My Brother's keeper?

[Guest pixy]

lol hmm.. I have to agree with the last part of what you said Sure, I believe male oppression can definitly be a problem, as it has been in the past, but what I am saying is, there should be a difference in dress... Maybe men should be wearing something else other than pants, alright, and women should be allowed to wear pants? But according to Deuteronomy, it says a women should not wear that which pertaineth to a man. And either way, despite tradition, men are associated with pants, and women are associated with dress or skirts, etc. Sure, those can change, but either way, despite what I just said, can we find some common ground first on that there needs to be some form of standards, not defining at this point what they shoudl be?

Crystal

I disagree that we should be establishing anything of the sort here. Legalism is immitation Christianity. Why would anyone here want to promote that? But, if you insist on drafting a dress code that is not Biblicly based, then, as I've said before in this thread, let's at least use some logic. As I've said, men are being far more immodest than women in wearing pants. I'm not going to be explicit here, but if anyone needs a reproductive anatomy lesson to understand why this is, feel free to send me a PM. If we're going to make a rule that pants can only be worn by one gender, then they should be worn by women, not men.

[kittylover0991]

lol hmm.. I have to agree with the last part of what you said Sure, I believe male oppression can definitly be a problem, as it has been in the past, but what I am saying is, there should be a difference in dress... Maybe men should be wearing something else other than pants, alright, and women should be allowed to wear pants? But according to Deuteronomy, it says a women should not wear that which pertaineth to a man. And either way, despite tradition, men are associated with pants, and women are associated with dress or skirts, etc. Sure, those can change, but either way, despite what I just said, can we find some common ground first on that there needs to be some form of standards, not defining at this point what they shoudl be?

Crystal

I disagree that we should be establishing anything of the sort here. Legalism is immitation Christianity. Why would anyone here want to promote that? But, if you insist on drafting a dress code that is not Biblicly based, then, as I've said before in this thread, let's at least use some logic. As I've said, men are being far more immodest than women in wearing pants. I'm not going to be explicit here, but if anyone needs a reproductive anatomy lesson to understand why this is, feel free to send me a PM. If we're going to make a rule that pants can only be worn by one gender, then they should be worn by women, not men.

LOL I like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*no thanks on the reproductive anatomy lesson*

LOL I"ve never heard that before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At the same time, I think it would be as immodest if they wore a skirt or a dress for the very same reason lol

Oh goodness pixy, you crack me up! lol (reproductive anatomy) You are so right! lol

[Guest pixy]

I think we are called out to be different from the world... and I think if you see someone in a dress, I think a light blub kind of comes on and you think "woman".. not "man". I also wouldn't be surpsied if a man wore a flowery skirt

Alright, so we agree that there NEEDS to be a standard and that is "Modesty" right? Well, what is you definition of "modesty"? (tired of semantics).

By the way, I think I am starting to like being "legalistic" Follow the word of God, believe that God says what he means and means what he says, and then share others how Christ has worked in my life and try and encouragement them and, I'm called legalistic I think I enjoy this a lot

Crystal

Crystal, you may like following a set of man-made rules; consider, however, that these man-made rules have little or no basis in scripture. Following the Word of God is not about following an extremist, non-Biblical dress code. That is not following the word of God; it is following man. Letting Christ be manifest in us, is about letting Him shine through our hearts, our actions, and our speach. That is what lets the World know there is something different about us. Wearing a skirt when it is impractical (or even dangerous because of the weather or the activity you're involved in) does not point towards Christ. It points towards foolishness--a kind of mindlessness that the World doesn't want to be a part of. Christianity is not about rules, it's about a relationship with Christ.

Legalism is so dangerous because it misses the target of what is true, authentic, life-changing Christianity. Anytime you point to something other than Christ (such as a dress code) you are preaching to the World that this other something (such as the dress code) is your idol and what is significant about your Faith. Is that really what you want people to think Christianity is about?

As far wanting to help be able to distinguish a man from a woman, perhaps an anatomy lesson is needed here: Men and women are generally shaped differenttly and have different parts, which are obvious even when clothed. If any of your friends are unclear on that, I'm sure I could locate and recommend a good anatomy textbook. Perhaps if you mingle with those who have trouble making this distinction, then wearing a skirt is a good choice for you. For me, however, I have never had someone mistaken me for a man, and I pretty much live in pants....

[kittylover0991]

My brother's keeper. How far does this go? In the area of modesty how far does this go. Are to we take all precautions or just a few or none at all?. What constitutes modesty and why should we be responsible for anothers eyes and thoughts?

So, have we come to a verdict or various verdicts (other than my "legalism" ) ??

[Guest lnj]

What if I were to say to you Butero that pants on men show too much detail? Would you don a robe? I don't think you would. You would not don a robe in 2007 as part of your daily attire.

[Guest lnj]

Butero I think it's time to call it quits..this could become a chapter in the never ending story!

[Fiosh]

Pixy, I don't want to get crude either, so I will put this as best I can, but women's anatomy can be seen in an immodest way when they wear pants as well.

That's actually a stronger argument for MEN not wearing pants.

[Guest lnj]

What if I were to say to you Butero that pants on men show too much detail? Would you don a robe? I don't think you would. You would not don a robe in 2007 as part of your daily attire.

Oh Butero you forgot to answer this question above......

[Guest pixy]

Butero,

Since you believe that scripture is telling us that pants are not modest, is it fair to assume that you do not wear pants? If you do wear pants, could you provide an explanation as to why you, a male, with more obvious reproductive anatomy below the waist than a female, is modest in wearing a pair of pants when a woman is not?

[Guest lnj]

Butero, what should a woman wear whilst climbing a ladder?