This is a lie. Barnes never cited women as wearing pants. That is PURE eisegesis (reading into something that is not there). Barnes mentions a garment that corresponds to pantaloons was worn sometimes and cites the Levitical priesthood.
Sometimes beneath this garment, as in the case of the priests, there was another garment corresponding to pantaloons.
See the quote below:
Coat - The Jews wore two principal garments, an interior and an exterior. The interior, here called the “coat,” or the tunic, was made commonly of linen, and encircled the whole body, extending down to the knees. Sometimes beneath this garment,
as in the case of the priests, there was another garment corresponding to pantaloons. The coat, or tunic, was extended to the neck. and had long or short sleeves.
More wishful thinking... Of course, when there is no evidence to support the claim some may feel it necessary to fabricate it by misconstruing what a writer wrote.
There are only 613 mitzvahs. God never intended for the Bible to be an exhaustive list of do's and don'ts. He provided principles. Then, He expected the people to take unspecified questions to the priests. They would then teach the people and God would hold the people accountable for what the priests declared.
(
Deu 17:8 ESV) "If any case arises requiring decision between one kind of homicide and another, one kind of legal right and another, or one kind of assault and another, any case within your towns that is too difficult for you, then you shall arise and go up to the place that the LORD your God will choose.
(
Deu 17:9 ESV) And you shall come to the Levitical priests and to the judge who is in office in those days, and you shall consult them, and they shall declare to you the decision.
(
Deu 17:10 ESV) Then you shall do according to what they declare to you from that place that the LORD will choose. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they direct you.
Those who seek specificity on everything are the one's swallowing the camel for them everything goes unless there is specificity against it. Thus, in this way a person can justify anything not specifically mentioned in the 613 commandments. With this mindset pedophilia is justified.
Deu. 22:5 does not specify pants. It specifies what is worn. This includes pants. So simple even a caveman can understand it. Unfortunately, some here refuse to grasp this most basic and simple logic. Therefore, they argue pants are not specifically mentioned.
The Bible demonstrates that godly men wore pants but godly women did not. This is a principle that can be used to determine whether or not men or women should wear pants. If you want your life to line up with Biblical precedent then, you should follow this principle.
As to your "question". You asked if men and women were naked under their garments. I responded in the affirmative. Everyone, except possibly you, are naked under their garments.
Now, you have changed the question and implied that I did not answer you when in fact I did. With this change in question, you are now trying to build yet another straw man argument by ignoring the real question. That is, did godly women wear pants. I say no and have asked for contrary evidence ad-infinitum. So, if you believe you have evidence that supports your claim please provide your evidence. You would think after the length of this thread you would have done so by now.
Once again, please demonstrate biblically where a godly woman wore pants.