Is it permissible for women to wear pants?: Difference between revisions

Is it permissible for women to wear pants? (view source)

Revision as of 04:52, 29 September 2019

9 bytes removed , 5 years ago

→‎Does the word "abomination" refer to a special class of sin?

Admin

Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, nuke, Suppressors, Administrators

11,153

edits

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 ===Does the word "abomination" refer to a special class of sin?===
-The root Hebrew word תֹּועֵבָה (towʿebah, pronounced "to·ay·baw")<ref>James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995)</ref> is translated by the KJV as "abmoination" or "abominable" depending on the sense.  In order to determine whether the argument is valid, we need to look at other uses of the word.
+The root Hebrew word תֹּועֵבָה (towʿebah, pronounced "to·ay·baw")<ref>James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995)</ref> is translated by the KJV as "abomination" or "abominable" depending on the sense.  In order to determine whether the argument is valid, we need to look at other uses of the word.
 In Deuteronomy 14 we read:
-:''Thou shalt not eat any abominable thing.  These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, and the goat, the hart, and the roebuck, and the fallow deer, and the wild goat, and the pygarg, and the wild ox, and the chamois.  And every beast that parteth the hoof, and cleaveth the cleft into two claws, and cheweth the cud among the beasts, that ye shall eat.   Nevertheless these ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you.   And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.  These ye shall eat of all that are in the waters: all that have fins and scales shall ye eat: 10 And whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto you.<ref>The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Dt 14:3–10.</ref>
+:''Thou shalt not eat any abominable thing.  These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, and the goat, the hart, and the roebuck, and the fallow deer, and the wild goat, and the pygarg, and the wild ox, and the chamois.  And every beast that parteth the hoof, and cleaveth the cleft into two claws, and cheweth the cud among the beasts, that ye shall eat.   Nevertheless, these ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you.   And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass.  These ye shall eat of all that are in the waters: all that have fins and scales shall ye eat: 10 And whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto you.<ref>The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Dt 14:3–10.</ref>
 So eating catfish, clam chowder, crab cakes or shrimp tacos are also an abomination to God.  Eating bacon or a pulled pork sandwich is as bad as a woman wearing pants.
-It is clear then that the use of the word "abomination" does not mean that somehow mean that the sin described carries through to the New Testament... unless you believe that Jewish dietary laws are also in effect today.
+It is clear then that the use of the word "abomination" does not somehow mean that the sin described carries through to the New Testament... unless you believe that Jewish dietary laws are also in effect today.
 =William Branham's opinion=