I recently wrote this for the Facebook group Breaking Out. I had written on skirts a couple times before this was written, which is why there are references to circular logic and other writings.
I’ve recently gotten out all my old WAP books out of an old trunk. Even though, back in the day we were dirt poor, I always allowed myself one splurge and that was Word Aflame Press books (those were always sold at camp, etc.) and so I have a whole trunk full of them. I’ve dusted them off and so I intend to write whatever comes to mind. Pardon the focus on skirts for the time being, but, once again, I am concentrating on circular logic. In these comments you will see not only circular logic but subtle spiritual abuse while the circular logic is being used. I am using these books because they are in print and, as often is needed when refuting these subjects, proven to have been said. I find even when quoting books that people claim things were taken out of context or what have you and yet over and over, author after author, the same patterns are seen. So, again skirts, but this time, a different author.
David F. Gray was an old time Pentecostal preacher. I heard him preach a couple of times at Oklahoma camp meeting, probably in the 1980’s. He wrote a few books. From the book Questions Pentecostals Ask Volume 2 pages 120-125, he is refuting a book that had been circulating that spoke against standards. I will quote pieces and parts of this and weed out the parts that are circular and abusive. Keep in mind that these things sound softer and seem not as bad couched in certain terminology which is why spiritual abuse and circular logic is subtle. However, the words are there and often, shocking when weeded out:
David Gray: “I have read the book in it’s entirety.” (Some are) “looking for an excuse to compromise these issues…and the downright untrue statements…concerning women wearing men’s clothing….the book is false and spurious….the author tries to destroy the credibility of Deut 22:5.”
David Gray makes the accusations that if you disagree with his opinions on what is women’s apparel that you are a compromiser. He doesn’t say this to YOU, as the reader, but lets you know his opinion about people who disagree with him by talking about those who compromise as if you are his audience and he is speaking to you about those “other” people….so you don’t have to feel bad about what he says personally, but he steers you away from any other opinion. He also accuses the author of the book at the same time (and we have not read the book so we don’t know) of trying to destroy the very credibility of a biblical verse.
He goes on refuting a lot of other arguments from the book. Then he says “The statement that slacks are women’s clothes is simply not true.” He then goes on to talk about an advertisement that also suggested women should wear men’s shirts and ties along with pants. He then says “The world is more honest than some Christians who want to compromise. They know, even though some carnal Christians argue otherwise, that women’s slacks were actually taken over from men’s pants.” He makes a declaration that slacks are not women’s apparel. He declares this to you, having no authority over you. He says that Christians who disagree with him are just people who want to compromise. He calls them carnal. He makes a statement that we all know is true, which is that women in America used to wear dresses and implies that carnal Christians deny this, when I don’t know of anyone who ever has.
This argument, which is not an argument that is even being used, is used to throw you off the trail of the real argument (called a “straw man argument”). It’s important to be able to see past the bunny trail arguments and see the crux of the matter….that there are accusations and browbeating happening here to bolster a weak argument. This is an example of legalism. A true conservative believer in wearing skirts does not need to bolster their argument because they have nothing to prove. They just believe what they believe for themselves and are happy to live the way they live. When I see accusations and browbeating, I am certain I am dealing with legalism and not true conservatism.
He goes on to talk about the abominable being thrown into the lake of fire. Then he says “Evidently God considers wearing the clothing of the opposite sex to be terribly significant, because he calls it an abomination unto Himself”. Understand what he is saying here. If you disagree with his opinions and are unable to sift through the straw man argument and defend yourself against the accusations, you will fear being cast into hell if you are not like-minded. This is how so many are “convicted” to wear skirts. Again, there is nothing wrong with wearing skirts in honor of this verse. The wrong is putting people into a mind-prison of fear of being cast into hell for disagreeing with the thought process. Different people think different things and have different opinions and that’s okay!
He goes on to say that people who say they’re going to heaven and yet “wear the clothing of the opposite sex” (read the implication) “there shall in no wise enter into” (the kingdom of heaven). He won’t come right out and say it. He makes you think the Bible is saying it but it’s not! The Bible is not saying it, he is twisting the Bible to agree with his opinion. But he is saying if you don’t agree with his opinion that women’s clothing is skirts and men’s clothing is pants and if you don’t apply that to your life, you are going to hell. He declares this. The Bible does not.
He ends with some good words “Any book that leads people astray should be rejected, lest some gullible, unstable soul be influenced by it”. Good words, indeed.
David F. Gray has since passed away and is no longer with us.