Could someone tell me what is going on when the Pope himself has condone same sex marriage and God himself said no to it and there are several books that state this fact. 1) Leviticus 18:22, 2) Leviticus 20:13 and 3) Deuteronomy 22:5. I feel that since the Pope has done this the religion he represents doesn't represent Jehovah God and he has brought inequity into the fold and those that wish to follow him will condemn there selves.
The Bible never says anything close to raping a woman is fine. It is definitely wrong. In 2 Samuel 13, Amnon was murdered by his half-brother for raping their sister. The sons of Jacob murdered the whole city for raping their sister Dinah in Genesis 34. Judges 19 also doesn't condone rape. Deuteronomy 22: 25 says that if a woman is raped the the man that raped her should be stoned. Now to the other topic of questioning, if a man is arguing with another man and he gets hit, it is no right for the woman to step in. Especially should she not grab a man by his man parts. The Mosaic law was very clear that sexual sin in any way would not be condoned. She committed a sexual sin by grabbing his man parts and in turn she would lose that hand for committing that sin. Jesus died on the cross for us and Paul clearly says that we are no under the law, but under grace. Jesus fulfilled the law. There is no excuse to sin because of that, but we don't cut off people's hands anymore.
I agree with Chris, just to add a little, God warned Israel to stay away from the gods of the land. We see in Eph. 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Pants do not take away the femininity of a woman, but if a woman dresses butch to look a be a man or a man dress feminine to be a woman. It is our gender we are not to change or imitate. That was highly practiced in the people worshiping the ancient gods and these principalities of darkness, wicked spirits are behind this.
We see today these spirits overwhelming effect on the world, and it is welcomed and supported by our governments and societies and taught in schools. Isa. 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
My understanding of Deuteronomy 22:5 it is speaking of sexual immoral matters of all kinds that is excepted and supported today, and transgender is ok and protected by the law in many countries of the world.
Those who vehemently oppose "women wearing pants", usually quote Deuteronomy 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."
Not much else is given to support this command, so it is open to all types of interpretation. With that added phrase, "neither shall a man put on a woman's garment", I think we could assume that any type of cross-dressing (as it's referred to now), must be rejected as abnormal & unbecoming of a child of God. Why God had stipulated this, whether there was such evidence amongst the Israelites at that time, or as a warning of a future situation whether within the tribe or when they would one day be confronted with the wickednesses of the gentiles & their temple worship, I can't be sure.
What we see today (such women wearing pants, or even kilts by the Scots) are the accepted cultural norms that, at the least, are decent & unprovocative. And of course, even though an outfit might be considered male-centric, the patterns on or cut of the garment would clearly reveal the gender to which they belong. I wonder if the same opponents to pant-wearing women are then quite accepting of those women who visit the beach with next to nothing on....and then say, 'well, at least they're not wearing pants'.
For me, I think there are far more important & immoral matters to deal with in society than what is generally considered normal clothing for the genders.
I do not know about the second part for sure; but I think 1). it's talking about the dad and son getting "involved physically" (and my stomach is twisting at the very thought) because remember how vile and sick people were at that time.
2). It is talking about cross dressing (v5)
Plus the context begins in v22 to talking about fornication/sexually immoral behavior.
Hello Thomas, This verse is referring to having sexual relations with the wife of one's father, not a mother, but a step mother. Perhaps one that has been divorced or widowed, but also to take liberties with the wife of one's living father. It dishonors the father and the marital bed.
Donna; A sister in Christ Jesus - In Reply - 2 years ago
Deuteronomy 22:5
1 Corinthians 11:15
A woman's long hair is her glory and covering.
About the clothing don't wear mens clothing, men don't crossdress either!
Dress modestly. That goes for men nowadays as well. Even in the church world sometimes I literally have to look away from the tight revealing clothing that distracts and reveals private matters.
I can't help but wonder how different this world would be if every woman covered her lady parts in public. And behaved modestly and shamefacedly with sobriety. Not flashy and decked out with gold, pearls, braids, face paint, etc. I do believe that has defiled our world in so many ways.
But then I also think women who are natural and modest and are full of the sweet Holy Spirit are absolutely beautiful! Men too!
I have also had the privilege of knowing many of these modest Godly people. So it's very easy to see that the Bible is correct.
We should not force people to obey these things it should come from the heart. And some get way too judgy and mean in the churches. I have seen many in Holiness churches wearing correct clothing in a very revealing or seductive manner. Pray about it. Friendship with the world is enmity with God. Who are you trying to please? Your flesh? The world? Or the Holy Spirit?
No, that's not what I read, 1Timothy 2:9, Deuteronomy 22:5,
Modesty seems to be better in feminine styled pants, no wind or other circumstances will expose anything. The Kilt & robes worn by men, might be the foundation of the dresses ect.
Good morning, Alex N. I think I become more amazed every day at the willingness of people of the faith (Christians) to ignore Scripture. Church discipline, judging, or any other topic that poses a 'problem' or uneasiness for us should be avoided at all costs tends to be the rule of thumb. What is Peter writing about in 1 Peter 4? Judgment must begin in the house of God. What do you think that means? Read the verses preceding it. God's house should always be a house of order. I'm not declaring it's perfect, of course not, for it's full of those of us doing our best to follow Him every day. Again, it's about those who declare a lifestyle of sin and still want the security of God's forgiveness and Heaven at the same time. God doesn't play that and never will. Jesus can't be your or anyone's Savior unless He's your Lord ( Romans 10:13). Don't forget the man Jesus healed at the pool of Bethesda in John 5, read the admonition Jesus gave him in v. 14. God makes us responsible for the gift of His salvation or healing. That's what repentance is all about.
As for the woman 'caught' in adultery, somehow they forgot to bring the man forth that she was with. I think when Jesus stooped down to write on the ground, Deuteronomy 22:22-24 may have been what He was writing. Sad how people always try to catch God on a technicality to serve their purpose or beliefs.
The Bible declares that we should study to show ourselves approved unto God, a worker that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth ( 2 Tim. 2:15). Trust me when I say that I make myself transparent with the Bible class I oversee. I point more fingers at myself than anyone, because I know that no good thing dwells in me save for Christ and His Spirit. The other part of my responsibility is to point to those who want to compromise their walk with God of the dangers that they are subjecting themselves to. I encourage you to reread 1 Cor. 5 and 6, Gal. 6:1-10, and 2 Tim. 3 (especially v. 5).
Look up Usama Dakdok and you will see what I am talking about. I am not sure about the comment you made about inner hurts, I do not have any inner hurts. Christ has made me free indeed. I am just sounding the alarm to warn Americans and the whole world of the grave dangers of islam that blasphemes against the Triune Godhead.
islam also promotes pedophilia, homosexuality, cross dressing, domestic violence against women and children, homicides, brain washing tactics to intimate their victims to never leave their cult. It is crazy to see how America has truly fallen away from Yahweh, Jesus Christ, by allowing muslims to erect their mosques in our country.
We must continue to expose the morbid atrocities of the koran, how sordid the koran is. I am disgusted when I hear people try to relate Christianity with other false religions, including islam.
Christianity opposes rape, pedophilia, and all other perversions of the world.
Read Deuteronomy 22:25 -27, "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die: But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."
Also read Judges 19 and 20 to see how God dealt with rapist.
The koran encourages rape with muslims and non-muslims. Look up Usama Dakdok wesite:The Straight Way.
Usama was born in Egypt and was raised in a Christian home, and attended an islamic pubic school, where he learned Arabic and the koran. Usama moved to the United States, and started an Christian organization, exposing the errors in the koran, and has toured acrossed the United States to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to muslims, and non-muslims, and to warn the church of the dangers of islam.
True. Salvation is not of works. Also, more to my point, condemnation to the lake of fire is the death sentence for the sin of rejecting what the Holy Spirit has revealed to the sinner, not the result of lesser sins.
Unbelief is what sends individuals to eternal hades. Jesus defined the will of God like this: believe in the Son of God (Jesus) and to love others. So you see, it's not a "works salvation" it's a gift from God the Father to those who will believe and accept. See John 3:16
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:
Deuteronomy 22:26
But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
What sins are worthy of eternal death in the lake of fire? Only one that I am aware of and that is rejecting the truth God has revealed to the sinner's heart by the Holy Spirit.
Hebrews 10:29
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
The first verses of this chapter 1-12 are rules on taking care of a neighbor's animal; men and women's regulations for dressing; how to sow seeds; and ploughing.
The focus on verses 12-29 is related to relations between men and women; and the judgments to be rendered on certain behaviors. We see as in Matthew 5:31 the so called "exception clause" which is likely related to betrothal since that is what caused Joseph to contemplate divorcing the woman he was betrothed to in Matthew 1:19.
It is clear from this chapter that a married woman who was correctly assessed not to be a virgin at the inception of a marriage after being accused by her husband was to be put to death (v.21); and this sentence was to be done for a betrothed woman and the man having relations with her (v. 23-24).
When the betrothed woman was innocent because she protested at the actions of rape of the man; he was to be stoned; and she was innocent (v. 25-27).
In the case of a woman not betrothed; after relations occur a payment was to be made to the father of the woman and he was to marry her. He also could not "put her away all of his days". (v. 29). This same rule was to be for the woman innocent of the accusations of the new husband at the consummation of the marriage (v. 17-19). He could not divorce her. This would surely seem to indicate that when a marriage wasn't tangled with these accusations the same rule would apply; in other words; a marriage was for life. It is interesting that even with David and Solomon among others having hundreds of wives (and concubines); divorce is never mentioned even with multiple wives in many cases. These scriptures don't indicate a woman initiating fornication or being the accusers here; but both parties are involved in ramifications when vows are made.
The last verse relates to not having relations with a father's wife; clearly demonstrated as a death penalty in other scriptures. (v. 30).
Hello. You maybe thinking of Deuteronomy 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."
If this is the verse in question, I understand that within the culture & acceptable norms for Israel, the sexes were not to resort to wearing the clothing that was appointed to the other sex. Even though their garments might have looked similar (as it probably did in those days), there would have been a clear distinction (whether by its cut or pattern) that differentiated between the two.
Today, a kilt is sometimes worn in Scotland & though one could consider it a type of skirt for women, that culture allows for men to wear it & women to wear an ankle length tartan skirt. Likewise, trousers & jeans are common garb for both men & women in our culture, whereas if a man wears a woman's skirt & maybe with high heels, he may be considered highly suspect. So, if a woman chooses to wear trousers, unless having to wear special clothing on a work-site, her trousers would be specifically cut for a woman & a clear distinction is made & seen, as with all her clothing; though jeans are probably a neutral garment & therefore an exception.
It does NOT say a woman isn't allowed to wear pants. Deuteronomy 22:5, Deuteronomy 12:32
Remember John 3:16, Matthew 25:31-46,
it's talking about dressing to resemblance appearance as opposite sex.
At about 5 or 6 years old, I was told by a neighbor man, I should wear a dress, I wore a dress & the "monster" raped me both ways. I went unconscious more than once & was held by a heavenly being after I asked to die. The heavenly being comforted me he was wearing a white robe. I had a conversation as an adult outside of my young self, I guess in the heaven. Then I was back.
Later I was in a church Sunday school that I was made to wear a dress, (by step mother) the boys would lay on the floor to see my undergarments. It was emotionally painful & I would cry not to wear a dress. Even as a young adult men have been dishonorable when I wear shirts or dresses. I could use it for my gain!! However I rarely wear s dress & when I do, heads turn. I find it much more modest to wear pants. The husbands at the churches, stores etc don't stare as much when I wear pants.
In the verse five it states perfectly that women are not to wear parents. It also says who does so would be the abomination, the person would be not the pants. I would not want to be the abomination to God. But, I have worked outside in the garden, moving wood piles and etc. in a skirt and I have done so for almost ten years. I still do not have a problem with it. God has always made a way to get around obstacles, but it takes faith on our end to believe He will go through with it. God made a way for me to wear a skirt and moved obstacles, but I also had to have the faith to believe He would move the obstacles. When serving God there will be things we have to sacrifice. Sometimes the sacrifice seems to big. But I have a question I would like for you to question yourself with. Is giving up pants more sacrificial than Jesus Christ laying down His life for you to be saved for all of eternity? Is it more important to you than your walk with God?
The Bible vs Public Education - In Reply on James 1 - 3 years ago
Basically the Bible teaches us to love God, and HATE sin.
There is no fuzziness in what the Bible teaches in Romans 1, Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:22
My kid came home from school upset because he had to take a test the next day: and agree that man evolved from apes. He knew it was blasphemy because I quizzed him. I told him that he had MY PERMISSION and SUPPORT to FLUNK THAT TEST!! We would make extra credits some other way.
If we don't agree with what public education is teaching our kids: instead of warming a church pew, teach in children's church what the truth is.
What did King David do as a young shepherd boy when he heard his God being cursed by the Philistines? He went down to the battlefield and took off Goliaths head!!
If a kid flunks a test find out how much it reduces the grade point average for the course.
Our children need to know they do not have to conform to something they do not believe in, MORALLY. Do your kids know what morals are? They aren't being taught that in school. Colleges beat in your brains with godless information till you cave in and say what they want on a test. Choose a Christian College!
In 1962, the Lords Prayer, the Ten Commandments and the Pledge of Allegiance to our National Flag was removed from schools. That was bad... but now they are forcing our kids to be gay, so they can belong. Even 6 year old kids who don't even know what sexual acts are. Do they know what sexual diseases are? That they are itchy, ooze, and cause irreparable harm to the body, so they can't have children later?
It takes guts to stand up for your kids and say NO to the gay education reformers. You'd fight back if someone tried to muscle you out of a parking place.
Teach your children & grandchildren about God. One day we will give an account to Gods Face, what we personally did about His Word - the Bible! There's no reward for cowardice or APATHY!
In this long list of prohibitions that are of a sexual nature, this forms part of the Law given to Israel as God's Holy people to be separate from the heathen who would live around them & their ways . Many of these prohibitions were actually performed by the Egyptians & others in the land of Canaan & so the warning by God to not only not imitate them but to live holy & decently as His children.
In your example, it would be incest for a father to have relations with his daughter & even though rape is not suggested in Leviticus chap 18, you get that possibility in Deuteronomy 22:25-29 (in another situation), where if that happens & the betrothed girl shouts for help, then she is absolved of any wrong but the man is put to death. If she is not betrothed, then payment is to made & a marriage take place.
In Leviticus chap 18, when we read "uncover their nakedness", it speaks euphemistically about having sexual relations, rather than observing someone naked. The 'uncovering' implies that the intention is to commit further wrong to the other person. In the case of Noah (Genesis chap 9), when his son Ham saw his father exposed after having a few drinks, & he told this to his brothers, the brothers Shem & Japheth discreetly went with a covering to cover their father. However, Ham & his descendants were cursed because of this sin of Ham. So here we see that an intentional observing is wrong, though whether in a family situation or outside, we can be faced with some degree of nudity & its important how we personally deal with it.
Deuteronomy 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."
In those early days, the garments of men & women were very similar, & not distinct as they are now. So in the aspects of style, cut & embroidery work, these would give them some distinction between the genders & general acceptability. Today, fashions are also clearly defined & acceptable even if it means that pants/jeans may be worn by women: so I don't see that this is what the verse refers to here.
It seems more likely that the Israelites are being forewarned as they come into heathen lands that this type of behaviour, unknown to the Israelites, were common among the heathen, particularly in their temple worship to their gods & goddesses. And later on, when transvestism became more common place among the heathen, even among the Romans (known for their debauchery), this warning became more applicable that God's people should never resemble the heathen in such practises & maintain a proper, relevant dress code. So I understand this warning in Deuteronomy does not apply to what is normal, acceptable, decent styles of clothing, but to those who pursue the wearing of such apparel of the opposite sex because of their depraved minds & sinful hearts.
The Lord God has been so very loving wonderful to me recently! I can not stress reading his word enough and seek him with your whole heart you will be rewarded beyond measure if you persist in hearing only from him ! He can make your heart pure and give you a love for him that makes the world so non essential by comparison!
Talking about the Promise that JESUS spoke of, Behold i send the Promise of my FATHER upon you BUT tarry in the city of Jerusalem till ye be endued with power from on high, which was baptism of the H.G. . John baptised you with water but i will baptise you with the H.G. and fire. what is the meaning of all this in Acts 1 it means that Christ is gonna be multiplied in humanity via that heavenly birth , thats what the H.G is the multiplication of Christ, th SON OF MAN in the spiritual realm in our hearts simply b/c that where that good seed is sown in mans hearts and minds. Thats y i talk about a baby Christ ,simply b/c there has to be multiplication of God . As Jesus said to whom the WORD came it made them Gods and the scripture cannot be broken . Remember God the FATHER, ALMIGHTY GOD SWORE BY HIS VERY SELF SAYING I WILL MULTPLY THY SEED AS THE STARS OF HEAVEN WHICH MEANS WE ARE GONNA HAVE A BABY CHRIST BORN IN US SINNERS Which is the H.G. as that which is born of the SPIRIT IS SPIRIT. Thats the H.G the child of PROMISE THE MULTIPLCATION OF VERY GOD IN US .Thats y he said whosoever receives one such child in my name receives me and Jesus is GOD simply b/c he reproduces after the GOD KIND. Thats y the sower of that GOOD SEED wants to sow his precious seed in our hearts that it might initiate a birth of Christ in us . Unless ya receive the Kingdom of God as a little Child you will in wise enter there in. This is the multiplIcation of God, the Child of promise, THE H.G. Jesus cd not refer to the H.G as the PROMISE if he were not the multiplication of Jesus himself, Mankinds fruit unto God.Whosoever receives one such child in my name receives ME . WHICH IMPLIES AN Israel of God THE GRANSONS ETC. My lil children of whom i travail in birth till Christ is formed in you. Thus there is a BABY CHRIST IN OUR FUTURE , THE SON OF MAN. Thats y Jeremiah saw all men in travail and child birth when he spoke of the NEW COVENANT. OK GBU
The covering is talking about hair. A woman should not have a mans haircut and a man should not have long hair. Sometimes we have no choice, if we go bald. But the point is a woman should not be or dress like a man and the man should not put on womens clothes. Like gay men and women do.
REVELATION 1:3 Blessed is hee that readeth and they that heare the words of this prophesie and keepe those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. 1611 king james version kjv
Humanly speaking, you would be correct. I hope you are not a humanist! This makes sense. Man is loosing his identity, the angels not knowing how too communicate with the soul! The Angels are the messengers that influence us according to his will! Clothing will become an issue in the future, it must be understood, that if you are a man, you will be expected to act like one! This will be hard for many to understand. During the V.N. war the enemy wore black, even the little ones! It was impossible to tell who was who. Only the enemy! this caused many problems at home , when they heard we were killing the woman and the children!
Pertaining to worship, does scripture not say a woman should have her head covered? IN other words, the "glory of God" (man) is to be uncovered during times of worship, while the "glory of man" (woman) is to be covered. Angels: In 1 Corinthians 11:10, Paul says "Therefore the woman ought to have power on her head, because of the angels. "So , this reveals something interesting. In him we live and move and have our being, Since angels are the messengers, would this be in fact the way, the angels identify the children of God? And therefor communicate accordingly? This becomes even more interesting Since I have such a difficult time understanding the woman . This would prove that the spirit is very much alive and well. That the Kingdom exists and is in control! However, this covering should not be taken for granted!
We should dress modest and modestly. shirts around the neck. short sleeves. shorts and dresses and skirts to the knees. and shoes that cover the foot, most of our shoes should cover the whole foot, and have one pair of sandles, as much as possible. This is how we should dress around ourselves alone and with other people and especially with our husband or wife. Swim suits should be like shorts with a skirt over the shorts for women and modest top not showing anything of her top.
If we consider the era & background to which this warning was given by God, we might view this Scripture in a different light. We need to remember that in those days, there was very little by way of separating the type of clothing men & women wore. And especially when men generally had long beards, their appearance would have brought ridicule rather than acceptance. As well, amongst the heathen, there were occasions when the sexes took on each other's apparel in their idol worship. And in this regard, one commentator looking at the Hebrew wording, suggests that the reference was to women wearing the armour that pertained to a man of war: women needed to wear this as they appeared before their goddess, Venus.
When living & serving in Pakistan, both men & women who chose to wear the national dress (called, Salwar Kamiz), had the cut of the clothing exactly the same as each other, except for a possible design printed for the woman's dress & a light shawl tossed over both shoulders. So I feel that the Deuteronomy 22:5 reference should not today be viewed as the sexes interchanging clothing, or a woman requiring to wear pants for work or leisure. The point was that the clothing worn had to be clearly acceptable as normal attire for the sexes & that the man shouldn't 'disguise' himself to be a woman & vice versa, as pertains to those classed as 'transvestites'. In India, I saw this often on the trains, where such men wore women's clothes (saris), to aid their begging efforts.
So I understand the Scripture being directed to those who purposely wore another's clothing for reasons other than what is considered normal & acceptable in society. I think the more pertinent issue today however, is how we dress for the beach, or how we try to present ourselves to the opposite sex in a seductive way, or wearing expensive clothing to convey class distinction. The world might consider this absolutely normal, but does God see that way & whether His children follow their example?
Leviticus 18, note the whole chapter, ending with Leviticus 18:30, Leviticus 20, Deuteronomy 7:25-26, please read in context Deuteronomy 7, Deuteronomy 12:28-32, Deuteronomy 13, Deuteronomy 18:9-22, Deuteronomy 22:5, Deuteronomy 23:17,18, Deuteronomy 24:1-4, Deuteronomy 27:15, Deuteronomy 25,
Leviticus 11, Proverbs 3:32, Proverbs 11:20,
1Kings 11:1-14, 2Kings 23:13, Proverbs 16:12, Proverbs 28:9,
Proverbs 12:22, Proverbs 15:8,9,26, Proverbs 17:15,
Hopefully these are helpful
I agree with Chris, just to add a little, God warned Israel to stay away from the gods of the land. We see in Eph. 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Pants do not take away the femininity of a woman, but if a woman dresses butch to look a be a man or a man dress feminine to be a woman. It is our gender we are not to change or imitate. That was highly practiced in the people worshiping the ancient gods and these principalities of darkness, wicked spirits are behind this.
We see today these spirits overwhelming effect on the world, and it is welcomed and supported by our governments and societies and taught in schools. Isa. 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
My understanding of Deuteronomy 22:5 it is speaking of sexual immoral matters of all kinds that is excepted and supported today, and transgender is ok and protected by the law in many countries of the world.
God bless,
RLW
Not much else is given to support this command, so it is open to all types of interpretation. With that added phrase, "neither shall a man put on a woman's garment", I think we could assume that any type of cross-dressing (as it's referred to now), must be rejected as abnormal & unbecoming of a child of God. Why God had stipulated this, whether there was such evidence amongst the Israelites at that time, or as a warning of a future situation whether within the tribe or when they would one day be confronted with the wickednesses of the gentiles & their temple worship, I can't be sure.
What we see today (such women wearing pants, or even kilts by the Scots) are the accepted cultural norms that, at the least, are decent & unprovocative. And of course, even though an outfit might be considered male-centric, the patterns on or cut of the garment would clearly reveal the gender to which they belong. I wonder if the same opponents to pant-wearing women are then quite accepting of those women who visit the beach with next to nothing on....and then say, 'well, at least they're not wearing pants'.
For me, I think there are far more important & immoral matters to deal with in society than what is generally considered normal clothing for the genders.
I do not know about the second part for sure; but I think 1). it's talking about the dad and son getting "involved physically" (and my stomach is twisting at the very thought) because remember how vile and sick people were at that time.
2). It is talking about cross dressing (v5)
Plus the context begins in v22 to talking about fornication/sexually immoral behavior.
1 Corinthians 11:15
A woman's long hair is her glory and covering.
About the clothing don't wear mens clothing, men don't crossdress either!
Dress modestly. That goes for men nowadays as well. Even in the church world sometimes I literally have to look away from the tight revealing clothing that distracts and reveals private matters.
I can't help but wonder how different this world would be if every woman covered her lady parts in public. And behaved modestly and shamefacedly with sobriety. Not flashy and decked out with gold, pearls, braids, face paint, etc. I do believe that has defiled our world in so many ways.
But then I also think women who are natural and modest and are full of the sweet Holy Spirit are absolutely beautiful! Men too!
I have also had the privilege of knowing many of these modest Godly people. So it's very easy to see that the Bible is correct.
We should not force people to obey these things it should come from the heart. And some get way too judgy and mean in the churches. I have seen many in Holiness churches wearing correct clothing in a very revealing or seductive manner. Pray about it. Friendship with the world is enmity with God. Who are you trying to please? Your flesh? The world? Or the Holy Spirit?
No, that's not what I read, 1Timothy 2:9, Deuteronomy 22:5,
Modesty seems to be better in feminine styled pants, no wind or other circumstances will expose anything. The Kilt & robes worn by men, might be the foundation of the dresses ect.
Hopefully helpful
As for the woman 'caught' in adultery, somehow they forgot to bring the man forth that she was with. I think when Jesus stooped down to write on the ground, Deuteronomy 22:22-24 may have been what He was writing. Sad how people always try to catch God on a technicality to serve their purpose or beliefs.
The Bible declares that we should study to show ourselves approved unto God, a worker that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth ( 2 Tim. 2:15). Trust me when I say that I make myself transparent with the Bible class I oversee. I point more fingers at myself than anyone, because I know that no good thing dwells in me save for Christ and His Spirit. The other part of my responsibility is to point to those who want to compromise their walk with God of the dangers that they are subjecting themselves to. I encourage you to reread 1 Cor. 5 and 6, Gal. 6:1-10, and 2 Tim. 3 (especially v. 5).
islam also promotes pedophilia, homosexuality, cross dressing, domestic violence against women and children, homicides, brain washing tactics to intimate their victims to never leave their cult. It is crazy to see how America has truly fallen away from Yahweh, Jesus Christ, by allowing muslims to erect their mosques in our country.
We must continue to expose the morbid atrocities of the koran, how sordid the koran is. I am disgusted when I hear people try to relate Christianity with other false religions, including islam.
Christianity opposes rape, pedophilia, and all other perversions of the world.
Read Deuteronomy 22:25 -27, "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die: But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."
Also read Judges 19 and 20 to see how God dealt with rapist.
The koran encourages rape with muslims and non-muslims. Look up Usama Dakdok wesite:The Straight Way.
Usama was born in Egypt and was raised in a Christian home, and attended an islamic pubic school, where he learned Arabic and the koran. Usama moved to the United States, and started an Christian organization, exposing the errors in the koran, and has toured acrossed the United States to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to muslims, and non-muslims, and to warn the church of the dangers of islam.
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:
Deuteronomy 22:26
But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
What sins are worthy of eternal death in the lake of fire? Only one that I am aware of and that is rejecting the truth God has revealed to the sinner's heart by the Holy Spirit.
Hebrews 10:29
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
The first verses of this chapter 1-12 are rules on taking care of a neighbor's animal; men and women's regulations for dressing; how to sow seeds; and ploughing.
The focus on verses 12-29 is related to relations between men and women; and the judgments to be rendered on certain behaviors. We see as in Matthew 5:31 the so called "exception clause" which is likely related to betrothal since that is what caused Joseph to contemplate divorcing the woman he was betrothed to in Matthew 1:19.
It is clear from this chapter that a married woman who was correctly assessed not to be a virgin at the inception of a marriage after being accused by her husband was to be put to death (v.21); and this sentence was to be done for a betrothed woman and the man having relations with her (v. 23-24).
When the betrothed woman was innocent because she protested at the actions of rape of the man; he was to be stoned; and she was innocent (v. 25-27).
In the case of a woman not betrothed; after relations occur a payment was to be made to the father of the woman and he was to marry her. He also could not "put her away all of his days". (v. 29). This same rule was to be for the woman innocent of the accusations of the new husband at the consummation of the marriage (v. 17-19). He could not divorce her. This would surely seem to indicate that when a marriage wasn't tangled with these accusations the same rule would apply; in other words; a marriage was for life. It is interesting that even with David and Solomon among others having hundreds of wives (and concubines); divorce is never mentioned even with multiple wives in many cases. These scriptures don't indicate a woman initiating fornication or being the accusers here; but both parties are involved in ramifications when vows are made.
The last verse relates to not having relations with a father's wife; clearly demonstrated as a death penalty in other scriptures. (v. 30).
If this is the verse in question, I understand that within the culture & acceptable norms for Israel, the sexes were not to resort to wearing the clothing that was appointed to the other sex. Even though their garments might have looked similar (as it probably did in those days), there would have been a clear distinction (whether by its cut or pattern) that differentiated between the two.
Today, a kilt is sometimes worn in Scotland & though one could consider it a type of skirt for women, that culture allows for men to wear it & women to wear an ankle length tartan skirt. Likewise, trousers & jeans are common garb for both men & women in our culture, whereas if a man wears a woman's skirt & maybe with high heels, he may be considered highly suspect. So, if a woman chooses to wear trousers, unless having to wear special clothing on a work-site, her trousers would be specifically cut for a woman & a clear distinction is made & seen, as with all her clothing; though jeans are probably a neutral garment & therefore an exception.
Remember John 3:16, Matthew 25:31-46,
it's talking about dressing to resemblance appearance as opposite sex.
At about 5 or 6 years old, I was told by a neighbor man, I should wear a dress, I wore a dress & the "monster" raped me both ways. I went unconscious more than once & was held by a heavenly being after I asked to die. The heavenly being comforted me he was wearing a white robe. I had a conversation as an adult outside of my young self, I guess in the heaven. Then I was back.
Later I was in a church Sunday school that I was made to wear a dress, (by step mother) the boys would lay on the floor to see my undergarments. It was emotionally painful & I would cry not to wear a dress. Even as a young adult men have been dishonorable when I wear shirts or dresses. I could use it for my gain!! However I rarely wear s dress & when I do, heads turn. I find it much more modest to wear pants. The husbands at the churches, stores etc don't stare as much when I wear pants.
Pants aren't what disqualify someone from heaven.
There is no fuzziness in what the Bible teaches in Romans 1, Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:22
My kid came home from school upset because he had to take a test the next day: and agree that man evolved from apes. He knew it was blasphemy because I quizzed him. I told him that he had MY PERMISSION and SUPPORT to FLUNK THAT TEST!! We would make extra credits some other way.
If we don't agree with what public education is teaching our kids: instead of warming a church pew, teach in children's church what the truth is.
What did King David do as a young shepherd boy when he heard his God being cursed by the Philistines? He went down to the battlefield and took off Goliaths head!!
If a kid flunks a test find out how much it reduces the grade point average for the course.
Our children need to know they do not have to conform to something they do not believe in, MORALLY. Do your kids know what morals are? They aren't being taught that in school. Colleges beat in your brains with godless information till you cave in and say what they want on a test. Choose a Christian College!
In 1962, the Lords Prayer, the Ten Commandments and the Pledge of Allegiance to our National Flag was removed from schools. That was bad... but now they are forcing our kids to be gay, so they can belong. Even 6 year old kids who don't even know what sexual acts are. Do they know what sexual diseases are? That they are itchy, ooze, and cause irreparable harm to the body, so they can't have children later?
It takes guts to stand up for your kids and say NO to the gay education reformers. You'd fight back if someone tried to muscle you out of a parking place.
Teach your children & grandchildren about God. One day we will give an account to Gods Face, what we personally did about His Word - the Bible! There's no reward for cowardice or APATHY!
Speak up before it's TOO LATE.
Mishael
In your example, it would be incest for a father to have relations with his daughter & even though rape is not suggested in Leviticus chap 18, you get that possibility in Deuteronomy 22:25-29 (in another situation), where if that happens & the betrothed girl shouts for help, then she is absolved of any wrong but the man is put to death. If she is not betrothed, then payment is to made & a marriage take place.
In Leviticus chap 18, when we read "uncover their nakedness", it speaks euphemistically about having sexual relations, rather than observing someone naked. The 'uncovering' implies that the intention is to commit further wrong to the other person. In the case of Noah (Genesis chap 9), when his son Ham saw his father exposed after having a few drinks, & he told this to his brothers, the brothers Shem & Japheth discreetly went with a covering to cover their father. However, Ham & his descendants were cursed because of this sin of Ham. So here we see that an intentional observing is wrong, though whether in a family situation or outside, we can be faced with some degree of nudity & its important how we personally deal with it.
In those early days, the garments of men & women were very similar, & not distinct as they are now. So in the aspects of style, cut & embroidery work, these would give them some distinction between the genders & general acceptability. Today, fashions are also clearly defined & acceptable even if it means that pants/jeans may be worn by women: so I don't see that this is what the verse refers to here.
It seems more likely that the Israelites are being forewarned as they come into heathen lands that this type of behaviour, unknown to the Israelites, were common among the heathen, particularly in their temple worship to their gods & goddesses. And later on, when transvestism became more common place among the heathen, even among the Romans (known for their debauchery), this warning became more applicable that God's people should never resemble the heathen in such practises & maintain a proper, relevant dress code. So I understand this warning in Deuteronomy does not apply to what is normal, acceptable, decent styles of clothing, but to those who pursue the wearing of such apparel of the opposite sex because of their depraved minds & sinful hearts.
When living & serving in Pakistan, both men & women who chose to wear the national dress (called, Salwar Kamiz), had the cut of the clothing exactly the same as each other, except for a possible design printed for the woman's dress & a light shawl tossed over both shoulders. So I feel that the Deuteronomy 22:5 reference should not today be viewed as the sexes interchanging clothing, or a woman requiring to wear pants for work or leisure. The point was that the clothing worn had to be clearly acceptable as normal attire for the sexes & that the man shouldn't 'disguise' himself to be a woman & vice versa, as pertains to those classed as 'transvestites'. In India, I saw this often on the trains, where such men wore women's clothes (saris), to aid their begging efforts.
So I understand the Scripture being directed to those who purposely wore another's clothing for reasons other than what is considered normal & acceptable in society. I think the more pertinent issue today however, is how we dress for the beach, or how we try to present ourselves to the opposite sex in a seductive way, or wearing expensive clothing to convey class distinction. The world might consider this absolutely normal, but does God see that way & whether His children follow their example?