Friday, February 1, 2008

Respose to comments received regarding "Biblical Guidelines about Clothing"

About two weeks ago I published this post on why I wear exclusively dresses and skirts. I'm amazed about how much of a response this post has generated, and I was so excited about receiving all the comments from you dear ladies about this post. Thank you so much for leaving your comments; it was a joy for me to get to know all of you, and to respond to your comments and questions. I have responded to the majority of them there in the comments section of that post, but there are a couple that I would like to respond to here, in a new post. For those of you ladies who may not have read the above mentioned post, please do so now, before continuing on with this one. Thank you! :)

I received the following comments from a dear lady named Lynne:

I find it interesting that you use arguments about the cultural aspect of clothing, especially since in our American culture, pants are seen as women's clothes as well as men's.

You brought up a great point, Lynne, that I was wanting to discuss! :) Now, before I continue on with answering your question, I want to make something quite clear to all of those ladies reading this post. Not a single thing that I say here about the whole "jeans vs. skirts debate" is said in order to point a finger at those females who wear jeans, trousers, slacks, pants, or whatever you want to call them. Nothing I say here is said in order to be judgemental towards those ladies. If I ever ever come across as being rude, mean, or judgemental towards ladies who disagree with me, then please accept my deepest and most heartfelt apology! What I am writing here on this blog about femininity is written in order to edify and encourage you ladies.

As I said above, you brought up a great point! Deauteronomy 22:5 says, "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." This can also be translated that they are "detestable to the Lord your God." Those who disagree with me on this subject often point out that today, pants are considered women's clothing, and so that makes it ok. But, I want to draw up an analogy to begin with here, if you don't mind. When someone lies, that is a sin. Now, if someone has been lying profusely over a long period of time(of, say, 5 years), does that make it automatically ok, just because it's become a very common occurance? That person commiting lies was sinning when he began doing so, but just because he continued to do so very very often for the next 5 years, and it thus became an everyday occurance, doesn't mean that it was allright for that person to be lying all that time. Likewise, when women began switching from wearing skirts and dresses(a female's distinct clothing) to wearing pants(men's clothing) in the 1960s, that was a sin. The above mentioned verse points that out clearly. Pants were clothing that pertained to men, and so to begin wearing them was a sin, by this verse's standards. This was not to be done. So, just because this sin has lasted for a good 40 years, and because it's become more prevalent as time goes by, doens't mean that it's any less of a sin today than it was 40 years ago when it first began.

There's something else I want to point out on this subject. The precise wording of this Deuteronomy verse is very noteworthy. It's very interesting and important. Notice what it says: "A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment". This is very noteworthy, and I'll tell you why. This verse could have been written "A woman shall not put on a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment." If it said this, then women could argue today that they're not doing anything wrong as long as they're not wearing a piece of clothing that was purchased in the men's section of a clothing store(thus, a "man's garment"). If this was the case, then women could easily argue that they can wear pants if they want to as long as they were purchased from the women's section and not the men's. But, as we can see, that's not how the verse is worded! Instead, it says, "A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, not shall a man put on a woman's garment." That's a big difference! From the way this verse is specifically worded, it shows that wearing pants (clothing, that for centuries and centuries has pertained to men), is a sin. I think this verse is worded this way for cultures like the one we have here today in the West, where many many women are wearing jeans, pants, etc.

Also, something we have to understand is that the "women wearing pants movement" came about because of feminism. For articles on why it's so important that we, as Christians, do not support any of the philosophies of feminism, please check back soon. I'm currently working on many articles on the subject of feminism(its history, hidden agendas, destructiveness, founders, etc.) and will be posting them here in the near future.

As long as you're not showing a personal, private part of your body that belongs to your future husband (or the Lord), you are dressed modestly.

I must say that this is a dangerous argument to have! Because, by saying this, then that means that bikinis and speedos are modest. Because, by your argument, in both items of clothing, the private parts of the body are covered with clothing material. Yet, both of these items of clothing are extremely immodest and are not to be worn by Christians. Recently, I read an outstanding book by Mr. Jeff Pollard entitled Christian Modesty and the Public Undressing of America. In this life changing book, Mr. Pollard uses his extensive knowledge of the Hebrew language and the knowledge he's gained from in-depth Bible studies to prove that the Bible teaches that any article of clothing that does not reach the knee is immodest, and is against what God requires for a Christian's clothing. I will be posting exerpts from this great book here on my blog shortly, so be on the lookout for those! :)


I received the following question from Caitlin:

Hi Rebekah, I had another question for you, and for other people who wish to share. What do you wear to swim in?

That's a great question, Caitlin, and I'm glad you asked it! :) I used to wear the regular 1-piece swimsuits, thinking that I was modest because I wasn't wearing the 2 pieces! However, after reading the above mentioned book, the Lord showed me, so clearly, the horrible error of my ways.

This past summer, my family was planning a vacation to Savannah, Geogia, and the beach there:Tybee Island. We were in need of modest swimming suits! We came across this website, and Mama decided to purchase one of their patterns instead of the modest swimwear they themselves sew, in order to see if she could make them herself. She succeeded beautifully, and the finished product can be seen here and here. I felt so blessed to be able to go to the beach and not feel self-conscious. I was able to go to the beach and have fun while being completely modest and glorifying God at the same time! It truly was a blessing, and I look forward to wearing this swimsuit in the future. :)

What about the rest of you ladies? What do you swim in in order to preserve your modesty?


Again, I want to offer a big thank you to all of you ladies who commented on the Biblical Guidelines about Clothing post. To those of you whose questions/comments did not appear on this new post, please refer to the comment section of the Biblical Guidelines post, and there you will find my responses to your comments! :) And, for those of you who may not have read that Biblical Guidelines article, please do so now! And I welcome your comments on it as well as on this one!

May the Lord richly bless you all!


  1. Rebekah,

    You grievously misrepresented Lynne's comment. She said:

    "As long as you're not showing a personal, private part of your body that belongs to your future husband (or the Lord), you are dressed modestly. And I mean whether you're showing it with an outline, a split, or whatever."

    A speedo would therefore be inappropriate (it shows an outline that leaves very little to the imagination!) as well as a bikini (I was taught that a woman's midriff is a private part of her body that is for her husband's eyes only -I'm not sure what you've been taught! :)

    Since pants were not normative in the Old Testament (or anywhere, until they came on the scene in Persia as WOMEN'S clothing), the analogy about lying is also inappropriate. Lying is a sin, and always has been, but pants weren't even around during the penning of Deuteronomy.

    Men used to wear tights exclusively, too, as well as heels! I'm not saying that I disagree with your personal choice to wear dresses only, but your argumentation for that choice is a bit flawed.

  2. Hi, anonymous! Thank you for your comment! I obviously misunderstood her wording. I apologize! There must have been some misunderstanding, and for that, I'm very sorry!

    I agree with what you said about the speedos and bikinis. I don't know why you're wondering what I've been taught when I pointed out basically the exact same thing in my post! I completely agree with what you said!

    I was refering to our culture here in the West. That's what we must refer to, for we(the majority, if not all of those ladies reading this) live in the West! Not in Persia, Israel, etc. So, we ourselves truly can't go by that. We have to go with our history here in the West. And that history shows that for centuries, pants(jeans, trousers, slacks) were men's clothing. Dresses and skirts were women's clothing. So, we are disobeying this verse! That's exactly right that pants weren't around when Deuteronomy was written-that's why it doesn't speak about them by name! So, we have to take what this verse teaches us and apply it to every culture and time period. Because cultures change, but this verse and its teachings don't. Likewise, if we lived in Scotland and all the men there only wore kilts and pants were seen as distinctly feminine because men didn't wear them, then that's what we'd be called on, as females, to wear. We have to apply this verse to whatever nation/culture we find ourselves in. Lying is a sin and so is dressing in manly clothing(if you're a female). That was my point.

    What you said about tights and heals perfectly illustrates my point. Men don't wear tights or heels in our culture. Times have changed and cultures have changed. But, this verse hasn't, and thus must be followed.

    Thank you for your comment! I enjoyed reading it, and I'm glad you took the time to present your point of view! :)

    May the Lord richly bless you!

    For His glory alone,

  3. I liked both of these comments girls! I love seeing such well thought out comments that come from one's values. I myself LOVE skirts. Always have. My beau doesn't know why I wouldn't want to wear them all the time *not that he thinks I should* because he thinks they look so comfortable. I haven't made the switch to completely skirts, but I am trying harder to make sure I am dressing distinctly feminine and that means more skirts in my weekly attire. Unfortunately, it has been SO cold here in GA lately and I walk to work in the mornings and I just can't bring myself to freeze in a skirt even though I suppose I could wear a petticoat and hose...We'll see how that goes.

    I LOVE reading your posts, Rebekah! You are so genuine and heart felt! You are very much in love with the LORD and it is evident you want to do everything to please Him! I am so encouraged by you!

    May He send you bountiful blessings!


  4. Hi Rebekah,

    Just a comment.

    You say that pants are what pertain to a man because western culture makes it so, however the standard that pants pertain to men is one that has been set up by man, and not God. If this is the case, why can’t man change the standard? Man should and must never attempt to change God’s standards, but why can’t they change a standard set by man?

    It is true that in western culture at least, pants have long been something that pertains to man. But if someone were to say: “Well, that is how things were, now they have changed”, how could the christian disagree? Because what has changed is not something set by God, or found in the world of God, but a man-made standard. No amount of time can make lying ok, because lying is clearly condemned as sin in the bible. But wearing pants is no where listed as a purely man’s activity in the bible. I see no reason why we must be permanently bound to the rules of our culture in things that God has not commanded.

    Just my thoughts…peace!


  5. Oh my goodness! Rebekah! You are SO cute in your red shirt and pretty flowery skirt in your pictures from your swimsuit post! I love the swim suit as well! You are ADORABLE and so feminine and beautiful! It just goes to show that a lady doesn't have to "let it all hang out" at the beach to be attractive and lovely!

  6. Hey Rebekah,

    Nice, clear post, and you and the other ladies seem to have some good discussion, clarifications, ect, going. S. has well expressed some of my own thoughts on this, and I don't need to repeat her. (or him) But I would like to bring up something here. Today I went to a play with some of my friends (and had a lot of fun :) and the heroine of the story was a troubled, yet strong and loving young woman. About the middle of the play or so, we find out that part of her trauma was that she was raped and her child died. A lot of things she had done, such as getting angry when touched or stared at, came into place. One thing I especially noticed was that she only wore pants, while her best friend went mostly around in a skirt. I believe that the costumer made this choice on purpose, because if what I've heard around is correct, rape victims often feel safer wearing only pants, for obvious reasons. And it IS easier to be attacked in a skirt. Now I don't know if this proves anything, but it is worth noting. Those who think it is a legitimate choice to wear pants have another reason to do so, and those who do not ... well, they should be very, very, very careful in communicating their beliefs lovingly, when a victim is listening or around. (And Rebekah, you have had a very loving tone throughout this, I am just noting one more reason to be loving.)

  7. I need to go to bed in a minute, but since I am looking back here before doing so, I second Leah about the pictures. The bathing suit is lovely and practical, and as for the pictures of you in the skirt your mom made - oh, Pretty Rebekah! No wonder you eventually got interested in sewing yourself ...

  8. Rebekah,

    Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here. :) Thank you for clarifying your position, though, and for taking the time to write this well-thought-out response. Yes, you did misunderstand my comment, and I was a little put out with the way it was represented in your post (speedos and bikinis *both* show personal, private parts of your body -midriff, to me -and I'm sure, to you -counts as "private," as does whatever is *painfully* outlined in a speedo :), but I accept your apology. We are of the same mind on that matter.

    I wanted to re-post a comment I made over at Anna's blog about modesty:

    The purpose of modest dress -the purpose of everything we do in this life -is not to please men (male or female), but to glorify God. Frankly, I don't think having a husband is proof of having accomplished this, nor do I think that being single is proof of the opposite. Our goal in life is not to be married -our goal in life is to glorify God in the sphere in which He's placed us. For most of us here, that sphere includes -or will someday include -the calling of a wife. Proverbs 31 makes it clear that a wife is to do good, not evil to her husband "ALL the days of her life." All.

    I would say that a woman who enjoys acting immodest is in direct violation of scriptural commands (Proverbs 11:22) Women are commanded to dress and behave modestly (1 Timothy 2:9), and a woman who lacks discretion might receive respect from certain, young men, but she does not receive it from the Word of God (Proverbs 9:13). The Bible tells us exactly which behavior is pleasing to the Lord (1 Peter 3:1-6).

    Women and men are going to be attraced to each other, but we have a responsiblity toward our brothers in Christ not to take advantage of that attraction for our own selfish enjoyment and pleasure. (i.e, 1 Corinthians 8:12)

    ~I posted this under "anonymous," but it really covers my opinions on the subject. I would also encourage everyone to hop over to Anna's blog and to see her wise words about modesty as well. It really all comes down to a heart issue (although the outward expressions of our heart are extremely important as well, because the Lord tells us that a tree is known by its fruit! :)


  9. Hi Rebekah...
    I've been off the computer for a week, and I just got back on (for a few minutes anyway...).
    I don't have a swimsuit like you have, but the girls in our family do is this:
    Wear a "modest", high cut one piece swimsuit. Then we wear knee-length shorts and an "active wear" t-shirt (that's not see-thru), which is not clingy and dries rapidly.
    I love your swimsuit though!! :)

  10. Rebekah,

    I understand that you feel that you should relate your arguments to 'Western culture', and as that is your opinion, you are entitled to do so. However, I think you need to brush up on your history.

    Women did not begin to wear pants in the 1960s. They began to do this during WW1, (1914-1918). Men left to go fight on the front and women found themselves taking jobs in the factories. The work was dirty and dangerous. Long skirts were seen as a possible danger and thus they wore pants in the factories.

    Even after the war and men returned home, some women continued to wear pants throughout the 20s and 30s. Wind at My Back is a Canadian tv show that illustrates women wearing pants, very stylish and feminine pants at that. I am sure that there are countless other films you can watch for other examples of clothing during this era.

    Again, when ww2 arrived, (1939-1945) the men left for the front and the women were manning the factories. They wore pants, or an overall like contraption while working in the factories and the fields. They also cut their hair to avoid it being caught in the machinery. When they were not in the factories they wore skirts, but often above the ankle. This was done as material was at a premium and ankle-length skirts were seen as wasteful.

    Perhaps yes, the feminist movement of the 60s saw pant wearing as more predominate, but it's roots occurred long before that. It was a necessity caused by war.

  11. Hi, Maggie! Thanks so much for your comment. Yes, you're completely right. I was aware of that history. But, as you made clear, they only wore those pants while they were in the factories. They didn't wear them every single day, for every single situation. It was feminism in the 1960s that brought on the "women wearing pants everyday" movement(And this did not come about because it was a "necessity" but because they wanted to be like men, etc. etc.)Also, not all women in all factories wore pants, either. My own great-grandmother worked in one of those factories during WW2, and she showed me a picture a few months back of her and the other ladies working in the factory. Most of the women in the picture were wearing skirts, not pants. And, most of them had shoulder length hair, or longer. It wasn't a necessity for those women to cut their hair, as they could have very eaily put it up in a bun, etc., to keep it out of the way, while still having it long and feminine.

    Also, a lot of the factories that they worked in didn't have to do with heavy machinery that could get skirts caught it them. Obviously there were some that were, but others (such as the one my great-grandmother was in)produced items that were not made from machines(they made lanterns for the soliers).

    That's why I mentioned only the 1960s history in my post...because that's when pant-wearing became an all the time thing, and it became so for very bad reasons(I will be posting articles on feminism shortly!)

    I will be responding to the rest of the comments in this section tomorrow, as it is getting late and I must get off to bed!

    Thank you again for your comment, Maggie! I hope you're enjoying a peaceful weekend.


  12. Dear Rebekah,

    Thanks for your encouraging post. I totally echo your sentiments. I bought a beautiful modest swimsuit at
    I really like it.

  13. This may be a bit off topic, but you said your mom was teaching you how to sew. i've always wanted to learn to sew but no one in my family sews. Do you know other ways to learn to sew?

  14. Leah, you're amazing! You're just so sweet, and your dear, encouraging comments truly always lift up my spirits and encourage me so much. :)

    Yes, skirts are so comfortable! Even if I didn't have this strong, purely Biblical conviction, I still would probably wear skirts primarily, because they are so comfortable! :)

    I'm happy to hear about your skirt experiences! :) Once you make that switch to distinctly feminine clothing only, you'll never regret it!

    You know what I've actually discovered? Skirts are actually warmer than pants in the winter! At the beginning of December, I was in a Pioneer era reinactment. It was so so cold in the mornings, but I discovered that I could actually bundle up far more under my long skirt than I ever could under pants. Thinking back to when I wore only pants(except for on Sundays), I've discovered that I was colder then during the winter than I am now. Even if I don't bundle up underneath all that much. I encourage you to try that! :)

    Thank you so so much for your comment about my floral skirt outfit and switsuit. It was very sweet and encouraging. :) That skirt is so comfy and flowy. I just love it! :) And I felt so blessed to have that switsuit! I could look modest without looking as if I was wearing a paper sack. lol I love it, and can't wait to wear it again! :)

    May the Lord richly, richly bless you, Leah!

  15. Dear Rebekah,

    Thank you for your well-thought-out and inspiring posts. I really admire the way you don't seem to be hurt by criticism and negative comments that you receive.

    I was wondering, do you have any thoughts about people saying that wearing skirts only is "legalism?" I don't really understand this myself. If a woman wears pants or shorts all the time, no one calls her "legalistic," and if a man wears pants all the time, no one calls him "legalistic." It is confusing to me that people use this label for women who choose to wear skirts and dresses only. I don't know if you've encountered this at all.

    Also, with regards to women feeling safer in pants, I can't identify with this at all. I feel much safer wearing skirts because I feel covered and secure. I feel more dressed and less exposed. I think maybe part of the issue with women who don't like to wear skirts is that it makes them feel feminine, and they no longer feel femininity to be a strength, but a weakness.

    But that's just not true. Femininity is strength, just not the same strength as masculinity. It's different. A woman who is in her femininity is so much stronger than a woman who relies on masculine strength. That's what I've found-- having experienced myself both ways. Anyway, that's just my personal experience, and I'm saddened that women feel vulnerable or afraid to wear skirts or dresses. That's heartbreaking.


Hi!! Thank you so much for visiting my blog! Please come back often. Thank you for your comment as well; your input is always most welcome! Even if you disagree with something, I encourage you to leave a comment; I just ask that you do so in a loving and Christ-like manner.

God bless you!

~Rebekah S.