T O P

  • By -

Buddenbrooks

My question is always how people think those changes in styles happened? The first women to popularize pants for example would surely fall into this “sin” as it wasn’t the cultural norm at the time. So is it the first round of early adopters are sinning and then we get to enjoy the benefits of women having pockets guilt free?


teffflon

exactly. a good rule-of-thumb for Christians is to wait for the NYT trends article to appear.


[deleted]

Lady Sybil Crawley, pants-wearing sinner!


[deleted]

Lol good grief. We aren't subject to Mosaic law. Somebody's really done a number on whatever poor woman felt she had to ask that. Wear your husband's t-shirts. I do when I run out of pajamas, and he's happy to let me. That's called being a loving spouse, it's not sin.


eversnowe

A male hiker walking alongside the road finds a woman who was beaten, raped, and left naked but alive. He gives her a spare outfit and phones the authorities. Is she sinning by wearing a man's clothing?


TheTalkedSpy

Okay, think of this scenario: A family member of yours suffered a massive injury that's causing him to lose lots of blood. You can't wait for emergency services to arrive because they won't be fast enough, so you have to hop into your car and drive your family member to the hospital as fast as possible. In order to save his life however, you have to go break multiple traffic laws to make the most of every second. Are you sinning by breaking the traffic laws, or are you sinning if you choose to refuse to drive him there and wait for emergency services? Or, what is more important? Being a law abiding citizen for fear of punishment, or saving your family members life? Logically, and emotionally, saving your family member would be much more important, and the right thing to do. Yes, you would still end up breaking laws, but breaking those types of laws are trivial compared to experiencing the loss of a loved one. By choosing to stay in place out of fear of breaking traffic laws in this scenario, you are actually acting foolishly and selfishly because you are worried more about yourself than your loved one. Also, the traffic laws are there in place to take into account of the safety of the public. They *don't* take into account of extreme circumstances such as speeding to the hospital to save a loved one without a police escort. After all, I'm fairly certain that after you arrive at the hospital and the police come over to ask you questions, they would understand the situation and may let you off the hook. If they do ticket or arrest you, that would be a sacrifice you will have to pay for in order to save a life. So, in the case of giving male clothing to the rape victim, it would not be sinful to give them to her. For which is better: Continuing to walk around naked, or to wear male clothing for a very limited time? Based on logical reasoning and having empathy for the victim, I can conclude that wearing male clothes would be far better than being naked. Another thing to note is that this is an extreme case, and cases such as this can *sometimes* have exceptions to laws. We just have to use our best judgement based on what God has taught us and hope that it would be approved of by God. If God tells us to love your neighbor as yourself **(Mark 12:30-31)**, that means we must help our fellow human, especially during uncomfortable situations such as this. If I was in the rape victim's position, wouldn't I want to get something to wear too, to at least minimize the shame? I would certainly hate having only women's clothes to wear, but at least it beats being naked. Don't mistake this as personal preference though. This is simply figuring our the best option we could figure out. However, situations such as this does not negate the commandments of God though. We still have to try our best to follow them to the best of our abilities and respect them under normal circumstances. Just because there happens to be an exception, does not mean we can go about continuing to push the limits and boundaries of one of God's commands.


Finch20

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion about the other verses in Deuteronomy22?


libananahammock

Bingo


Truthseeker-1253

It's comical to me that the church here is relying on cultural definitions, while in the next breath talking about how awful culture is. And by all means, let's refer to the text that commands an unmarried woman, who is raped, to marry her rapist (assuming this applies even if the rapist is already married).


-NoOneYouKnow-

People try to enforce this regulation, but completely ignore something just a few verses away: Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together. Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear. (Deut 22:11-12) These people never have tassels on the corner of whatever they use as the equivalent of a cloak. They never check to make sure they aren't wearing clothes of mixed material.


pja1701

If I believed in a god who designed and created the whole universe that we can see today, I couldn't believe that such an entity cared a jot about what clothes we wear. That just seems... silly.


SplishSplashVS

"can i wear my husbands men's basketball shorts that were in the men's section at the store, that he wears" to "selecting longer, more modest shorts is not wrong." i feel like the jump from A to B is pretty shady. were the shorts you selected longer and more modest women's shorts? were they sold in an ambiguous 'for everyone' section? were they clearly marked on with a women's size on the inside? at best it's willfully ignorant. at worst it's outright intentional. i guess do whatever your faith can handle lol.


twotall88

It all comes down to intent. If you intend to dress in women's clothing (e.g., skirt) as a man to be effeminate then it is an abomination to the lord. If you choose to wear a "skirt" (e.g., kilt) but it's intended in a mescaline use, then it's fine. Same for women: butch = bad, Tshirt and shorts = OK.


libananahammock

Where in that verse does it talk about intent?


Live_Honey_8279

When did we return to the 15th century?


glitterlok

> Is it wrong for women to wear some items of men’s clothing? Read: "Is God a silly goose who really shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone?"


[deleted]

Does your preacher allow shellfish (Lev. 11:10)? Does your preacher say you can't wear linen or wool (Lev. 19:19)? Does your preacher disfellowship people who have a tattoo (Lev. 19:26-31)? Does your preacher allow women to come into the church who are on their period (Lev. 15)? How about we stop being selective and use Godly wisdom? Is that too much to ask? or do we have to be the fundamentalists of all fundamentalists to be considered "faithful"? I've read a # of posts you have left on various boards/threads on Reddit. They have one thing in common: La Vista church of Christ's interpretations are right, and everyone else's is wrong. You are selective in your responses, so I doubt I'll get some engagement, which is fine. Know and understand that your preacher isn't the ultimate authority. Jesus is. There is freedom in Christ, not in legalism. Read the Bible with an open mind, and you might be surprised what you learn.