|
Tab Menu 1
Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun! |
 |
|

06-23-2017, 02:54 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Wisconsin Dells
Posts: 2,941
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
I see no connection between cross dressing and Deut. 22:5. The issue is mixing, not modesty.
|

06-23-2017, 03:02 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,710
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
I don't preach skirts as heaven or standards, but I do teach about applying biblical principles in todays culture. In the early 20th century women putting on pants is no different than if men started wearing dresses to keep cooler in our summer climates today. There is a practiacal purpose for a man to wear a dress leisurally because according to my wife a dress is much cooler. We would be considered by all of our peers as crossdressing if we did. I think it would be rightfully so. Why, because a dress is viewed by our culture as womans garment.
The fact is that at the beginning of 20th century pants were just as equally considered a mans garments. Someone had to violate cultural beliefs in order for pants to ever had become fashionable on women. I don't believe it was Christian women who begun the trend of women wearing pants. I think it begun with hollywood and then WW2 gave incentive by giving practical function for ladies in the job force.
|

06-23-2017, 03:06 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,710
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Can anyone picture this trend beginning?
|

06-23-2017, 06:26 PM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood too
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 40,356
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Pitta
I see no connection between cross dressing and Deut. 22:5. The issue is mixing, not modesty.
|
Scott, not about crossdressing?
But it's about mixing?
I think Harry Morse would kick you right in your Azusa Street Revival.
__________________
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
|

06-24-2017, 01:43 AM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Wisconsin Dells
Posts: 2,941
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
I focus on mixing due to the comparison to Leviticus 19.
Do not mix 2 different kinds of animals for plowing
Do not mix 2 different kinds of seeds for planting
Do not mix 2 different kinds of materials when sewing
Do not mix mens clothes with womens clothes
|

06-24-2017, 04:19 AM
|
 |
This is still that!
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 9,680
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
so if a woman were to wear all men's clothes, or a man was to wear all women's clothes, it's good?
|

06-24-2017, 06:26 AM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood too
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 40,356
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Pitta
I focus on mixing due to the comparison to Leviticus 19.
Do not mix 2 different kinds of animals for plowing
Do not mix 2 different kinds of seeds for planting
Do not mix 2 different kinds of materials when sewing
Do not mix mens clothes with womens clothes
|
So, where does sparring the life of birds in a nest and building a parapet come into your theory? Scott, seriously, you should rethink your methodology.
__________________
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
|

06-24-2017, 06:34 AM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood too
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 40,356
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah
so if a woman were to wear all men's clothes, or a man was to wear all women's clothes, it's good?
|
Obviously the answer must be yes. Because logically intent is never brought into the verse of Deuteronomy 22:5. We are not shown that it is strictly a prohibition against the practice of a foreign religion. Or that the intent was purely due to a sexual perversion. We have Levitical laws pointing to prohibitions of sexual perversion, and the clothing issue isn't found there. This was was a prohibition against men wearing female attire, and women wearing male attire no matter what the intentions. Because if it was merely about intent? Then males can do and wear whatever they pleased. Making God having to give the thumbs up.
__________________
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
|

06-24-2017, 06:35 AM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood too
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 40,356
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Good Samaritan I wish you didn't have to post that picture. It makes reading and posting a nightmare. Please use preview post nexxt time to see if the picture fits.
__________________
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
|

06-24-2017, 06:57 AM
|
 |
This is still that!
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 9,680
|
|
Re: More on Skirts
Objection 3: Further, just as it is unbecoming for a woman to wear man's clothes, so is it unbecoming for her to adorn herself inordinately. Now the former is a sin, for it is written (Dt. 22:5): "A woman shall not be clothed with man's apparel, neither shall a man use woman's apparel." Therefore it seems that also the excessive adornment of women is a mortal sin.
Summa Theologica, by St. Thomas Aquinas
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aqui...S_Q169_A2-p4.1
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:08 PM.
| |