I said, "I don't know" as in "I don't know if I can agree with what you are saying", which really means, "I don't agree, but I'll just be the nice girl that I am."
Still studying means I'm being polite and pretending that I didn't shut down on your post.
Ain't I nice, until you - pressed me?
I'll ignore the part where you called me an *** and pass that off as youthful ignorance.
My problem with the K&D is this:
- The immediate design of this prohibition was not to prevent licentiousness, or to oppose idolatrous practices
and- but to maintain the sanctity of that distinction of the sexes which was established by the creation of man and woman, and in relation to which Israel was not to sin.
Now, Prax, in all practicality and for the sake of just plain old common sense - WHY does the scripture even address a man even attempting to put on a woman's clothing?
In their time period it was part of the pagan rituals of sacrifice to don the clothes of the opposite sex and have licentious sexual activities.
Now, if that was not even happening, WHY would the Word even speak of a man donning a woman's clothing - just for fun or what?
The distinction of sexes - my goodness - that is just ridiculous for me to comprehend. If the Word is worried about a man wearing a woman's clothing then - hello - something is rotten in Denmark - just logically.
It isn't speaking of gender distinction. It is speaking of existing and living the part of the opposite sex - the abomination.
Threaded Mode
