no pants for ladies and no dancing?

[mont974x4]

OK, for the sake of not furthering the hijack of someone elses thread....


1. Is it biblical for women to wear pants?
2. Is the "no dancing" issue biblical?


IMO...
1....women can wear pants. The issue is not pnats vs dresses but rather the cut or design of them. Back then everyone wore robes but there were men's robes and womens robes. Today, we have mens pants and womens pants. Like the hair mentioned in 1 Cor the purpose is to maintain our God given sexual identity.

2. I see no basis to think we can not dance. As I recall, David danced. So if anyone can share the verses used to justify the no dancing policy I'd appreciate it.

[rainbowpromise]

1. Is it biblical for women to wear pants?
2. Is the "no dancing" issue biblical?

IMO...

I cannot accept that this is a physical issue. I believe it is a matter of the heart. Biblically we have different roles, I do not feel this applies to clothing.
I wear men's shoes because I have rather large feet. However I can wear ladies shoes, they are just few and far between in finding.
I have been searching for a winter jacket in the ladies section for 2 years now. Still working with a sweater because I cna't find one. I know that I will find one in the men's section.
A friend of mine shops at tall men's shops. she also has a shoe size that does not come in ladies. She mostly wears jeans and t-shirts so she can look somewhat feminine.
Dancing is a different story. Dancing as it is portrayed in the Bible by David, is quite acceptable. I am sure that the world's view of dancing fits into the same category as Herodias' daughter dancing before Herod. Nothing good came from that. I still view dance as acceptable depending on the situation.

[RajunCajun86]

david danced and i would venture to say that Jesus danced at the wedding where He turned water into wine

women's dress:
Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments
1 Timothy 2:9

i don't think you can claim that the Bible says no pants on the ladies and no dancing for all

[DiscipleOfIAm]

What about Hollywood movies and card playing? Some IFB's hold to this as well.

[mont974x4]

What about Hollywood movies and card playing? Some IFB's hold to this as well.
Personal choice. If you place limits on what movies you see I won't beat on you for it any more than you should beat on me if I choose to see those movies. I don't watch x rated movies, but will watch some r rated movies. I know people that won't even watch the Veggie Tales...this seems extreme to me but that's ok. :D

As to cards? That one never made sense to me either. :doh: However, if you place that standard on yourself, by all means hold to your convictions just don't expect everyone else to hold to it as well.


Some honest common sense should apply in our personal decision making. For example, we can have a beer. The Bible says don't be drunk. If I know I have self control issues then I should just stay away from it. However, I should not demand everyone stay away from it.


Things are just that, they are things. How we use, or abuse, them is where we have issues.


http://www.koinonia.org.il/images/CarryCross.jpg ^_^

[BereanTodd]

I. On the women/pants issue the verse that is usually used to support this is from Deuteronomy:

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

The problem there is that at the time it was written, 1500 BC or so, men generally wore garments that much more closely approximated dresses/skirts than modern day pants.

There is absolutely no basis for saying women should not wear pants. It is a regretful part of the legalistic, unbiblical vestiges of certain parts of American evangelicalism. There are guidelines to follow in clothing (women and men). I would say some good general principles would be:

1. Women should wear feminine clothing, and men masculine. There is a distinction in that respect.

2. Both should dress modestly at all times in public.

Beyond that there is not a whole lot that the Bible actually says in regards to dress, unless you want to expound somewhat on the modesty, or consider the issue of head-covering.

II. In respect to dancing, this is another area where the legalists have gotten way off base. There are forms of overly sexualised dance that I might consider sinful, but dancing in and of itself is not unbiblical nor ungodly, and can often be done in praise of our Lord and Savior.

III. As long as we're discussing areas of legalistic errors too often made, we might as well throw in drinking. Our Lord Jesus drank all of the time, he turned water into wine for others, in fact such a miracle was His first major miracle. Drinking should always be done in moderation (as should all things), and drunkeness is clearly sinful, but drinking is in no way unbiblical.

[Erinwilcox]

I. On the women/pants issue the verse that is usually used to support this is from Deuteronomy:

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

The problem there is that at the time it was written, 1500 BC or so, men generally wore garments that much more closely approximated dresses/skirts than modern day pants.

There is absolutely no basis for saying women should not wear pants. It is a regretful part of the legalistic, unbiblical vestiges of certain parts of American evangelicalism. There are guidelines to follow in clothing (women and men). I would say some good general principles would be:

1. Women should wear feminine clothing, and men masculine. There is a distinction in that respect.

2. Both should dress modestly at all times in public.

Beyond that there is not a whole lot that the Bible actually says in regards to dress, unless you want to expound somewhat on the modesty, or consider the issue of head-covering.

II. In respect to dancing, this is another area where the legalists have gotten way off base. There are forms of overly sexualised dance that I might consider sinful, but dancing in and of itself is not unbiblical nor ungodly, and can often be done in praise of our Lord and Savior.

III. As long as we're discussing areas of legalistic errors too often made, we might as well throw in drinking. Our Lord Jesus drank all of the time, he turned water into wine for others, in fact such a miracle was His first major miracle. Drinking should always be done in moderation (as should all things), and drunkeness is clearly sinful, but drinking is in no way unbiblical.

Excellent post! I think I've found a new friend. . .:) I don't think I've seen you around this forum before--welcome!

[mont974x4]

Good posts folks. Thanks!

I'm looking forward to seeing an opposing view the verses supprting them.

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Oh, and public swimming. I forgot that one, too.

I'll post my thoughts later, no time now. Good stuff though!

[arunma]

1. Is it biblical for women to wear pants?

I can do one better. I've seen a few girls at my church who dress somewhat goth! I don't mind; it's actually very modest dress, believe it or not. I don't judge people by what they wear, so long as they adhere to Biblical standards of modesty.

2. Is the "no dancing" issue biblical?

I take no issue with dancing either. Yes, some types of dancing are highly sexual. But then, many types of speech and dress are also sexually inappropriate, and we still do not refrain from speaking or wearing clothes.

[BereanTodd]

Excellent post! I think I've found a new friend. . .:) I don't think I've seen you around this forum before--welcome!

Thank you very much for the kind words!

Oh, and public swimming. I forgot that one, too.


Really? I've never heard that one before, although with some of the extreme, overly-sexualised suits now days I could at least see the basis on which the argument would be made (not saying I would agree obviously).

[Camondw]

I think that there are certain rules and morals in scripture in the bible that were applicable in their day, but may not be now. Dress codes would be a good example. What was the reason behind giving the rules against or toward a certain kind of dress? And, is that still a valid reason to follow the rule. It really all comes down to the condition of the heart.

Also, it is important to remember that as christians we are not held under the letter of the law, but rather under the spirit of the law. Seeing as how Christ fulfilled the letter of the law,

This is just my belief. I would welcome any input from any of you.

Thx


--
Fato Prudentia Major

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

I believe Deuteronomy 22:5 still should be applied today. I just wouldn't push it as far as saying women can't wear pants. Cross dressing on the other hand I would say is still an abomination to God. Also any immodest dress is wrong. It could be a real low neckline on a woman or a guy wearing pants that show half of his boxers. As for swimming these same rules apply. Yes, there are modest swimsuits out there.

As for dancing the Bible is clear that not all dancing is wrong. A lot of club dancing out there is though.

[mont974x4]

I agree with pretty much everything that's been said so far. As I said earlier, common sense and decency should rule the day. Remember many of these issues are cultural too, how do you think Christians that grew up with nude beaches think?

Still, I can't find anything against dancing of any kind. I'd really like to know the Scripture that "no dancing" stance is based on. I remember when I was kid my older sister went to an Amy Grant concert with a Baptist church (some of her friends from that church invited her altho we attended another church). She was sitting in her chair along with everyone else and she just started kind of be-bopin in her chair. The youth pastor told her friends to not invite her to functions anymore because she was dancing and it was a sin.


LOL She didn't tell my dad until years later, I almost wish I could have seen his reaction if he had found out right after it happened. As it was so much later, Dad just apologized to her and assured her she did nothing wrong.

[Andyman_1970]

david danced and i would venture to say that Jesus danced at the wedding where He turned water into wine


He would also dance every time He taught in the synagouge. The teacher for the day would take the Torah scroll out of the "ark" and parade and dance the Torah through the congregation, and the congregation would dance and push and shove to get up to the scroll and kiss the scrolls. It was how they showed how much they loved God the whole Deuteronomy 6 thing.

[Tariel]

I can do one better. I've seen a few girls at my church who dress somewhat goth!

wait a sec....what does that have to do with anything? I'm part goth myself, and judging by what I've seen in what I wear myself, and what I've seen from the other girls on campus, goth dress is not only quite modest, but quite feminine. It's the goths and part-goths that are more likely to be wearing skirts, not the highly conservative people on campus.


And as for the whole "no dancing" thing...it really depends. Technically on campus we're not supposed to dance, but that never stops anybody from dancing when they get good grades or even get published. But, if people were dancing sexually, I'm sure that they would get in trouble. Fast.

[Andyman_1970]

I believe Deuteronomy 22:5 still should be applied today.


So do you eat shrimp, bacon, or cheesburgers? Do or will you require your wife to take a ritual bath after her period? How about your clothes, do you have any clothing with more than one type of fabric stitched together? And the feasts, do you observe the appointed feasts? What about a Sabbath?

What does Acts 15 say about the matter for Gentiles? (I assume you're a Gentile)

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

So do you eat shrimp, bacon, or cheesburgers? Do or will you require your wife to take a ritual bath after her period? How about your clothes, do you have any clothing with more than one type of fabric stitched together? And the feasts, do you observe the appointed feasts? What about a Sabbath?

What does Acts 15 say about the matter for Gentiles? (I assume you're a Gentile)

I'll answer you question if you answer me these. Do you think it is wrong for a guy to dress up as a girl or a girl to dress up as a guy? If so why? Do you think any O.T. rules apply? Or only ones that are mentioned in the N.T.?

[Andyman_1970]

I'll answer you question if you answer me these. Do you think it is wrong for a guy to dress up as a girl or a girl to dress up as a guy? If so why? Do you think any O.T. rules apply? Or only ones that are mentioned in the N.T.?

Personal preference I don't prefer womens clothes on a man. With that said there is no Biblical mandate that indicates it is Biblically wrong.

So do you eat shimp, how about bacon, what about your jacket, does it have two different types of fabric sewn together in it? Also, I assume you're a gentile, where does Acts 15 deal with what women wear?

Back to your question, one year for our churches "harvest fest" I dressed up as a woman, while it was pretty humorus, I don't prefer to ever dress that way again, but cannot find a command or passage in the Bible that tells me what I did was a sin. I would argue you can't either.

To argue Deuteromony 22 that women should wear dresses is grossly taking God's Holy Word out of context and misusing it...............not to mention it reeks of the "picking and choosing" out of the Bible. A charge that conservative Christians love to level at those "Godless liberal" Christians.................ah the irony.

I answered your questions it's no your turn.

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Personal preference I don't prefer womens clothes on a man. With that said there is no Biblical mandate that indicates it is Biblically wrong.

So do you eat shimp, how about bacon, what about your jacket, does it have two different types of fabric sewn together in it? Also, I assume you're a gentile, where does Acts 15 deal with what women wear?

Back to your question, one year for our churches "harvest fest" I dressed up as a woman, while it was pretty humorus, I don't prefer to ever dress that way again, but cannot find a command or passage in the Bible that tells me what I did was a sin. I would argue you can't either.

To argue Deuteromony 22 that women should wear dresses is grossly taking God's Holy Word out of context and misusing it...............not to mention it reeks of the "picking and choosing" out of the Bible. A charge that conservative Christians love to level at those "Godless liberal" Christians.................ah the irony.

I answered your questions it's no your turn.

It's no your turn? That means I don't have to answer? ;) j/k

I don't eat shrimp because I don't care for it. I wouldn't say it is a sin though because I believe God gave the OK to eat other types of food. I don't eat bacon much because it's unhealthy but again I would say it is OK to eat it, in moderation. As for my coat I'm not sure how man types fabrics it has to be honest with you.

That all being said I believe cross dressing is wrong because it takes away the distinctions between male and female gender. Today's society makes it a sin to try to make a distinction. I believe God is never changing. I believe rules can change for various reasons. I believe we are under grace. I also believe though we shouldn't not sin so that grace may abound (Romans 6:1). I believe this is a very difficult topic that takes a lot of looking into. I believe Jesus expanded the law while on Earth here and didn't do away with it just as he said. He told us how this is a heart issue and in effect made the law even harder to follow. He didn't do away with the law but he did fulfill it so that we can make it to Heaven since we will never be good enough to make it there on our own.

[Andyman_1970]

Project 86, if to begin with you had said something along the lines of "I prefer that women wear dresses, rather than something a man might wear like pants." I would have no issue with that statement whatsoever.

The line gets crossed into legalism when the Torah is used to make Gentile followers of Jesus abide by commands that do not apply to them, I believe Paul speaks alot about this in his letter to the Galatians.

[DiscipleOfIAm]

I went through a phase where I did not eat shrimp, pork, etc based on the OT commands. Then, a pastor explained to me that the OT is obsolete due to the New Covenant from Jesus and the NT.

But, does that mean we throw away the OT and disregard any of its teachings? No way!

[Andyman_1970]

It's no your turn? That means I don't have to answer? ;) j/k

I don't eat shrimp because I don't care for it. I wouldn't say it is a sin though because I believe God gave the OK to eat other types of food. I don't eat bacon much because it's unhealthy but again I would say it is OK to eat it, in moderation. As for my coat I'm not sure how man types fabrics it has to be honest with you.

Ok how about the feasts? What about Sabbath? Why just pick one command to follow and not all of them. Didn’t Paul say if you’re going to follow one command of Torah you are obligated to follow all of it?

That all being said I believe cross dressing is wrong because it takes away the distinctions between male and female gender.

You are more than welcome to believe it’s wrong, I believe it’s weird (hey I’ve tried it I should know……….LOL). Biblically it is not a sin.

I believe Jesus expanded the law while on Earth here and didn't do away with it just as he said. He told us how this is a heart issue and in effect made the law even harder to follow.

I couldn’t’ disagree more, first you misunderstand the purpose of Torah, I’ll expand that in a bit. Second, Jesus Himself says that His “yoke”, which is a rabbi’s set of interpretations of Torah, is easy. So was Jesus lying? Jesus tells another rabbi who asks Him what commands are the most important and Jesus tells Him that loving God and loving other are the most important, and that the rest of the Torah hangs on these two commands. This is very similar to a question rabbi Hillel was asked about 20 years before Jesus. He was asked by a Gentile who desired to convert to Judaism, which command is more important that all the other 612 commands. Rabbi Hillel responded, “love your neighbor as yourself, all other commands hang on this one command”. Jesus is telling that rabbi that if you live those two commands you are in effect living out the other 611 commands.

He didn't do away with the law but he did fulfill it so that we can make it to Heaven since we will never be good enough to make it there on our own.

Now the term “fulfill” when used by a rabbi means to correctly interpret. To use the term “abolish” means to incorrectly interpret. Jesus is saying in Matthew 5 He came to give God’s people God’s interpretation of Torah, how God wants them to live it out.

You also need to understand no where in 1st century Judaism was it understood that by doing all 613 commands one could earn salvation. 1st century, 2nd Temple Judaism (which is what Jesus entered into and interacted with) was not a works based salvation system. Salvation has always been grace through faith, and is only though the grace of God. The Torah commands were how God’s people were identified as being God’s Covenant people, not how one got into that Covenant relationship. They were to live the Torah commands out so they could be a light unto the world and show the world God’s love and grace.

I know I’ve given you a bit of a hard time about this, but respectfully I would suggest you do some more research on the Torah and what it meant to those who Jesus taught and interacted with in the first third of the 1st century.

[Andyman_1970]

I went through a phase where I did not eat shrimp, pork, etc based on the OT commands. Then, a pastor explained to me that the OT is obsolete due to the New Covenant from Jesus and the NT.

But, does that mean we throw away the OT and disregard any of its teachings? No way!

While I wouldn't use that language (obsolete), Acts 15 defines what we as Gentile followers of Jesus are obligated to follow with regards to the Torah. That was the whole purpose of the Jerusalem council. I would argue that Jewish followers of Jesus still have an obligation to follow as many Torah commands as they can.......but that's a thread for a different topic. Again, following Torah does not earn one salvation points with God, it is merely the every day manifestation of ones life as it desires to point to the Creator God to gave them Torah.

The Torah is certainly not obsolete as it was what Jesus taught and interpreted, it's what He memorized as a 6-10 year old little boy, it's what the disciples learned and memorized, it's what the early church lived out for almost the first 15 years of it's existence. For me it's invaluable in framing Jesus and the disciples teachings in their proper context.

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Ok how about the feasts? What about Sabbath? Why just pick one command to follow and not all of them. Didn’t Paul say if you’re going to follow one command of Torah you are obligated to follow all of it?

Col 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:

Note this doesn't say anything about cross dressing.



Rabbi Hillel responded, “love your neighbor as yourself, all other commands hang on this one command”. Jesus is telling that rabbi that if you live those two commands you are in effect living out the other 611 commands.

As Jesus said

Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

Matthew 22:37-40 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. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Note the greatest commandment is to love the Lord thy God. How do we do that?

1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.


1st century, 2nd Temple Judaism (which is what Jesus entered into and interacted with) was not a works based salvation system. Salvation has always been grace through faith, and is only though the grace of God.

Totally agree with you there.

I know I’ve given you a bit of a hard time about this, but respectfully I would suggest you do some more research on the Torah and what it meant to those who Jesus taught and interacted with in the first third of the 1st century.

Well since I have returned the favor don't feel so bad. I would like to learn about the Torah more. When time permits I certainly plan to do so. I have learned much from Messianic Jews but there is always so much more to learn. I do find our discussion here very good since there are things to think about and wrestle with.

One more question. Why did God have such a problem with cross dressing back in Moses day but not now? I would like a good answer to that because I do wonder how that would follow the logic you present.

[Andyman_1970]

One more question. Why did God have such a problem with cross dressing back in Moses day but not now? I would like a good answer to that because I do wonder how that would follow the logic you present.

That's a good question. I would start by researching the practices of the pagan nations that were in proximity of Israel around the time God gave them Torah. That may shed some light on it.

[Andyman_1970]

Note the greatest commandment is to love the Lord thy God. How do we do that?

1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Remember that John is an observant Jew when he wrote this, so to utter the term "commandments" specifically means the 613 mitzvot (commandments) in the Torah. Are you suggesting we need to be Torah observant in order to love God?

[ellisb2]

I thought it was a Baptist baptist "tradition" for women not to wear slacks in church and no dancing in church?

[Jim1927]

I had to smile when I read the title of this thread,,"no pants on women..." In England "pants" are ladies dainties. When I was young we weren't even allowed to say "pants" in public...We wear trousers!

Cheers,

Jim

[rainbowpromise]

I thought it was a Baptist baptist "tradition" for women not to wear slacks in church and no dancing in church?

Thankfully the traditions of man are not what saves us.

[arunma]

I thought it was a Baptist baptist "tradition" for women not to wear slacks in church and no dancing in church?

At my (Baptist) church, the majority of the women wear slacks. And that includes several of the pastors' wives.

[Erinwilcox]

Personally, I have no problem with women wearing slacks (depending on the cut), but I do not like them to be worn in church. It is done, but personally I don't like it.

[mont974x4]

I had to smile when I read the title of this thread,,"no pants on women..." In England "pants" are ladies dainties. When I was young we weren't even allowed to say "pants" in public...We wear trousers!

Cheers,

Jim
Quick! Tell Britney Spears!!! :D

[mlqurgw]

The point of not mixing fabrics and men and women not wearing that which pertains to the other is, as most other things given, symbolical of not mixing that which is man made with what God made. We are to never blur the distinction in spiritual things. The physical is to teach spiritual truth. God called many foods unclean in the OT but now they are clean typifying that God has made clean that which was before unclean, the Gentiles. That is the context of Acts 10. We make a mistake when we just look at the literal meaning of many things in the Scripture. The Law was never meant for us to live by because we can't do it.
According to Paul, by the inspiration of God, the purpose of the Law was to teach us our need of Christ. Gal. 3:19-25 Also it should be remembered that we are free in Christ. Believers are free to do what they want. Our new nature desires to honor Christ in all things. Though we fail and fall and cannot do that which we desire in the inward man, the old man is alive and even more adamant about ruling us than ever before, we trust Christ to have made even our failures to work for our good.

[rainbowpromise]

Personally, I have no problem with women wearing slacks (depending on the cut), but I do not like them to be worn in church. It is done, but personally I don't like it.

I don't feel a woman should have to sit through a service wearing something that makes her uncomfortable. I personally wear a skirt, but I don't think every woman should be required to. :)

[Tenorvoice]

See post here (http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=29401196&postcount=7)

I think this guy covered the dancing issue a few days ago for all of us very well.

[ellisb2]

Ok so I was wrong.

[Iosias]

I see no basis to think we can not dance. As I recall, David danced.

I think rather the issue is not whether the Scripture forbid dancing explicitly but whether dancing itself is forbidden as a result of principles we can draw from Scripture. In my experience dancing is no innocent thing and as we are charged to commit no sin in though word or deed we must be mindful not to do things which very well may cause us to sin in such ways. Therefore it may not be a sin to dance per see but it is certainly not advisable. In a similar way whilst drinking alcohol is not sinful and is not forbidden getting drunk certainly is and seeing the only way to get drunk is to consume alcohol it is advisable not to consume it lest through the weakness of the flesh we fall into sin.

[BereanTodd]

In a similar way whilst drinking alcohol is not sinful and is not forbidden getting drunk certainly is and seeing the only way to get drunk is to consume alcohol it is advisable not to consume it lest through the weakness of the flesh we fall into sin.

Then why did Jesus drink frequently (probably every day of His adult life)? And if you say "well, He's the God-man, He could withstand temptation", I would say to you, then why did He turn water to wine for others???

[Iosias]

Then why did Jesus drink frequently

And what is your proof? Is it wrong to drink? No! Is it advisable? No.

[mont974x4]

I think rather the issue is not whether the Scripture forbid dancing explicitly but whether dancing itself is forbidden as a result of principles we can draw from Scripture. In my experience dancing is no innocent thing and as we are charged to commit no sin in though word or deed we must be mindful not to do things which very well may cause us to sin in such ways. Therefore it may not be a sin to dance per see but it is certainly not advisable. In a similar way whilst drinking alcohol is not sinful and is not forbidden getting drunk certainly is and seeing the only way to get drunk is to consume alcohol it is advisable not to consume it lest through the weakness of the flesh we fall into sin.
As to drinking alcohol not being advisable? Timothy was advised to drink, not just for his stomach but basically for general health. 1 Tim 5:23

If you know you have a problem with alcohol (mainly a self-control issue) then , yes, be honest with yourself and abstain. However, it would be wrong to demand that same standard for others. For my part, I won't tempt you.


As to dancing? I haven;t found anywhere in Scripture that mentions dancing in a bad light..in and of itself. Like alcohol, and other matters where we are free, if you have an issue then by all means avoid it. However, again, that is your choice and you can not demand such a stance for all people.

[BereanTodd]

And what is your proof? Is it wrong to drink? No! Is it advisable? No.

1. The frequent times he turned water to wine.

2. All 1st century Jews drank. Wine was an important part of many feasts, including Passover.

3. He was accused of being a drunkard, which would make no sense at all if he didn't drink.

Again, he turned water to wine for an entire party ... if it is not adviseable was Jesus wrong in doing this? If He was wrong was it sinful of Him to have done it?

[Iosias]

All 1st century Jews drank.

Well John the Baptist didn't :)

Luke 1:15 "For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb."

Luke 7:33 "For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil."

3. He was accused of being a drunkard, which would make no sense at all if he didn't drink.

But who said that Christ didn't drink? :scratch:

Again, he turned water to wine for an entire party

What was the purpose of this miracle? What was the result of this miracle?

John 2:11 "This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him."

Who has said that Jesus was wrong? Who has said that alcohol is sinful?

1. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.brace/1NEW.htm
2. http://www.request.org.uk/issues/topics/drugs/drugs05.htm
3. http://www.gotquestions.org/sin-alcohol.html

[BereanTodd]

Who has said that Jesus was wrong? Who has said that alcohol is sinful?


You say that it's not adviseable, and yet He turned water to wine for others. If it's not adviseable to drink, that would seem to say it would be wrong to give vast ammounts of alchohol to others, particularly at a party where it's liable to be abused.

If some feel called to abstinence, that is great, there is nothing at all wrong with that. But there is also absolutely nothing wrong in drinking. It is the same thing our Lord did daily.

[Iosias]

You say that it's not adviseable, and yet He turned water to wine for others. If it's not adviseable to drink, that would seem to say it would be wrong to give vast ammounts of alchohol to others, particularly at a party where it's liable to be abused.

If some feel called to abstinence, that is great, there is nothing at all wrong with that. But there is also absolutely nothing wrong in drinking. It is the same thing our Lord did daily.

Read the links I posted in my previous post :)

[Atlantians]

OK, for the sake of not furthering the hijack of someone elses thread....


1. Is it biblical for women to wear pants?
2. Is the "no dancing" issue biblical?

1. Considering the fact that Pants were non existent when the Bible was written, I would have to say if it is unbiblical... it is unbiblical for men also.:P
But I think, in todays culture, if a girl wheres pants ussually worn by guys, there is no problem.
Unless the girl is trying to make herself look masculine.
I think it is more important that a girl dress modestly then not where clothes ussually worn by men.

2. What no dancing issue?
I think some dancing is ok, most of todays styles are lustful and perverse however.

[UBERROGO]

I think the issue is really that men look like men and women look like women. And both to not provoke lust in the other. The pants and dresses thing is a little old fashioned but it still serves the purpose that I can tell when the local baptist college makes thier trips to
Wal-mart. ( Large groups of men in dress shirts and ties and women wearing nice dresses with gym shoes.)

[HypoTypoSis]

1. Is it biblical for women to wear pants?

Since I can't find it in the bible it must not be biblical so, case closed; unless, of course, the above phrase is used with the inference as in "wearing the pants in the family", then something might be said in the matter. :cool:

2. Is the "no dancing" issue biblical?

Yes, it's the Twelfth Commandment, "Whatsover thou thinketh evil is sin for thou to doeth".

IMO...
1....[]...........Back then everyone wore robes

A semi load of Singer sewing machines would have rapidly relegated robes to rags.


a semi load of chain saws would have had outstanding results.

hmmm, time warping a semi load of machine guns to Geronomo would have resulted in an interesting footnote in the history books. Question is, whose history books?

Meat thermometers would have made it possible to get rid of the no pork law.

Ever notice with the flaming sacrifices that God always left the best bbq'd parts for man's edification?

[Erinwilcox]

I think the issue is really that men look like men and women look like women. And both to not provoke lust in the other. The pants and dresses thing is a little old fashioned but it still serves the purpose that I can tell when the local baptist college makes thier trips to
Wal-mart. ( Large groups of men in dress shirts and ties and women wearing nice dresses with gym shoes.)

:eek: Dressing up to go to Wal*Mart? Maybe I'm not a good Baptist;) --half the time, I'm in exercise pants and a hoodie. . .:blush:

[Erinwilcox]

Seriously, though, I don't think that pants/dresses are the issue. The issue is the heart. In many cases (though there are exceptions), modesty is a heart issue and from the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks and the body dresses. If a sense of modesty can be instilled into the heart of a girl/woman, then I believe that dressing modestly will follow naturally. I wear pants all the time and my father doesn't have a problem with me wearing them. Were I to bring home a pair of the tight jeans that are "in" right now, he'd sit me down and have the "modesty talk." There are extremes in both cases. While you can never be "too modest," you can take it to the extreme in a sense and never wear a pair of slacks (but if this is one's conviciton, then the Lord bless you in that and don't change), but the other extreme is one that is not so forgiving--the immodest extreme. Better to err on the side of caution than to through modesty to the wind.

[UBERROGO]

:eek: Dressing up to go to Wal*Mart? Maybe I'm not a good Baptist;) --half the time, I'm in exercise pants and a hoodie. . .:blush:


Tsk Tsk ;)


It's the local Hyles Anderson Baptist Collage that does it. They are located in north-west Indiana. Near Gary and Chicago.

[HypoTypoSis]

the other extreme is one that is not so forgiving--the immodest extreme. Better to err on the side of caution than to through modesty to the wind.

Unless, of course, you fear your beauty may cause the passing male stranger to sin by lustfully wishing; then you might want to consider covering yourself head to toe and wearing a veil as in "olden days" as they still do in the "olden land" in these new daze. :D

[JPPT1974]

Unless, of course, you fear your beauty may cause the passing male stranger to sin by lustfully wishing; then you might want to consider covering yourself head to toe and wearing a veil as in "olden days" as they still do in the "olden land" in these new daze. :D

That reminds of the old Kevin Bacon movie
"Footloose" where they made outlawed dancing,
boozing, carousing, etc.

[Andyman_1970]

And what is your proof? Is it wrong to drink? No! Is it advisable? No.

Was Jesus a Torah observant Jew?

Oh and John the Baptist was a Nazarite, hence the aversion to grapes and their products.