Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

I Am Christian

Deuteronomy 22.5
‘The woman shall not wear that which pertains unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment for all who do so are an abomination unto the Lord your God.’

What do people think about this and what it means?
One of but many reasons that I’m no longer a Christian and not bound by that book of mythology.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
It means the Old Testament god is a fashion critic. 🤣
SW-User
I think it means a bunch of controlling and judgemental men wrote a phenomenal fairy tale ensuring they covered as many bases as possible during their short lifespans.
Fernie · F
@SW-User well said!!!!
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Pherick · 41-45, M
Oh of those verses that people who think "The Bible is God's Word" would like to forget exists. Or when asked say "Oh well its God Word, but that verse is different".
Damn my wife wore pants to work today! Does that mean she’s sinning?
Fernie · F
@Fernie Psst, Fernie !
Fernie · F
@bijouxbroussard Now THAT is attractive!!!!! I think men with long hair or a pony tale (no man buns please) are so sexy and the kilt sends them over the hotness edge
SW-User
Basically we're all going to hell for our fashion choices
Gusman · 61-69, M
If you want to live by the book then that is your prerogative.
To call someone a sinner for wearing the "wrong" clothing is just plain wrong. An abomination?🙄
I see a lot of "Christians" Arguing the aren't bound by mosaic law and I just thought I'd refute that notion because that isn't bibilical at all.

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

Matthew 5:17

These "Christians" Seem to believe that the Blood Sacrifice of Jesus somehow means they're no longer bound by those laws.

But jesus himself even said he didn't come to destroy the law but to fulfill it.

That means the law still stands according to JESUS HIMSELF.
[i]
Even if Paul taught something different he was in error.[/i]

There's nothing Scriptural about the notion that CHristians are not bound by Judaic and mosaic law- Jesus didn't destroy the law according to scripture.

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. Matthew 5:18

It's clear to any honest student of the bible that the real primary influence of christianity is paul. If Jesus had intended on starting a new religion He would have written a Creed. It's clear in scripture that if scripture is true ( which I doubt.) That jesus according to scripture lived breathed and DIED a JEW.

IF he IS resurrected ( HAHAHA? miracles are bullshit. it won't happen. ) he will come back as a JEW.

And it's Saul who taught that Jesus's blood sacrifice ultimately redeemed people from having to follow Mosaic law.


Matthew 5:19

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least
commandments, [i]and shall teach men so, he shall be
called the least in the kingdom of heaven[/i]: but
whosoever shall do and teach them, the same
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
@SW-User Nope.
SW-User
You make excellent points. However just because something is not abolished does not make it severely binding. The purpose of the law was to prove that we were in need of salvation. A savior. He has come to fulfill that purpose. I recall in the bible there was a passage where on the sabbath day, a man was hungry and went to pick a grain of wheat but that is supposed to be considered sin correct? Mark 2:23-2:27 in these passages jesus states that the Sabbath was made for man not man for sabbath. This indicates that there are certain areas of mercy where supposed sinful actions are not sinful. If that's the case for the sabbath, why not something else? Also jesus did give us two new commandments. To love each other as ourselves and to love God with all our heart. On those two commandments hang all the law and prophets.
SW-User
@BetweenKittensandRiots There was also a passage where Jesus spoke about meat in Which in the OT it states certain meats were not to be consumed. Mark 7:15: What enters a person is not what defiles them but rather what comes out of them. Mark 7:19: It enters not into the heart but the stomach and is expelled. Mark 7:21 for it is within a persons heart that comes evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder. If you can make a distinction between these passages which doesn't seem to exclude shellfish and pork and passages that condemn them, it would surely ease my mind. Also i'm [b]not trying to preach to you[/b]. I just wanted to state that for some reason, a lot of biblical interpretations are not always just black and white. Context is important too.
Fernie · F
what is that...buybull crap? That stupid book, written by and for males....is pure anti-woman. Most religions are...that's what this is about
Ynotisay · M
In all honesty? I think it's nonsense and means nothing.
Fernie · F
a steaming pile of bovine manure
Pherick · 41-45, M
I personally prefer to go to hell for wearing poly-blends.

[quote]Leviticus 19:19: You are to keep My statutes. You shall not crossbreed two different kinds of livestock; you shall not sow your fields with two kinds of seed; and you shall not wear clothing made of two kinds of material.[/quote]
@Ynotisay Leviticus wasn’t a person but refers to the Jewish “Law of Priests”. Supposedly from the Torah and Old Testament, read by Moses to the Israelites. 🤔
Ynotisay · M
@bijouxbroussard Ah. So it's just a group of guys telling people what they should do based on what Moses said? Didn't know that. Good info. Thankfully, as an atheist, I won't be needing to take a test. :)
@Ynotisay And as an agnostic, former Catholic schoolgirl, while I’m aware of the backstory it has no real value in how I live my life. 😉
Fernie · F
You know what chaps my ass...all my young life we (catholics) were not ALLOWED to eat meat on Fridays...It was meant to be an act of penitence, in remembrance of the Friday on which Christ was crucified.🤨 then one day some earthbound human decided to change that and let us eat meat on Fridays...same thing with divorce...how come HUMANS can change anything they choose? ALL the wrong things of course...LET women be priests if we can't eradicate religion altogether
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
@Fernie Allowing women to be priests would help the Catholic church to survive and possibly gain relevance in today's world.
Fernie · F
@Crazywaterspring never mind then...bad idea
This was one of the laws from the Old Testament. People followed these various laws and amended/twisted them to their benefit. They believed that they were living holy lives by following the laws. The new covenant set forth the true/new path for eternal life. It is not what you wear, what you eat, or your works, but the Gospel.
Gusman · 61-69, M
@St0ut It is what many do though. Pick and chose.
@St0ut I didn't say it was; however, the New Testament is the fulfillment of the prophecy of the Old Testament. While that did not make the OT null, it did change many of the laws established in the time of Moses.

This is just what I think...feel free to have a different opinion...no biggie
FreeSpirit1 · 51-55, F
It means for people who believe in a god and creator they also have to believe he gives a shit how you dress.....🤪
rottenrobi · 56-60, F
My guy in high school wore my skirts because it was over 100 degrees. He said it felt good when he rode his skateboard. I guess this is why the redneck assholes kicked his ass?
trackboy · 22-25, M
awesome he had muscular legs. did you have fun rubbing them?? you skipped the rest of the questions. 😺
rottenrobi · 56-60, F
@trackboy I'm sure you can imagine the rest. Think big and fun! 😁
trackboy · 22-25, M
@rottenrobi he was muscular all over????? did he go out for any sports?? 😺
It's self explanatory and it's God's Word
Neoerectus · M
That the men writing this down during very strict patriarchical times wanted to control women. The universe/creator doesnt give a crap what humans wear.
Fernie · F
@whowasthatmaskedman not for Women ...it's a constant battle
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Fernie One you will win. Any civilisation that wastes 50% of its potential HAS to lose out.
Fernie · F
@whowasthatmaskedman It should have happened long ago but the boys won't give up their perceived power easily...they murder us
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
I'm not letting a collection of Bronze age Hebrew folk tales dictate my fashion choices. The women in my life love it when I wear a kilt.
@Crazywaterspring Oh, I bet ! 😋
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
A middle aged guy always gets attention wearing a kilt.
TheWildEcho · 56-60, M
@Crazywaterspring but a kilt isn't womens clothing, its mens
thanks to everyone who took the time to reply!
I find all this really hard. SO on the original verse, I get that God is saying here that men and women are different but equal, and that we wear different clothes to respect this.
That's Ok.
But Deuteronomy 22.11 says "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together." What does that mean? does it mean anything to us today, and if can we just ignore it?
And Deuteronomy 22.23.24 says "If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you."
Again, I guess this is about sex before being married being not a good thing, and I actually agree with that. But stoning to death???
No-one is in favour of that are they, but if not, what do we think of the rest? how do we know which bits to follow and which to ignore?
Just when you think you're getting hold of it it seems to slip away..
Ynotisay · M
@KimberleyAnne There's dozens of passages about behavior that should result in death. Working on Sundays, adultery, not being circumcised, cursing parents, clipping your beard and on and on. I think the problem might be with thinking that 'god' said these things when it was really just a bunch of men trying to control behavior.
Well. My fundamentalist friends would say it means women can't wear pants, work boots, or athletic shoes.

Given that Deuteronomy amounts to three sermons given by Moses before the People entered Canaan, I suspect it's like all aspects of Jewish law-- aimed at subscribing a large circle around believers to differentiate them from others.

I think the point is that pagans dressed in various costumes in devotion to their male and female gods. Just like pagans mixed milk and meat, ate blood, and so on-- all stuff banned in Deuteronomy.
SW-User
As Christians, we are no longer bound by the Mosaic Law. We are to follow the Royal Law to love God, and to love one's neighbor as one's self. However, the moral principle of the is at issue. Each sex was to dress as is custom for that sex. Does it mean a Scotsman cannot wear a kilt or a woman in the workplace cannot wear a business suit? Or course they can.
St0ut · 51-55, M
@SW-User There is no such obligation for Christians to follow royal law.
SW-User
@St0ut It is a reference to James 2:8,9. Look it up.
Keepitsimple · 51-55, F
So you’re here preaching that crossdressing is a sin?? You’re on SW, not a Jesus save me site.
Echoing · 61-69, F
My God doesn't care how I dress, only how I am inside.
SW-User
The bible is at best fairytalish
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SW-User
I think that was more enforced during a specific time period honestly. Nowadays the line is somewhat blurred between what is men and womens fashion. Classic jackets and jeans etc.
Amen. That’s right. God doesn’t care what we wear, as long as it is not showing our nakedness. He’s more concerned about what is in our heart. @SW-User
blindbob · 41-45
it doesn't actually define "what pertains unto a man" or "a woman's garment." for all we know, men are supposed to wear skirts while women are supposed to wear trousers.
FaeLuna · 31-35, F
I guess I'm an abomination for borrowing men's clothes? I should probably return my friend's sweatshirt anyway...
Pherick · 41-45, M
@FaeLuna Sorry Abominations like you are not allowed to leave the house :P
SW-User
To sum it up it's saying that men's cloths are for men, and women's cloths are for women.
St0ut · 51-55, M
Make sure you do t wear cotton and silk or any other branded fabric.
trackboy · 22-25, M
I read that you was also not to spill your seed. was always told not to jack. coaches told us that too and told us we would not do well in wrestling if we spilled our seed.
SW-User
It's God instructions, but if you want to do what you want, that's fine. No one is going to make you follow God's laws if you don't want to. Your choice 🤷‍♂️.
@SW-User God obviously hated women.
frenchstrictdad · 46-50, M
I think i's vetter that a girl wear skirt/dress but pants can be acceptable in some case
Ynot1more · 46-50, M
MATTHEW 7:1 judge not lest you be judged....
Fernie · F
@Ynot1more they ignore that
hunkalove · 61-69, M
It means a lot of SWers are headed for Hell in a handbasket!
Magenta · F
It's meant more spiritual and not literal.
Fernie · F
@Magenta that book is taken literally...which is why it is so dangerous...nothing spiritual about it...depending on your definition of spiritual which to me has NOTHING to do with religion

 
Post Comment