Skirts, Pants, and Deuteronomy 22:5

[mr seamstress]

It would appear that the greatest power of Deuteronomy 22:5 is that it is dividing you all and when you are divided you are more easily conquered.
John 11:35 sums up how I feel.

Thanks Susie trying to help. I doubt it they will listen to you or me.
In my community there is this woman who works as a casher in local shop, who claims to be christen. Just don't try to talk to her about Jesus with starting a story about a man wearing a robe. She let it be known she doesn't want to hear any stories about any men wearing a robe including Jesus. As you know the Bible is full of stories of men wearing a robe. This is how I would describe men hear, has no heart to hear what is needed to heard.

[Dust]

... Just like any other church they will preach over your casket and send you to hell by their hearts... Their blood runs ice cold over your funeral.

There is a time for fraternal correction, done with love (charity). But a funeral does not seem like that time. It is a time for praying for the deceased person (and pray that God forgives their sins), not a time to condemn them. Once you are dead you can't change your behavior. So we pray for God's mercy.

[mr seamstress]

There is a time for fraternal correction, done with love (charity). But a funeral does not seem like that time. It is a time for praying for the deceased person (and pray that God forgives their sins), not a time to condemn them. Once you are dead you can't change your behavior. So we pray for God's mercy.

The current church I go to is an open church for everyone, but hold man to wear a pair of pants to make it to heaven. No one should judge man this way. By that I question what is in their hearts when presiding over their funeral?
By the way clergy has preach if one has a fixation on one subject that subject is your God. To many clergy has a fixation that men should be wearing a pair of pants and makes me wonder if that a pair of pants is their God?
Current clergy preaches from pulpit with wearing a robe over his regular clothes, but see man shouldn't be in skirt or dress. The Bible does says man delivering the gospel should wear a gown.
I was taught a rose by any other name is still a rose. This means to me is a dress is a dress even you called it a robe. These restrictions who is allow to wear gowns has to go.

[STEVIE]

My advise to you Steve close your eyes, don't read this thread and shut up.

My answer a simple NO, I will not!
What is more, I dictate to no one about how they should feel about what I wear, that's their business!
I know quite a lot about bible based oppression myself, so spare me the lectures too.
As far as I can tell, this thread has helped no one and solved nothing at all.
Quite the opposite, in fact!
Steve.
NB I do not believe that you should equate a priest's robe with a dress in this context either.

[mr seamstress]

This is an interesting point, and one that Christ Himself called out (on other topics), over and over. It continued to be a theme in much of St. Paul's writings.

I hope you accept my point of view is base upon solid info. It is just a matter getting this point of view in front of others and getting it rewritten so everyone can fully understand it. What I write isn't about making everyone in Skirtcafe to believe in Christianity is about those who do believe.
This point of view isn't found when one searches if man can wear a dress or skirts. None of these web pages contain this point of view When I search. i found web page citing Deuteronomy and man will go to hell for wearing dresses and skirts. And I found web pages says man can wear such clothing, but still discourage man for doing so. I find what I wrote is rock solid and will do more in promoting man can wear dresses and skirts, still be a Christian and make it to heaven wearing such attire.
I hope Jordan accept what I post and he will put out there for others to see.

In some churches women are not allow to wear pants because of Deuteronomy and my point of view should help them equality as well. I believe in equality for all.

[JohnH]

There are two churches that allows anyone into sit in there pew in my community. But they still hold against the individual their life style or their appearance. Saying a straight man in one of these churches isn't allow on the pulpit and be in the choir because of his attire, while woman can wear anything and still allow to be in the choir. Just like any other church they will preach over your casket and send you to hell by their hearts. In their hearts they still hold Deuteronomy 22:5 against them. Their blood runs ice cold over your funeral.

In my church choir we have two tenors, a baritone, and a bass (myself). There are a lot of sopranos and altos. If I was excluded from the choir due to my attire, there would be a gap. Fortunately my attire is no big deal. If women can wear trousers, I can wear dresses.

John

[moonshadow]

No, I will take a resurrected body in whatever way the Lord wishes me to have. It could be a lean muscular masculine body free of aggression and depression or a beautiful feminine body, or whatever. And I might be able to sing a high coloratura soprano down to the deepest oktavist range.

With each passing day I feel further and further removed from the others of my species.

Several years ago I prayed to whatever might be out there listening, and I reiterate this prayer every so often... my wishes haven't changed...

If- there is an afterlife...

Then- when I when I go, I pray to God almighty that I will spend eternity roaming the universe. I want to understand what God understands. I want to understand the universe, how it operates, I want to peer behind the curtain of physics and see the mechanics and understand the equations of all that is.

I can not possibly have a frail human body on this journey. My soul must wander without my worldly shell, the eyes can not see the truth, nor can the ears hear it, nor can my skin touch it. My monkey brain lacks the ability. I doubt I'll be wearing a skirt during this time. I probably won't have any anatomy at all, as I'd be lacking a physical body. Lacking these physical attributes, I don't suppose I'll have a defined gender, which is the crux of my declaration of being of the "nonbinary" gender. It has nothing to do with worldly religions, doctrines, politics, liberalism, and while at one time I thought it might have placed me on the LGBTQ spectrum, these days I reject that notion, for even LGBTQ is a tribe and my soul is just too big to be defined by any tribal doctrine.

I was born a male, called a boy, and now society calls me a man. The truth is, I am more than whatever gender society wishes to place upon me, the truth is now and more than ever, as the world plunges itself into self-worship, I look out across the stars, when I can see them and I find peace, for it reminds me that I am a Child of God, and the universe lives in my heart. Now more than ever...

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.

Those on this thread that would sneer at the notion of placing faith in God, I ask you, would I be better served to place my faith in mankind?

Hardly.

[Kirbstone]

Moon,
I would recommend you tune in to the You-tube presentation of the Festival of Remembrance at the Albert Hall, London to help restore your faith in Humanity,

Tom

[mr seamstress]

As the average woman demands equal rights, she, herself beholden to Deuteronomy because she doesn't want men in her life to wear skirts or dresses. As she teaches men she has a right to restrict them from what they can wear, she also gives them the power to restrict women in equal ways back. This cycle is always going to continue, until the woman realize she is her own enemy.
A lot of churches decided to quit including about women can't wear pants according to Deuteronomy, but left men can't wear dresses or skirts. By that woman is still tied to Deuteronomy. The average woman believes she was set free from Deuteronomy when churches started announcing women can wear pants. As long she believes Jesus robe wasn't a dress and men have to wear pants, she will always be her own worst enemy in gaining equal rights. As long men continue to believe Jesus robe wasn't a dress, he to is being his own enemy. he is helping women to continue in not recognizing men's rights as equals to women's rights.
In biblical times Men and women clearly wore the same garments. There is reasonable belief that there wasn't any differences what men and women wore. There is nothing in bible indicate when God made a gown for man and woman had a different style due to their sex. Nor was there any indication Mary dress Jesus any different from a girl infant.
I would suspect Jesus had a hard time in getting men to wear a clothe around their genitals as women did. It is more likely men seen that piece of clothes was nothing more women's clothes for their period and they didn't want anything to do with it. Jesus gave that piece of clothe a different name in order foe men would wear it as underwear just like women, except men didn't have a monthly period. when women wore the clothe it was recognize as a rag, but when men wore same type of clothe it was recognize as underwear. Women wore underwear same as men. but their underwear was also used for women's period. Jesus never wore any pants, just underwear under his robe as women wore the same type of clothe under their robe.

Until women break away from the Bible as it is currently being taught, they will never achieve equal rights. Man will always tries to make women his slaves, and claim his right to dominate them. Man acknowledge women can wear pants, but still has some domination over woman as long he can control her from not allowing men to wear dresses and skirts. She will always do some of his bidding. She will never be free man a long he can make her believe Deuteronomy 22:5 means men can't wear dresses and skirts, a man's lies. Man with his bible going to lie to women about Deuteronomy so he can dominate her. To many women in today society don't have the intellect they are being control because of a simple false statement, by man.


I don't claim be a preacher, but I have full understanding how Deuteronomy being falsely used to control man and women.

Since 16th century church decided to make dresses women's clothes even though they still put dresses on all infants and the shirts they wore went to their knees, basically that shirt was a shirt dress that was used also a night gown. Today churches refuses to acknowledge and admit this truth and more. They gave these clothes different names to hide the fact what these clothes are. The definition of dress keeps changing since 16th century from man's opinion.
When churches claim men no longer can wear dresses and telling women they own all dresses, was in fact churches where using their power to steal man's clothes and handing them over to women. By churches claiming they have a right putting out their personal opinion, that God gave them power to be thieves in stealing men's clothes.

The fact Deuteronomy had nothing to do with restricting men ability to wear dresses or skirts and women's ability in wearing pants. When churches did concede women can wear pants, you would think that women would concede the fact that men can wear dresses and skirts also.

There is this question if Deuteronomy 22:5 translated correctly? All these facts and more needs to be put out there in one place. There is no one certain web page contain all these facts. Until then nothing going to change. When I started this thread I was hoping all these facts would come together so everyone can see the truth. Not everyone here is on board seeing these truths to be put out there in public to help man in his decision in what he can wear.

[Susie]

I'm going to assume that this post is linked to the date - the average woman doesn't know about this verse. I didn't.

[Ray]

Susie, I think that most of us Brits don’t have a clue about this stuff. It’s just not relevant to our lives. As the U.K. isn’t very religious, Deuteronomy is just a long word. Nothing to see here, etc.

However, the USA is VERY religious, so I suppose it matters a lot more to them.

[TSH]

I'm going to assume that this post is linked to the date — the average woman doesn't know about this verse. I didn't.

The average person doesn't know about this verse, period. Those who do deceptively try to circumvent this by some bizarre mental gymnastics to justify their narrow-minded attitude, just as they do with the many other contradictory verses in their holy drivel.

Susie, most Brits don’t have a clue about this stuff. It’s just not relevant to their lives. As the U.K. isn’t very religious, Deuteronomy is just a long word. Nothing to see here, etc.

By non-existent God, would I love to be in a country in which its citizens aren't constantly grandstanding for their ridiculous religious beliefs and trying to force everyone to live by them...

However, the USA is VERY religious, so I suppose it matters a lot more to them.

The thing is, not many Americans are even aware of this, outside of fanatical Bible thumpers. You'll be surprise how many Christians here haven't even read the book that they supposedly revere so much.

[Jim]

The thing is, not many Americans are even aware of this, outside of fanatical Bible thumpers. You'll be surprise how many Christians here haven't even read the book that they supposedly revere so much.

I've read the book through in a number of translations. That's why I know the same chapter says one must have tassels on the four corners of one's garment and the clothing can not be made with mixed materials. I also noticed that Gentiles, those of us who aren't Jewish, were never told to obey these laws.

[STEVIE]

In an earlier discussion with Susie, she commented on the literal amount of discussion and angst which has arisen from this one verse.
Deuteronomy 22:5
“A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God."
33 words from the "new" king James Bible.
A single sentence which has blighted the lives of men and women for too long.
We cannot change that text nor undo history but we can turn our backs and walk away from it.
33 words and a countless number following on that has no good.
We know it is wrong so end the discussion, ignore it and the power of it will cease.
There have threads locked in the past for less apparent reason, this one is simply pointless and futile.
Mods please consider.
If anyone thinks I just should not read this thread, think again, no apologies!
Steve.

[Barleymower]

“A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God."
33 words from the "new" king James Bible.
A single sentence which has blighted the lives of men and women for too long.

Obviously God didn't that. To my knowledege there is no recording of any interaction with God. A human wrote these words, probably a man. Question for me is why?
I fear that if we really got into the thick of it, a debate would rage with blame fired in all directions. The truth is probably hidden in plain sight, we just refuse to acknowledge it.