Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? - Religion (6) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? (28289 Views)
Wearing Of Trousers, Earings And Make-up By Ladies Will Not Take Them To Hell. / Dr Olukoya Of Mfm Place Embargo On Wearing Of Trouser By Female To Church / is The Wearing Of Necklaces And Ear Rings Scriptural In The Bible? (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply) (Go Down)
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by SailorXY: 12:11am On Jun 21, 2012 |
FXKing2012: talking about culture... how about that culture that permits marrying ur sibling from same parents? do u think they have a different judgement before God? many cities worshipped idols in ancient times, the law was given to Moses for Israel... did that exempt the other idol-worshipping cities from God's wrath or judgement?   |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 12:17am On Jun 21, 2012 |
SailorXY: lolz. Check my profile and threads. I have stood against mastubation in this forum. I have stood against ungodliness in the body of Christ and many more. I guess you am mistaken for someone else and if not, I take your comments as it is. You are entitled to your own opinion but you have not proved anything I said wrong, just passing judgment. 1 Like |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 12:22am On Jun 21, 2012 |
haibe: Okay, let me once and for all show you from the same context of Deut 22:5 that, those laws were ONLY GIVEN TO ISRAEL. Take a look at this: If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, [both] the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil [size=20pt]from Israel[/size]. Deut 22:22 Kjv. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 12:27am On Jun 21, 2012 |
Deut 21:18-21 commanded parent to kill their stubborn and rebellious child. How many parents have really obeyed this law? If wearing of trousers by female is a sin, then, not killing your own rebellious and stubborn child is also a sin. Do u agree? Both are laws contained in book of Deut but of different chapters anyway. 1 Like |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 12:40am On Jun 21, 2012 |
@ haibe, "When you build a new house, you must build a railing around the edge of its flat roof. That way you will not be considered guilty of murder if someone falls from the roof. Deut 22:8 "You must not plant any other crop between the rows of your vineyard. If you do, you are forbidden to use either the grapes from the vineyard or the other crop. (9) "You must not wear clothing made of wool and linen woven together. (11) "You must put four tassels on the hem of the cloak with which you cover yourself—on the front, back, and sides. (12) "Suppose a man marries a woman, but after sleeping with her, he turns against her and publicly accuses her of shameful conduct, saying, 'When I married this woman, I discovered she was not a virgin.' Then the woman's father and mother must bring the proof of her virginity to the elders as they hold court at the town gate. Her father must say to them, 'I gave my daughter to this man to be his wife, and now he has turned against her. He has accused her of shameful conduct, saying, "I discovered that your daughter was not a virgin." But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.' Then they must spread her bed sheet before the elders. The elders must then take the man and punish him. They must also fine him 100 pieces of silver, which he must pay to the woman's father because he publicly accused a virgin of Israel of shameful conduct. The woman will then remain the man's wife, and he may never divorce her. (13-19) "But suppose the man's accusations are true, and he can show that she was not a virgin. The woman must be taken to the door of her father's home, and there the men of the town must stone her to death, for she has committed a disgraceful crime in Israel by being promiscuous while living in her parents' home. In this way, you will purge this evil from among you. Deut 22:20-21 "Suppose a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or mother, even though they discipline him. In such a case, the father and mother must take the son to the elders as they hold court at the town gate. The parents must say to the elders, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a glutton and a drunkard. Then all the men of his town must stone him to death. In this way, you will purge this evil from among you, and [size=20pt]all[/size] [size=20pt]Israel[/size] will hear about it and be afraid. Deut 21:18-21 WHICH OF THESE LAWS DO YOU PRACTICE AND FOLLOW? AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THE CONTEXT IS "ALL ISRAEL" OR "IN ISRAEL". You don't have to agree with me on this topic BUT I have shown you too much enough prove that those laws are ONLY for the Jews. 1 Like |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by SailorXY: 12:43am On Jun 21, 2012 |
fridayiwere: Deut 21:18-21 commanded parent to kill their stubborn and rebellious child. How many parents have really obeyed this law? If wearing of trousers by female is a sin, then, not killing your own rebellious and stubborn child is also a sin. Do u agree? Both are laws contained in book of Deut but of different chapters anyway. u'll make more sense in the joke section    |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 12:47am On Jun 21, 2012 |
SailorXY: Please stop abusing people. ALL you have to do is prove your point from the word of God that women wearing trouser commit sin. Okay. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Nobody: 12:49am On Jun 21, 2012 |
@Goshen: I think Haibe believes that most of those laws have been done away with. His argument is that deut 22:5 being an 'abomination against God' makes it an eternally applicable law to both Jews and Gentiles alike. Just like homosexuality is. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 1:00am On Jun 21, 2012 |
uhonmora: @Goshen: Thank you but I have just shown him that the context says it is ONLY for ISRAEL. The "ALL" is for "all Israel". I have proved that from the same Deut 22 context. It's left for him (haibe) to still prove otherwise. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Nobody: 1:01am On Jun 21, 2012 |
Personally, I do not see anything wrong in ladies wearing trousers as long as it's modest. As a matter of fact, there are certain occupations and sports where it would be more appropriate for ladies to wear shorts and trousers than skirts (think of women in the military, engineers who have to wear overalls for protection, female footballers, e.t.c). For some, trousers keep them warmer in extremely cold weather. Any lady can wear trousers if she wants to as long as she's modestly dressed. Would God damn a christian lady to hell just for wearing modest trousers? I dont think so. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 1:31am On Jun 21, 2012 |
uhonmora: Personally, I do not see anything wrong in ladies wearing trousers as long as it's modest. As a matter of fact, there are certain occupations and sports where it would be more appropriate for ladies to wear shorts and trousers than skirts (think of women in the military, engineers who have to wear overalls for protection, female footballers, e.t.c). For some, trousers keep them warmer in extremely cold weather. Thank you and God bless you. This is the same message I have preached all through here and aside of modesty, the motives also. If a woman wear trouser to seduce a man, that is between her and God but if she wears it as a normal wear, I don't see the word of God condemning such and the word of God didn't call it a sin especially as it regards to our NT because the OT was given only to Israel but now, God is NOT working with ONLY Israel as a nation. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Nobody: 5:05am On Jun 21, 2012 |
If 'it is an abominatx to the Lord' shld apply, then it shld b regardles of time n place. Dat means women shld nt serve in an organizatx whr trousers ar bn worn, no nysc 4 them, they shld stand dir ground cos its an abominatx to the Lord. If Deut 22:5 stil holds today, then it is only our native wears that we shld b wearing. Whr dnt we see anythx bad in women wearing shirts, polo, round neck but only trousers when we al knw it is smhw mainly 4 men. D moral of dat passage is dnt dress to d extent dat people wil confuse u 4 another sex. For example Tyler perry wil cast like a woman to act as if he is a woman. Dat is d basis. If we want to spiritualize dat passage today, it means women shld nt 'wear' wht belongs to man in d sense dat women shld nt exercise final authority in d church. If they must 'wear'(teach, pray, evangelise etc), it must b done in a covered position. There is no how acculturatx wil nt tk place only dat we must nt reduce our standards. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Nobody: 5:16am On Jun 21, 2012 |
In my tribe, d only recommended dress 4 ladies is iro n buba n 4 men is agbada, dansiki. You can hardly see people wear these again except during engagement ceremonies. Infact we never had anythx lyk skirt in our mode of dressing, it was borrowed, d idea of men wearing shirt was borrowed n its nw official. Nw we av trousers that men cannot even wear, if u do they wil tel u its women wear. Why is it only trousers we detest 4 them, why shld we accept skirts, polo, shirts n leave trousers since everythx was gotten 4rm d same place. Jalamia worn by hausa is smhw lyk gown worn by male n female, why do we accept dat since al were borrowed. If u want to follow dat verse to d core, then no acculturatx..wear only ur native wears dat are recognised. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 8:02am On Jun 21, 2012 |
fridayiwere: Deut 21:18-21 commanded parent to kill their stubborn and rebellious child. How many parents have really obeyed this law? If wearing of trousers by female is a sin, then, not killing your own rebellious and stubborn child is also a sin. Do u agree? Both are laws contained in book of Deut but of different chapters anyway. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 8:04am On Jun 21, 2012 |
I'm yet to see a direct answer to d question posted above |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 8:45am On Jun 21, 2012 |
The whole essence of the law in Deut was to put way evil from among the people of Israel and to instill the fear of the Lord in the mind of the people at that material point in time .And that particular scripture (Deut 22:5) in question, was to discourage both men and women from putting on dresses to confuse people about their sexes- dressing to an extent that people will would mistaken you for another sex. . |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 9:07am On Jun 21, 2012 |
"All who rely on observing the law are under a curse,for it is written cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the book of the law" .Gal 3:10. Cursed is everyone who obeys only Deut 22:5 and does not obey other laws written therein. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by LogicMind: 9:22am On Jun 21, 2012 |
Goshen360: he can't he just listens to pastor and thinks that everyone else is evil |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by fridayiwere: 9:48am On Jun 21, 2012 |
Don't get me wrong pls. I quoted the scripture and gave my analysis or verdict according to the scripture. If u have any reason to disagree,pls counter it with the scripture instead of going personal. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Ptolomeus(m): 7:37pm On Jun 21, 2012 |
JeSoul: Ptolomeus,Hello dear friend I guess you mean the picture ... Well, I've seen posted on another thread, the picture of a completely naked man with a goat on his shoulders and bible in hand ... That woman was not even naked ... on the beach wear less clothing ... Well ... My intention was to make a joke, not to distort the thread, much less to offend anyone. Anyway, I totally agree with you. My apologies. I reiterate my deep affection and friendship. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by haibe(m): 9:55pm On Jun 21, 2012 |
I see some people keep asking questions i have answered in different posts, so sorry ℓ̊ won't repeat myself, the posts are not yet erased therefore we can still read them, some one said we ought to still follow all laws if we were to obey deut 22:5. E.g "Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou has sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. "Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together. "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woolen and linen together. "Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of this vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself." If we must obey verse 5, should we have to obey these verses as well? There were three different kinds of laws given to Israel in the Old Testament: dietary laws, ceremonial laws, and moral laws. Some would put the dietary laws under the ceremonial laws, however, a distinction can be made. Obviously, dietary laws restricted the items Israel was allowed to eat. This was mostly for health reasons. One needs to understand that Israel did not have all the modern conveniences for insuring the safety of their food. Neither did they have government agencies to guard the food quality. Ceremonial laws were given to teach Israel spiritual lessons and to make provision for their inability to obey moral laws. Not that there was anything inherently evil in the prohibited practices, but Israel needed to learn some important Spiritual principles. For instance, Deuteronomy 22:9,11 taught Israel the doctrine of separation. They were not to marry the heathen, nor accept their ways. This principle was carried over to the New Testament in 2 Corinthians 6:14, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers." Moral laws were prohibitions against practices contrary to the nature of God's holiness. Since God's nature has not changed, moral laws are still to be obeyed today. For instance, "Thou shalt not kill" was a moral law. Since man was made in the image of God, to kill a man is to strike out against God. Of the Ten Commandments, 9 were moral laws and one was ceremonial. How can we know? We can know by reading the Scripture. Exodus 31:14 clearly states that the Sabbath was to be a sign between God and Israel. Verse 17 states, "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever..." Colossians 2:14- 17 informs the church that the observance of Sabbath days was blotted out at the cross and is not binding upon the New Testament Church. However, man is still to love God with all his heart, soul, and mind (Matt. 22:39). Man should still keep himself from the graven images of idolatry (2 Cor. 6:16). The Lord's name should not be taken in vain (Rom. 2:24; Jas. 2:7). When Paul commanded children to honor their parents (Eph. 6:4) his reason was that it "is the first commandment with promise." Committing adultery, lying, and stealing, are still sins because God's holiness has not changed (Mal. 3:6). How do we know that Deuteronomy 22:5 is part of the moral law of God? The answer is found in the verse: "All that do so are an abomination unto the Lord." Since God has not changed, that which was an abomination to Him 3000 years ago is still an abomination to Him today. Compare Deuteronomy 22:5 with Leviticus 11:10 and you will discover that the word "abomination" was used in the dietary laws. However, certain foods were to be an abomination unto Israel, they were never said to be an abomination to God. Deuteronomy 22:5 cannot be set aside when deciding which clothes are right and wrong. Its principle remains for the New Testament Church as "correction and instruction in righteousness." |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 6:59pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
And I heard my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ say: [size=15pt]Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.[/size] John 7:24 |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 7:00pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart." 1 Sam 16:7 Niv |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Image123(m): 9:12pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
And it is very good as you, haibe & image are talking it out - there are many silent readers who will profit from your discussion. And oh, I have discussed the issue of women speaking in church, women wearing make-up etc etc at least twice with snr brother Image in the past so I will just take the back seat on this one . Cheers & Godbless brother.i won't really say Image123 has been talking it out, i also feel that urge to take a back seat like you since oh, i had discussed it at least twice before. But what can man do, there is little or no helper coming in to discuss, everybody wannabe silent readers so i have to get up from time to time as it were. fridayiwere: Deut 21:18-21 commanded parent to kill their stubborn and rebellious child. How many parents have really obeyed this law? If wearing of trousers by female is a sin, then, not killing your own rebellious and stubborn child is also a sin. Do u agree? Both are laws contained in book of Deut but of different chapters anyway.When we say ceremonial laws and moral laws, actually there is no such terms found in the scriptures. Infact the words ceremonial and moral do not appear in the KJV. So we should not come here to puzzle people and give them our man made laws that state that ceremonial laws are unimportant, and moral laws are. That would be exalting our man made traditions above the Word of God. i don't understand why we(Goshen and co) would say that the 10 commandments are the moral laws, and then give out some examples at our convenience to be ceremonial laws. It appears that we do not then know the meaning of those words. Because actually, the sabbath law is ceremonial. When we say ceremonial and moral, that's for better understanding, that's theology. But the Bible teaches that the law of God is one. If there is any division at all, it is two, and the two is love for God, and love for others. The whole law is divided into those two. In other terms, it is one, the law is love, simple and biblical. Rom 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Love is the fulfilling of the law. It's contradictory telling people not to fulfil the law. Rom 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. So loving your neighbours and loving God is what the whole law is about. When we say ceremonial laws in the OT, those are those rites and formalties, many of which we do not need to waste time doing again BECAUSE Jesus has done them for us. Like cleansings and animal sacrifices. Take this turtle dove, sprinkle that, if a person sees this he is unclean till evening, and its likes. Now we know that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin, hence we do not need to take no turtle dove or heifer, we have a substitute, a better one at that. We are not unclean as Christ has cleansed us, and shown us a new and living way. We can eat his and that BECAUSE God has cleansed. But that is not to say we should not do anything ceremonial, weddings are ceremonial, the Lord's supper is ceremonial, water baptism is. So its wrong to conclude that ceremony is gone. Some parts of church services are ceremonial and ordered/arranged. Every law of God is love and still very applicable to us, any. They are love. The Bible is our basic instruction and manual for living on earth. It's not all about heaven and hell. MAny ask, so you mean if i do this or don't do that, God will send me to Heaven or Hell. Not everything is for qualification to Heaven or Hell. Some are for your health, some are customary, for basic relationships and inter-relationships, some for the ecology, and on and on. Let me quickly breeze through that chapters fridayiwere asked on. It is still much applicable and beneficial to us. I'll cut for easier reading. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 9:52pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
@ Image123, Can I asked you few questions please? Maybe you might be able to answer this? I guess you are preaching a strange and another Gospel, am just afraid. However, this is my question to you: Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Heb. 10:9 Kjv. Then he said, "Look, I have come to do your will." He cancels the first covenant in order to put the second into effect. (NLT) What do you understand by that verse? |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Image123(m): 10:00pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
Deu 21:1 If one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him:Some of these commandments are judicial, to regulate behaviour and judgements, and to help judges who were subject to the Word of God. If you are not a Judge, and not under the Jewish constitution as it were, some of them may not be totally practicable by you of course. In the few verses above we can learn that God demanded accountability, responsibility and value for life. If they knew the murderer of course you know the judgement, and it is well stated in another passage. In this case, it be not known who hath slain him. Yet, the elders and the judges were to come together, with the assumption that the cities around the peremiter may also have something to do or know of it, or to help track down the murderer. And then they swear to not knowing of it and offer a sacrifice and prayer to God. This is basic detective work. This principle is useful and applicable in sane places, where the law enforcement agencies work hand in hand to discover a crime/criminal. Deu 21:10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive,This is permission and condition for marrying a captive, as usually the law didn't encourage them to marry non-israelites. In this case, this is a captive that could either be killed or become a slave. But they were permitted, if you "fall in love", instead of the other two options, you could marry her. But she is given her rights and privileges, and you are inturn given a full month to consider your decisions. They didn't go ahead to r.ape them or behave like the gentiles simply because she is a captive. It was a sane thing and a very much enviable law that we need in our days. Deu 21:14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.i think this is beautiful. should we say we are not under the law, this doesn't apply? The opposite is sheer wickedness. You married her, then sell her again as a servant, that's wrong, even today. So far, all these apply to us. Deu 21:15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:Can anybody say this should not apply to us today? We are not under the law, therefore we should be partial to our children, that's wrong forever. Deu 21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:Please, note that this is a judicial matter. It's not jungle justice. They didn't bring the child to the neighbourhood and stone him. They didn't stone him out of anger in the house because he didn't go and fetch water. They took him to the judges, the elders. When? When they felt he was useless. He was not just stubborn and rebellious, it was his nature, they had chastened him, and talked to him but he would not hear father or mother. They had lost hope. What do you want to do with such a child in the first place? Well, the judgement then was to kill him, so that evil is put away, and others will hear and fear. What kind of child would not listen to his parents or to elders, but will be rebellious. Rebellious is defying authority, fighting to overthrow a government or other authority. What sort of useless child is that? You want to pamper that kind of kid. No, of course take him to the authorities that can correct him. We still judge such a useless child today! Do you say, we are under the new testament, leave him. No, we judge him. He's just not going to be killed because of grace that came by Jesus. It's the same grace that saved the woman caught in adultery from being stoned. The adultery is wrong and will continually be wrong, that's the law. The stoning is good and right and holy, and Jesus said someone should cast the first stone. He didn't argue against the judgement, but by His grace now, the sinner/convict need not be condemned. He/she can be converted. The adulteress can become a child of God by grace, so too can the rebellious hopeless son become born again, and fervent in spirit. It is grace that brings this. If he/she continue in sin, they will ultimately still be judged by God. The new testament doesn't give them a go ahead to transgress the law. Deu 21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:Can anybody who isn't ignorant really say that this is useless to us. This is gthe basis for Christ's sacrifice. This is why we can say Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. This is the passage that made Him a curse for us. How can anybody say this is irrelevant. Or that Deut 22v5 is irrelevant because of the surrounding verses. This is just few sentences, 5 verses away. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Image123(m): 10:08pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
@ Image123,What is the first covenant which he speaks of? Then you would know what was taken away. The covenant/agreement that He made with Israel that Aaron and his house would offer Him sacrifices, offerings, and burnt offerings for their sins. Read the passage please, and its context. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Image123(m): 10:11pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
e.g Num 25:13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 10:12pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
@ Image123, I don't want to go into the debate of ceremonial and moral law stuff with you over and over again. If your claim is that the word "ceremonial and moral" don't appear in the bible and so, there is nothing like that. Well, permit me to say you err in that aspect. Ceremonial includes ordinances as I have stated before. Do you see any ordinances in the ten commandment? Where are you only holding onto trouser? What about stone rebellious kids? What about non-virgins? What about the ones that relates to eating? what about different cloths materials? What about mixed farming? What about wearing tassels and fringes? For you to say because ceremonial as a word don't appear means we are not making sense is to say we should not believe in trinity, trinity don't appear in the bible. There are many words we use as terminologies today just to explain issues but they dont appear in the bible and you know it. So don't come up with such teachings as there is no ceremonial or moral in the bible. I can as well debate you on this topic without the use of ceremonial or moral law usage, if we are to generalize the law. WELL, KINDLY ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOVE AND LET'S GO FROM THERE. |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 10:24pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
Image123: So now you agree with me that the first (OLD) covenant WAS WITH ISRAEL? AND NOT WITH THE CHURCH? |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Image123(m): 11:36pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
Deu 22:1 Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother.This is LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR AS YOURSELF amplified.It still applies today, except one wants to be hypocritical. Deu 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.Like i said at the start of this thread, i do not normally or usually go about correcting or condemning people on this verse and its applications. But if we are going to be truthful, at least for the purposes of this thread, and to prove all things. Then we should note that this verse sits in a higher class. A class of ABOMINATION UNTO THE LORD THY GOD. So that even if by any chance, other verses around it are trivialized, this verse shouldn't. Be that as it may, i've talked much on it, i'm not going on another talk. But it seems clear and undisputed that trousers belong to men from history and from the Bible. It is some years ago that women began to wear trousers. Otzi the IceMAN is said to have been enjoying what belongs/pertains to him B.C. Some people ask of clothing like stockings/socks and co. It does not belong to any one gender as it were. Anyone can wear socks, slippers, glasses/specs. They do not GENERALLY specifically belong to one gender. Deu 22:6 If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree, or on the ground, whether they be young ones, or eggs, and the dam sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou shalt not take the dam with the young:This is the common sense right thing to do. And its of benefit to the ecology and against animal cruelty anyway. If you took the mother, and left the young or the eggs, the young and the eggs will perish. That's not good, but if you took them you can use them or raise them. And you do not know for sure that the bird belongs to someone. Such a common sense rule should still be useful for us, in its applications. Deu 22:8 When thou buildest a new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thine house, if any man fall from thence.For God's sake, how can somehow say or infer that obeying this verse is playing religion? We should be responsible with our properties, and build to approved standards. So because na my money, you should endanger lives. Safety should be a core value. Your generator, your electric cable, your rabies dog, your undomestic germanshepherd dog, all should not be handled or maintained carelessly and to the detriment of others. You should build a house where anyone including kids can get to the roof and play, and there is no barricade, or mesh or burglary proof. This is so very applicable to many senseless and careless nigerians. Deu 22:9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.This is a responsibility on agricultural standards. God's promises come with conditions and responsibility. Blessed shall be your this and that is not beans or magic, it took discipline, not just trial and error, and crazy research that could lead to permanent damage of the best specie due to multiple crossings over time. Also deals with animal cruelty, and spiritually unequal yoke. They all still have their applications.. When you bring a donkey and a cow to work together, you would actually be punishing them, especially the donkey, and getting your work done. It is still wrong to do that today. You let those animal rights people catch you. On the clothing, it still applies that we do not follow the world in its fashions but be simple and modest/moderate. A garment of divers sorts was not simple in those days in comparison(please do you research instead of throwing questions only, i also like and know how to be the silent reader, setting tough questions). Deu 22:12 Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself.The verse is in line with the previous, the children of Israel were expected to be different from others, distinct, separate. Believers today are under same rule, be separate and distinct, even in your appearance, modesty and sobriety. Num 15:38 Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribbon of blue: Num 15:39 And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the LORD, and do them; and that ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring: The Israelis still wear this stuff, today, we have the word of God written in our hearts, but the applications of this law remain significant. What you wear says a lot about you, and how you would be addressed. the people of the world are bold and eager to print all sort of rubbish and sentences and pictures on shirts. i find gullible christains wear shirts that say all sort of ungodly stuff. Things that even ordinary serious muslins would not wear. Your cloth is your identity most times. It easily says you are a fan of a particular football club or music star. We should do all things to glorify God. 1John 3:13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. Deu 22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,Here is the basis on which Jesus Christ was talking about divorce wherre He said Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. Only that He wouldn't go with the stoning judgement because He brought grace. This is the same chapter. Deu 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.And then the other judicial laws on marriage which i would not 'bore' you with now. In all, this is significant, all of God's Word is significant. Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. Psa 19:8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. Psa 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. Psa 19:10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Psa 19:11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. Psa 19:12 Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. Psa 19:13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. Psa 119:128 Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way. i'm not under the law, but i have great regards for God's law, just like the apostles and Jesus. Luk 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Act 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: 1 Like |
| Re: Is Wearing Of Trousers By Female A Sin? by Goshen360(m): 11:50pm On Jun 24, 2012 |
@ Image123, Please STOP all these long story stuff, it's boring and distortion to this thread. I asked you a question and you responded that the "old covenant was the covenant God made WITH ISRAEL THAT AARON....". So I asked you will you NOW agree with me that the Old Covenant was only given to ISRAEL?. Now, if you insist on we obeying the laws of Moses (generalizing the law now), Kindly answer this second question and let's go straight to the point: If you have a rebellious son/daughter, will you stone that child to death? Answer YES or NO Please and let's treat issues straight. |
.(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply)
Samuel Adefila Abidoye's 2018 Prophecy: Celebrities And Politicians Will Die / Quote Me, Pastors Use Juju To Hold Their Members! --- Guru Maharaj Ji’s / Prophet Jeremiah Omoto Fufeyin Shares N30 Million To Members For Christmas
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 146 |