The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum go ahead call me a legalist!

So go ahead call me a legalist, just because
I believe in dresses for women and pants for men.
Short hair for men and long hair for women.
Women for men and men for women.
And a man doesn’t wear earrings he gives them. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/evilgrin.gif" alt="" />

PS movies are of the <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/threaddevil.gif" alt="" />

Okay... if that's what you really want! <font size="4">[color:"0000cc"]You are a Legalist!![/color]</font>

However, I have to agree with you on all counts except the sweeping statement re: "movies are of the " I really like "Chariots of Fire". <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Pil,

You are against pants for women <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> Now, I would never, however, wear a suit and tie. That looks masculine.

I agree with the short hair/long hair thing. Although we have to remember that men wore their hair longer in the past. So, how do we define long hair? I have heard people say it matters more that men don't wear so-called feminine haircuts and women don't weat so called masculine haircuts.

Sorry, I really should have expounded a bit rather than giving a cart blanche thumbs up to the original statement. No, I am not one who holds that under no circumstances should a woman wear pants. What I do believe, and this is nothing more than my personal preference, that a woman should not generally appear in public wearing pants. This would be especially applicable in regard to public worship. However, there are what I would consider acceptable occasions where pants can be worn, e.g., working in the garden, in climates/seasons which are cold, working around the house, etc.

This is perhaps a more difficult issue to discern. Again, my personal opinion is that men's hair should be cut above the ears and women's should be below the ears (when let down). Paul certainly had something particular in mind when he penned ICor 11:3-16. His statement that it is "against nature" for a man to have "long hair", prohibits one from trying to inject "cultural boundness" into the text. For it seems more than obvious that what he is teaching is that God created man "by nature" to have short hair. Thus this principle transcends culture.

The principle which I believe the Scriptures teach is that there should be a clear and definite demarcation line between genders, including but not restricted to how men and women act, their respective roles and how the look. Their must be allowed some latitude with the latter since no one culture is ordained of God to be paradigmatic and to which all others must conform. In our present culture here in the West, there is a significant problem, aka: unisex. But you already know that! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

Semper
Just so you know my post was half way in jest.
Certainly the pants thing is within the relms of Christian liberty and to call it sin would be sin. I wanted to stir the pot.

In Christian love, William

I like be able to wear pants and have worn my hair short and feminine. There is a difference between trying to look like a man when you are a female and dressing up female when you are a man. I am thankful that I am not required to ride side saddle and can wear breeches for comfort and ease. I don't consider myself to be liberal. Just comfortable. It wouldn't be easy to work in the yard or doing a lot of things like mow the lawn wearing in a dress.

Now regarding men wearing skirts—I recall a story told about John Murray, one of the founders of Westminster Theological Seminary. I heard rumor that during WWI, he was member of a regimen from Scotland called the "ladies from hell" named for the reason that they dressed in kilts (plaid skirts) known for their ferocity in battle.

William,


You have certainly stirred mine!

In my generation it was The Beatles and the first fruit of Rock and Roll. So what if you grow your hair long? Our parents knew that something was going wrong. This was especially true for those that were fortunate enough to have parents that went to church and read the Scripture.

The far reaching consequences of disobedience to the Scripture has always been amazing to me. The denial of a simple call of God's word for His children to have an orderly appearance has led to these "things", supposedly representing humanity, that we now see on our streets.

Black clothes, studs, piercings (sometimes in unspeakable places) and tattoos are now the order of the day. We not only have long hair but shaven heads and multi-colored "spikes". Many of these rebellious children spend millions of dollars buying clothes and iconic trinkets and jewelry just to demonstrate their hedonistic and nihilistic attitude to the world and those around them. They spend hours in front of mirrors teasing their hair and appearance in a thinly disguised attempt to show their peers that "they don't care". Some of the clothes that the girls and young women are now wearing would have made a pornographer blush just 40 years ago. It seems that the more outrageous or provocative they appear, the more appeasement and honor is afforded to their god(s) of this world. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bow.gif" alt="" />

I can't wait to see what their children are going to do to "top" this.

The "T" in TULIP rings true again.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Their children will probably rebel against their parents standards and dress in three piece suits with short haircuts just to demonstrate their independence. It could be the pendulum will swing the other way.

Just keep in mind the way someone is dressed outwardly doesn't tell you the condition of their heart.


Wes

The last guy I saw in a dress I arrested for attempted murder and robbery and put him in jail thinking he was a she. The female deputy doing the strip search was quit surprised and it caused me to have to redo all my paperwork. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bigglasses.gif" alt="" />

Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more:

One of the fundamentals of Calvinism is that a man always will choose that which is most desirable under any given circumstance. Thus, everything a person does is a reflection of either his desires/affections and/or his beliefs. One can tell much by the way a man conducts himself or how he dresses. What that really is may be difficult to know exactly, but it certainly is a reflection of his heart. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

I believe that these are all area's that the Church should be preaching and teaching on.

These are all Biblical concerns in our Christian lives. These are all area's that effect our Sanctification and can cause others to stumble.

But It wouldn't be "legalism" unless the church "mandated" that these rules were followed for the purpose of one's salvation.

I personally don't like women in any type of pants and I get discouraged at what allot of the women in my congregation (pca) are wearing. But I have to keep in mind that I'm not perfect and I stumble everyday.

In my opinion, just as long as the "whole counsel" of God is being preached and taught and the area of "modesty" is being touched on, then that should be sufficiant to help the women of the congregation be convicted and spur them on to consider how they dress.

I would say that even a plea given from the pulpit like, "I would like to see the women of the congregation wearing more dresses and flats please." wouldn't be out of line. If this is touched on and or other issues, ones involving men as well are touched on enough, that should help to steer the congregation the right direction.

But when you start hearing things like, "If you are wearing immodest clothing, you need to repent and question your salvation!" Then I would be worried. I would look around me, to make sure that I hadn't been secretly teleported to "Bob Jones." <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth. There are "issues" in my church and things that I wish were being done more. For myself, the lack of admonishment and exhortation coming from the pulpit bothers me. There also doesn't seem to be allot of apologetics going on as well. But no local assembly is perfect and sometimes you have to take the good with the bad.

Dave.