Deutoronomy 22 vs 5: The woman shall not wear that which is partaineth unto man,neither shall a man put on woman garment: for all do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

they now designed and claim its women trouser, nothing like women trouser in the bible, God is not a fool.most women will go to hell because any abomination to God is a sin and before anyone codemn me here, she has to keep the rules of God too

imagining B2F in a suit preaching..o lawd

Depending on your interpretation of the verse.

The truth is this. God didnt create or make trousers for men. God didnt proclaim it a mans cloth.

What the bible teaches is that, whatever belongs to a woman. That is whatever cloth a woman has worn on her body, a man must not wear, and whatever cloth a man has worn, a woman must not wear. Very simple.

Before you aceept the church teachings hook, line and sinker. Study yourself and seek more knowledge.

Thanks

newken: Depending on your interpretation of the verse.

The truth is this. God didnt create or make trousers for men. God didnt proclaim it a mans cloth.

What the bible teaches is that, whatever belongs to a woman. That is whatever cloth a woman has worn on her body, a man must not wear, and whatever cloth a man has worn, a woman must not wear. Very simple.

Before you aceept the church teachings hook, line and sinker. Study yourself and seek more knowledge.

Thanks

so i you saying a wife can nt wear her husbands shirt or nickers

@OP, I have actually asked this question on another thread sometimes back. As trousers are seen as men's wear, what about the items below which are also now worn by women but have not received such publicity as trousers:

1. Trainers
2. Boots like NYSC, oilworkers
3. T-shirts even NYSC tees
4. Shirts (its just the button setting that now differentiates men's from women's)
5. Face-cap
6. Suit jackets also worn by females
7. Wearing colour blue clothes since the colours are seen to pertain to men
8. Belts
9. Socks
10. Underwear shorts often worn under many skirts for modesty

Please be aware that I am not arguing for or against as I believe strongly in modesty, dressing to please God and being a worthy ambassador of Christ.

ewo!! b2fuck is nw a preacher na wao i wonda who is deceiving who here. cos 4 me i rather wear trousers than Bleep around like b2fuck.

Alwaystrue: @OP, I have actually asked this question on another thread sometimes back. As trousers are seen as men's wear, what about the items below which are also now worn by women but have not received such publicity as trousers:

1. Trainers
2. Boots like NYSC, oilworkers
3. T-shirts even NYSC tees
4. Shirts (its just the button setting that now differentiates men's from women's)
5. Face-cap
6. Suit jackets also worn by females
7. Wearing colour blue clothes since the colours are seen to pertain to men
8. Belts
9. Socks
10. Underwear shorts often worn under many skirts for modesty

Please be aware that I am not arguing for or against as I believe strongly in modesty, dressing to please God and being a worthy ambassador of Christ.

Hi Alwaystrue,

Your list above seem to be mostly unisex. I believe it only matters when the items can be categorised distinctively as being meant for either of the sexes.

Hi @Ola,
Nice to hear from you.

I think 'Unisex' came about to accommodate women into what men only wore before, don't you think?

Suit jackets are tailor cut seperately for men and women, I am not sure we have unisex jackets.
Most trainers too have mens different from womens even in the shops but I have often known men as those initially using trainers as most sports then were done by males. There are usually mens trainers from womens therefore.

Shirts and polo (edited) have, I assume, been worn by men and blouses by women. These blouses hardly have button down all the way to the end but now women wear shirts/polos (edited) with different location of button to men. This is not unisex. There are womens shirts/polos from mens shirts/polos.

A new born in a blue attire is seen as a boy while a newborn in a pink one is seen as a girl as that is the colour often seen as pertaining to the sex but sometimes that is not the case. Men wear pink and women wear blue. What about that?

In the interhouse sports events of my younger days, the girls wear was like a pair of shorts with a flap around it to cover it as a form of modesty and may be identity. In principle the girl is wearing covered shorts....she is wearing a garment pertaining to a man under her skirt, what about that?

There are trousers also tailor cut for women as well, if we want to use the idea of unisex or mens wear seperate from womens then it shows there is no case then. My Objective view.

I believe these laws actually have a much more deeper meaning than is often seen literarily sometimes. There was reason for that law which I think we may be missing.

My mind went to three things though....
1. Deception (like yahoo yahoo boys do by masquerading as women online and vice versa);
2. Envy, lack of contentment, pressure which makes either sex want to act like the other e.g some gays.
3. General vanity leading to sex change operations which some claim saying they feel they are a man trapped in a woman or vice versa and a host more.

Now regarding wearing clothes, there are questions I think we can ask ourselves:
1. Is it sensible and modest. Does it display my feminity (laps, tummy, cleavage, backside, explicit shape, groin) and masculitnity (groin and pecs) interms of showing off something that can turn the other sex on especially if it is not my spouse?
2. Does my dressing show I have love for my neighbour I.e. Could it make my neighbour sin just like no.1 above?
3. Does it glorify God? If I am going to a gathering that wearing trousers will be misconstrued, why wear it then especially if I have other things to wear?
4. In the event I slip or fall, will the cloth cover up to a large extent my modesty? If I am going for an exercise involving jumping, working at a height or lot of leg movement, what is best worn in such case?

I feel the most important thing is that when we wear clothes, many times our heart will tell us whether it is good or bad. Many ave reached a stage in their walk that they commune with God on what outward dressing glorifies Him.

When our heart is broken, contrite and peaceful in God, it will show without effort on the outside.
I Peter 3:4-5

Alwaystrue: Hi @Ola,
Nice to hear from you.

I think 'Unisex' came about to accommodate women into what men only wore before, don't you think?

Suit jackets are tailor cut seperately for men and women, I am not sure we have unisex jackets.
Most trainers too have mens different from womens even in the shops but I have often known men as those initially using trainers as most sports then were done by males. There are usually mens trainers from womens therefore.

Shirts have, I assume, been worn by men and blouses by women. These blouses hardly have button down all the way to the end but now women wear shirts with different location of button to men. This is not unisex. There are womens shirts from mens shirts.

A new born in a blue attire is seen as a boy while a newborn in a pink one is seen as a girl as that is the colour often seen as pertaining to the sex but sometimes that is not the case. Men wear pink and women wear blue. What about that?

In the interhouse sports events of my younger days, the girls wear was like a pair of shorts with a flap around it to cover it as a form of modesty and may be identity. In principle the girl is wearing covered shorts....she is wearing a garment pertaining to a man under her skirt, what about that?

There are trousers also tailor cut for women as well, if we want to use the idea of unisex or mens wear seperate from womens then it shows there is no case then. My Objective view.

I believe these laws actually have a much more deeper meaning than is often seen literarily sometimes. There was reason for that law which I think we may be missing.

My mind went to three things though....
1. Deception (like yahoo yahoo boys do by masquerading as women online and vice versa);
2. Envy, lack of contentment, pressure which makes either sex want to act like the other e.g some gays.
3. General vanity leading to sex change operations which some claim saying they feel they are a man trapped in a woman or vice versa and a host more.

Now regarding wearing clothes, there are questions I think we can ask ourselves:
1. Is it sensible and modest. Does it display my feminity (laps, tummy, cleavage, backside, explicit shape, groin) and masculitnity (groin and pecs) interms of showing off something that can turn the other sex on especially if it is not my spouse?
2. Does my dressing show I have love for my neighbour I.e. Could it make my neighbour sin just like no.1 above?
3. Does it glorify God? If I am going to a gathering that wearing trousers will be misconstrued, why wear it then especially if I have other things to wear?
4. In the event I slip or fall, will the cloth cover up to a large extent my modesty? If I am going for an exercise involving jumping, working at a height or lot of leg movement, what is best worn in such case?

I feel the most important thing is that when we wear clothes, many times our heart will tell us whether it is good or bad. Many ave reached a stage in their walk that they commune with God on what outward dressing glorifies Him.

When our heart is broken, contrite and peaceful in God, it will show without effort on the outside.
I Peter 3:4-5

Good job my sister. I agree with your conclusion and I'm also learning a thing or two about this unisex thingy. Keep up the good work, the Lord is your strength.

OLAADEGBU:

Good job my sister. I agree with your conclusion and I'm also learning a thing or two about this unisex thingy. Keep up the good work, the Lord is your strength.

@Ola, thanks. Please me too I am learning on this. I think motive pays a major part in how we will be judged. Remember I Corinthians 13 says if a person gives all he has to the poor without love, it is for nothing so the action doesn't count much without a right heart. That is why I will really not give a conclusion on this matter as heart matters a lot.

Personally I think modesty, cleanliness and motive (whether to deceive or to prove a point, lead astray or be disobedient) matter a greater deal.
I would rather prefer people dress as an ambassador of Christ all the time which the word of God guides us to through the help of the Holy Spirit.

It will interest many to know that a lot of laws like this and other overlooked ones have their righteous meaning and intent. So much that the Holy Spirit is the one who will remove the veil of the letter of the law and reveal its intent to you.

Alwaystrue:

@Ola, thanks. Please me too I am learning on this. I think motive pays a major part in how we will be judged. Remember I Corinthians 13 says if a person gives all he has to the poor without love, it is do nothing. That is why I will really not give a conclusion on this matter as heart matters a lot.

Personally I think modesty, cleanliness and motive (whether to deceive or to prove a point, lead astray or be disobedient).
Personally I would rather prefer people dress as an ambassador of Christ all the time which the word of God guides us to through the help of the Holy Spirit.

It will interest many to know that a lot of laws like this and other overlooked ones have their righteous meaning and intent. So much that the Holy Spirit is the one who will remove the veil of the letter of the law and reveal its intent to you.

Amen. My conclusion is whatever we do we should do it to the glory of the Lord. God was the first fashion designer when He probably made a leather jacket for Adam and a furr coat for Eve. But the motive was to cover their unclothedness and to dress decently. Anything that reveals or exposes what should be concealed should be done away with. We should endeavour to please our Lord in whatever we wear giving glory to God.

OLAADEGBU:

Amen. My conclusion is whatever we do we should do it to the glory of the Lord. God was the first fashion designer when He probably made a leather jacket for Adam and a fur coat for Eve. But the motive was to cover their unclothedness and to dress decently. Anything that reveals or exposes what should be concealed should be done away with. We should endeavour to please our Lord in whatever we wear giving glory to God.

Are you lying for Jesus as always?. . .

Fanatics want to bring the children of GOD under bondage by stipulating what they should or should not wear.

A woman can be promiscuous either with a trouser or a skirt and the same can be applied to other designs and clothes models.

When the bible says a woman should not wear a man's clothes , it has nothing to do with design or model , rather it is the literal and physical putting on of clothes by a woman that had been worn previously by a man or the other way round.

In my deerprlife days wearing flowery shirts and beautiful clothes was frowned upon as worldly , this was bondage to the extreme and prevents focus on the weightier matters of scriptures.

mazaje:

Are you lying for Jesus as always?. . .

For your information. God was also the first Surgeon when He surgically operated on Adam to bring forth Eve.

OLAADEGBU:

For your information. God was also the first Surgeon when He surgically operated on Adam to bring forth Eve.

According to Jewish mythology right?. . .The Hindu and Arabic mythologies have different tales from the Jewish mythology you know. .

OLAADEGBU:

Amen. My conclusion is whatever we do we should do it to the glory of the Lord. God was the first fashion designer when He probably made a leather jacket for Adam and a furr coat for Eve. But the motive was to cover their unclothedness and to dress decently. Anything that reveals or exposes what should be concealed should be done away with. We should endeavour to please our Lord in whatever we wear giving glory to God.

Ola, leather jacket and fur coat Lovely.
God indeed is the first fashion designer and surgeon. Remain blessed.

Alwaystrue:

Ola, leather jacket and fur coat Lovely.
God indeed is the first fashion designer and surgeon. Remain blessed.

And He didn't have to use anaesthetics to put Adam to sleep.

Thanks Frosbel for the above. Very apt.

I agree also with Alwaystrue; although I find that Olaadegbu also agrees with her and so I must quickly point out an issue there

Ola has never hidden the fact that he is die-hard deeper life. Most people, including Prado the rapper know what deeper life stand on concerning dressing. The scripture quoted by the OP is the position of the deeper life church on dressing and not modesty as he claims on this thread. The deeper life takes the law of Moses in totality; unfortunately they leave so many other part of it undone.

The Christian position on anything, including dressing, is not bc Moses laws say so; it is bc the law of the Spirit of life do not permit it. So we resort to our motive and judging our heart on whatever action we take. Are we lead on this action? Is our heart condemning us? Is it of faith? That is the NT position.

It doesn't matter what U wear. What matters is are U wearing Him? He will determine for U what is appropriate.

^^^^

I know where Ola is coming from, having been a deeperlife for over 10 years and now no longer a member, it's easy to see the rottenness of it all, the emphasis on dress while the heart is as black as coal, emphasis on outward issues very similar to Islam ,while neglecting the weightier matters of the heart that lead to mercy , kindness and love.

Believe me, I have seen holier than thou brethren erupt like a volcano and sisters who cover from head to toe with the deerplie hijab while displaying hardness of heart.

frosbel: ^^^^

I know where Ola is coming from, having been a deeperlife for over 10 years and now no longer a member, it's easy to see the rottenness of it all, the emphasis on dress while the heart is as black as coal, emphasis on outward issues very similar to Islam ,while neglecting the weightier matters of the heart that lead to mercy , kindness and love.

Believe me, I have seen holier than thou brethren erupt like a volcano and sisters who cover from head to toe with the deerplie hijab while displaying hardness of heart.

Believe you? Anyone trusting or believing you is doing so at the expense of their soul.

OLAADEGBU:

Believe you? Anyone trusting or believing you is doing so at the expense of their soul.

oh yeah, he we go again, with your childish images displayed to create fear in the hearts of the weak.

I rebuke you.