More on Skirts

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

My AC is set at 78.

That's way too hot.

[good samaritan]

We have had some high 90's already and someone said we touched 100, but not sure of that. I don't like to set the temp too low in the house because it just makes it harder on us working and playing outside. I don't like staying indoors. I would rather the heat. Maybe a good shade tree every now and then with a cool breeze. Makes you thankful.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

We have had some high 90's already and someone said we touched 100, but not sure of that. I don't like to set the temp too low in the house because it just makes it harder on us working and playing outside. I don't like staying indoors. I would rather the heat. Maybe a good shade tree every now and then with a cool breeze. Makes you thankful.

It gets pretty hot in 2 C.

[Nitehawk013]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Not one in the NT pointed out the word "abomination" and said it was a key word in identifying a timeless cross dispensational sin.

As indicated by others, "abomination" is used in the OT and the NT to describe a great number of sins. This includes "unclean" foods in Leviticus.

No one in the NT, or in the OT, pointed out all the "abominations" as a group and said these are a special class of sin.

I like this.

Further question. Can anyone point us to the commentary of any well respected, reviewed scholar or respected theologian who would classify women wearing pants as an abomination? Or any reputable, reviewed Hebrew or Greek scholar who would interpret Deut.22:5 or ANY NT verse as insinuating at all that they have any bearing at all on modern women's pants?

Besides a few Oneness Pentecostal scholars please.

[JoeBandy]

The only GODLY clothing I can find in the Bible is Genesis 3:21. God himself made this clothing. Can some one please tell me the difference in Adam and Eve's garment???

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think he's saying that all sin is abomination to God. If we make certain sins an abomination and other sins not an abomination, we are making a special rule because of the use of the word "abomination" which is an argument no one in the NT used.

Growing up I always heard it preached like this, "once an abomination always and abomination". In other words they were making certain sins an abomination and others not.

The whole argument against pants on women is based on personal conviction against pants on women, and not sound historical backing of the clothing design of that day. We don't look down on Arabs that wear robes today as wearing women's dresses, if a robe is made for a man it is a mans apparel. The same thing should be said for women's pants.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by JoeBandy

The only GODLY clothing I can find in the Bible is Genesis 3:21. God himself made this clothing. Can some one please tell me the difference in Adam and Eve's garment???

They were both Hotel robes made out of animal skins.

There difference of the two garments made out of animal skins had to be prevalent.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Growing up I always heard it preached like this, "once an abomination always and abomination". In other words they were making certain sins an abomination and others not.

Really, well they were wrong. I know people who are wrong, but there wrongness doesn't cause me to swing in another direction.

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

The whole argument against pants on women is based on personal conviction against pants on women, and not sound historical backing of the clothing design of that day.

You know why we have a small idea how they dressed in Roman and Greek cultures? Because they had imagery. You know how we really have no specifics on the Hebrews, Israelis, or Judeans? Because they only left a written record, not a artistic record. You know what they are showing you in the Bible dictionaries, and artworks concerning Moses and Jesus? The middle age to present? Arab, and Yemeni bedouin attire. That's like saying a biker in chaps looks just like a cow puncher from the early 1800s.

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

We don't look down on Arabs that wear robes today as wearing women's dresses, if a robe is made for a man it is a mans apparel.

Arab military doesn't wear those medieval bedouin robes. Also, the whole dress thing on Arabs is actually part of their religion. Most Masjids want people to come to juma prayer with those dresses. There is no "we" in your statement. Because myself and others understand that the Arab muslim needs to repent and stop wearing 300 dollar shoes with the backs crushed down because they treat them like sandals.

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

The same thing should be said for women's pants.

There is no such thing as women pants. They is no such thing as same gender marriage. I guess in about 40 years everyone in Church Land will be arguing over allowing same gender marriage into the pews.

[JoeBandy]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

They were both Hotel robes made out of animal skins.

There difference of the two garments made out of animal skins had to be prevalent.

Can you show me using only scripture where and how specifically clothing changed between Adam & Eve and Duet. 22:5?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

I like this.

Further question. Can anyone point us to the commentary of any well respected, reviewed scholar or respected theologian who would classify women wearing pants as an abomination? Or any reputable, reviewed Hebrew or Greek scholar who would interpret Deut.22:5 or ANY NT verse as insinuating at all that they have any bearing at all on modern women's pants?

Besides a few Oneness Pentecostal scholars please.

What is a robe like garment?

Because that is what scholars called them.