If it is, then if your a girl wearing pants, its a sin. If you wear guy's boxers, and your a gilr, its a sin. Please be open minded about this question and think thorougly before submitting your answer. thanks.
2006-11-25 08:50:54 · 11 answers · asked by Regenerit 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Endora-"an equal sin to wear clothing of mixed fibers--what are your clothes made of? Cotton/poly blend?"
Wow, i think thats dumb to have mixed fibers as a sin. Why dont people just ban clothing?
2006-11-25 09:01:36 · update #1
There is only one Scripture that addresses the subject of cross-dressing – "A woman must not wear men's clothing, and a man must not wear women's clothing...." Deuteronomy, Chapter 22, Verse 5. In Old Testament times, men and women wore clothing that was superficially similar - long robes and wrapping garments were common for both sexes. Yet, this is not a command against women wearing a garment that in some ways might be common between men and women; it is a command against dressing in a manner which deliberately blurs the lines between the sexes. As long as you are lookin' like a woman or a man as the case might be, its not a "sin."
2006-11-25 09:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by thundercatt9 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Considering pants were invented originally for women and then taken over and declared men's clothes . . . how can one keep it straight? There are some fundies that take that scripture to heart. I don't think wearing unisex or opposite sex clothing and still being your own sex is necessarily a sin . . . it can have some very uncomfortable intimate repercussions if someone doesn't know a person is pretending to be the opposite sex.
2006-11-25 09:06:23 · answer #2 · answered by whozethere 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A sin according to what? Islam, Christianity, Ancestor worship? Dress codes are usually mandated by culture, and rarely by religion, although there are some cases. If a guy wants to walk around in High heels That's fine by me. What people usually dislike about cross dressing is the association with homosexuality, although they are 2 different things.
2006-11-25 08:58:15 · answer #3 · answered by pinacoladasundae 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Says so in the Bible. Though perhaps we see 'male' and 'female' clothes as different these days - a lot of women do not wear skirts/dresses, and have jeans/trousers instead. That is accepted as an ok 'female' thing to do.
It's all society based - did you know that the Greeks thought the Persians were sissies because they wore trousers (as opposed to dress-like tunics)?!
2006-11-25 08:58:24 · answer #4 · answered by lady_s_hazy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the Bible strictly forbids the wearing of garments that pertain to the opposite sex. It is NOT a matter of hetero/homo sexuality. It is a matter of sexual identity and perception. If God made you a woman, you should edify God by celebrating that womanhood; and if God made you a man, you should edify God by celebrating that manhood. If a person feels the need or desire to dress and behave like the opposite sex, it is a sign that serious healing is needed. Respect how God made you and don't spit in His face by being like the opposite sex. If he wanted you to be like the opposite sex, He would have created you as the opposite sex. I have no idea why women have come to think it acceptable to wear men's clothing, but I bet they would change their attitude if men started wearing dresses, high heels and make-up.
2006-11-25 09:00:57 · answer #5 · answered by hmghosthost 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
and by the bible verse in deuteronomy that directly follows the one you are referring to, it is an equal sin to wear clothing of mixed fibers--what are your clothes made of? Cotton/poly blend?
2006-11-25 08:57:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No.. positioned on what you like... regardless of if i assumed in sin or god (which i do no longer), I doubt that god might have time to envision even in the experience that your underclothes have a front door flap or no longer.... nor might he/she care i think... i think there's a "double well-known" in our society approximately adult men and their underclothes alternatives as adult men have long had to "stay conscious" to (unfair) "bigger" standards whilst it consists of proving their (macho) gender id... Little women are allowed to play with automobiles, and play tough and tumble video games, and the extra serious they're referred to as is "tomboys"...yet whilst somewhat boy dare instruct play types like hugging a doll (which isn't in comparison to a minimum of something a father could desire to do to a newborn), he's categorised "a sissy", and his sexual orientation is termed into question.... no longer honest, yet its how this is/has been for a while... i think of adult men consequently are conditioned early directly to make particular they don't have interaction in any "questionable" habit that could desire to draw interest to their breaking (culturally imposed) gender id regulations. So in case you prefer to positioned on the main comfortable underclothes you could, I won't call you any names, or question you orientation... underclothes determination would not substitute one's orientation... (in certainty, statistically maximum bypass dressing adult men are no longer gay; nor do I care why they pick the underclothes they do...)
2016-10-17 13:08:04 · answer #7 · answered by wishon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Deuteronomy 22:5 should answer your question nicely......some clothing OBVIOUSLY is belonging to one sex....ie dresses for example.......I wouldn't want to see my hubby in a dress, TYVM!
2006-11-25 09:04:23 · answer #8 · answered by lookn2cjc 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It may be a little weird, but I don't think it is a sin. I think it all depends on your motivation.
2006-11-25 08:57:08 · answer #9 · answered by Kidd! 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course not. What a silly question.
2006-11-25 08:57:14 · answer #10 · answered by silvercomet 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋