Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #351  
Old 05-31-2008, 11:55 AM
Steve Epley's Avatar
Steve Epley Steve Epley is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,903
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkstokes View Post
You do not have scripture for this remark. The jews that received this command from God via Moises -- both male and female wore robes. There were differences in the robes, but they both wore them.
Wearing pants are abomination they pertain to men TODAY. You don't need a lexcion go to any public place and look at the rest room doors. SOCIETY or CULTURE posts those signs NOT conservative Apostolic preachers. If you work an abomination you are goingto go to Hell unless you repent.
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:15 PM
Grasshopper
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
I think a dress or skirt is more modest on a woman than most pants I've seen today. Ladies, I'm a healthy man, trust me when I say this...pants are designed to accentuate various aspects of your body that we guys are attracted to. Men are far more visual creatures than women...that's why Sports Illustrated Swimsuit sells out everywhere and Playboy is sold in nearly every book store. Don't get me wrong...sometimes dresses and skirts can be just as immodest. But more often a dress or skirt can be both stylish and modest where most pants today aren't. So I side with the conservative brethren in that I believe women should wear modest dresses or skirts.

In my opinion the dresses and skirts are about modesty. I don't believe you'll go to Hell for wearing pants. I don't believe it's a "sin" of any kind. But most pants I've seen are immodest. Maybe ladies don't see what men see when they see a woman in pants so it might be difficult for you to understand so I'm not going to rant against you if you don't understand. If I were a pastor I would admonish modesty and express how I believed dresses and skirts are more modest on women. If you wished to wear pants to church, I wouldn't harass you or make you feel unwelcome. I would try to temper any statement made from the pulpit about pants with some love and grace acknowledging that some might be wearing pants, but his is how I felt as a preacher. If the pants (or dress) were too immodest in my opinion, as a pastor I'm obligated to do something. I think I'd ask my wife to talk to you about it privately when you're weren't wearing the article of clothing. If you continued wearing it I might have her mention it again, but I still wouldn't throw you out. We might have a "Modesty and Holiness Women's Meeting" to devote entirely to issues women face regarding modesty and outward holiness.

And if all that didn't work to help you grow in our church...I guess you'd just be that lady that catches the eyes of the men and makes the other wives uncomfortable. Just try not to vex us too bad. But by the time it got here...odds are you'd make some adjustments. If you were adamant about pants, maybe we could agree that you at least wear a modest dress or skirt to church services. We'd just wait on the Lord together on this. Normally a willing and sincere heart comes around in time.
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:20 PM
Grasshopper
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Epley View Post
Wearing pants are abomination they pertain to men TODAY. You don't need a lexcion go to any public place and look at the rest room doors. SOCIETY or CULTURE posts those signs NOT conservative Apostolic preachers. If you work an abomination you are goingto go to Hell unless you repent.
Brother Eply....I wouldn't base my theology on a bathroom door sign...



SHE'S ALSO BALD!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:22 PM
StMark StMark is offline
Pot Stirrer


 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,102
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
Brother Eply....I wouldn't base my theology on a bathroom door sign...



SHE'S ALSO BALD!!!!

Her Bun is in the back
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:27 PM
Steve Epley's Avatar
Steve Epley Steve Epley is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,903
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
Brother Eply....I wouldn't base my theology on a bathroom door sign...



SHE'S ALSO BALD!!!!
But the obvious is glaring. Pants belong to men.
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:27 PM
jaxfam6 jaxfam6 is offline
Crazy father of 4


 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Now? Phoenix, AZ. Before? Newark, OH, Wyandotte, MI, Tampa, FL
Posts: 3,926
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
I think a dress or skirt is more modest on a woman than most pants I've seen today. Ladies, I'm a healthy man, trust me when I say this...pants are designed to accentuate various aspects of your body that we guys are attracted to. Men are far more visual creatures than women...that's why Sports Illustrated Swimsuit sells out everywhere and Playboy is sold in nearly every book store. Don't get me wrong...sometimes dresses and skirts can be just as immodest. But more often a dress or skirt can be both stylish and modest where most pants today aren't. So I side with the conservative brethren in that I believe women should wear modest dresses or skirts.

I do not agree. I am a healthy guy and I tend to think that dresses and skirts tend to be designed to be more sexual and sensual. Pants if worn tight, just like a skirt or dress, are certainly not modest.

Lets just leave Bible out for a minute here. I work in a building that has four floors. I walk the stairs instead of taking the elevator because I was getting a bit lazy. The other day I heard something above me and I looked up. Guess what I saw? A lady walking down the stairs on the insie near the railing that is open. I could see everything. Her skirt was modest, it was long, it was loose. I still saw everything. I decide that from now on I can not look up when in the stairwell at work. Then I got thinking about it. ALL places I have been have these open stair wells. Been to a two story mall lately? The ones I have seen have glass railings. If a lady stands beside the rail and is wearing a skirt or dress if you are below her and look up guess what you will see.
I think the traditions that have been taught are very hard for some to let go of. I think we need to really remember that God gave us a mind to think fo ourselves. We are taught in the BIBLE that we are to seek out our own salvation with fear and trembling. We need to allow God to do a work in people and we need to stop doing our work in people.
__________________
Life is .............

I'll get back to you when I figure it out.
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:29 PM
Grasshopper
Guest


 
Posts: n/a
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by StMark View Post
Her Bun is in the back
We don't know that. There has to be a bubble above or on the side of the head...just for distinction of course.
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:40 PM
CC1's Avatar
CC1 CC1 is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,840
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
Brother Eply....I wouldn't base my theology on a bathroom door sign...



SHE'S ALSO BALD!!!!
It also appears that her dress is above her knees! On the other hand she does have on long sleeves so I guess the ultra cons can use bathroom signs to preach long sleeves also. LOL!!
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:42 PM
StMark StMark is offline
Pot Stirrer


 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,102
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
We don't know that. There has to be a bubble above or on the side of the head...just for distinction of course.


~ ~ GAWD TOLD ME ~ ~






.
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 05-31-2008, 12:43 PM
Steve Epley's Avatar
Steve Epley Steve Epley is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,903
Re: Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

Quote:
Originally Posted by CC1 View Post
It also appears that her dress is above her knees! On the other hand she does have on long sleeves so I guess the ultra cons can use bathroom signs to preach long sleeves also. LOL!!
She just have fat arms but I will consider the info.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
**** Are the NCO and AWCF "raiding" the UPCI or providing a "safety net"? **** SDG The D.A.'s Office 373 02-06-2012 01:01 AM
Has "Church" become a "Family Business"?? SecretWarrior Fellowship Hall 70 06-09-2008 08:41 AM
What Does "Joint" or "Fellow" Heirs with Christ? Praxeas Fellowship Hall 2 01-13-2008 02:12 AM
It seems the word "Seperation" varies as much as "Holiness" does??? revrandy Fellowship Hall 20 09-29-2007 12:39 PM
Seven kids get "it" or "Him" at youth camp Sherri Fellowship Hall 10 07-16-2007 01:57 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Salome

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.