We are all kilted sinners! Oh no!! :-)

[The Kilted Chaplain]

Bless his heart. It sounds like he has just enough information to be dangerous, but not nearly enough to know what he's talking about. Poor Nutter.

[OC Richard]

What an idiot.

Especially when last month I piped at two services at two different churches at which the Pastor was kilted.

His entire rant is based on a false concept of what a kilt is. I hope that he gains some knowledge at some point.

Yes indeed it's people like that who give intelligent calm respectful mature openminded Christians a bad name.

[MacSpadger]

With everything that is causing problems in the world today, this fellah zooms in on kilts. Irregardless of what his religious views are, I think he may have got his priorities a wee bittie skewiff

[Tobus]

I suspect that this was written by an attention seeker.
By writing something controversial he/she has obtained a lot of visits to their webpage.

I was thinking the same thing. It's a cry for attention with content that's intended to be insulting, inflammatory, and hateful. Kinda like that Fred Phelps fellow.

The best thing to do is just to laugh at these people. Attempting to argue with them on the merits of their position (or lack thereof) just gives them the validation they're looking for.

His argument isn't based in knowledge of scripture or culture. It's ignorance looking for a stage.

[Cowher]

I would like to personally thank everyone who has posted to this thread for their intelligent, thoughtful and respectful words.
This thread had the potential to go south so fast.
Thank you, one and all. You have proven that this forum is truly the home of some of the finest people on the web.

I second this. It's funny that even with so many people from different backgrounds and parts of the world this has remained a calm thoughtful discussion. KILTS have drawn together some very mature people who in my opinion express themselves eloquently and in a civil manner.
That's cool :-)

[Lallans]

Now I know I'm a true pelican in the wilderness.

Anyway, the sin I can see is that most of the kilts depicted are too long- I assume the bird who posted them picked the most girly-looking ones he could find, meaning over-the-knee.

I will close by observing that while the corners of my head are severely marred, Moab is my washpot.

[Geoff Withnell]

Sigh.

snippage

Third of all, evidence for their spiritual arguments tends to lack CULTURAL context as well. Believe me, rabbis throughout history have spent a LONG time meditating and pondering over the intent and appropriate meaning and interpretation of the contents of the Torah. It might be just a tad arrogant to think that Johnny-come-lately who just picked up a Bible and read it from cover to cover might supersede the knowledge of hundreds of generations of scholars (both Christian AND Jewish). The key to literary criticism here is to understand the context of the passage among the others surrounding it, IN ADDITION to understanding the cultural, social, and political climate it was written. Only then do you even stand a chance to begin to grok WHY something was written -- for what purpose?

In this case, (specifically Deut. 22:5) is problematic. Scholars agree that scholars DO NOT agree on the interpretation of this verse. It would be arrogant to say that you KNOW, for a fact, and beyond any reasonable doubt, that you understand what's going on here, when scholars themselves hold no such arrogance, and admit that they can only guess at the true meaning.

Aside from interpreting this verse literally, as-written, others have postulated that a woman wearing men's clothes refers SPECIFICALLY to the MALE-only items (Hebrew: kli gever) involved in Jewish spirituality: namely, teffilin, and tallit. Another Jewish scholar reads the word as kli gibbor (remember, in ancient Hebrew the vowels were omitted so this is a homograph).... And in THAT context, it would mean: warrior's gear, i.e. sword, shield, armor. Which would make sense if your civilization calls for women to stay away from the battlefield.

Other scholars argue that the prohibition is based ENTIRELY in the fact that G-d wanted to separate the Jewish people from the ceremonies, rites, and rituals of the surrounding tribes and peoples, many of whom practiced fertility religions, and cross-dressing may have had some role to play in some of those rituals.

Yet, even other reasoning for WHY this law is put into place ponders the simple deceitfulness of wearing the opposite gender's clothing. E.g. a man might want to dress like a woman in order to gain access to women for the purpose of committing adultery (like in the case of a harem)... Because separation of the sexes was VERY important in those days, at that time, there would be some very real reasons why someone might want to disguise themselves. But it is interesting to note, that Jewish scholars very specifically ALLOW men to wear women's clothing for the purpose of amusement, such as the case of putting on a Purim play, and playing a female character (Shulhan Arukh - a 16th century book of Jewish law).

Jewish scholars also point out that the KEY to all of this isn't absolute -- i.e. it is not the CLOTHING ITSELF, but rather, the societal context of each particular region, time, and place. E.g. If in your particular remote village in Asia it is commonplace for MEN to wear skirts and WOMEN to wear pants, you would be violating Deut. 22:5 by wearing PANTS... (Shulhan Arukh (Yore De`a)

more snippage

A very learned and well reasoned post. I heard musch of the same from my Rabbi recently. My synagogue had commissioned a new Torah scroll. This is a very expensive artifact, being entirely hand written on parchment, using quill pens. And it must be perfect. The last commandment in the Torah is to write a Torah scroll. Since very few people are qualified to become scribes, the custom is to fill in a letter outlined by the scribe when a new scroll is being written. I availed myself of the opportunity to do this. I was a little concerned about the reaction of the (very orthodox) Rabbi who was the scribe for this project to my kilt. So that morning, I was at the orientation for the "writers" in my suit. The scribe took me aside and said "I expected you to show respect by putting on your finest outfit. Where's your kilt?"
Needless to say, I wrote in the Torah, dressed in my Barb Tewksbury box pleat Leatherneck.

Geoff Withnell

[kc8ufv]

One only has to look at the above photo to see what's wrong with kilts or skirts on men.

Except for the cream color hose on the guy on the left, I see nothing wrong with the photo mentioned...

[Zardoz]

Where is his tirade about women wearing pants?

Right here; http://www.dividedbytruth.org/women_pants.htm

He has a tirade about lots of stuff!

And his site isn't new or anything, I recall this same topic being discussed 4 or 5 years back...

[slohairt]

What a fool!

He probably believes that all men should clean-shaven and wear black suits, whilst the womenfolk wear floral dresses!