/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

No.

Do pants pertainith to men?

>>567967

Sure, why not? Unless you believe in adding to the Bible, everyone was wearing robes - even men - back when that was written. The admonishments about women dressing as men and vice versa had very different meaning.

If you want to add to the Bible to include pants, that's on you.

>>567991

>men wore robes

>therefore women can wear pants

This is your brain on modernism

>The admonishments about women dressing as men and vice versa had very different meaning.

The decrees of God do not change with time.

How can you people actually have a real opinion on this pointless question. Like how much time do you spend thinking about women in pants??

Who cares??

>>568027

Here's one reason:

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.

>>568038

C

OLD

V

E

N

A

N

T

>>568071

APOSTOLICS YES!

Really fires up the neurons

>>568071

MORAL LAW

O

R

A

L

L

A

W

>>568101

CEREMONIAL LAW

6 If you come across a bird’s nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. 7 You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life.

8 When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof.

9 Do not plant two kinds of seed in your vineyard; if you do, not only the crops you plant but also the fruit of the vineyard will be defiled.[a]

10 Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.

11 Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together.

12 Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.

WHERE IS YOUR PARAPET HEATHEN

>>568142

tbh if you allow people on your roof you should make a parapet

I would say the intent matters. If you're cross dressing with intent to deceive, you're bearing false witness in a way. If both sexes are wearing jeans and working on something, that's fine. Don't be effeminate, but don't let clothes hinder your ministry.

>>568142

APOSTOLICS YES!

>>567967

Pants are not modest clothing for women, as they emphasize their sexual attributes.

>>568189

Wouldn't that depend on cut?

>>568166

Are you some kind of mind reader to know anyone's intent? This is earth, not some fantasy universe. Back to the communist socialist fun camp with you and take less drugs. It doesn't matter what you try to say, there's no excuse. It is an abomination and God knows what he's talking about, and there's no room for your judgement.

I think femininity is what's important. In our culture, woman can look feminine and modest while wearing pants.

>>567967

This is a low-effort post and you should be ashamed of yourself

>>568214

>Pushing old ladies is a sin

Yes

>Pushing old ladies out of the way of a bus is not a sin

Also yes

Intent matters.

yeah but I'd rather them wear a dress

women shouldn’t be able to wear pants or vote

>>568202

This. Of a reasonable length, not tight or raunchy, and comfortable to wear and to look at is okay. Anything that looks decent and not disrespecting self and others. Just do not cross-dress i.e. evoking or wearing an image of opposing gender intentionally.

>>567999 (checked)

I think his point was that in biblical times men and women both wore similar kind of clothing (semi-long robes).

Now with pants it's pretty much the same.

skirts and no underwear

mandatory by law

>>568895

Tiny miniskirts?

>>568897

no long

you got to be modest

>a thread had to die for this

Women wear pants and leggings to show off their posteriors, thighs, and gap in order to inspire lust, and you know it. Pants on women are immodest and scandalous. Women should be absolutely forbidden from ever wearing pants under any circumstances. They should be restricted by law to wearing dresses or skirts. As for the types of jobs and hobbies that require pants, women should be forbidden from doing anyway. Society needs to enact strict sumptuary laws posthaste.

>>568892

Booty and tighs are sexual attributes of women, that's why you hide those under a (long) skirt, the only modest clothing for women.

>>568849

Amen.

>>569022

Spotted the Muslim.

>>569059

>Muslims are the only people in the history of the world who have ever enforced dress codes

Really tired of this knee-jerk response.

>>569066

If you want to put your mom in a burka, so be it; but don't try to claim it's proper Christian beliefs. We already know that Muslims use this board pretending to be Christian (usually Baptist) and we have to call it out every time it shows or they will take over.

>>569072

>If you want to put your mom in a burka, so be it

A dress or skirt is not a burka. If you think that's what I wrote then you need to get your eyes checked. This fallacy is called a false equivalence and you should be ashamed of yourself for resorting to it.

>but don't try to claim it's proper Christian beliefs.

I absolutely do claim that the legal encouragement of modest dress and the discouragement of cross-dressing is proper Christian belief. If you support immodest dress and transvestitism then you are not a real Christian.

>>569091

You kinda did say:

>They should be restricted by law to wearing dresses or skirts.

That's very Saudi, bro.

>>569091

You

>>569022

>Women should be absolutely forbidden

>They should be restricted by law

>women should be forbidden from

Admit it, you're a Muslim. Also, FYI, it's way easier to lift a skirt and fuck on the sly than it is to drop pants.

>>569097

A woman wearing a dress or skirt in Saudi Arabia would get her arrested.

Maybe you should get your brain checked?

>>569099

No, see, you're saying that how women dress should be mandated by law. That they should be forbidden from certain hobbies and jobs. You want society, our society, to make laws similar to Saudi Arabia's laws requiring women to dress a certain way and to not do things like drive a car or whatever.

I realize a skirt is not a burka, but the laws you're proposing are of similar fashion.

>>569098

In Christian societies women were required by law to wear female clothing from the Middle Ages to the Victorian era. You know, back when the West was actually Christian. Modernism and feminism are not Christian. The immodesty and transvestitism that today symbolically express those spirits are not Christian. You can weakly keep calling Christian sumptuary laws Islamic if you want to demonstrate your ignorance of history, but if you consider Christianity to be the same thing as Islam and prefer modernism and feminism to Christianity, then why pretend to be Christian?

>>569072

>>569098

Why are dried-up feminists invading this board?

>>569104

When your daughter's liftin' that skirt to take Jamal's BBC up her ass, you'll be a cryin' cuck wonderin' why you didn't force her to wear pants.

>>569102

>No,

Yes.

>see, you're saying that how women dress should be mandated by law.

Do you really think that Muslims are the only people on earth in the entire history of the world who have ever had legal dress codes?

Your ignorance is astonishing.

You are aware that how people dress in Western countries is already mandated by law, right? Go walk down the street naked if you don't believe me. Oh wow you're practically living in a Caliphate!

>That they should be forbidden from certain hobbies and jobs.

As they were in Christian societies until the Victorian Era. Was the entire world Islamic before the late 19th century?

>You want society, our society, to make laws similar to Saudi Arabia's laws requiring women to dress a certain way and to not do things like drive a car or whatever.

A Saudi Arabian clock is right twice a day. Did you know that in Saudi Arabia it's illegal to murder people? Well I guess we have some laws that we should be striking from the books now! Oh wow. Because the ultimate metric for whether or not a law is just or not is how vaguely similar you think it is to Saudi Arabian legal codes.

>>569111

Did you really just compare murder to wearing pants?

>>569121

Did you just ignore my point?

The comparison is used to demonstrate the fact that just because a proposed law is vaguely similar to a law on the books in Saudi Arabia does not mean that law is inherently unjust and can be dismissed for that reason alone. Your argument is totally illogical.

>>569126

Yeah, I did ignore your point because you brought murder into a discussion about clothing while proclaiming my ignorance for simply disagreeing with you. Not a good way to keep an audience, you know.

In short, I'm done. You go write your Congressman about the laws you want enacted and let us know how that works out for ya.

>>569136

>Yeah, I did ignore your point because you brought murder into a discussion about clothing

Transvestitism and murder are both crimes under Christian and Muslim legal systems alike. The comparison is completely valid.

>while proclaiming my ignorance for simply disagreeing with you.

I proclaim your ignorance based on you having demonstrated a lack of awareness of the laws that existed in Christian countries prior to the 1920s, not just for disagreeing with me.

>Not a good way to keep an audience, you know.

I'm not here to entertain you.

>In short, I'm done.

I accept your concession.

>You go write your Congressman about the laws you want enacted and let us know how that works out for ya.

This thread is for discussing what should be, not what is, nor what is feasible. You should have saved your fingers the effort it took to type this.

>>568780

>Nothing wrong with women wearing pants.

found the cuck white knight

Nope

>>570390

>>569163

> I want my daughter to wear skirts so Jamal can fuck her easier

This is the sort of thing actual cuckold fetishists fetishise about. Sane people don’t view the world like this.

>>569163

>allowing Jamal any access whatsoever to your daughter

You've fail as a father.

No, pants are immodest for women. They use it to show their tighs and the shape of their hips and arses.

Women should wear skirts, at least knee-long.

ITT: Women ain't nothin' but bitches and hoes.

This is the niggest thread in the history of /christian/. Learn some damn respect for God's creation. You're not owed a woman and you don't own a woman. Stop being niggers.

>>570613

>Learn some damn respect for God's creation

They don't respect themselves wearing hoes clothing.

I wasn't able to understand the rest of what you said.

>>570616

>if you say women should dress modestly you are a moslem

Really lame.

>>570619

I really don't care, m8, they can dress whatever way they want.

But a ho is a ho.

>>570613

>>570619

Dress is often indicative of character. I would rather a woman take care of herself and dress modestly in dresses or skirts than in a variation of yoga pants.

Don't tell me that there are still people who worry about that in year of our Lord, two thousand and seventeen. Women shouldn't dress like gay truckers, but that's about it.

Speaking of gay truckers, even that is a f ar bigger problem. So many teens dying their hair funny colors and saying that they're now trans and we can't even contain it because they literally tell on their parents to the teachers so you get slapped with abuse charges.

>Don't tell me that there are still people who worry about that in year of our Lord, two thousand and seventeen.

Reddit has really taken over. I told you mane, I told you not to go on to preach on reddit. Now this board is doned.

why is this board so shit now fucking reddit niggers