about them are so [i]positive[/i] -- let's face it, a secular TV station could have made them look ridiculous. Praise God for the "window" that He's made for the world to look in on their lives; they really seek to honor Him in everything.

Tears_of_joy wrote:

JennRich, did you read this wonderful [url=http://moriefamily.com/03%20Testimony.htm]Testimony[/url]? It is a blessing to read the testimony of this family.

No, I'll try to do that ASAP. . . I have to log off now, but I'll be back later. . .

My wife and I have had some struggles with this issue as well. I would love to see her wear skirts all the time but we live in a rough neighborhood and she says she doesn't feel as safe in a skirt or dress. I can accept that. However, we often fellowship with a congregation that at the very least, strongly encourages women to wear dresses (I'm not sure how strictly it's enforced) and my wife will always wear a dress or a skirt around them. I, likewise, try to wear pants if I'm around them, simply out of respect.

When you went to help set up this big top tent, did you go knowing that their conviction was pants and no muscle shirts? If so, you were probably in the wrong. We are not to be contentious, even if they are being legalistic.

Chris

I am o, so hesitant to add another post to this thread... and I so seldom post on here anymore - but I do have honest questions and opinions about this subject, and I want to be gracious and honest here.

First, my family and I (I have a 17 yr. old and 8 yr. old daughter) are all for modesty. We make it a topic of discussion regularly and my oldest daughter is very convicted by the Holy Spirit about her clothing and I have never once had to say anything to her about what she is wearing. But in our family we do believe it is ok to wear pants, capris and even longer shorts. Horror of horrors- i know. This is something the Lord has not convicted us about- maybe He will one day, I don't know, but not so far. He is refining us/me in so many other ways over the last five of years- wearing pants is the least of my worries :) If this is your conviction, then by all means, then please obey what you feel the Holy Spirit is telling you.

Ok, here are some thoughts that come to mind. Some have mentioned that even when women wear loose pants that a man can see their 'form'. When a man is wearing jeans or pants, can't a woman see his 'form' as well? In many of the families I have seen where the women wear dresses only, the men are wearing normal clothes that you would see on any guy- even jeans. I think if you were really looking (and that is the key phrase- 'really looking'- anyone can look at anyone and really 'look' for something that may turn their mind the wrong way), you could see what kind of body a man has in those jeans or pants. But of course the point is that you shouldn't be looking with that in mind anyway, right? Aren't men being immodest by wearing pants too? If we really wanted to be 'biblical' why shouldn't men also go back to wearing 'skirts' or dresses/tunics like they wore in bible days. and yes, through the centuries, men did wear skirts (short and longer wraps as well).

Pants are a relatively new concept for men and women. Pants were not even aorund in bible days- men and women wore just about the same thing. There were probably slight differences in the tunics or longers garments they wore - like decorative differences and things that may have set themselves apart, women from men-- but from this I can see that the verse about women a nd men not dressing like each other is, like someone mentioned, dealing with crossdressing, etc.. purposely trying to appear like the opposite sex. Boy, I wonder how hard that was to do in those long tunics they wore back then? There was not much of a difference in how they looked.

I found this article while searching for this topic- and thought it was worth taking to the Lord. Pants or skirts, for men or women, my hearts desire is to see both men and women in love with their Savior.

-In Christ, Chanin

p.s I would like to also state that I know of many families that fit the stereotypical southern baptist- huge families, women only wear dresses, everyone looks just perfect, long nice hair on the girls, tied with a ribbon and matching jumpers; the boys are all washed spic and span in their matching shirts- please remember you are only seeing the outside and what's outside does not always reflect what is on the inside. There are many a troubled family, troubled children and marriages that 'appear' so nice and perfect on the outside because that's what they want everyone to see. I am not discrediting anyone. I know many are sincerely seeking the Lord in these areas, but again, there is something about the whole thing that you can get caught up in appearances and personal relationships with the Lord can be second or third to tradition, dress, family, etc....

---------------------

THE PANTS ISSUE!

Scriptures Prohibiting the Wearing of Pants by Women? By Stephen Mann

A) Verses Teaching No Pants

I have cut and pasted all five verses prohibiting women wearing pants from my KJV.
Please study the five verses below with an open mind and you will see what the Bible actually says about women not wearing pants....

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

(That's right, friend, there are absolutely no verses at all that prohibit pants on women!)

B) Deuteronomy 22:5

Ah, but you say what about this verse...
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. Deuteronomy 22:5 (KJV)

Well quite simply, there are four reasons why I have difficulty with the no-pants interpretation from this passage...

1. The passage doesn't clearly prohibit pants on women but there are very clear prohibitions for eating pork, not keeping Friday/Saturday (Sabbath) holy, not wearing mixed apparel of linen and wool etc., so even if there was (which there isn't), it still wouldn't mean it is for us today if it isn't taught to Gentiles in the new covenant.

2. If Deuteronomy 22:5 is to be seen as a law to be obeyed today, then a consistent interpretation would mean the prohibited mixed threads, Kosher foods and other laws in the same chapter should also be followed. Why are anti-pants teachers overlooking these others?

3. If the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle, it should also be applicable to prohibit other male garments on women such as t-shirts, boots, underwear, scarves, gloves, sneakers, etc. Why is this principle not followed to its natural implications?

4. Lastly, if the Deuteronomy 22 passage is to be used as a principle for today (and the previous three points are overlooked), then it remains to be proved that pants are men's clothing. Culturally they were on women in China long before the Western men left off wearing tights (which by the same principle should be called men's apparel!) and hence fail on historical grounds as well.

C) Hebrew for the word translated 'garment'

Let's look at the Hebrew word that 'garment' is translated from: 8071 simlah (sim-law'); Strong says: "perhaps by permutation for the feminine of 5566 (through the idea of a cover assuming the shape of the object beneath); a dress."
Some would focus in on the word Strong uses above (dress), saying that the word in this passage teaches that the dress is female attire. They overlook the fact that Strong goes on to say...
"especially a mantle: apparel, cloth (-es, -ing), garment, raiment. comp. 8008."
Strong says the majority of times it is translated raiment, clothes and garment (as it is here in Deuteronomy 22:5 in the KJV). Not once is it translated into the English word 'dress'. Rather similar to when we say men and women's dress sense, we are not talking about only female attire. The word means clothes, not dresses!

Some commentators teach the passage is specifically prohibiting women wearing men's armour, but whether it's apparel or armour there is no teaching here that pants are for men only.

D) Skirts

While Deuteronomy 22 verse 5 is often quoted, verse 30 is often overlooked...
"a man shall not take his father’s wife, nor discover his father’s skirt" Deuteronomy 22:30 KJV

If ladies wanted to legislate doctrine for men, here's a good place they could have started!

Did men wear skirts back then?

Yes!

Is it Biblical?

Yes.

Here in verse 30 you have it straight from the KJV Bible that all you women wearing skirts are cross dressers! This is really men's apparel.

Consider this verse...

Then David arose, and cut off the skirt of Saul’s robe privily 1 Sam 24:4

There are many more Bible verses for men wearing skirts than women wearing them! The Bible speaks of men's skirts twelve times: (Dt 22:30, Dt 27:20, Ru 3:9, 1 Sa 15:27, 1 Sa 24:4, 1 Sa 24:5, 1 Sa 24:11, 1 Sa 24:11, Eze 16:8, Hag 2:12, Hag 2:12, and Zec 8:23).

If you're really going to follow the Bible literally and get back to Biblical men's and women's garments, then get those sewing machines buzzing, men, and stop those women from wearing your skirts!! (Yes I am joking.)

E) History

In ancient Egypt their normal clothing was a loincloth wrapped around the hips and girdled at the waist. A cape was worn on the shoulders and later a long garment called a kalasiris was introduced. Men wore this as a skirt around their waist; women wore it over their upper body, or as a full-length garment that sometimes had sleeves.

The Hebrews, Assyrians, and Babylonians all wore a long, sleeved garment similar to a nightshirt, with cloaks or kalasiris-like overgarments. These clothes appear to be stiff, with fringed and tasselled borders and square or rounded corners.

For thousands of years in history we don't find pants and it is a relatively modern and culturally brief period of history where there was a distinction of pants only on men and dresses only on women.

Even today in the Pacific and other areas of the world, many continue to wear a sarong or robe on males and females with only a small distinction between them.

F) Summary

There is no verse in the Scriptures prohibiting women wearing pants or saying that a dress was all a female could wear. Instead we find, in the Bible and in history, men wearing similar garments to women (what we would call dresses today).

There is also no Biblical precedent or teaching regarding males alone wearing pants. Although there may be some cultural norms in some countries today, there is no prohibition by God and it is never referred to (as many falsely preach today) as an abomination to God. This is a sad example of denominational ignorance and eisegesis (reading meaning into the text) instead of exegesis (reading the text's meaning).

moreofHim,

Thank you for adding scriptural, biblical, historical and cultural insights to this discussion... these really fly in the face of the traditions of men.

The ideas the Western church has about women wearing pants are cultural, not biblical.

I'm just going to add in my own personal experience.

I go to a very conservative church for Seattle. Women wear little or no makeup, they dress modestly and WEAR PANTS.

In fact, on the occasions that they do wear skirts or dresses for special occasions such as weddings, celebrations etc they are often less modest than when they wear pants or capris.

We assume that skirts and dresses are more modest because that is what we have been raised to think, but that is not necessarily true in all circumstances.

Paul Washer said, 'If your cloths are a frame for your face is it pleasing to God, if your cloths are a frame to show off your body then they are sinful and God hates them.'

Many skirts, even in the past, were fitted to portray a certain feminine shape or ideal. Even among the most conservative Christians -don't make me dig up photos of Amy Carmichael or Biddy Chambers in their prime.

Many women today wear pants that do not accent their natural shape -however there are pants that do. There are skirts that do too, and at many churches in the West these skirts can be worse than the pants.

The point of Leviticus 22 is about PROTECTING GENDER ROLES... not about forbiding women to wear pants. That is hijacking this verse to support our own unproductive traditions.

Krispyu wrote:

I didnt think I looked that wierd, but to them, I guess I did.

Come on Krispy, you did look weird, don't kid yourself! You know that. If you had a ponytail you would for sure have looked like a left-over hippie! lol (oh! I know you said you have short hair...). You - an ex-marine - that likely looks like a football player, big and husky - that is how I visualize you and if I am correct, you just may have looked like an over-grown kid - one that never quite grew up!

:-P

ginnyrose

Krispy,

I have been thinking about your question all day yesterday then last night I was too tired to write; went to bed and woke up and am still thinking about it....so, I will write about my understanding on this issue. Hope this post will not get too long. :-o

I will say upfront I do wear dresses/skirts. The only time I ever wore pants was when I was a teen and it got dreadfully cold and I had to go out and milk cows in the dairy barn which was very cold. It had snowed and the weather was nasty. So, Dad told me to wear a pair of his pants ito wich I stuffed my skirt. I do not think anyone but my own family saw me. But what I do or not do is not the point in my post. We want to know what does the Scriptures say. What I share is my conviction and the reasons for do so. If it will be conscrued as teaching, so be it.

For one thing the Scriptures do not say: "Women, thou shalt not wear pants." However, the OT law says it is an abomination for a woman to wear what pertains to men. But, does this apply to us in the NT era?

When God gave the law to Moses, the law could be divided into three segments: the Ceremonial/Religious law (which dealt with the rituals, sacrifices, the holidays, etc.), the Civil law (which dealt with how a government is to be run, the punishments for evil doing, etc.), and the moral law (which dealt with human relations that worked for an orderly society, etc.).

[u][b]The ceremonial/Religious law:[/b][/u]: was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, his sacrifice: death/resurrection/ascension marked the end of this law. Read Hebrews.

[u][b]The civil law:[/b][/u]: was given to the civil government to enact and keep order in society. Their function which includes the use of the sword is allowed, or commanded. This contrasts with the one where Jesus says whosoever uses the sword shall perish by the sword. Jesus modus operandi for the NT saints was that his children would not entangle themselves in warfare: their methods were to be more peaceful and I would suggest the reason for this is because now the Holy Spirit has been given which will convict men and this far more powerful 'weapon' against sin then brute force.

[u][b]The Moral Law[/b][/u]: this deals with situations in life where the rubber meets the road. This is the battlefield in which satan works to destroy God's creation, hence the many laws given which details God sense of orderliness among the finest of his creation. If satan can destroy this, he has succeeded. It is this law I would like to look at, or rather only one aspect of it.

In Deut. 22:5 it says that cross dressing is an abomination. Is it still?

When God made man he called it very good, in contrast to the rest of his creation which he called good. When God made a male human and a female human it was the crowning touch of all his creativity. It was awesome. I love to imagine being in the garden at the end of the day when these two would come to meet with God for his daily visit. They were both naked and did not know it. GOD was in the midst of that relationship. It was one glorious fellowship. They enjoyed each other because God made them to do so. There was unhindered pleasure, because God ordained it so, He made it to be so. Male and female. Savor this for a moment.

Since males and females are such a wonderful creation, satan now enters the picture and worked to destroy this the best he can and has for many. He works to destroy this distintiveness between genders.

In past cultures males and females dressed differently. Since the late 1800s there has been a move afoot to blur the distinction between the genders. It took a while - satan does not really care how long it takes as long as he thinks he will succeed. Beginning in the last half of the 20th century, it became acceptable for 'Christian' women to dress like males or wear pants. Some years later we discover where homos were coming out 'of the closet' and flaunted their sin which included cross-dressing. And people were horrified. Or at least some were/are. Now my question: why are people more horrified when males do it then when females do it? It is because the males are intimidated by the reactions from women who will declare that "no man is going to tell me what to do?" Ah, we have been liberated from the yolk of male tyranny! But has that happened?

Consider what the liberated females had to pay for such perceived liberation: disease, abandonment by their husbands, divorce, single motherhood which all dooms them to the lowest levels of poverty. Who gains?

When one reads through the OT and takes note of the laws pertaining to women, I get the picture that God considers females a treasure and He so desperately wants to protect them from careless husbands and themselves! Consider, the laws restricting females after giving birth. This requires that females take it slow and care for their body and child which results is better female health for the mother and while she is caring for the child, bonding occurs which is essential for that child's growth and development. The point is that if we study these laws we can see how God was NOT interested in showing who is boss and that HE IS BOSS SO YOU BETTER DO WHAT I SAY, like carnal men do, but these laws were given help us. And I say we do well to prayerfully consider these and ask the LORD to give us insight into how he wants us to honor him with our attire. (We all know what the NT says about it, do we not? This part of the issue has been shared elsewhere on this thread....)

Blessings,
ginnyrose

PS: I had my husband read Krispy's post and my response. EDIT: removed a sentence: sounded too arrogant. Sorry! And told me to go ahead and post it!

Yea, no ponytails on this guy. I still sport the "high & tight" standard issue Marine Corps cut. But I do have a gotee... which is turning salt & pepper as I approach my 40th b-day this fall.

And I do stand 6'-1", 215 lbs. and was still lifting weights until I messed up my shoulder last year. My chiropractor is working diligently to repair the damage. Did something to pinch off a couple of nerves in my neck. My wife thinks one of the nerves goes to my brain.

God help me... here I go again... In our circles muscle shirts have a more sinister name of disdain 'wife-beater' (I hope I can say that respectfully but it is a common phrase around men especially). When the term is used it is usually because the men think the guy wearing it is trying to show out. Even the men who work out hard as body- builders who may be much larger and 'buff' don't wear them (even ex-marines ;-). I knew of a guy who was always going around in a tank top. They people grew almost to hate the man. They always believed he was trying to get the eyes of their wives and such. I don't know if that's what those men were thinking in Krispy's case- but I'm just trying to keep it real based on what I have witnessed. If you were to ask the guy about why he wears his tank-tops all the time he would act quite innocent. But the perception of the men who see him doing it is quite hostile. It's not a religious thing. It's a manly thing.

I followed this thread all day yesterday and the Lord has used it to bring much needed change into my life.

When I got saved, one of the first things the Lord dealt with me about was my manner of dress. I didn’t hear it from a sermon or from another believer, but from the Spirit of God. So I got rid of all the mini-skirts and low cut blouses and bought new clothes that I felt like would be pleasing to the Lord. This mostly consisted of long skirts and loose fitting tops. During this time of my life as a new believer seeking to draw close to the Lord, the thing people noticed about me was not my appearance or my figure – it was the beauty and radiance of Christ that they saw. Over the course of time, I began to incorporate more “professional” looking clothing into my wardrobe, but during a recent time of seeking God I felt like He was dealing with me again about my clothing. Reading the posts in this topic about what a stumbling block this is for men just broke my heart because I have been guilty of this. My desire for attention, which should have driven me to the feet of Jesus, instead found satisfaction by dressing in a way to draw attention to my figure.

Last night I cleaned out my closet and bought new clothes. Today I feel that I am dressed the way a woman of God should dress – modestly. I truly desire that my appearance would bring honor and glory to Him again and that Christ would be my beauty.

BrokenOne,

Thank-you so much for sharing your testimony. Is it not awesome what God will do in one's life when we submit to him? And it is not that difficult when we are totally submitted, is it? It takes a crucifixion of the self-will. It would be nice if all you had to do it is once...Paul says he dies daily. If he had, we must too.

Mind if I share something? Five years ago our third son got married. In sewing a dress for myself for this event, I decided to sew a beautiful applique on it. I spend lots of time hand stitching (I love to sew). It looked pretty, trust me. In the meantime there was this nagging voice saying, "but Sandra, that is too fancy." Just like a stuck needle on a phonograph record. I ignored it because the Bible does not specifically say you cannot sew anything like this on your dress.

I went to bed that night. And this voice was relentless. Finally, I said, "OK, Lord, if you want me to remove this in the morning, I will." I slept well the rest of the night and did as promised the next morning.

God bless you, my dear.

ginnyrose

Roniya wrote:
Yup, I know them. My parents knew Jim Bob and Michelle before they had any kids! We recently saw their new home; they live a couple hours from us. It's is awesome how God is using their testimony on secular tv.

Umm, I think we're hijacking Krispy's thread. :-o Sorry Krispy! Maybe we can get back on topic here!

I'm an accessory to the hijacking, ha . . . this really did have to do with wearing dresses. . . anyway, that's amazing that you know them, and that you've seen the new house! It is amazing (from what I've seen on TV) and I wish I could go visit them or something. My husband probably thinks I'm crazy because I watch the programs about them over and over (I have them on video), but they're just so encouraging to me.
Jennifer

I use Brell Cream in my hair, my black plastic framed glasses are held together at the center with a white piece of tape, and along with my black slacks and black shoe I wear white socks. Oh... an I sleep with a tie on.

Jerry Lewis on steroids - yup, that's how I pictured Steve. He forgot to tell us about his bucked-teeth (this is where the name "Krittr" comes from). It's okay. People tend to think I'm this huge nerdy guy too...but then they see me in a suit and think I look like a hit man. Never judge by cyber appearance (right, Steve?)

Brother Paul :-P

Wouldn't this fall under the obedience factor again? Kind of like men with long hair, it's not explicitly forbidden, but it's not best.

Jordan

I've found myself that the Indian (traditional Hindu/Moghul) culture is extremely modest and comfortable. I find one of the females' dress( the punjabi clothing) a good compromise between pants and dress or skirts. Like what GrannieAnnie said she wears, it is a very long tunic and loose pants. Most are bright; however, there are less bright ones for those who do not want to call attention to themselves. If I had the money, I think almost all of my clothing would consist of this garb.
[url=http://www.diversehamilton.ca/Pictures/indian-Clothing%20women.jpg]Punjabi[/url]