corner graphic   Hi,    
Facebook image
ver. 2.0.17.09.20
Finding the new version too difficult to understand? Go to classic.studylight.org/

Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary

Deuteronomy 22:5

"A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.

Adam Clarke Commentary

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man - גבר כלי keli geber, the instruments or arms of a man. As the word גבר geber is here used, which properly signifies a strong man or man of war, it is very probable that armor is here intended; especially as we know that in the worship of Venus, to which that of Astarte or Ashtaroth among the Canaanites bore a striking resemblance, the women were accustomed to appear in armor before her. It certainly cannot mean a simple change in dress, whereby the men might pass for women, and vice versa. This would have been impossible in those countries where the dress of the sexes had but little to distinguish it, and where every man wore a long beard. It is, however, a very good general precept understood literally, and applies particularly to those countries where the dress alone distinguishes between the male and the female. The close-shaved gentleman may at any time appear like a woman in the female dress, and the woman appear as a man in the male's attire. Were this to be tolerated in society, it would produce the greatest confusion. Clodius, who dressed himself like a woman that he might mingle with the Roman ladies in the feast of the Bona Dea, was universally execrated.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1832.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

That which pertaineth unto a man - i. e. not only his dress but all that especially pertains distinctively to his sex; arms, domestic and other utensils, etc.

The distinction between the sexes is natural and divinely established, and cannot be neglected without indecorum and consequent danger to purity (compare 1 Corinthians 11:3-15).


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Barnes' Notes on the New Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/deuteronomy-22.html. 1870.

The Biblical Illustrator

Deuteronomy 22:5

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man.

Dominion of fashion

God thought womanly attire of enough importance to have it discussed in the Bible. Just in proportion as the morals of a country or an age are depressed is that law defied. Show me the fashion plates of any century from the time of the Deluge to this, and I will tell you the exact state of public morals. Ever and anon we have imported from France, or perhaps invented on this side the sea, a style that proposes as far as possible to make women dress like men. The costumes of the countries are different, and in the same country may change, but there is a divinely ordered dissimilarity which must be forever observed. Any divergence from this is administrative of vice and runs against the keen thrust of the text. In my text, as by a parable, it is made evident that Moses, the inspired writer, as vehemently as ourselves, reprehends the effeminate man and the masculine woman.

1. My text also sanctions fashion. Indeed, it sets a fashion! There is a great deal of senseless cant on the subject of fashion. A woman or man who does not regard it is unfit for good neighbourhood. The only question is, what is right fashion and what is wrong fashion. Fashion has been one of the most potent of reformers, and one of the vilest of usurpers. Sometimes it has been an angel from heaven, and at others it has been the mother of abomination. As the world grows better there will be as much fashion as now, but it will be a righteous fashion. In the future life white robes always have been and always will be in the fashion. The accomplishments of life are in no wise productive of effeminacy or enervation. Good manners and a respect for the tastes of others are indispensable. The Good Book speaks favourably of those who are a “peculiar” people; but that does not sanction the behaviour of queer people. There is no excuse, under any circumstances, for not being and acting the lady or gentleman. Rudeness is sin. As Christianity advances there will be better apparel, higher styles of architecture, more exquisite adornments, sweeter music, grander pictures, more correct behaviour, and more thorough ladies and gentlemen. But there is another story to be told.

2. Wrong fashion is to be charged with many of the worst evils of society, and its path has often been strewn with the bodies of the slain. It has often set up a false standard by which people are to be judged. Our common sense, as well as all the Divine intimations on the subject, teach us that people ought to be esteemed according to their individual and moral attainments. The man who has the most nobility of soul should be first, and he who has the least of such qualities should stand last. Truth, honour, charity, heroism, self-sacrifice should win highest favour; but inordinate fashion says, “Count not a woman’s virtues; count her adornments.” “Look not at the contour of the head, but see the way she combs her hair.”

3. Wrong fashion is productive of a most ruinous strife. The expenditure of many households is adjusted by what their neighbours have, not by what they themselves can afford to have; and the great anxiety is as to who shall have the finest house and the most costly equipage.

4. Again, wrong fashion makes people unnatural and untrue. It is a factory from which has come forth more hollow pretences and unmeaning flatteries than the Lowell mills ever turned out shawls and garments. Fashion is the greatest of all liars. It has made society insincere. You know not what to believe. When people ask you to come, you do not know whether or not they want you to come. When they send their regards, you do not know whether it is an expression of their heart or an external civility. We have learned to take almost everything at a discount.

5. Again, wrong fashion is incompatible with happiness. Those who depend for their comfort upon the admiration of others are subject to frequent disappointment. Somebody will criticise their appearance or surpass them in brilliancy, or will receive more attention. Oh, the jealousy and detraction and heartburnings of those who move in this bewildered maze! Poor butterflies! Bright wings do not always bring happiness.

6. Again, devotion to wrong fashion is productive of physical disease, mental imbecility, and spiritual withering. Apparel insufficient to keep out the cold and the rain, or so fitted upon the person that the functions of life are restrained; late hours filled with excitement and feasting; free draughts of wine that make one not beastly intoxicated, but only fashionably drunk; and luxurious indolence--are the instruments by which this unreal life pushes its disciples into valetudinarianism and the grave. Wrong fashion is the world’s undertaker, and drives thousands of hearses to churchyards and cemeteries.

7. But, worse than that, this folly is an intellectual depletion. What is the matter with that woman wrought up into the agony of despair? Oh, her muff is out of fashion!

8. Worse than all, this folly is not satisfied until it has extirpated every moral sentiment and blasted the soul. A wardrobe is the rock upon which many a soul has been riven. The excitement of a luxurious life has been the vortex that has swallowed up more souls than the maelstrom off Norway ever destroyed ships. What room for elevating themes in a heart filled with the trivial and unreal? (T. De Witt Talmage.)


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Exell, Joseph S. "Commentary on "Deuteronomy 22:5". The Biblical Illustrator. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tbi/deuteronomy-22.html. 1905-1909. New York.

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

"A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment; for whoso doeth these things is an abomination unto Jehovah thy God."

That this law is still applicable to God's people appears to be certain, because of Paul's identification of a man's "long hair" as a shame (1 Corinthians 11:12-15). Most of the present-day commentators write this regulation off as applicable to ancient magical or pagan religious rites, supposing that the need for the regulation no longer exists, but there is no evidence whatever to support such views. Keil flatly stated that alleged proofs of such things by Spencer are very far-fetched, and that the real reason for the regulation is:

"To maintain the sanctity of that distinction of the sexes which was established by the creation of man and woman, and in relation to which Israel was not to sin. Every violation or wiping out of this distinction is unnatural, and therefore an abomination in the sight of God."[6]

We consider such views as the following to be sound on this question:

"Whatever tends to eliminate the distinction between the sexes tends to licentiousness; and that one sex should assume the dress of the other has always been regarded as unnatural and indecent.[7] Transvestism has historically almost always been practiced by those who exemplified the characteristics of the opposite sex; and these were often homosexuals. To wear clothes of the opposite sex immediately labels one in his community."[8]


Copyright Statement
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.

Bibliography
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/deuteronomy-22.html. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man,.... It being very unseemly and impudent, and contrary to the modesty of her sex; or there shall not be upon her any "instrument of a man"F6כלי גבר "instrumentum virile", Pagninus, Junius et Tremellius; "instrumentum viri", Vatablus. , any utensil of his which he makes use of in his trade and business; as if she was employed in it, when her business was not to do the work of men, but to take care of her house and family; and so this law may be opposed to the customs of the Egyptians, as is thought, from whom the Israelites were lately come; whose women, as HerodotusF7Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 35. relates, used to trade and merchandise abroad, while the men kept at home; and the word also signifies armourF8"Arma viri", Munster. , as Onkelos renders it; and so here forbids women putting on a military habit and going with men to war, as was usual with the eastern women; and so MaimonidesF9Hilchot Obede Cochabim, c. 12. sect. 10. illustrates it, by putting a mitre or an helmet on her head, and clothing herself with a coat of mail; and in like manner JosephusF11Antiqu. l. 4. c. 8. sect. 43. explains it,"take heed, especially in war, that a woman do not make use of the habit of a man, or a man that of a woman;'nor is he to be found fault with so much as he is by a learned writerF12Cunaeus de Repub. Heb. l. 2. c. 22. , since he does not restrain it wholly to war, though he thinks it may have a special regard to that; for no doubt the law respects the times of peace as well as war, in neither of which such a practice should obtain: but the Targum of Jonathan very wrongly limits it to the wearing fringed garments, and to phylacteries, which belonged to men:

neither shall a man put on a woman's garment; which would betray effeminacy and softness unbecoming men, and would lead the way to many impurities, by giving an opportunity of mixing with women, and so to commit fornication and adultery with them; to prevent which and to preserve chastity this law seems to be made; and since in nature a difference of sexes is made, it is proper and necessary that this should be known by difference of dress, or otherwise many evils might follow; and this precept is agreeably to the law and light of nature: it is observed by an Heathen writerF13Laert. Vit. Platonis, l. 3. p. 238. , that there is a twofold distribution of the law, the one written, the other not written; what we use in civil things is written, what is from nature and use is unwritten, as to walk naked in the market, or to put on a woman's garment: and change of the clothes of sexes was used among the Heathens by way of punishment, as of the soldiers that deserted, and of adulteressesF14; so abominable was it accounted: indeed it may be lawful in some cases, where life is in danger, to escape that, and provided chastity is preserved:

for all that do so are an abomination to the Lord thy God; which is a reason sufficient why such a practice should not be used. Some from this clause have been led to conclude, that respect is had to some customs of this kind used in idolatrous worship, which are always abominable to the Lord. So MaimonidesF15Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 37. observes, that in a book of the Zabians, called "Tomtom", it is commanded, that a man should wear a woman's garment coloured when he stood before the star of Venus, and likewise that a woman should put on a coat of mail and warlike armour when she stood before the star of Mars; which he takes to be one reason of this law, though besides that he gives another, because hereby concupiscence would be excited, and an occasion for whoredom given: that there was some such customs among the Heathens may be confirmed from MacrobiusF16Saturnal. l. 3. c. 8. , and ServiusF17In Virgil. Aeneid. l. 2. as has been observed by Grotius; the former of which relates, that Philochorus affirmed that Venus is the moon, and that men sacrificed to her in women's garments, and women in men's; and for this reason, because she was thought to be both male and female; and the latter says, there was an image of Venus in Cyprus with a woman's body and garment, and with the sceptre and distinction of a man, to whom the men sacrificed in women's garments, and women in men's garments; and, as the above learned commentator observes, there were many colonies of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, from whom this custom might come; and to prevent it obtaining among the Israelites in any degree, who were now coming into their country, it is thought this law was made; for the priests of the Assyrian Venus made use of women's apparelF18Jul. Firmic. de Relig. Prophan. p. 6. , and in the feasts of Bacchus men disguised themselves like womenF19Lucian. .


Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855

Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/deuteronomy-22.html. 1999.

Geneva Study Bible

The d 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.

(d) For that alters the order of nature, and shows that you despise God.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/deuteronomy-22.html. 1599-1645.

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Deuteronomy 22:5-12. The sex to be distinguished by apparel.

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman‘s garment — Though disguises were assumed at certain times in heathen temples, it is probable that a reference was made to unbecoming levities practiced in common life. They were properly forbidden; for the adoption of the habiliments of the one sex by the other is an outrage on decency, obliterates the distinctions of nature by fostering softness and effeminacy in the man, impudence and boldness in the woman as well as levity and hypocrisy in both; and, in short, it opens the door to an influx of so many evils that all who wear the dress of another sex are pronounced “an abomination unto the Lord.”


Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text scanned by Woodside Bible Fellowship.
This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-Brown Commentary is in the public domain and may be freely used and distributed.

Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/deuteronomy-22.html. 1871-8.

Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary

Probably this precept was meant to distinguish GOD'S people from their idolatrous neighbours, among whom, and probably for the gratification of their lusts, the distinction of the sex in their dress was not preserved. And it is possible, it might have a further object of a religious and spiritual nature. The apostle seems to have the same idea in view, when he speaks of the different dresses of the sexes in his Epistle to the Corinthians. 1 Corinthians 11:12-13.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Hawker, Robert, D.D. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pmc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1828.

Wesley's Explanatory Notes

Shall not wear - Namely, ordinarily or unnecessarily, for in some cases this may be lawful, as to make an escape for one's life. Now this is forbidden, both for decency sake, that men might not confound those sexes which God hath distinguished, that all appearance of evil might be avoided, such change of garments carrying a manifest sign of effeminacy in the man, of arrogance in the woman, of lightness and petulancy in both; and also to cut off all suspicions and occasions of evil, which this practice opens a wide door to.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.

Bibliography
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes

on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/deuteronomy-22.html. 1765.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

5.This decree also commends modesty in general, and in it God anticipates the danger, lest women should harden themselves into forgetfulness of modesty, or men should degenerate into effeminacy unworthy of their nature. Garments are not in themselves of so much importance; but as it is disgraceful for men to become effeminate, and also for women to affect manliness in their dress and gestures, propriety and modesty are prescribed, not only for decency’s sake, but lest one kind of liberty should at length lead to something worse. The words of the heathen poet are very true: (97)

What shame can she, who wears a helmet, show,
Her sex deserting?”

Wherefore, decency in the fashion of the clothes is an excellent preservative of modesty.

“Quem praestare potest mulier galeata pudorem,
Quae fugit a sexu.”

The Fr. translation is forcible: “qu’une femme, qui contrefait le gendarme, et fuit son sexe, ne gardera nulle honte.”


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/deuteronomy-22.html. 1840-57.

John Trapp Complete Commentary

Deuteronomy 22:5 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.

Ver. 5. The woman shall not wear.] Because it is against both natural and civil honesty.

Neither shall a man put on] That is, say stage players and those that plead for them, a man shall not wear women’s apparel ordinarily and daily, so as women used to do. But the word is, Put on, and so they do: the same word is used of David’s putting on Saul’s armour, which yet he put off again presently. So full, saith one hereupon, are our hearts of distinctions and shifts, odia restringere, ampliare favores, to restrain hatreds, as they call them - that is, the commandments that make against them.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". John Trapp Complete Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1865-1868.

Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible

Ver. 5. The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, &c.— A woman shall not wear man's clothes, neither shall a man put on women's clothes. Vid. Mill. Dissert. 9: p. 258, &c. The last words of the verse clearly shew this to have been an idolatrous custom; and several authors have produced instances of the like practice among the heathens. See Maimonides, More Nev. p. iii. c. 37. But, beside this, if the law had not an immediate respect to idolatrous practices; every one knows, that if the sexes were not distinguished by their habits, it would open a door to all impurity; for which reason, were there no other, this law was very wise and pious. See Macrob. Saturnal. lib. 3: cap. 8 and Spencer, de Leg. Heb. lib. 2: cap. 29. Some have thought that this law had reference to the abominable practice condemned Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 18:30.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Coke, Thomas. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1801-1803.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible

This shall not be done ordinarily or unnecessarily, for in some cases it may be lawful, as to make an escape for one’s life. Now this is forbidden, partly for decency sake, that men might not confound, nor seem to confound, those sexes which God hath distinguished, that all appearance of evil might be avoided, such change of garments carrying a manifest umbrage or sign of softness and effeminacy in the man, of arrogance and impudency in the woman, of lightness and petulancy in both; and partly to cut off all suspicions and occasions of evil, which this practice opens a wide door unto.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Poole, Matthew, "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1685.

Whedon's Commentary on the Bible

5. The sexes are to be distinguished by their dress.

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment — This prohibition was in the interest of morality. The interchange of dress would give occasion for great license. At festivals of Baal the priests and worshippers appeared in red transparent female garments, and were in other respects attired as women, while the women were dressed as men, and carried swords and lances. In the Annals of Tacitus, 3:53, Tiberius is represented as severely condemning the interchange of dress between men and women.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Whedon's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/deuteronomy-22.html. 1874-1909.

Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible

Cross Dressing Is Forbidden (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Deuteronomy 22:5

A woman shall not wear what pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahweh your God.’

Cross dressing is strictly forbidden. It may well be that such behaviour was a part of certain religious rituals by which attempts were made to stir up, or even deceive the gods, but the principle was also laid down as a general one. Men should be men and women should be women, and they should be clearly distinguishable, and on principle should not wear each other’s clothing. To do so would be an abomination to God. From the beginning mankind was made male and female, the former as God’s representative on earth, the latter to assist him as an equal and bear children. And this distinction must be maintained and be clear to their children, and to the world.

This law respected the positions of both men and woman, and honoured their respective responsibilities. To mix them up was to dishonour both, and ignore God’s purpose for each. Both had authority in their own sphere within the covenant, which must not be trespassed on.

It may also possibly have in mind what purpose someone might have in such behaviour. By this means they might spy on each other’s behaviour, they might have nefarious reasons for entering into each others sanctums, they might trespass on each others right to privacy. They were blurring distinctions which were intended to be maintained, and providing themselves with a means of trespassing where they ought not to be. It made for suspicion and dishonesty in society.

“What pertains to a man.” This would include his weapons. Women were not to ape the man, or behave like men.

The modern attempt to blur the difference between the sexes is rebellion against God’s way of things. In His economy each have their differing function. While male and female are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28), stressing equality of status, this does not affect function. Each must act within their sphere. Such behaviour would also affect their children and coarsen society.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible ". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/deuteronomy-22.html. 2013.

Joseph Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments

Deuteronomy 22:5. Shall not wear — That is, ordinarily or unnecessarily, for in some cases this may be lawful, as to make an escape for one’s life. Now this is forbidden for decency’s sake, that men might not confound those sexes which God hath distinguished; that all appearance of evil might be avoided, such change of garments carrying a manifest sign of effeminacy in the man, of arrogance in the woman, of lightness and petulancy in both; and also to cut off all suspicions and occasions of evil, for which this practice would open a wide door.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Benson, Joseph. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". Joseph Benson's Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rbc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1857.

George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary

God. Some take this literally, as the contrary practice is contrary to decency, and might be attended with very pernicious consequences. All know what noise was occasioned by the action of Clodius, who put on women's apparel, that he might be present with the Roman ladies at the feast of the good goddess. Yet others think that Moses here forbids some superstitious practices. St. Ambrose (ep. 69,) remarks, that in some of the mysteries of the idols, it was requisite for those present to change clothes in this manner, sacrum putatur. Lucian testifies, that men put on women's clothes at the feasts of Bacchus. They did the like in those of Venus, while the women took men's clothes in the festivals of Mars. (Jul. Hirmic. c. 4.) (Maimonides) --- In the East, people honoured the moon, to which they attributed both sexes, and Venus in like manner. Josephus ([Antiquities,?] iv.8,) believes that women are here prohibited to engage in warfare. Hebrew, "the vessels (armour) of man shall not be upon a woman." Semiramis gained a great name by her martial exploits, and commanded all her subjects to dress like herself. (Justin., i) --- The Amazons were likewise very famous in war, and it is said that half the army of Bacchus was composed of women. Alb. Gentil maintains that Moses here condemns an abominable crime, which he did not wish to mention, at which the Book of Wisdom hints, (chap. xiv. 26,) and which St. Paul condemns more explicitly, Romans i. 26. Moses had already denounced death against the perpetrators of it; and surely the manner in which he now speaks, seems to forbid something more than simply putting on the garments of the other sex, for he, &c. (Calmet) --- Yet that disorderly conduct deserved to be reprobated in strong terms, (Haydock) when it was not excused by some necessity or proper motive, such as actuated some holy virgins, St. Theodora, &c. (Tirinus)


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Haydock, George Leo. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1859.

E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes

that which: i.e. any article of ornament or apparel.

man = geber. See App-14.

woman"s garment. Generally red, and eschewed by men.

the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

God. Hebrew. Elohim. App-4.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "E.W. Bullinger's Companion bible Notes". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/deuteronomy-22.html. 1909-1922.

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged

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.

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man. Disguises were assumed at certain times in pagan temples. Maimonides ('More Nevochim.,' pars 3:, cap. 12:) mentions that a man attired in a coloured female dress, in honour of Venus, Ashtaroth, or Astarte, and a woman equipped in armour, worshipped at the shrine of the statue of Mars, (see also Spencer, 'Do Legibus Hebraeorum,' lib. 1:, cap. 5:, 11:)

The old Asiatics, when they engaged in the worship of Ashtaroth, were accustomed, according to Philocorus, quoted by Townley (in his edition of Maimonides, note 33), to exchange the male and female dresses. In fact, all idolators confounded the sexes of their deities-representing them sometimes as male, at other times as female; and hence, their worshippers, male and female, fell gradually into the custom, which became extensively prevalent, of changing their attire in adaptation to the sex of a particular divinity. (See many instances adduced by Young, 'Idol. Corruptions in Religion,' vol. 1:, pp. 97-105.)

It is probable that a reference was made to unbecoming levities practiced in common life. They were properly forbidden; for the adoption of the habiliments of the one sex by the other is an outrage on decency, obliterates the distinctions of nature by fostering softness and effeminacy in the man, impudence and boldness in the woman, as well as levity and hypocrisy in both; and, in short, opens the door to an influx of so many evils, that all who wear the dress of another sex are pronounced "an abomination unto the Lord."


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/deuteronomy-22.html. 1871-8.

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(5) The woman shall not wear . . .—One of the things of which we may well say with St. Paul, “Doth not nature itself teach you?”


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/deuteronomy-22.html. 1905.

Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

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.
woman shall not
1 Corinthians 11:4-15
abomination
18:12

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Deuteronomy 22:5". "The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/deuteronomy-22.html.


Lectionary Calendar
Wednesday, September 20th, 2017
the Week of Proper 19 / Ordinary 24
ADVERTISEMENT
To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use our convenient contact form
Powered by Lightspeed Technology