lpetrich

Has anyone tried to work out what clothing the people in the Bible had worn?

That is relevant to the Biblical proscription of cross-dressing, Deut. 22:5 -- A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this. (NIV)

This is sometimes used to argue that women ought not to wear pants.

However, Exodus 20:26 -- And do not go up to my altar on steps, lest your nakedness be exposed on it. (NIV) -- states that one should not step on an altar, lest one expose oneself to it.

This suggests that the intended audience had not commonly worn pants or underwear.

Further evidence is in Exodus 28, which describes some rather extravagant priestly garments; Exodus 28:42-43 -- "Make linen undergarments as a covering for the body, reaching from the waist to the thigh. Aaron and his sons must wear them whenever they enter the Tent of Meeting or approach the altar to minister in the Holy Place, so that they will not incur guilt and die. "This is to be a lasting ordinance for Aaron and his descendants. (NIV) -- in effect, a priest must wear special undies when he enters some very holy place.

So there is nothing in the Bible that indicates that pants are a specifically male garment.

Volker.Doormann

(36) Jesus said, "Do not be concerned from morning until evening and from evening until morning, neither about your food and what you will eat, nor about your clothing and what you will wear .... www.gospelthomas.com/gospelthomas36.html

Volker

lpetrich

Volker Doormann, that's not what I was asking about.

Volker.Doormann

Sorry. It is your question.

Volker

HelenM

Actually I don't think it is, because the verse doesn't say "Women mustn't wear what men wore in Bible times" but "Women mustn't wear men's clothing" implying that women are not to dress in ways that are considered exclusively male today. (I'm not sure we have many of those any more, though)

I think the point is that a woman who tries to look like a man is implying she's not happy about being the gender God created her to be. Which is the sin of being dissatisfied with how God made you (Biblically speaking).

Helen

Sarpedon

"If thou hast not a sword, go and sell your garment and buy one!"

So having a sword is more important than having clothes.

keyser_soze

I think he was just looking for what type of clothing was worn. If he has an ulterior motive for his questioning, we should at least give him the opportunity to get to it himself, and should assume first blush on the question for now.


Helen, I think you are interpreting again. Opinions are like....nevermind.

lpetrich

My question was essentially "how does one tell which sort of clothing belongs to which sex"?

And showing that men in the Bible did not often wear pants -- one can expose oneself to an altar, and a priest's special undies were worth commenting on.

MrDarwin

I can understand some people not liking Divine or Dame Edna, but how could anybody (even God) possibly detest Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon?

Jeremy Pallant

Problem is, Helen, times change. I'm sure that at some point for a woman to wear trousers would have been regarded as inappropriate, but as times changed, so did opinions. In other words it's an example of situational morality.

Now, if it's wrong for women to wear clothing considered male in nature, why is there no great outcry against the Scottish kilt? I mean, not only is it basically a dress, but traditionally they don't wear anything underneath it.

Goodness knows why. As much as I love Highland Scotland, a more inappropriate garment for such a cold, windy, rainy environment short of total nudity cannot be imagined.