Revisiting the "PANTS" Issue

[AmericanAngel]

Originally Posted by rrford

LOL! Should I really care about that take of Forum Personalities regarding me on this issue? Methinks not.

Let them eat cake!

I likie your attitude!!!!!!
I have 57 response so far in my head!!!!!

...now, I'll finsh reading!
Sighned,
Lurker #29

[StMark]

Originally Posted by AmericanAngel

I likie your attitude!!!!!!
I have 57 response so far in my head!!!!!

...now, I'll finsh reading!
Sighned,
Lurker #29

I think it's fear. Those who believe and teach it are afraid to debate it but will come up with an excuse ( as rrford did) not to get into the fray.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

You're right, styles and clothing will change. I don't know, maybe we'll make more sweeping changes in the UPCI as time goes on. But dresses and skirts have been worn by women for ages...I don't see them going out of style. For all we know society might swing back into a more classical style where women mainly wear dresses and skirts. Regardless...I think a modest dress or skirt is far more modest than most pants. Though I have seen some pants more modest than some dresses too. I think I would relegate this to a pastoral conviction. Follow your pastor's lead.

I have not read very many posts on this thread, mainly because clothing issues have been debated to death!. I did, however decide to drop in and at least check out a few posts. It took about 30 seconds of skimming to find this one and all I have to say is HOGWASH!!

Pastoral conviction is what got all this mess started in the first place. Preachers should stick to the Word and preach modesty. From there they need to leave it up to God and each of His children to decide where those lines of modesty will be drawn. Clothing choices are a matter of personal conviction.


Now I can say I added at least one post to this thread.

[AmericanAngel]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

Brother Eply....I wouldn't base my theology on a bathroom door sign...



SHE'S ALSO BALD!!!!

Maybe it's a kilt!!
sorry, coudn't resist!

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by StMark

I think it's fear. Those who believe and teach it are afraid to debate it but will come up with an excuse ( as rrford did0 not to get into the fray.

Yes Mark

Change is one of the hardest things to accept. Look at how hard the pharisees fought Jesus about Him healing on the Sabbath.

[StMark]

Originally Posted by CC1

Yup. The arguement that pants are considered men's clothing just does not hold water and hasn't for the last 30 years.

The new paradigm should be to look at pants on women vs pants on men with the same distinction given to men's shirts vs. womens blouses.

Woman's pants are cut very different from men's pants to fit women properly and most are styles or prints that men wouldn't be caught dead in (i.e. flowers on the material or capri's).

Then some are the same material and function like blue jeans but again the cut is different and there is as much distinction between men and women's jeans as there is men's shirts and blouses.

Plus what about all of those Pentecostal men and women wearing T Shirts?????? Where is the distinction there?

I also find it amusing all of the Pentecostal men who claim pants are more sensuous on women. I find that really hard to believe since pants cover up the bare flesh and shapely shape of a woman's leg.

I find a well built pretty woman much sexier in a dress and find slacks on a woman more practical and many times more modest.

Of course is some woman is wearing her pants way too tight that is not true but that would be the same case with a woman wearing a dress or skirt way too tight also.

T shirts are not the deciding factor. a ruffled blouse with lace,yes. but not a T shirt. If you saw a man prancing down the Mall in a dress most people would be disgusted and you know it.

[AmericanAngel]

Originally Posted by StMark

I think it's fear. Those who believe and teach it are afraid to debate it but will come up with an excuse ( as rrford did0 not to get into the fray.

who says i wasn't? Let me finish reading....k. LOL

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by Rico

I have not read very many posts on this thread, mainly because clothing issues have been debated to death!. I did, however decide to drop in and at least check out a few posts. It took about 30 seconds of skimming to find this one and all I have to say is HOGWASH!!

Pastoral conviction is what got all this mess started in the first place. Preachers should stick to the Word and preach modesty. From there they need to leave it up to God and each of His children to decide where those lines of modesty will be drawn. Clothing choices are a matter of personal conviction.


Now I can say I added at least one post to this thread.

amen

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by StMark

What if they wore them outside of the church but wore a dress to church services and events ? would they be allowed to participate then ?

A lot of the younger UPC pastors ( from what I am told) are not going to enforce dresses outside of the church

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

I don't know. I don't think our pastor's the kind of guy who would prevent them from singing or greeting as long as they wore dresses or skirts in church. He's pretty patient and easy going with people.

Originally Posted by Encryptus

Interesting. Institutionalized double standards.

Think it will catch on????

OUCH !!!




.

[StMark]

Originally Posted by bkstokes

Yes Mark

Change is one of the hardest things to accept. Look at how hard the pharisees fought Jesus about Him healing on the Sabbath.

You are saying that those who teach it don't have a genuine conviction?

are you saying they know they should change but wont do it out of fear of change?

are you comparing them to what Jesus called "Vipers" in the bible ?