Ensey Strikes : Women who wear pants may go bi?

[Aquila]

Does this not imply that the vast majority of women are bi-sexual or will go bi-sexual?

Courious as to what the saved women of this forum who wear pants think.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by DAII

You're fishing ... you sought to defend the no pants on women ... then gave a laundry list ... to try to fit what sticks.

Men wear makeup if they are going on TV ... or covering a zit.

Your paradigm is inconsistent ... the OT Church ... yes, church had body piercings. Yet, this is not your litmus test.

Sorry, DA - I feel no need to defend what I believe. I have too much experience in my own family at watching others change and then losing the next generation. On the flip side, I have also seen some OP churches lose the next generation, because they would not change.
I believe there is a balance, but that balance may differ from church to church. And I am ok with that.
My reason for posting was just to find out what people were comfortable with and if they considered any of these "sin".
I find it amazing and somewhat disturbing that many people on this forum do not see issues with things that many people in the regular "church world", do have issues with.
I read a book sometime back called "Intoxicated with Babylon". This was not written by an apostolic, but contains many of the precepts that you would find in an "OP" church.
In light of what I have learned here, I would say that "all things are lawful, but all things are not expedient".
Next thread, please!

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Baron - Men's makeup?
Also, no one would have a problem with any of these on the platform?

Yea some do. Some of the teenage boys are into the eyeliner stuff and some even paint their nails. Weird to me but whatever.

I have no problem with that.

[*AQuietPlace*]

I was gone for the day, but my mind is still working on this morning's conversation.

aegsm, you asked when women wearing pants stopped being a sin. I think you could also ask -

when did women showing their ankle stop being a sin?
when did women going out in public without petticoats, bloomers and who knows what all else they had to wear - stop being a sin?
when did men wearing blue jeans stop being a sin?

All of those at one point in culture were completely unacceptable. Blue jeans were considered sloppy, and gentlemen didn't wear them. I'm sure they were considered "sin".

Pants on women is the exact same concept. It was just a culture shift, just like everything else I mentioned.

And all of the things that you've asked about - earrings on men, piercings, etc. - all of those things have been culturally taboo. I don't think that has completely changed. Will it someday? Who knows? But we have to be careful not to mix up cultural taboos and biblical taboos. In the Bible apparently nose rings were common. So I don't think you can say it's a SIN. You can say, with good reason I think, that it's unwise. Just like you mentioned, Paul said - just because it's not unlawful doesn't mean it's expedient.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I was gone for the day, but my mind is still working on this morning's conversation.

aegsm, you asked when women wearing pants stopped being a sin. I think you could also ask -

when did women showing their ankle stop being a sin?
when did women going out in public without petticoats, bloomers and who knows what all else they had to wear - stop being a sin?
when did men wearing blue jeans stop being a sin?

All of those at one point in culture were completely unacceptable. Blue jeans were considered sloppy, and gentlemen didn't wear them. I'm sure they were considered "sin".

Pants on women is the exact same concept. It was just a culture shift, just like everything else I mentioned.

And all of the things that you've asked about - earrings on men, piercings, etc. - all of those things have been culturally taboo. I don't think that has completely changed. Will it someday? Who knows? But we have to be careful not to mix up cultural taboos and biblical taboos. In the Bible apparently nose rings were common. So I don't think you can say it's a SIN. You can say, with good reason I think, that it's unwise. Just like you mentioned, Paul said - just because it's not unlawful doesn't mean it's expedient.

AQP - I did not intend to repost on this thread, but I do have to correct you on one important fact.
I believe that I never stated that anything that I brought up was a "sin".
The one place that I did use "sin" it was in the general sense of a societal or cultural norm.
I will say that your train of thought is what I was trying to generate!
Your apology is accepted!

Thanks.

[missourimary]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

I find it amazing and somewhat disturbing that many people on this forum do not see issues with things that many people in the regular "church world", do have issues with.

I don't attend an OP. The church I attend is Wesleyan. My former OP wouldn't accept:
makeup (even to cover blemishes) for men or women
slits
pants on women
cut hair on women (not trimmed or permed or anything, either)
hair accessories that didn't match the hair
sleeves above the elbows
any sort of piercings on men or women
tattoos would have been well hidden under clothes, but otherwise were a testimony of God's deliverance
flies or hip pockets on women's skirts
animal prints
sequins or bead work on clothes or accessories
gold buttons, gold buckles on shoes, or gold eyeglass frames
women's watches that had metal bands
cell phones in church or for teens
internet
video--including YouTube
They also frowned on women saying anything in church, unmarried women, women wearing tennis shoes, and women wearing any clothing that might let people imagine what was under the clothes--not something particularly easy for all women to disguise.

All these among other things.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Prax - I'm not debating about whether they needed a rule.
Do you agree that women wearing pants was considered outside of the norm, in the past?

yes but what does that prove other than "in the past it was not normal"? Pants, in the past, were not normal even for men. Women working outside the home was not normal. Women driving cars was not normal and in Saudi Arabia it still isn't considered normal (though I hear that is changing)

Do you agree that it was preached against by all of the major religious groups, in the past?

No and I also do not know when you are referring to, but I can't agree with this simple because I have no knowledge of all major religious groups preaching against pants on women. I think we merely assume this is true

From my readings of history and church histories, it was.

I've not read anything in history that says all major religions preached against women wearing pants.

Simply put, as I said before, it was not a social/cultural norm so there was no reason to preach against it for most centuries. It was not until it began to become more of a norm or practice that churches preached against it.

If this is correct, then when and why did it shift to a societal norm?
And how did the "church" world respond?

It's not correct that I know of but as I already pointed out, this began to occur during the war when women had to work outside the house in jobs that were traditionally meant for men

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

So, when a culture shifts from one norm to another, what should the churches response be?
When does a cultural norm move from "sin" to not?
Another good example is earrings on men.
And the latest is tattoos.

That depends on what the bible says and whether or not the bible itself has a norm intended for believers

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by missourimary

Also, women were in the workforce long before 1900.

Yes and they may have worn pants. My point was though during the war more women had to work out of the home. This was necessary for 2 reasons. Their source of income was over seas and since the men were overseas it was necessary to keep the work load moving along so women took these roles and of course this was in a much greater number and many of those jobs were just not "dress friendly"

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by missourimary

MEN wore MAKEUP?!?! Harlots!! They were blending the sexes!

Men were wearing makeup as far back as Egypt! I've read it was functional too, like football players wearing the dark patch under their eyes...baseball players too