Josh S.

I think that’s a pretty big stretch :). For one, Rom. 12:1-2 has nothing to do with apparel. To say that it does takes the Scripture completely out of context. Second, Peter was not saying that we are to abide by every law that applied to the Old Testament priests. If he was then we’re all dressing wrong, because we should be in “a breastpiece, an ephod, a robe, a woven tunic, a turban and a sash” (Exodus 28:4). Peter obviously wasn’t saying that, and I believe that you’re aware of that because I sincerely doubt that you’re wearing the priestly garments as described in Exodus 28 (although if you really are wearing, for example, an ephod of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet yarn, with linen, made square and folded double, a span long and a span wide, with four rows of precious stones on it (carnelian, chrysolite and beryl on the first row, turquoise, lapis lazuli and emerald on the second, jacinth, agate and amethyst on the third, and topaz, onyx and jasper on the fourth, mounted in gold filigree settings with each one engraved like a seal with the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel), then I sincerely apologize).

We can’t just pick and choose Scriptures out of the Bible to fit what we believe. We have to look at Scripture in its entirety, taken in context, and adapt our believes accordingly.

There is simply no Scripture in the Bible, direct or indirect, that says a woman should not wear pants. It doesn’t exist. There ARE, on the other hand, numerous things that are taught directly in the Bible, and when culture runs against those things then we must stand with the Word of God and not adapt to culture. But when culture runs in a direction that is NOT counter to the Bible then there is nothing wrong with adapting to it.

In Christ,
Josh S.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 5:17-20 KJV]

Jesus fulfilled the “ceremonial” laws of sacrifice and atonement. But he carried over the “moral” law including the 10 commandments into the new dispensation and actually took them up a notch.

He took “Thou shalt not kill” and made it so that if you even if you have hate in your heart, your guilty of transgressing the law:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. [Matthew 5:21-22 KJV]

Now Jesus also took “Thou shalt not commit adultery” and made it so that even just looking at someone with lust is breaking that commandment:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. [Matthew 5:27 KJV]

So we can conclude that moral law was carried over and with higher standards then the Mosaic law.

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 5:20 KJV]

In conclusion, we are a royal priesthood, a peculiar people, and if it being an abomination to God isn’t enough, we should not dress in a way that causes men to lust, even moreso these days then back then because back then, it wasn’t a crime to look lustfully at a womans derriere, and since Jesus came it is, we need to help our brothers out!

And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. [Romans 12:2 KJV]

I’ll shed light on the length of skirts for you:

The word of God tells us we are to be a royal priesthood, a peculiar people.

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: [1 Peter 2:9 KJV]

So knowing that, what requirement did God Himself give the priests concerning wardrobe?

And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach [Exodus 28:42 KJV]

So you see, since our thigh bone ends in the knee, and we are now the royal priesthood, that is where the length comes from, straight the word of God.

My intention was not to avoid the subject of cultural change. I’ve actually spoken about that numerous times in other articles and comments. The point that I was making in my quote is that cross-dressing (as it is defined in the Wikipedia article that I quoted) is deliberately dressing counter to cultural norms with the goal of deliberately identifying yourself with members of the opposite sex. There is a very big difference between my wife putting on one of my shirts and my wife dressing to make herself look like a man. I hope that clarifies my view :)

God bless,
Josh S.

Also: Woman’s rights. Men stink.