Whatever Deuteronomy 22:5 is referring to is important. And yes, those women who wear what that passage is forbidding are doing wrong - the men who also disobey that verse are also doing wrong. God says they are an abomination to Him - that certainly makes it more important than personal preferences, don't you think? Unless you think it does not matter when people personally choose to be an abomination through their conduct and apparel.

Listen Jerry I'm not saying that it's okay to be an abomination towards God. Where in scripture does it say that it's an abomination to wear pants? Remember some people do it out of ignorance and we need to have grace in dealing with them. Also remember that Deuteronomy is a book of law and we are not under the law. Therefore I do not believe we can make a doctrine or "rule" out of it or force anybody to do it. I believe with the OT we can get good morals and principles but we can not convince anybody of doing it unless found in Paul's books dealing in the church age. I spoke with Sam Gipp about it and he said the same thing, IT'S A PERSONAL CONVICTION! I know Sam Gipp is not perfect but I do know that he is one of the best defenders of the Bible and is very knowledgeable in it.

The ceremonial and sacrificial laws are done away with - the Scriptures do not teach that God's moral laws are no longer applicable (in fact that would contradict many passages). Again, show me where ANY other passage that teaches certain things are an abomination to God and that these are done away with, then maybe this one is too - but if none of the other abominations are changed, then this one still applies too.

What does Deuteronomy 22:5 refer to? Women's clothing are skirts and dresses - and men's clothing is pants. If you are not convinced of that, then I encourage you to study out the history of pants (and skirts/dresses). Were they male or female garments at first, how did they change - is it acceptable to God for the opposite sex to be wearing them now? God has not changed - if something offended Him 3500 years ago, I believe it still does.

where do you get it that it's an abomination?

Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Pretty clear that men wearing women's clothing and women wearing men's clothing is an abomination to God. What is not clear and will involve study and prayer is what constitutes the clothing of each gender.

After studying out the issue of pants - how it was men who wore them in the Bible, the history of pants in North America - I am firmly convinced pants are a man's garment and God doesn't want women wearing them (and vice versa - He doesn't want men wearing skirts and dresses either).

Hello Jerry. Let me ask you a question.

Looking at the various cultural elements in the world today, are we to look at this by where the person reading this verse lives?

In scotland, they have the kilt. In the middle east, flowing robes (by both genders).


I guess a simpler question would be:
Where is the line drawn that decides what belongs to what gender in respect to that persons location?

Thanks Jerry.

I see where your coming from. You have some good points that I want to take a look at a little more before I answer the matter further.thanks for the thoughts!

I already addressed the issue of the kilt. The Bible does not give cultural rules - but rules applicable to mankind in all cultures.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by jerry

I already addressed the issue of the kilt. The Bible does not give cultural rules - but rules applicable to mankind in all cultures.

You suggested looking at the history of clothing to determine what is and isn't gender-specific clothing. That would seem to be an appeal to cultural authority. That's the problem -- this verse in Deut. doesn't actually tell us what exactly pertains to a man or woman.

As for pants: The only reference I find in the Bible about them (breeches) is a garment specifically designed for priests. They are not even said to be for men in general, but for priests. More often the Bible mentions robes, which I can say I have never put on except in a hospital.

The verse quite obviously teaches that cross-dressing is an abomination, but you have to admit that it does not mention pants or dresses.

This has to fall under the same kind of thing as what constitutes "long hair" -- the Bible doesn't specify, so we have to let the Holy Spirit do that work. We know that it is a shame for a man to have long hair, but the Bible does not tell us how many inches is long. Setting up a rule about it strikes me as the error of the Pharisees, who added their own traditions to the law in order to make sure people didn't transgress the law.

You're right, Brandon, the Bible does not specify (beyond breeches) what is male or female clothing - only that there is supposed to be a difference between them, and that to wear clothing pertaining to the opposite gender is an abomination to the Lord. The Bible teaches that men (yes, certain men, not necessarily all men) in the Bible wore breeches. Breeches are pants.

I presented my convictions and conclusions on the issue - an application, if you will, of what I believe that verse is talking about. Whatever your conclusions, you certainly have to agree that God is not pleased when we do what that verse is telling us not to do. I am sorry if I came across as indicating in any way that my convictions/conclusions were the only way of applying that passage - I was just attempting to clarify what I believe that passage is stating and how it applies to the dress issue we face today. I am not a pharisee and do not teach if a woman is wearing pants that she is not right with God (which would be legalism if the Bible did not teach that). At the same time, I am standing for what I believe the passage to be teaching, even if others do not agree. Because of my convictions, I would not have my wife or daughters (if and when I ever get married and have children) wear pants - though I don't go around in public rebuking women I see in pants.