Is It Biblical for Women to Wear Pants?

A critique of an email.

By Mary Stephens

Ephesians 5:15 See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,

 

One of our readers received a letter from a friend in which the friend was giving a lot of excuses as her justification to wear pants. They include what appears to be her own inventions and probably things that someone who has "freedom in Christ" spoon fed her.  Based on the title of this article, you may have come here expecting something different from what you are actually going to read.  The point here is not the "pants on women" issue.  It's a lot bigger than that.  Please don't get sidetracked on that issue and miss the main point.  The main point is that a lot people are messing with scripture, misinterpreting it and actually calling God a liar in order to avoid dealing with the subject of modesty in general.  Please consider carefully where you are getting the justification for you own "liberty" in regards to not only dress, but also any other areas of life.  We may all be guilty at times of redefining scripture to excuse ourselves of sin or carelessness.

My replies in purple Arial font follow the statements made by the woman which are preceded by >>. Her spelling has been left intact for the most part.

---------------------------------

>> How do I explain old covenants and new covenants to you? There are
>> SEVERAL covenants in the bible...did you know that? Each time a new
>> covenant was made, the "rules" changed.

This is not true. If you study the covenants of the Bible you will find that some of them are built upon the others. This is true of the New Testament covenant. It is built on the Old Testament law, for the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. If we did not have the O.T. law of Moses' covenant, we would not know what sin was. If we did not have the prophetic aspects of those covenants we would not know what it was that Christ came to fulfill. Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.   Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Secondly, there are many covenants in the Bible that do not relate to many people other than those that made them. Examples: David and Jonathan, Jephthah, Laben and Jacob, etc. There are a good deal more than several, and to say that the "rules" change with each new one is ridiculous, in a word. Of course they do, for they were made for many different purposes. The most notable covenant in the Bible is the covenant God made with Abraham regarding his seed, a covenant which is not only still very much in effect today, but will last through the Kingdom of Jesus Christ on this earth.

By the way, using the covenants of the Bible to prove that women don't have to dress modestly is rather a stretch, in my opinion.

>> Some things I can think of that used to be the "rules" that have
>> changed:

But God did not trash all of these things!

>>sacrafice of animals --

Will possibly be restored, read the end of Ezekiel.

>>writ of divorsement --

This was given for the hardness of their hearts in the first place.  Jesus clearly teaches that from the beginning it was not so!  Then He strengthened the "rule", if you will.  This does not help her case too well since we see that Jesus refers all the way back the Garden of Eden and pulls that "rule" up to the present.  Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 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.

>>not eating certain meats --

This has been changed, BUT we still have certain things that we are not to eat. Acts 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled...

>>no work on sunday at ALL (which now is CLEAR in the bible is ok) --

This shows her lack of knowledge of scripture. The Jews did not work on what is our Saturday, the seventh day of the week, the Sabbath. Now it is "ok" to work on Sunday, BUT Romans 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it... Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Also, the day of rest principle was established by God from the very first week of creation, long before there was any "law" or covenant.

>>stoning for sins --

This is not our job any more, but it is the job of the government, so to speak.  Acts 25:11 For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die...  Romans 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. And, people are still worthy of death though we are not responsible to enforce it.  Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

>>mercy and grace (Jesus) --

I am not sure why she says the "rules" of mercy and grace have changed. That does not make sense. Grace shows up as early as Genesis 6:8, and mercy in Genesis 19:19. They continue throughout the scriptures.

>>paying debts with children --

Presumably she is talking about selling children into slavery to pay debts. But, this was not really a "rule" per se.  It was more a result of carelessness or sin or unavoidable life events.

>>slaves --

First of all, the word "slave[s]" only shows up twice in the King James Bible (Jeremiah 2:14, Revelation 18:13). Otherwise, they were referred to as servants which covered various positions of servitude.

This was not changed either.  There is no N.T. command to no longer own servants if you're a Christian. 1Corinthians 7:22, Ephesians 6:6, and the whole book of Philemon. Colossians 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:  In Christ servants and masters were to treat each other in a Christ-like manner, Ephesians 6:5-9.  (Note: the kind of slavery that we had in the U.S. was not Biblical, and IF the truth been preached by the preachers in the South without interference we may have avoided that dreadful war.)  

Also note that even in the Old Testament there was mercy in regards to slaves. In particular: Deuteronomy 23:15 Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: 16 He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.

>>preists used to make sacrafices for the people for forgiveness of
>> sins (now WE go to Jesus)

She got that right. Using all this to justify wearing pants, though?  I don't get it.

>> Old laws, rules were created not by GODS authority, but by scribes,
>> rulers, elders, pharasies,etc.

Phew. Talk about blaspheming the scripture!

The O.T. law was given by God so that the Jews would know right from wrong because they did not have the Holy Ghost in them permanently like saved people do today. I tremble for this lady that she would even say such a thing! But, she shows herself so ignorant of the Old Testament that perhaps she has not read the account of the giving of the Law of God at Mt. Sinai and has only taken someone else's word for it. You cannot read it with the Holy Ghost teaching you and come up with that. Psalm 119:53 Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake thy law. [Note that it says "thy law" It is not man's! This is repeated constantly in the O.T.]

>>And the bible is the written word, inspired
>> by God...but must be taken within context.

This is quite a mouthful coming after the previous statement. This woman is obviously highly confused.

>>God showed us in the old
>> testament things to come, and how they did things of old....and within the
>> part of how they did things of old...he was showing us that we are FREE
>> from silly laws and rules made by men of old...but are under a new covenant.

>> **See scriptures where RELIGIOUS LEADERS questions Jesus authority. Luke
>> 20: 1-8, 19-26.... And Jesus turns around and questions THEIR LAWS.
 

By Jesus' day the Pharisees had added a huge amount of rules to the Old Testament. It was called the Mishnah, and it was not included in scripture, except for a few examples given to show what they taught. What Jesus was objecting to was this mass of rules that supposedly "interpreted" the O.T. law that He had given Israel. The Pharisees were preoccupied with enforcing these man-made rules and interpretations (sound familiar?) and did not allow people to simply live by the law God had given them. Due to the accusations made against God here, I will include a whole passage that explains this clearly:
Mark 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. 2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. 5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. 10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

I had to check the passages that she referred to carefully because it didn't agree with what she said was going on there.  Luke 20:1-8 certainly has to do with the chief priests and scribes questioning Jesus' authority, but 19-26 is about giving tribute to Caesar and has nothing to do with the laws of the O.T.

>> Read John 10:34-38 JESUS SAID, "is it not written in YOUR law?...."
>>(But tells them that this law is AGAINST GOD.)

Only He does not tell them any such thing! He is establishing His testimony BY this law! She is messing with God's word horrendously. John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.  Note that what Jesus quoted is the word of God and it cannot be broken.

Also, the verse that Jesus is quoting here is in Psalms, which Jesus includes with the law! (Psalm 82:6) So, now the Psalms are included as being "man made" according to this woman's reasoning.  It is doubtful that this woman would have thought of Psalms as part of the law. So, what exactly is "man made" and what is God inspired then? What a mess!

>> Matt. 23:27-28 Jesus tells the scribes and pharisees they are not GODLY
>> even though they outwardly "appear" to men as Godly....they follow the
>> "rules" but their hearts are not right with God.

I guess she missed verse 23 where Jesus TELLS them to keep both the weightier and the lighter matters of the law. Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Note that He says not to leave the other undone. That means DO BOTH. Also, He includes judgment, mercy and faith in the law. Does that mean that these are human inventions and we should not have mercy and faith? Have these "rules" changed too? Rather, these are the more important aspects of the law and they carry over into the New Testament church teaching very much! John 7:24, 1 Corinthians 2:15, 1 Corinthians 13:13, Hebrews 11:6, James 2:13, James 3:17, etc.

>> Did you know that God can change his mind? (only a few examples for sake of time...)
>> 1-God was going to kill everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah ...and Lot (?) went
>> before God and begged God to spare them. God told Lot if he could find 10
>> righteous men, he would change his mind and spare them all.
>> 2- Noah went before God and begged God to allow for a writ of divorsement.

She really shows her ignorance of the Bible here by not getting either story right. And, this is a pretty pathetic straw to grab to prove it's all right to wear pants (or dress however she pleases).  Just sayin'... 

Also, there is no indication that God would change His mind about women wearing men's apparel, and men wearing women's apparel because He has not changed His mind about Sodomy. 1Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 ...shall inherit the kingdom of God. [It would be interesting to ask these double-minded folks if, since it is all right for women to wear men's apparel, would it be all right for their men to wear dresses or nice skirts and blouses? That one always puzzles me.]

>> Under OUR NEW covenant, divorse is a SIN.

Yes it is, and this is an odd item to use to prove her point since Jesus strengthened the law regarding divorce and remarriage. Even those who try to excuse it have to admit this, since under the O.T. law they were allowed to divorce for even minor offences. Deuteronomy 24:1-3, Mark 10:2-12.

>> Galatians 3:17-22 (We are not under the law of the old testament any
>> longer, we are under the promise of the new covenant...the "Laws" of the
>> old testament cannot override the "promise"....The Law does not make the
>> promise of none effect.)

She is partially right, but muddled again.  Let's see what the Bible actually says: Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. 19 ¶ Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. The promise in this context that she claims is the new covenant is clearly described as one that pre-dated the Law. It was to Abraham. The Law was to keep people out of trouble as it were, and to "school" us in our need of a Saviour. Now we get in on the promise to Abraham through faith in Jesus Christ.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Her problem is that she is coming at this from a totally unbiblical perspective -- to prove that the law is trash and you cannot use it to learn right from wrong!  In fact, I'm almost inclined to say that what she's trying to say tends toward another gospel.

>> Acts 15: 1-29 **** (Debate over gentiles keeping the law, The "councel"
>> sends an office letter, James proves gentiles are free from the LAW.)
>> Acts 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have
>> troubled your words, subverting your souls, saying ,Ye MUST be circumcised,
>> and keep the law, TO WHOM WE GAVE NO SUCH COMMANDMENT. 15:28 For it
>> seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater
>> burden than the necessary things. (15:5-6 a group, a councel, came
>> together to make a rule/law...)

At first she appears to be proving that we don't need to keep the Law because the council never commanded that, but at the end she appears to be saying that whatever the council decided was wrong because a group of men making a rule/law. So, we are to believe that what they decided was "no good?" By whose authority? Paul certainly did not seem to think that their decision was "no good" because they "made a law". He carried the message to the saints. In 1 Corinthians 10:23-28 God restates part of this "man-made" rule for us. But, what does the emphasis on "TO WHOM WE GAVE NO SUCH COMMANDMENT" mean? What point is she trying to make with that? Her reasoning here appears to contradict itself, unless I am missing something. Someone was telling them to keep the law, and they told them not to, and to only mind a few certain things, but they are all apparently wrong in her eyes. Or are they? Her comments are very confusing.  1Cor. 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

>> John 18:31 Take him and judge him according to YOUR law.

Unbelievable. Pilate said this! He was not a Jew, he was a pagan Roman. It was not his law. It was their law! They answered "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:" because they could not lawfully crucify a man, which is what they wanted, v. 32.

>> Mt. 12: 1-21 (Arguments over healing on the sabbath day, and Jesus
>> challenges their "law" about that.)

I do not see any place in this passage where Jesus challenged them about "their law". Rather, He is establishing His law in a way that they cannot see because of their self-righteousness. (Hello?)

Romans 10:2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

>> 1 Peter 3:1-5 (It isnt what a woman dresses as, or adorns herself
>> with...its her HEART)

1Peter 3:4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible...  In other words, the outward things are corruptible.  It is what is in the heart that counts, because what is in the heart comes out! It certainly does matter what a woman dresses herself "as".  Even the world knows that certain attire sends signals - though some modern women are working hard to deny this.  Proverbs 7:10 And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart. Proverbs 4:23 Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.

>> As for God making Adam and Eves clothing....it specifically says WARMTH,
>>of course it would have to cover more than a loincloth....to make one warm...I
>> think you are reading more into that than NECCESSARY.

This is astounding. Warmth is not mentioned at all. Talk about reading more into it than necessary! She reads in something that is not even there. Genesis 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. She really does not know whereof she speaketh. The main problem is with her heart. She is going about to establish her own righteousness and is reinterpreting and changing the words of God to do so.

She, and we all, need to pay attention to the admonition in the New Testament regarding what the Old Testament is for. 1Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

I deleted a bunch of references here because it was just more of the same, and it became monotonous.

>> Acts 3:17 Through ignorance ye did it, also as your rulers.

Speaking of the crucifixion of Jesus. Does not apply to the subject.

Dear ones for Christ's sake, please remember this - Always check the cross references of anyone trying to "prove" their position! It is so incredibly easy to slip something in that doesn't fit, and if no one checks up on them, they get away with it. Open your Bible and Look for Yourself! Acts 17:10-11 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.  (By the way, beware of those who inundate you with so many references that you don't have time to look them all up. There are bound to be some out of context or misused entirely among them.)

>> 2 Cor. 2:17 For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God.

No, of course not. People who mess with God's word never admit that they are corrupting it. Yet, as we have seen above she has absolutely blasphemed the Bible in her assertion that the Law of God was a man-made deception.

>> 2 Peter 3:16 Men do some scriptures unto their own destruction.

2Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. She is messing with the word again. This is not speaking of people doing the scripture to their destruction, it is clearly speaking of unlearned and unstable people wresting the scriptures "unto their own destruction." Now there are plenty of people that do not rightly divide the word of truth and end up trying to obey sections that are for other times, past or future. This, however, is talking about the folks that mess with God's word, specifically Paul's writings that are hard to understand, because they are ignorant and easily swayed. The word of God is a two-edged sword and if you do not handle it right, you will cut yourself! Find something to wrestle with that you can win against, but leave God's word alone. [If you have read this article this far, you probably don't need to be reminded of all the unbelievable wresting of scripture that we have seen already.  Sad.]

>> Luke 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves
>> before men; but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed
>> among men is abomination in the sight of God.

Here she cut off her nose to spite her face. Is dressing modestly highly esteemed among men? Do people in general try to promote modesty for women - the wearing of skirts/dresses, clothes that decently cover, etc.? NO! If you want to see something highly esteemed among men look at the ad sheets, TV, Hollywood, Bollywood, the malls, etc. It is tight fitting or mannish pants for women, skimpy dresses and skirts, almost non-existent swimwear, and showing as much flesh and undergarments as they can get away with much of the time. It is the minority that take a stand against the immodesty of heart and dress! Women behaving and dressing modestly is not highly esteemed among men in this day and age we live in. It especially isn't esteemed among women.

And, if she is referring to the Old Testament Law as being highly esteemed among men, she is still grossly wrong. Who highly esteems the Law of God? The vast majority? NOT A CHANCE! It is the few. Even in Old Testament times we see repeatedly that Israel as a whole did not esteem the law of God. Over and over they had to be chastened by the Lord to get them to return to even partially keeping of His law.

>> 2 Tim. 2:15 Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that
>> needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING the word of TRUTH.

Too bad she didn't try this out instead of just quoting it.
Also too bad she didn't quote it right. The Bible says "thyself" because it is a singular thing. It means that you - singular - not the group - are responsible for your own studying and rightly dividing, so that you, yourself, will be approved unto God. It is not to the church as a whole. You cannot ride someone else's spirituality to approval from God! If you don't know it, you won't show it.

>> The scripture in Duet 22:5 says...it is an abomination TO the Lord thy
>> God...but who said that? GOD didnt say that, MEN did. They made laws and
>> SAID they were of God...when they were OF MEN, and that is answered above
>> in those scriptures I listed. I emailed my friend SPECIFICALLY about this
>> scripture. Waiting for her answer....

The infernal regions will freeze over before she gets a Biblical reason to trash God's word like that! This is absolutely unspeakable! It is enough to test one's sanctification. Since she believes lies about God's Law and so thoroughly destroys its authority, she has nothing to tell her what sin is, so how does she even know she needs to be saved? And, what pray tell was she saved from? Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Christians can get way off and out of God's will, but they will get chastened for it unless they are spiritual bastards. Hebrews 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Defending the right of women to wear pants or whatever they want is an obsession with some people, almost cultic in nature. They have shut their minds off and are merely regurgitating the brainwashing that some "wise woman" or guru has poured into their wee heads. But, remember - they choose to do this.  2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

>> 1 Tim. 2:9-10 modest dress:

Actually, it says modest apparel - AND shamefacedness, AND sobriety, AND good works.

>>who's definition of modest do we follow?
>>GODS definition is not the rules of the old....

Chapter and verse please? So far she has not given one scripture in context to prove this wild accusation that the Old Testament Laws were man-made, while we have observed the exact opposite!

>>My answer to this is we must
>> search our own heart and seek God about what is proper for us.

Which being interpreted is, "Thou shalt not tell me how to dress."(1 Opinions 3:5) "You aren't allowed to judge." "I've got my liberty." And, several other "I-love-my-own-way" slogans. Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Well, we have a king - the Lord Jesus Christ - and He has told us what is right in His eyes and according to His heart in the N.T writings to His church. Maybe His answer would be "good enough"?  Why must we search our own hearts anyway? And, what if someone's heart is defective? In fact......aren't they all?! Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Proverbs 28:26 He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool: but whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered.

I don't want to trust my heart. It's gotten me into too much trouble already. It would be more to the point to search God's heart and revealed word for the answer, rather than to search our own deceitful hearts. But, that is where she runs into trouble. She does not trust God's word and has called Him a liar, and therefore she cannot trust His heart! Psalm 119:128 Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way.

I wonder what this "wise" woman would say if some other woman searched her heart and decided that it was all right to wear a bikini to church? As a matter of fact, there have been false preachers who actually convinced some woman that it was God's will for them to commit adultery together. Is that OK because they "searched their heart" and found it all right "before God"?! Or what about the cases that have been reported of women actually stripping to the waist "in the spirit" in Charismatic churches? They would tell her it was "proper" for them before God.

The problem is this: when we judge things by our own deceitful hearts and seek God without total trust in His written word then we don't have an absolute authority other than ourselves. Everything is relative to how we feel about it. Christianity is not a religion of relativity. It is the truth that makes us free (John 8:31-32), and the truth is not negotiable! Your standard is either based on pressing ...toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Philippians 3:14 Or it is based upon self-righteousness and having it your own way. Jeremiah 8:7 Yea, the stork in the heaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle and the crane and the swallow observe the time of their coming; but my people know not the judgment of the LORD. 8 How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain. 9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?

>>Which brings me back to not purposely attracting sexual attention to ones
>> self..but with the knowledge we cannot control another person's thoughts,
>> and there are men out there that will chose to have those thoughts no
>> matter what we wear or look like.

First off, let's touch on the subject of mind control. In this day and age that is a big deal because there are so many people who know that we can in effect "control another person's thoughts" through the power of suggestion, "grooming", sexual and spiritual dominance and probably other things of which I'm not aware.  Any woman who doesn't know that she can influence ("control") a man through her dress and body language either hasn't watched any T.V. or movies and/or is completely naive, OR she is in denial and refuses to take responsibility for her own actions, OR she is a liar.

If the man "shouldn't think those kind of thoughts" - and he shouldn't - how does that justify the woman professing godliness who is dressed like a harlot? What kind of ungodly, self-righteous logic is that? This gives a lot of room for wickedness, folks! Yes, the men have dirty minds and it's about time you learned it and took action in your attire to help them overcome the flesh!  Not because it's your fault that you're attractive, but because they are sinful! We all are in fact.

What's more, it's about time you realized that we all have "dirty minds" at times and need to
Just in passing, I'd like to note that the tendency in American and Western culture for women to admire each other's bodies and "sexiness" is a disturbing trend, and even more so as we see Christian women being influenced by it. This does not reflect the mind of Christ in either the O.T. or the New. Prv. 31:30, I Tim. 2:9
do everything possible to get the victory over them. Did it ever cross your mind that there may be women in your fellowship who were saved out lesbianism and are still struggling with those old lusts?? There were in Corinth!
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Romans 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. Romans 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.

It is supposedly always the big, wicked man's fault that he is tempted, no matter what the "sweet, young thing" wears or does? Wow! This is totally contrary to the underlying concept being taught in Romans 12:1-15:4. We are all supposed to be helping each other in Christ - in many areas, not just dress. Go read it in your King James Bible, and please note the last two verses: Romans 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me. 4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Our example is Christ, and the Old Testament is for our learning! That "man-made law" which this woman so quickly damns to hell contains the two most important standards of all time by which we can live life with complete "success" and freedom in Christ. Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.   If you live by these in light of the word of God, you will be successful in God's eyes no matter how poor or rich you are! But, it is a full time job.

Again we see, For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Galatians 5:14 Is it loving thy neighbor to lust after her?  No. Is it loving thy neighbor to tempt him to sin? No.  This is a two-way street and it's more than a little frustrating that Christians on both sides insist on emphasizing one issue to the exclusion of the other.

Romans 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. We will give account to God, not man; and while she claims this as her excuse for justifying ungodliness, it would be good for her and those like her to get ahold of the thought of standing before a righteous God whose name is Jealous, Ex. 34:14. Do you really think that He would lightly pass over the matter of a Christian woman dressing in a way that caused a brother in Christ to commit adultery in his heart (Matt. 5:28) when said woman could have dressed more discreetly and knew it? Do you think on the day of giving account to God that giving a brother an occasion to fall will be brought up? Do you think that God will look lightly on a saved man who took liberties with the ladies (regardless of their dress) because his lust was burning out of control? It works both ways.  As Christians we are responsible for how we behave toward each other in Christ. The very fact that the Lord tells us not to put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in our brother's (or sister's) way means that we CAN do this! There are many ways, but one IS dress - contrary to what the "free" crowd wants to admit.

Of course, it's impossible to dress in such a way that no man will lust. There are men so full of adulterous thoughts that nothing really inhibits them, even extreme modesty (ask someone saved out Islam or the Amish religion). But, if we can reduce causing these kind of thoughts in God-fearing Christians, shouldn't we make the effort within reason? Romans 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Romans 12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. Romans 13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.  Yes, there are men that will think evil even when a woman is dressed modestly and is behaving discreetly, it is impossible to avoid that in this wicked world we live in, and it isn't the woman's fault.  But, that does not excuse dressing in the attire of an harlot!  Just sayin'... James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

>> As for the bible talking about pants, and only addressed to men: in the
>> new covenant, the bible says there is no male nor female to God.

Oh, please! (Excuse me while I giggle.)

We are actually expected to believe that because there is no male nor female in Christ, therefore it doesn't matter what we wear? This is actually laughable. Again, how about running it the other way? Since there is no male nor female, etc. how about if we dress the men in skirts and long hair? If the logic supposedly works one way, then why doesn't it work the other way? Hmm....? I'm still waiting for an answer on that one.

In fact, there are other things that we could justify based upon this unlearned and unstable wresting of the word of God. Examples:  No one should marry (Shakers). Women preachers are OK. (Methodists, Pentecostals, and others.)  There are verses that we know prove these things wrong, but based upon this foolish logic they could apparently be discredited. When you start messing with the Book, the Book starts messing with you, and pretty soon you have yourself quite a mess.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Go read this verse in context in the King James Bible. It is not justifying women wearing men's apparel or dressing immodestly. In fact, NOTHING relating to apparel is even in the passage. She has destroyed the real beauty of the passage by this false claim. The beauty of it is that we are all one in Christ and we were brought to Him by the schoolmaster - the law which she has condemned as false. You will not find a place on earth where women are treated better and more wholesomely than in a church that is obedient to the whole council of God and in a culture that has been well salted by the Bible. Check it out in history!  (Just to be clear here - I AM NOT speaking of so-called "Biblical Patriarchy" or any similar deviations!  That is not sound biblically and does not follow N.T. church teaching according to truth. The way women are treated within it is too often disgusting and dishonoring to the name of Jesus Christ! See more here.)

NOTE: Perhaps this woman is a wild exception, I don't know, but I have certainly never heard such strange and ungodly extremes for justifying women wearing pants. Hopefully this will be of some help to someone in answering this kind of unlearned and unstable reasoning on the subject. But, please remember from this the importance of looking up the verses they give and examining the excuses used in light of scripture when anyone goes to a lot of trouble to "explain" why they "have liberty" to be an offense in the body of Christ.

Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. 30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: 32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. [God grant that we all be more like this! If those who are convinced of the necessity to dress modestly would strive consistently to do this, we would be a better example to others.]

>> I sent this question to that friend of mine:
>> Her answer as follows:

She now quotes from another source.

>> As far as the "rules" of the Old Testament were written by God for the
>> Israelities. The foundation is this. The Israelities are under a
>> different set of rules than us because of Christ's coming and completing the law.

>> The Israelities did not know how to be spirtual, or like God living in
>> them, because Satan was the ruler of the earth, and the Holy Spirit had
>> not come. The Holy Spirit could come on a few special people (prophets),
>> but did not dwell in anyone because of the curse. The price of Christ's
>> life had to be paid before that could happen.

>> When Christ came and paid the final price, he completed the law. Some of
>> the laws remained the same, i.e.: the tithe. Some of the laws were
>> upgraded, ie: marriage (the husband was not allowed to divorse his wife
>> for just any reason. Now only adultery or if the unsaved person left was
>> the spouce free to marry.)

>> Yes, the Old Testament and the New Testament both are the inspired Word
>> of God, but by comparing the laws and tracing them through each
>> testament, one can see what Christ did for the law. He came not to
>> abolish it, but to complete it. Now we live by faith and love. Then
>> they lived by the law. See love has replaced or improved some of the
>> law. But some of the law is still intact because it is fundamental to
>> our relationship to God, ie: the tithe.

This woman sounds considerably more coherent, but she still has some things mixed up. I really do hope her message that the law was from God got through to lady no. 1, though!  She very much needed to be straightened out on that!

First of all, the tithe is not a law that carries into the New Testament church, and it is certainly not "fundamental to our relationship to God"! That could easily be mistaken as an element of works in our salvation. When it comes up in the N.T. after Christ's death it is in the context of Old Testament people and what they did. (See Hebrews 7) This is something that has changed. 2Corinthians 9:7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver. ("not of necessity" means that it is not law.) 1Corinthians 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

If you want to tithe, fine and well. If that's what you purpose in your heart to give, more power to you. Interestingly, even the Old Testament Jews gave a lot more than just a tithe. That was just one of their offerings. There were heave offerings (Ex. 29:27-28, Num. 15:19-21), freewill offerings and first fruits (Lev. 12:18-23, Deut. 12:6 and 17, Ex. 22:29) [Also, when they did tithe they tithed of more than just their money. Matt. 23:23, Luke 11:42]

Secondly, just because a law is not mentioned in the New Testament, does not necessarily mean that it is "no good" to God now. For example, the only place that we find what God thinks of bestiality (having sex with animals) is in the Old Testament. (Ex. 22:19, Lev. 18:23, Lev. 20:16) The fact that it is not mentioned in the N.T. does not mean that it is now OK! In other words, the O.T. law still tells us what God thinks of sin.

Also, love has not replaced or improved any of the law. Love did not fulfill the law, Jesus Christ did, Mt. 5:17. (He did not "complete" it as she puts it, but He fulfilled it.  The words are not quite the same.) We live by faith in the righteousness of Christ; Rom. 10:3-11, Rom. 4:13-16. "Love" (and I use that in a broad sense) has become a sort of idol to many "Christian" women by which all things are judged and measured. Jesus Christ is the measure. The law reveals to us what God considers holy and righteous, and the Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled every aspect of it. We could not keep the law. We needed a Saviour that could do that for us, who could offer us His righteousness through simple faith and belief.

Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

CONCLUSION

Is it biblical for women to wear pants? I'm not going to answer that for you. Sorry. If you are born again you have the Holy Spirit of God inside you. You can read the scriptures and the Spirit will guide you into all truth. That is His job. But You have do the listening. Neither I nor anyone else can do it for you.

John 16:13-14 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Yes, I did just more or less cleverly evade the question. My intention never was to answer it for you in the first place. My desire is for my sisters (and brothers) in Christ to learn to walk in truth themselves without having to be told what to do by some authority other than the word of God. It is a shame in the body of Christ today that so many Christians depend on others for their authority instead of upon the word of God and His Holy Spirit.  Some women can be modest in some styles of pants, while other women are very immodest in dresses and skirts. In fact, some women can be immodest in very decent styles of clothing because their attitudes and actions are immodest. No set of rules will ever make you something spiritual. Only a desire to honor God and His word can do that, and that, friends, is entirely up to you.  It requires a heart change that only comes through salvation and obedience.

Micah 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

1 Peter 3:3-4 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

Psalm 119:9 Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word...11 Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

1 John 2:15-17 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

1Corinthians 10:6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted... 11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

 

 

graphics and background by mary vannattan
edited 2014