-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Pants for women?
- Thread starter Pacman
- Start date
It depends. Several years ago, I was at church and during the sermon a young woman got up and left the sanctuary. I watched he as she walked down from the balcony. She had in a very slender dress on and she looked fantastic. I realized as she walked out of sight, I had no idea what the preacher had said.
I dont have any problem with women wearing pants, but how they fit should be considered. Cause, in all honesty, I’d probable stumble again if the jeans were too tight.
I dont have any problem with women wearing pants, but how they fit should be considered. Cause, in all honesty, I’d probable stumble again if the jeans were too tight.
We're to be obviously different. Pants aren't in and of themselves bad but so called modest dress is a great way to be different.
I should point out that a woman could be in a full length dress that covers from wrist to ankle and still be completely immodest. It is impossible to write a hard rule for modesty. And we all know these are some of the less outrageous examples. By comparison a woman in "mom jeans" would be very modest. I still prefer skirts and dresses though. 
Modest meaning the modern understanding of non sexual? Or simply appropriate to the occasion?
I actually require My wife and daughters to wear pants for certain things. I require a dress or skirt for other things. Otherwise I leave it up to them to decide. But I always expect them to be dressed appropriately for the occasion. I don’t agree with the modern churches definition of modesty that basically means frumpy...
I actually require My wife and daughters to wear pants for certain things. I require a dress or skirt for other things. Otherwise I leave it up to them to decide. But I always expect them to be dressed appropriately for the occasion. I don’t agree with the modern churches definition of modesty that basically means frumpy...
I liked the ones that came up to the ribcage. All the cool chicks were wearing those back then. Oh and they were acid washed.Mom jeans?! MODEST?!?! I have to respectfully disagree. As a child of the late 80s/early 90s, there’s nothing as hot as a lady in mom jeans!
Oh yeah! You’re definitely hitting a few of my buttons with these mental images.
As for pants, I have no issue with them. Actually prefer my ladies in jeans instead of dresses and skirts...I think. They don’t wear much of the later, just pants and shorts. But anything has the potential to be immodest or modest, so I just encourage and expect modesty mainly by them not wearing things that are revealing. Now pajama pants...that’s another story. Super sexy and immodest. I love me a lady in some nice pajama pants.
Last edited:
I just go by whatever looks modest to me.
Deuteronomy 22:5 NKJV — “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God."
I'm not saying pants necessarily fit into this prohibition today, maybe days gone, but at the least I think the spirit of this is to make sure we aim to dress in a manner that makes it difficult to mistake our gender. I believe this should be considered as each person discerns how they or their family dress.
I'm not saying pants necessarily fit into this prohibition today, maybe days gone, but at the least I think the spirit of this is to make sure we aim to dress in a manner that makes it difficult to mistake our gender. I believe this should be considered as each person discerns how they or their family dress.
I as well prefer a dress for my wife and daughters, just because I like it and make them look feminine. But reality is that they wear pants most of the times.
But we have a custom that I approve however all purchased cloths they buy. And they know I won’t approve really skinny pants. For me the criterion is indeed like said here above that it should be recognizable as women’s cloths. And it has almost never been any issue as far as I can remember.
But we have a custom that I approve however all purchased cloths they buy. And they know I won’t approve really skinny pants. For me the criterion is indeed like said here above that it should be recognizable as women’s cloths. And it has almost never been any issue as far as I can remember.
I prefer women who are not wearing pants.
My wife knows what Scripture says, and what hubby says... but she also has free will ... and therefore is capable of choosing to walk in sin (literally)... my job is to speak the truth to her, and to pray she repents Before it’s too late to save her soul!
Now, if she chooses not to repent... oh boy... that’s where daddy gets a bit upset... I’d say downright angry... In fact... when she dares to walk out of that room with pagan pants on... oooooooooooo.... I feel a righteous hatred swell up inside of me something fierce!
I always try sticking to a strict interpretation of Scripture... therefore IMO she sins when she weareth that which partaineth to a maneth...
AND much more importantly, the Scripture says absolutely no mention of any under-garments to be worn in addition to a skirt or dress... therefore such restrictive garments are unrighteousness and should be avoided! ...
Look guys, it’s pretty clear that the Biblical ban on pants is due to the obvious fact that pants are a hinderance to a husbands conjugal rights... as are any Luciferian undergarments that could be worn under a pleasant godly skirt... therefore both articles of so called “clothing” are anti-patriarchal and unBiblical!
Scripture tells us that “rebellion is as of witchcraft”, so when a wife chooses to be rebellious and wear pants in blatant defiance of God’s decree, then it becomes clear that she’s being possessed by an unclean spirit of witchcraft... our job as loving husbands is to cast the “witch-demons” out of our wives whenever they rear their pants or panty wearing heads!!!
Now, if she chooses not to repent... oh boy... that’s where daddy gets a bit upset... I’d say downright angry... In fact... when she dares to walk out of that room with pagan pants on... oooooooooooo.... I feel a righteous hatred swell up inside of me something fierce!
I always try sticking to a strict interpretation of Scripture... therefore IMO she sins when she weareth that which partaineth to a maneth...
AND much more importantly, the Scripture says absolutely no mention of any under-garments to be worn in addition to a skirt or dress... therefore such restrictive garments are unrighteousness and should be avoided! ...
Look guys, it’s pretty clear that the Biblical ban on pants is due to the obvious fact that pants are a hinderance to a husbands conjugal rights... as are any Luciferian undergarments that could be worn under a pleasant godly skirt... therefore both articles of so called “clothing” are anti-patriarchal and unBiblical!
Scripture tells us that “rebellion is as of witchcraft”, so when a wife chooses to be rebellious and wear pants in blatant defiance of God’s decree, then it becomes clear that she’s being possessed by an unclean spirit of witchcraft... our job as loving husbands is to cast the “witch-demons” out of our wives whenever they rear their pants or panty wearing heads!!!
Thankyou @rustywest4, should I ever see a demon with panties on its head I shall be sure to cast it out.
Uhh... pretty sure that contextually, when 'clothing that pertaineth to a man' was written, pants were not a thing. Robes yes. Linen breeches, for priests.... etc.
Maybe we need to take up kilts for the men @rustywest4 if you really need 'freedom.'.
Maybe we need to take up kilts for the men @rustywest4 if you really need 'freedom.'.
