Deuternomy 22:5, how does it apply now?

I have just reviewed your posts responding to mine and I realize you have either not read any of them , or you do not understand the English of which you are o dominant.

I think if we take a look at all of scripture to understand the meaning of the verse for today it would imply that those dressing to give the impression they are the opposite sex are acting sinfully, privately or publicly (whatever that means in the society you live in).

In those times men and women wore robes so we cannot be all petty about our old fashioned traditions that insist dresses are for women and trousers are only for men being the meaning. There are practical reasons women choose to wear trousers, just as men chose to switch to them in times past. Nothing in scripture says women need to don impractical footwear, wear skirts in cold weather (or at all for that matter).

It doesn’t matter which side of the shop
You buy your clothing, why matters is you don’t try to dress yourself To appear like someone of the opposite sex. In a baggy robe it might be easy to give the wrong impression when there where only 2 styles and you deliberately picked the wrong style to wear. If you are going by the letter of the law you have missed the point. As believers we are not under law but we love. It would be immoral and unloving to cause someone of the same sex to become attracted to us because we are dressed as the opposite sex. Just as it is unloving to our brothers and sisters to wear revealing or tight clothing that may cause them to stumble. If we look for why it was written we see that the reason remains on both the old and the New Testament.

A legalistic would say if you are a woman and see a homeless man in the street freezing you can’t give him your coat or jumper because it’s for a woman. They would say don’t disguise a man as a woman to help him escape a life threatening situation where someone was looking to kill him etc... This is not why the law was written. The law was written to help us love God and fellowman. The law was for the lawless. It was only a shadow of what was to come. A life ruled by the love Of God by His spirit in Is.

Thank you for your post. Personally I have seen in a video some guys dressed as women and they still look like guys. One video I saw however, I did think the person was a woman at first.

I liked the point you made about giving to the homeless and I agree with that.

Good Post, Tara,
you certainly have proclaimed the 'Spirit of the Law'...
as it is written:
ROM. 7:14.
For we know that the 'Law is Spiritual': but I am carnal, sold under sin.
EX. 20:1.
And God spoke all these words, saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

it's always evident that when God/Yeshua speaks, that IT IS SPIRITUAL...
JOHN 6:63.
It is The Spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you,
they are Spirit, and they are Life.

Good stuff.

Some weapons to defend the truth.
The intellectuals on the far left are pushing the idea that human life is evolving towards androgyny. That we will be genderless in the future. Well ain't that a head thumper!

you mean your freedom of speech, right? I don't know about racism though. I think I would go for 'ignorant' instead

in other news, the world has just received a notice from (cough cough) 'truth' that only English will be allowed from now on

'truth' plans to enforce this edict by snorting and making comments about CNN and other fake news channels

so far, no one has paid any attention

CNN, NBC, MSNBC, New York Times, they are all fake news, a political extension of the democratic party.

Just One Example Of Your Fake News Below, NBC Intentional Altering Of Truth, And They Were Caught, Before The World Watching!

TampaBayTimes

PolitiFact: NBC’s Chuck Todd leaves out key context in shortened William Barr clip

A clip played by NBC host Chuck Todd cut important context from Attorney General William Barr’s interview with CBS News, leaving the impression that Barr spoke only in political terms about his move to drop charges against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

On Meet the Press, Todd played an abbreviated quote from Barr’s May 7 interview with CBS News’ Catherine Herridge, in which Barr was asked how history would view his decision to reverse course on a prosecution that had already produced a guilty plea.

"He didn’t make the case that he was upholding the rule of law," Todd said after the clip. "He was almost admitting that, yeah, this is a political job."

obviously the subtlety of my post missed you

and your ability to jump to conclusions

1. I am not a left leaning individual

2. God understands all languages so take it up with Him

3. the fluff in your post requires a good undercoat brush. they sell them on 'chewy'

4. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Christ does not belong to any political party. In Him there is neither a Democratic nor a Republican party. He belongs to LOVE and this Love does not know anyone by political affiliation. I think we Christians should always desire and pray that things happen according to the will of God and not according to our will and understanding. . In so doing, we will be able to see a government installed by God who walks solely in according to the will of God.

I pray for guidance all the time, and it leads me to make a check mark next to candidate Donald J. Trump

Pro life, President Donald J. Trump

I think Deuternomy 22:5 means that God doesn't want us cross dressing. I think He created order - male and female distinct and different. Crossdressing tends to break down that order. Same with transsexuals, effeminates, and sodomites. I think all that is of satan. And I think tolerance of it is not a virtue at all.

You mean you can't have a beard, mustache, hairy chest, and dress up like a female and hang out in the ladies Walmart or Target restroom?

5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

here's the thing. Deuteronomy 22 is entirely about instructions what to do and what not to do. the name Deuteronomy means '2nd law' and is practical in application and is actually a review of the law before the Israelites enter 'the promised land'. basically, it is a renewal of the covenant God made with them previously.

so what is v. 5 saying and does it apply?

oh you bet it applies. why do people need to hear this? because they are ALREADY doing it. we see it today. transvestites and women saying they have a 'wife'.

if God says 'DO NOT' it is because people already are 'DOING IT'

it's common sense and why do we need to question what is apparent all through scripture? smh

Sorrry for the delay in answering. Got a house full of guests and the thread has kind of run away. The OP addressed Deuteronomy 22:5. It was part of the Law of Moses. When our Lord Jesus came He approached Israel with the possibility of ushering in the Kingdom of God. When Israel refused this, rejected the King and murdered Him, our Lord Jesus, or God if you will, turned to a New People (Matt.21:43). This "New Man" was made (out) OF some Israelites and (out) OF some of the Nations (Eph.2:15). But the Israelite who turns to Jesus is faced with a dilemma. What about the Law of Moses. It makes up a Covenant with God (Ex.24:7; Deut.29:21). And in this Law are commandments that forbid any relations with the Gentiles. So the unity of the New Man would have been broken right at the beginning if a converted Jew was required to keep Covenant.

The solution to this is that our Lord Jesus first fulfills the Law Himself, and then takes the "Old Man" onto the cross with Him (Rom.6:6). He is then at liberty to bring forth this New Man which is totally New and does not have a past (2nd Cor.5.17). And having taken the Old Man onto the cross, the New Man is not subject to the Law because the Law, as part of the old, "is passed away". That is, if a Jew refuses Christ, he is part of the Old, and the Law applies to him. But if he embraces Christ, his ethnicity and the Law which applied to the Old Man, are abolished. But under what rules shall the New Man live if the old is abolished?

The new rules are embodied in Christ. During His life our Lord did the will of His Father (i) in respect of the Law, and (ii) over an above the Law (for example, the Law does not require the death of an innocent man for the guilty). So in His lifetime our Lord Jesus established a full experience of a Man both under Law and above Law. And this experience is added to the Holy Spirit (Jn.7:39). So when you receive the Holy Spirit (Jn.20:22) int your human spirit at rebirth, you receive the "Law of LIFE in Christ Jesus" (Rom.8:2). That is, you have no written Law like Israel. You alluded to this by calling it, "the Law of Liberty". There is still a Law, but it is administered instantly by the indwelling Holy Spirit (Rom.8:13-14).

Therefore, when you wake up in the morning and try to decide what to clothe yourself with, as the New Man IN Christ, you do NOT turn to Deuteronomy 22:5. You turn to Christ, in the Person of the Holy Spirit, IN YOU and ask Him. If you have been practicing this for a while, you will know intrinsically what you may, or may not wear. But the Law of Moses still has some profit for the Christian. It is this; We can know beforehand the mind of God. What God, in the Person of the Holy Spirit, commands to do is the way to go, but maybe you still have some reservations. Then we are pointed in a direction by the Word of the Law. For instance, you go for a walk in the countryside. You come upon a place where a farmer's cattle have broken through the fence and are standing in a road. What shall you do? Well, if you have no witness in your spirit, you are pointed in the direction that you should care for your neighbor's things.
Sorry for the delay in answering. Got a house full of guests and the thread has kind of run away. The OP addressed Deuteronomy 22:5. It was part of the Law of Moses. When our Lord Jesus came He approached Israel with the possibility of ushering in the Kingdom of God. When Israel refused this, rejected the King and murdered Him, our Lord Jesus, or God if you will, turned to a New People (Matt.21:43). This "New Man" was made (out) OF some Israelites and (out) OF some of the Nations (Eph.2:15). But the Israelite who turns to Jesus is faced with a dilemma. What about the Law of Moses. It makes up a Covenant with God (Ex.24:7; Deut.29:21). And in this Law are commandments that forbid any relations with the Gentiles. So the unity of the New Man would have been broken right at the beginning if a converted Jew was required to keep Covenant.

The solution to this is that our Lord Jesus first fulfills the Law Himself, and then takes the "Old Man" onto the cross with Him (Rom.6:6). He is then at liberty to bring forth this New Man which is totally New and does not have a past (2nd Cor.5.17). And having taken the Old Man onto the cross, the New Man is not subject to the Law because the Law, as part of the old, "is passed away". That is, if a Jew refuses Christ, he is part of the Old, and the Law applies to him. But if he embraces Christ, his ethnicity and the Law which applied to the Old Man, are abolished. But under what rules shall the New Man live if the old is abolished?

The new rules are embodied in Christ. During His life our Lord did the will of His Father (i) in respect of the Law, and (ii) over an above the Law (for example, the Law does not require the death of an innocent man for the guilty). So in His lifetime our Lord Jesus established a full experience of a Man both under Law and above Law. And this experience is added to the Holy Spirit (Jn.7:39). So when you receive the Holy Spirit (Jn.20:22) int your human spirit at rebirth, you receive the "Law of LIFE in Christ Jesus" (Rom.8:2). That is, you have no written Law like Israel. You alluded to this by calling it, "the Law of Liberty". There is still a Law, but it is administered instantly by the indwelling Holy Spirit (Rom.8:13-14).

Therefore, when you wake up in the morning and try to decide what to clothe yourself with, as the New Man IN Christ, you do NOT turn to Deuteronomy 22:5. You turn to Christ, in the Person of the Holy Spirit, IN YOU and ask Him. If you have been practicing this for a while, you will know intrinsically what you may, or may not wear. But the Law of Moses still has some profit for the Christian. It is this; We can know beforehand the mind of God. What God, in the Person of the Holy Spirit, commands to do is the way to go, but maybe you still have some reservations. Then we are pointed in a direction by the Word of the Law. For instance, you go for a walk in the countryside. You come upon a place where a farmer's cattle have broken through the fence and are standing in a road. What shall you do? Well, you are "pointed in the direction" that you should care for your neighbor's things. If the Lord does not want you to inform the farmer, he will speak in your spirit. It could be that a child is about to drown 1 mile down the road and the Lord needs you there for that. Who knows? They Holy Spirit does.

This is what happened to Paul on his missionary journey. He wanted to go to Bithynia for the gospel's sake (Act 16:7). It was according to the the Lord's commission in Acts 1:8. But the Holy Spirit wanted him in Macedonia. Paul was sensitive to the Holy Spirit. So must you be when it comes to dress, hair length, what car to buy, who to marry and even when to speak or not. You have no written Law to follow. For you, it is nailed to the cross. But you have Christ living in you and His LIFE will lead you in all matters (Rom.8:2, 14).

I have a little hair on my face but not too noticeable though a bit darker than I like. Not too much hair on my chin but I get this dark hair that comes occasionally that I have kept on plucking off my chin.

Lenna, I wasn't questioning if this verse still applies but what it means.

right

and I stated how it applies now AND what I thought

now you say this

your op said how does it APPLY today and what do you think?

did you forget?

No, but I meant how does it apply in the sense of what way.

ok I see

you meant one thing but said another and somehow I lost the power to read minds

well, in the sense of what way, I would say exactly the same way

Revised Edition of the OP

your thoughts 2.0

confused?

I know I was

kidding..halfway...