Does Deuteronomy 22:5 Apply to Christians?

Deuteronomy 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" (NKJV). Does this obscure Old Testament command apply to Christians? If so, how do we comply?

Dr. David K. Bernard responds by explaining the connection between gender identity and dress, and what this means for modern-day believers.

If you enjoy this podcast, leave a five-star rating and a review on Apple Podcasts or your preferred podcast platform. We also appreciate it when you share Apostolic Life in the 21st Century with family and friends.

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Deuteronomy 22 5 says, 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. Is this obscure Old Testament verse relevant to life in the modern world? Keep listening to find out on this week's episode of Apostolic Life in the Twenty First Century. Welcome to Apostolic Life in the Twenty First Century, a podcast dedicated to helping modern-day believers live out the teachings of the first century church. This podcast is part of the teaching ministry of Dr. David K. Bernard. Dr. Bernard has dedicated his life to studying the Bible and helping believers apply its message to their daily lives. In Apostolic Life in the 21st century, Dr. Bernard answers your questions about what the Bible teaches and how those teachings apply to everyday life. Thank you for joining us for this episode. If you enjoy this podcast, we encourage you to check out Dr. David K. Bernard's books. Dr. Bernard has written more than 30 books on biblical theology and Christian living and leadership. Visit Pentecostal Publishing dot com and search David Bernard for a list of available titles. Enter promo code DKB10 at checkout to save 10% on your order. That's Pentecostalpublishing.com, promo code DKB10 to save 10% at checkout. The UPCI's official position paper on holiness states that the Word of God teaches a distinction between the dress of a woman and a man. And then it quotes Deuteronomy 22, 5, which says, 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. Why should a Christian, I'm phrasing this, of course, from a uh maybe a worldly person's perspective, why should a Christian care about an obscure verse from Deuteronomy? After all, some might point out that in the same chapter, the book of Deuteronomy talks about building a parapet around the top of your house so that somebody doesn't fall off, and Christians don't follow that command. So what is it about verse five that we should care about?

SPEAKER_01 2:20

And that question comes not only from a worldly person, but even uh Christians of different denominations, they will say things like, Well, that's under the law, that doesn't apply today, or there's some certain things in Deuteronomy that we don't follow. So why should we follow this and not those other things? So let me address the subject comprehensively. First of all, um, as Christians, we want to follow the will of God. And it's not just this one verse in Deuteronomy, but more fundamentally, before sin entered the human race, we go back to God's original plan for humans, his original creation. Genesis 1.27 says that God created humans in his image. Male and female, he created them. So it's God's plan for human beings to be either male or female, and for male and female to be partners, not only in marriage, but in the larger sense, it takes man and woman working together to fulfill God's plan for human society, for planet Earth, and to reflect God's image. Where both of us, male and female, are created the image of God. God is neither male nor female. He transcends those categories. He is spirit, he is all-encompassing. And so really, we as human beings, uh, as we work together collectively, male and female, we're able to fulfill God's purpose and uh reflect his image in this world. So the fundamental point is God has created us in this binary identity as either male or female. So Deuteronomy happens to be simply an example. Since this is the way God has created us, well, we find under the law of Moses, the statement in Deuteronomy 22, 5, that men should look, act, dress like men. Women should look, act, and dress like women. It doesn't mean there are no activities in common or no articles of clothing common, but it's a simple practical thing that in your overall appearance, uh, you should be able to tell when somebody's a long way off walking towards you, you can by their clothing, their overall dress, looking at it as a whole, that's a man or that's a woman. And so even in Bible days, uh both male and female wore what we would think of as robes, there were distinct uh differences where a man's robe, a woman's robe, and even today in Arab countries, uh, a man would not be caught wearing a woman's robe, and vice versa, because they are distinct. So that's the teaching under the law uh in the Old Testament, but it's simply an application of the original principle from creation. And we see this, it transcends just a legal requirement or a ceremonial law, because it says those who violate these things are an abomination unto God. Abomination literally means something God hates. Now, there were times that God would tell Israel, uh, such as uh when establishing the dietary laws, this will be an abomination unto you. You shall not eat pork, it will be an abomination unto you. Well, that should be, you're supposed to despise that. You're supposed to abstain from that. You're not supposed to be involved with that. And that was part of the ceremonial law of the Old Testament that helped identify Israel and keep them distinct from other nations and helped them teach that God has a plan for your life, and in every decision you make, you should think, uh, what is the distinction that God wants me to make? But it never said that pork was an abomination to God. After all, God did create uh pigs and they do have a valid purpose. The New Testament says all uh that God has created is wholesome and all food is acceptable to Christians. So we're not under that dietary law. But notice he never said that particular dietary restriction was going to be something that God hates. But when it comes to blurring this distinction or overturning the distinction between male and female, that is something God hates. Now, God's nature never changes. So this is not just something he hated for a thousand years, but this is a reflection of his plan for the human race, which will never change. So that is a strong indication that this verse is not just limited to that culture or to the law of Moses, but it's an expression of God's pre-existing plan for humans. Now, we also see that in other parts of Deuteronomy 22. And what you have to understand, the Old Testament was written to the people of Israel. They were a theocracy, they were ruled directly by God. And so there are some things that we would look at as civil laws, but it was considered religious because they were a religious society in a way that we're not as a nation. Likewise, there's some things that are that we would consider to be ceremonial law, in that is, they were types and shadows that point to greater truths in the New Testament. And so the dietary laws I mentioned are an example. They're abolished in the New Testament. They fulfilled their purpose, but they point to the greater truth that we should be spiritually separated from the world in all of our activities. We should judge them, whether something we eat, something we drink, something we wear, some activity, we should evaluate is it according to God's will or not? And so that ceremony has been fulfilled. We no longer follow the animal sacrifices, for example. They're fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who is our supreme sacrifice. So those ceremonial laws are types and shadows that were implemented for the physical nation of Israel, but they were teaching greater truths that would ultimately point to permanent reality in Jesus Christ. So Colossians 2 says about these ceremonial laws, they were types and shadows. Now that we have the reality, the body, we don't have to follow the types and shadows, but we follow the reality. Now, so there are some things in Deuteronomy like that. But ask yourself, is this distinction between male and female a temporary ceremony that points to a greater truth? If so, what's the greater truth? And the answer is there is nothing greater. The truth itself is God's plan for distinction between male and female. And so this is a legitimate and correct way to look at Deuteronomy. For example, you can't just throw out Deuteronomy or even Deuteronomy 22 by saying, well, here's some ceremonial laws in this chapter that we don't follow, or here's some civil laws like you addressed. It's actually a good law, but it's talking about practical protections for preserving the life of other people. But we don't just throw all that out. For example, that same chapter, Deuteronomy, has a law against adultery. It has a law against rape. Well, who among us would say, well, those laws are not relevant? Those are ceremonial, they're abolished in Christ. We're free to commit adultery, we're free to rape. Obviously, we would not twist scripture like that. So we can't just eliminate Deuteronomy 22, 5 on that basis. Now let's go a little bit further. Let's go to the New Testament. What do we find there? Well, in 1 Corinthians 6, 9 through 11, we see that men are supposed to be masculine in their behavior. And it specifically says that homosexual behavior is sinful. And the King James says men are not to be effeminate. And there are two words used that together go more than just simply the appearance of effeminacy, but actually behavior that would be like a woman in the sense of homosexual conduct. And then 1 Corinthians 11 says there should be a distinction in the outward appearance between a man and a woman. A woman should let her hair grow long, a man should cut his hair noticeably short, so that we can tell that men or women are distinct. This is the same principle, just applied in another area. So actually, this teaching is consistent throughout the Bible, from Genesis before sin, Deuteronomy under the law, 1 Corinthians under grace, after the law. And so that lets me know this principle that men and women should be distinct in their dress, their outward appearance, their hair, their behavior, their conduct, their relationships, that is God's plan from the human race from the beginning up until this very time. And it's interesting, people that would try to ignore that, and they typically would look at modern Western culture and say, you know, uh, yes, historically uh men have worn pants, women have worn dresses, and we say, well, let's keep that. Um, and even today, even though society has blurred that so that women freely wear uh what used to be considered men's clothing, if you want to try to make the visual distinction in our Western culture, that's still the only thing left that you have to avoid a unisex appearance. And you can even see that in public buildings. When you go to the restroom, often there will be a silhouette of a man with pants, a silhouette of a woman with a skirt or dress. So even our secular culture knows that if you're going to try to make a visible distinction, that's all we have in Western culture. Now, other cultures have different styles of dress, and we should follow what is appropriate in that culture. But the point is, even secular society recognizes the nature of that distinction. And finally, I would say most people that would uh throw off this distinction if they're from other Christian groups, I would ask them, are you really seriously willing to follow those implications? So are you willing to say that that men should uh wear dresses, that preachers can preach from the pulpit wearing dresses? If if you really say Deuteronomy has no relevance and this principle of distinction of dress has no relevance, it's strictly law, it's not grace, then if you follow the logical conclusion, you should have zero problem with transgenderism, with what used to be called transvestites, men wearing women's clothing. That should be perfectly acceptable. But if it's not, and I would think it's not, then that lets you know that this principle still is speaking to us despite our culture. And finally, I would say for someone that doesn't accept the Bible, obviously we're using the Bible as our authority, but I would simply appeal to them, this is the natural order. Human beings, even if you believe in evolution, human beings are designed to be male and female. That's how the human race is propagated, that's how human marriages are constructed, that's how societies are constructed. And so just eliminate this distinction is not just something that's an option. It's actually a fundamental violation of your body integrity of human nature as it is played out over millennia. And that creates great devastation that we're now beginning to see in our society. So I would say reconsider. And in that regard, you might want to look at my book, Anchor Points, which is gives an apologetic study based on these principles. And I quote or cite a very interesting book by Nancy Pearcy, uh P-E-A-R-C-E-Y, called Love Thy Body. And she says, if you study the order of nature, you study the human body, you'll come to this conclusion that God intends for there to be this distinction between male and female. So in this case, biology and nature support what the Bible teaches.

SPEAKER_00 13:46

This is the will of God for us today. Thank you for listening to this episode of Apostolic Life in the Twenty First Century. If you enjoy this podcast, please take a moment to give us a review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. We also appreciate it when you share apostolic life in the 21st century with a friend or family member. And make plans to join us again next time as we look at how the Bible applies to everyday life.