Should Hebrew Israelite Women Wear Pants?
This is a portion from a video where brother Divine Prospect addresses a viewer’s question on: Should Hebrew Israelite Women Wear Pants?
As I have said previously, It’s a shame we have to cover such “petty” things when the grand scope of the transition happening in the world is SO dire, but with so many lies and much false information (with an agenda) permeating the atmosphere…it MUST be addressed.
This is a pretty popular question, usually based on lack of understanding of this scripture:
“A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahuah Elohayka.”
So, is a woman who wears pants committing a sin? Is she breaking the covenant law? What were pants in ancient Israel? Did anyone wear pants in ancient Israel? Who “invented” pants and when did the world start wearing them? Do modern day pants only pertain to a man or should men just be careful to shop for men’s clothing (usually in the men’s section) and should women just be careful to shop for women’s clothing (usually in the women’s section)?
Find out the answer to these questions and more in the video above.
I think the response will both inform you and surprise some, but at the very least it’s informative.
[Audio Transcript Begins]
Divine Prospect is speaking
[Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] asks what is you take on [hebrew israelite] women wearing pants?
I went over this before and I explained that, in the scriptures nobody was wearing pants as it’s defined, by the way clothing is identified in contemporary terms today.
So when we jeans, nobody had jeans (or), was wearing jeans back then.
In biblical times, men had undergarments, that were designed to protect their sacred areas down their and their male member parts and these things were more like boxer briefs.
And the purpose of it was to hold, the “royal jewels” in place (laughter). Alright?
So, they wouldn’t be dangling all over the place, underneath what the men were wearing. The men weren’t wearing pants, what they was wearing was undergarments.
When you look to see where jeans or pants themselves came from, you have to start looking at the Persians and you’ll see that the Persians were the ones that really came up with this idea of pants and the way that we see it today.
And then jeans itself, is a more modern invention. So, in regards to wearing pants, women did not wear these undergarments [in ancient Israelite culture] the way men did.
So, if you’re identifying pants the way it was exemplified in ancient Israelite culture, such as these undergarments, these boxer brief type things that held your male member parts in place and you’re saying that women should not wear that, then I agree. Women shouldn’t wear that, because that’s something that men wore back then, but today as far as jeans themselves, the scriptures do not speak on jeans or pants.
There were distinct garments that men wore back then and distinct garments that women wore back then and those distinct garments that they wore were to be for those separate genders.
Now, there were certain groups that would wear the garments of the other gender and that was outlawed in ancient Israel.
Today, as far as pants are concerned, because pants is so much a part of our society and the way they function is much different than they functioned in the past…that would be up to Israelite communities to decide, whether wearing pants should be a garment that should be strictly for men or whether it’s a unisex garment, where certain ones pertain to women and certain ones pertain to men, but if we want to look at it from a historical perspective…the way that we wear jeans, like I got jeans on right now, they weren’t wearing this, men weren’t wearing this in ancient Israel. They weren’t wearing pants the way that I’m wearing it right now.
So, I just wanted to answer that for ya’ll. That would be up to your communities.
I’ll give you an example of how they would interpret it back then.
So, if they went to a market and the market has…
Now mind you I did a lecture called, “Man Up.” “Stand Up, Like a Man” ie “Man Up.”
Go back and watch that lecture. I talk about the garments that men wore and I talk about the garments that women wore. I went into this back in that lecture. For those of you who haven’t seen it, it’s a great lecture. Go back and check it out. It was a pretty good lecture, its call “Stand Up Like a Man” ie “Man up.”
If they went to a marketplace and let’s say, for example, they were selling these undergarments to hold the male members in place.
Just like men, when they go and they do certain sports they wear jockstraps.
Why should a woman wear jockstraps? That would be her wearing something that pertains to a man. That’s not a part of her wardrobe, because there would be no need to wear jockstraps, right.
So, anyway…If they went to a market and there were these britches, what we call britches is just talking about this undergarment that helped gather the male member parts close to the body, so it wouldn’t be compromised or dangling while the man is performing these tasks. Especially the priests, right?
And a woman went to this marketplace and she said, “Hey, I want to purchase that.”
And she buys it and puts it on, she’s wearing something that pertains to a man. In that case, that’s something that’s outlawed and there will be a penalty attached to that.
Today, if a woman went into a store and there’s a woman’s section and there’s a men’s section and she decides, “I’m going to go to the men’s section and I’m going to wear men’s pants and put these men’s pants on,” and she purchases it and wears it…She’s putting on something that pertains to a man, because that garment was specifically designed for males to wear. She is now breaking the commandment, by wearing that piece of clothing.
So, remember this is very, very, very important…
And you know, [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out], I understand what you’re saying.
[Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] is saying these questions are so trivial and you know what I believe that they are.
They are really trivial and it’s unfortunate, because there’s so many grander things that we can discuss that will take us into the higher stratosphere of understand being Israelites and how to really actualize the things that we talk about from the scriptures that, unfortunately, because there are so many pitfalls and there are so many hindrances to get to that point that we have to go back to rudimentary things and really address them to alleviate people from those strongholds, so they can move forward.
So, again, don’t misinterpret what I’m saying to you guys. I’m not saying, “Oh women should wear pants!” That’s not what I’m saying.
I’m trying to give you the understanding so that you can take the wisdom from that and apply yourself, as it pertain to your prospective community.
What I will say that as Israelites, we should have a distinctive was in which we dress so that way we are identified as being set apart from the rest of the secular realm.
That’s very important.
And if one of things we do in our communities is we say to the women, “Hey, look we’re going to refrain from you wearing pants, because that is something that has been integrated so much in the secular realm that if you put it on, you’re going to be identified like everybody else in this society. Then, maybe what we should do is, we should have a different way of culturally appearing to other ethnic groups and one of those things is the garments that we custom make for ourselves, especially for women should not be pants. It should be something that pertains more to what we wore back in ancient times.”
But, if that’s the case and the men are to say that, then are the men also going to wear garments that their forefathers wore, which were not jeans, in order to be consistent with what they are obliging the women to do.
That’s very important.
If we’re going to get into that.
So, my brother, [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] is saying the definition of britches is pants, not jockstraps.
When did I say that the priests and the men of Israel were wearing jock straps? I was using jockstraps as a modern contemporary example. I didn’t say that they wore jockstraps. I said that the purpose of them wearing those undergarments was to protect their male member parts.
That’s what it is. I don’t, I don’t understand. I really don’t understand how you got jockstraps from that. If you consider jockstraps as a way of protecting the male member parts and saying that that is connotatively similar to what britches was, chronologically historically speaking back in ancient Israelite times…then I would agree with you, but I’m not saying that those undergarments were…
What I want is, show me that britches were not undergarments.
Show it to me.
Show me that britches were not undergarments.
Go into any lexicon.
You can go to the Biblical Domain of Semantic Languages. You can go into the Brown-Driver-Briggs. You can go into the Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon…give me a lexicon, any lexicon, not a Strong’s (Dictionary) or you can a Strong’s if you want, if you don’t have access to lexicons.
And show me where these britches that you are talking about were outer garments.
Show it to me.
Show me that these britches were outer garments.
Shout out to [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out]. Thank you for the shout out.
Show me where these britches that you’re talking about that are pants, show me that they were outer garments.
Give me one lexicon that agrees with that.
I’ll wait. I’ll wait.
[side conversation] My brother [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out], I didn’t watch all that video, so don’t want to speak on the matter. Until I’ve watched or consumed it all. So I don’t want to give my opinion on that until I’ve watched it and then in a future live stream I can address that.
Can a nation be in another nation? Alright, [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] Are you an Israelite?
[Left out rest of side conversation and only posting what’s relevant to the topic at hand.]
So, I’m waiting show me where britches were not undergarments.
Show it to me. Can you show me where britches were an outer garment and not an under garment. Show it to me. I’ll wait. Show it to me.
I’m waiting for him to respond to this.
You see, my brother [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out], I’m waiting for you to answer the question.
You have no reference or point of reference to showcase that britches were outer garments.
What I’m trying to explain is that britches were designed to protect the male members, as things were being performed, tasks were being performed. That was the purpose of those undergarments. They were not designed to be worn as outer garments, or as pants, or as jeans, as we wear today. They were not.
So, I’m trying to give an example of a jockstrap. Women should not wear a jockstrap, because women do not have the male members that need to be protected. So, there’s no need for them to wear jockstraps.
So if they had one on because there’s some kind of identity crisis that, “Oh, I need to wear a jockstrap.” Then we have a problem, because now she’s putting on something that pertains to a man, because it pertains to something particular as it pertains to a male member part.
[Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out], I’m going to refrain from that ach (laughter). I didn’t even get there yet.
You know what I’m saying.
I mentioned about the Persians as well, but again, again, I’m still waiting for one lexical entry that will subscribe to the fact that these undergarments, that you call britches…
And remember britches (pants), is not even historically even a Hebrew word.
Britches is not a Hebrew word.
That is an English term.
That’s an English term (pants). So automatically, when I know someone is using that term, they don’t understand the implications behind using the word britches (pants), because when that term was introduced to translate a Hebrew word, that was already something that was being worn in that society at that time. BUT is it a direct representation of what the Hebrew word was? No, it’s not. It’s not.
You see how simple that is [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out]? You just broke it down.
So, [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] says women should not wear pants. (Shoulder shrug) Okay.
(moves on to more comment)
But anyway, I agree [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out]. You’re absolutely correct and I think that’s why even though a lot of people like the teachings that come from here, some other people are bothered by it, because it undermines there precept positions. And when you ask somebody, “Hey I see that’s what you believe, but can you prove it?” How do you know what you know? What’s the epistemology behind what it is you’re showing to me or you’re explaining ot me?
When they say, “Women should not wear pants.” And I’m saying when you say pants, are you talking about boxer briefs, because women should not be wearing boxer briefs. That would be the equivalent of what you call britches in the scripture. That’s an under garment. Jeans is an outer garment. It’s not an undergarment. We’re talking about two different articles of clothing here.
So, you have to get the context correctly, before you can attempt to apply what it is that you’re talking about. If you don’t have the context and the semantical value of the term that you’re using correct and if it’s not accurate then you’re going to misapply it and that becomes a problem. So, again the people who this bothers, unfortunately, they are people who have dogmatic stances on things and they’ve never been challenged to expound on what it is that they’re teaching.
They have not been challenged on it.
You understand what I’m saying?
And I’m not here trying to debate and say everybody’s wrong and I’m right. I’m just trying to give you information on what to do.
Alright, [Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] said next question.
[Viewer’s Screen Name Blocked out] If that’s your conviction, no problem. If you say, “Hey, women should not have pants on!” Hey, if that’s your subscription ach then that’s your subscription. You just would have to showcase that.
All I’m saying is that at the end of the day, we have to be able to put things in its proper context in order to apply it first. If it’s not something that works in a contemporary scheme of things, we have to extract the principle and say okay look, since I can’t directly correlate what I’m reading in the scriptures to some thing that’s happening today, because we no longer do that practice or we’re no longer in that environment, if I extract the principle, how can I apply the principle today? That’s the most important thing family.