Nakedness and the Bible, pt 2

Originally Posted by lil-rush

Appeals to emotion have no place in a logical argument.

Logically, yes I believe God would hold people accountable for sins. God is a just God, and He is not going to have different standards for people just because they are more or less informed than others.

I see..
So, would you say those natives are ALL sinful because their culture told them that is the way their clothes should looked like?
Interesting thoughts..
Can you elaborate on how Christians should dress? What kind of materials? and how much is too revealing according to God? and should the tribe repented from dressing like that?

This is just my thoughts while i am reading your response..
Oddly it seems to me that the God's standard you are talking about (as far as clothing standard) is American's standard..
Is that what you mean?

Thanks for the clarification..

[Brackenzee]

Originally Posted by lil-rush

If I asked God to keep me from lust and seuxal perversion, does that mean I could walk around naked? Not trying to be vain, but let's be honest, babe. If I walked around naked, would it be my own thoughts I'd have to worry about, or the thoughts of men who would see me?

If other men are lusting after you, that's their own problem. Unless you're doing things to entice them, then you've done nothing wrong. Especially in a place like a nude beach where it's understood that everyone will be naked.

You think that everyone at nude beaches/colonies can look at other naked people and not be attracted to good-looking people?
If someone is attracted to a girl when she is clothed, why would that change just because they go to a nude beach?

So? There's nothing wrong with being attracted to good-looking people.

I'm not going to risk it. If my being naked could cause a man or woman to have even 1 lustful thought, why would I do it? I am not going to be a stumbling block.

Nobody is asking you to be naked. You clearly don't wish to. We're just saying that to universally condemn nudity as somehow morally wrong is contrary to the Bible and to common sense. Also, your justifications for it seem borderline sexist--that men are such salacious perverts that the sight of a naked woman makes us incapable of keeping our desires in check. Obviously, this is true of some men, but such men generally have far worse problems than lusting for a nude woman due to the selfsame flaws.

Originally Posted by dodolah

I see..
So, would you say those natives are ALL sinful because their culture told them that is the way their clothes should looked like?

Yes, they are sinful. They might not have realized they were sinning, but, as the saying goes, "ignorance is no excuse."

Interesting thoughts..
Can you elaborate on how Christians should dress? What kind of materials? and how much is too revealing according to God? and should the tribe repented from dressing like that?

The level of modesty varies depending on every person. I'm not going to give strict details of how a person should dress, because my personal views would come in. In general, it's best if everything from a little below the clavicle to mid-thigh is covered. Of course, modesty also depends on how you wear clothes. I could wear a long-sleeve turtleneck that covers my entire torso and still be immodest by my behavior. The thing is, modesty isn't just how much of your body you cover. It is the way you act, the way you wear your clothes, etc.

I can neither say what sort of materials, because pretty much everyone on here is not Torah-observant. If I say you can't wear clothes of wool and linen mixed together, people are going to say "I'm not under the law anymore," so I won't even bother.

Yes. the tribes should repent. Once they realize they have done wrong in the eyes of God, they should repent. The beginning of Lev 4 gives evidence that once you realized you've sinned, you should repent.

Oddly it seems to me that the God's standard you are talking about (as far as clothing standard) is American's standard..
Is that what you mean?

Nope. My standard comes from the Bible. In case you didn't notice, people kept their clothes on in the Bible. This is why I'm not going to go into specifics of what I consider modest, because my views on modesty are obviously influenced by my culture.

Originally Posted by Brackenzee

If other men are lusting after you, that's their own problem. Unless you're doing things to entice them, then you've done nothing wrong. Especially in a place like a nude beach where it's understood that everyone will be naked.

Going naked is doing something to entice them. If I know my being naked will cause men to sin, I should not walk around naked. Yes, men have a level of responsibilty for their sinful desires, but that does not mean I should simply dress as I please.

As I said in the ladies forum a while back, if your friend is a recovering alcoholic, you would not drink his favorite beer in front of him. That's just cruel, and even if it is his personal responsibility to abstain from alcohol that does not mean it gives you the right to be a stumbling block. Likewise, if I know my walking around naked will cause men to sin, I should not say I will do it regardless because they should be able to control their thoughts.

1 Cor 10:32, Romans 14:13, Leviticus 19:14(I realize this is a law from the Torah).

So? There's nothing wrong with being attracted to good-looking people.

That was not the point I was trying to make. My point was that if men think I am good-looking in clothes and have lustful thoughts of me while I am in clothes, this is not going to change if we both strip down to our birthday suits and go to a beach. The man will still have those lustful thoughts.

Nobody is asking you to be naked. You clearly don't wish to. We're just saying that to universally condemn nudity as somehow morally wrong is contrary to the Bible and to common sense.

Oy vey. I speak in generalities on this site and I get in trouble. I speak in specifics on this site and I get in trouble. I'm not saying y'all are forcing me to walk around naked. I was simply using myself as an example for Nuhen. He and I are friends, so I figured he'd grasp my point better if I spoke in specifics. Would you prefer I say "some random girl with a hot bod"?

I'm just saying to say nudity is permissible is contrary to the Bible and to common sense. And I don't universally condemn it. It's permissible in the bathroom, or when you're changing, or in the marriage bed, etc.

Also, your justifications for it seem borderline sexist--that men are such salacious perverts that the sight of a naked woman makes us incapable of keeping our desires in check. Obviously, this is true of some men, but such men generally have far worse problems than lusting for a nude woman due to the selfsame flaws.

Sorry I'm not a feminist and don't feel the need to make all of my posts gender-neutral. Speaking of both men and women in a post is time-consuming, and unnecessary in my opinion. If you can't replace the word "man" with "woman" in your head, that is not my concern, because everything I said can be applied to both sexes.

For example, "If someone is attracted to a girl[or boy] while she[or he] is clothed, why would that change just because they go to a nude beach?" is annoying to type.

And I did not imply that all men were salacious pervs. In case you missed it, "If my being naked could cause a man or woman to have even 1 lustful thought, why would I do it?" Wait whoa. Just realized, I totally made a gender neutral post there. Anyways, back on topic. I implied with that statement that my being naked wouldn't cause every single person on earth to go into a sexual frenzy, but if it causes even one person to sin, why risk it? Likewise, if any person being naked causes another to sin, why would that person risk it? Our goal as Christians (or Jew that follows Christ, as the case is for Nuhen and others) is not to please ourselves, but to help ourselves and others to grow in Christ.

Originally Posted by lil-rush

Yes, they are sinful. They might not have realized they were sinning, but, as the saying goes, "ignorance is no excuse."

Nope. My standard comes from the Bible. In case you didn't notice, people kept their clothes on in the Bible. This is why I'm not going to go into specifics of what I consider modest, because my views on modesty are obviously influenced by my culture.

Very interesting. Thank you for your clarification.
I am so glad that God indeed gave people free will and ability to interpret Him in a different way.
my view of God is so different than your's.. that I feel I have a different God. Perhaps, I am wrong.

This is just my opinion.. But, I think God would understand that every people has different cultures and the way they dress is different than other's.
And, those Papua tribes being naked is not bound by legalistic law such as this.
I see God's perspective is on a so much higher priority than telling people what kind of headdress they should wear and so on.

I wonder why your God created Adam and Eve naked? Is He being indecent? or He actually think that it is perfect?

Originally Posted by dodolah

Very interesting. Thank you for your clarification.
I am so glad that God indeed gave people free will and ability to interpret Him in a different way.
my view of God is so different than your's.. that I feel I have a different God. Perhaps, I am wrong.

This is just my opinion.. But, I think God would understand that every people has different cultures and the way they dress is different than other's.
And, those Papua tribes being naked is not bound by legalistic law such as this.
I see God's perspective is on a so much higher priority than telling people what kind of headdress they should wear and so on.

1) God does not have different standards for people based on what is culturally acceptable for them.
2) Saying public nudity is a sin is not legalism. Even if it is, what is wrong with being legalistic? Legalism is when you add onto a commandment. For example, if public nudity is a sin, legalism would be me saying "Since public nudity is a sin, I[a mere human] am going to make a law that you have to wear clothes that cover you neck to ankle in order to avoid any sort of public nudity."
3) God does tell people what type of headdress to wear. Ever heard of a kippah?

I wonder why your God created Adam and Eve naked? Is He being indecent? or He actually think that it is perfect?

God created Adam and Eve naked because before sin there was no reason they would need to be covered up. We live in a fallen world, and you can't base your standards of how one should act on how the world was before the fall of man.

[greatkraw]

Originally Posted by lil-rush

1) God does not have different standards for people based on what is culturally acceptable for them.
2) Saying public nudity is a sin is not legalism. Even if it is, what is wrong with being legalistic? Legalism is when you add onto a commandment. For example, if public nudity is a sin, legalism would be me saying "Since public nudity is a sin, I[a mere human] am going to make a law that you have to wear clothes that cover you neck to ankle in order to avoid any sort of public nudity."
3) God does tell people what type of headdress to wear. Ever heard of a kippah?



God created Adam and Eve naked because before sin there was no reason they would need to be covered up. We live in a fallen world, and you can't base your standards of how one should act on how the world was before the fall of man.

I defy you to show me scripture where itsays to wear a kippar

The man and his wife were not ashamed because of their physical nakedness but because of their spiritual nakedness before God as fallen, spirit dead sinners

[Brackenzee]

Originally Posted by lil-rush

Going naked is doing something to entice them. If I know my being naked will cause men to sin, I should not walk around naked. Yes, men have a level of responsibility for their sinful desires, but that does not mean I should simply dress as I please.

Jesus never put the responsibility for controlling such desires on the one being lusted after. Moreover, most accounts I've read from people in situations with public nudity seem to agree that after you get over the awkwardness that you stop noticing it and just interact like you normally would.

As I said in the ladies forum a while back, if your friend is a recovering alcoholic, you would not drink his favorite beer in front of him. That's just cruel, and even if it is his personal responsibility to abstain from alcohol that does not mean it gives you the right to be a stumbling block. Likewise, if I know my walking around naked will cause men to sin, I should not say I will do it regardless because they should be able to control their thoughts.

A fair enough point. If someone has expressed that they have trouble with such things, then it would certainly be discourteous to tempt them. What bothers me is the implication you make that other people who live in societies where nudity isn' a problem are doing something wrong. You're applying Western mores to other societies.

That was not the point I was trying to make. My point was that if men think I am good-looking in clothes and have lustful thoughts of me while I am in clothes, this is not going to change if we both strip down to our birthday suits and go to a beach. The man will still have those lustful thoughts.

You could reverse the argument; if they're going to sin with your clothes on, then nudity doesn't change anything. Moreover you keep using the word 'thoughts', as if fleeting thoughts are sinful. But that's not really supportable from the Bible or from common sense, as we can't control fleeting thoughts, the random firing of our synapses. Adultery in the heart means more than what really amounts to natural biological sex drive.

Oy vey. I speak in generalities on this site and I get in trouble. I speak in specifics on this site and I get in trouble. I'm not saying y'all are forcing me to walk around naked. I was simply using myself as an example for Nuhen. He and I are friends, so I figured he'd grasp my point better if I spoke in specifics. Would you prefer I say "some random girl with a hot bod"?

My apologies, I didn't mean to 'get you in trouble'.

I implied with that statement that my being naked wouldn't cause every single person on earth to go into a sexual frenzy, but if it causes even one person to sin, why risk it? Likewise, if any person being naked causes another to sin, why would that person risk it? Our goal as Christians (or Jew that follows Christ, as the case is for Nuhen and others) is not to please ourselves, but to help ourselves and others to grow in Christ.

Your point is sound within reason, but I still think you're over-extending the application. Obviously, we need to be courteous to the sensitivities of our neighbors, but that can be taken too far. I think it's ridiculous that, for example, we've hypersexualized the female breasts to the point that they're considered obscene, or that you would suggest that a culture where people generally don't wear much clothing is doing something morally wrong by not adhering to Western standards.

[thefightinglamb]

This discussion has gotten absurd with those who are absurd dominating the discussion somehow.

Of course, woman's breasts are sensual...you would have to be gay not to see that.

I wrote last night and still am trying to figure out how to word what I want to say.

Note: In the Bible, people from heaven are not NAKED but wrapped in cloaks. Paul also speaks of not wanting to be found naked, but fully clothed with a 'true outer garment'...while this can be true as a spiritual metaphor it is also true as a plain straight-forward fact.

No one from heaven or seen in human form from heaven has come down naked (perhaps Jesus as a baby, but he didn't stay naked-no grown-up).

I would say artlessly that when you go about naked you are letting your flesh have more control over your mind than your mind over your flesh.

Let's take this to a more basic level, which I believe I have agreed with the other side on...is it okay for a girl to dress like a whore?

You could say no, if she has it why not flaunt it...if its just beautiful, what problem is that to her if other guys lust after her?

The scripture that just came to mind, is if it causes someone else to stumble it is not wise to do....and how Paul says he would rather not eat meat than cause his brother to stumble...it is the same PRINCIPLE. If a girl who is sexually attractive came to college without her shirt on, it is absurd to think you would not be more focused on her than your school work.

The same with other societies where 'nudity is accepted', just because it is accepted DOES NOT mean it is right. Kind of like Gomorrah. OR even Rome where all sorts of lewd sexuality was practiced and accepted...am I going to judge that society? Yes...and I say it is wrong.

It is only a reprobate mind who could say that 'nudity is just beautiful'...I wonder if the people that have said this have ever been in a locker room, because there is a lot of nudity on old people that is not beautiful whatsoever.

But then my heart was struck with why I actually find sculptures such as Michelangelo acceptable...and I think it is just because it is artwork and not reality.

I have not written this as clearly as I ought, but my points are made.

God bless
tony

[VW]

Originally Posted by thefightinglamb

This discussion has gotten absurd with those who are absurd dominating the discussion somehow.

Of course, woman's breasts are sensual...you would have to be gay not to see that.

I wrote last night and still am trying to figure out how to word what I want to say.

Note: In the Bible, people from heaven are not NAKED but wrapped in cloaks. Paul also speaks of not wanting to be found naked, but fully clothed with a 'true outer garment'...while this can be true as a spiritual metaphor it is also true as a plain straight-forward fact.

No one from heaven or seen in human form from heaven has come down naked.

I would say artlessly that when you go about naked you are letting your flesh have more control over your mind than your mind over your flesh.

Let's take this to a more basic level, which I believe I have agreed with the other side on...is it okay for a girl to dress like a whore?

You could say no, if she has why not flaunt it...if its just beautiful, what problem is that to her if other guys lust after her?

The scripture that just came to mind, is if it causes someone else to stumble it is not wise to do....and how Paul says he would rather not eat meat than cause his brother to stumble...it is the same PRINCIPLE. If a girl who is sexually attractive came to college without her shirt on, it is absurd to think you would not be more focused on her than your school work.

The same with other societies where 'nudity is accepted', just because it is accepted DOES NOT mean it is right. Kind of like Gomorrah. OR even Rome where all sorts of lewd sexuality was practiced and accepted...am I going to judge that society? Yes...and I say it is wrong.

It is only a reprobate mind who could say that 'nudity is just beautiful'...I wonder if the people that have said this have ever been in a locker room, because there is a lot of nudity on old people that is not beautiful whatsoever.

But then my heart was struck with why I actually find sculptures such as Michelangelo acceptable...and I think it is just because it is artwork and not reality.

I have not written this as clearly as I ought, but my points are made.

God bless
tony

Actually, the point is that nakedness is not sinful in and of itself, but that the sin that lives in us makes anything sinful that we allow it to. Blessed is the man who is not condemned in what he allows. The whole point is love, not the old love which is to love our neighbor as ourselves, for we may not even love ourselves, and besides, this is a small love compared to the new commandment, which is to love one another even as Jesus loves us. And if we have this love for each other, we will not take an action which would cause another to be condemned, nor would we take an action from another as condemnation for ourselves or for them. Now not every brother or sister in that grown in His love, so the Spirit must be our guide in these things, for He truly knows the heart and the mind, the spiritual mind of every believer we come into contact with.

It is not the thing which is a sin, but the true sin is the sin that dwells in us. If I say, do not be naked, then sin in me takes that commandment and makes all sorts of sinful lusts to bud in my heart and mind. This is why the law could not make any worshiper perfect, and a new law had to be brought in. With a new priesthood. And a new sacrifice, one sacrifice for all and for all time. So, it is not the things we do or eat or drink that are sinful, but how we see them in our hearts and minds. And the sin in us will condemn us as long as we think it is sinful. That is its purpose, to keep us condemned. It is very difficult to approach the Father with condemnation, in fact, it is impossible. This is why we have freedom from condemnation in Christ Jesus, so that in this perfect cleansing, we have our complete access to the Father in Him.

Godliness is not in the denying of things. The denying of things has a show of Godliness, but is actually of no use against fleshly indulgence. Huh??? We can deny the things we lust after until we die, and we have not defeated our sinful nature even a little, and if anything, we have strengthened it by doing this, by denying it what it wants. So are we to give in to its lusts? No, heaven forbid. We are to stand fast in the confidence with which Jesus has purchased us from death and sin by His blood, and come often into the presence of the living God, to be changed into His image. This is the victory against sin in our lives that has been provided by our Father, that we spend time with our Father and He nature grows in us so that we can spend more time with our Father. And we have the perfect high priest for this, Jesus, who always lives to intercede for us as we are drawing near to our Father in Jesus.

Compared to this, what is nakedness? What is wine, or cigarettes, or any other thing which perishes with the using? It is what comes out of us that shows us to be defiled. Nakedness before sin was not only natural but perfect, they was it was meant to be. After sin, it was sinful, because of sin, not because of nakedness.

In His love and peace,
vic

I vote yes. Change in the locker room. What else would people prefer? That Christians change their clothes out in the open?

About this "old law to love our neighbor as ourselves", I would submit that it is still as binding today as it was when God first gave it. Also Jesus affirmed it as the second greatest commandment. And Paul said that all the law was summed up in that command.

Pretty interesting discussion and none of it is absurd imho.
I think if the lewdness becomes the major concern, applying western norm would be ridiculous.
After all, Christianity was born in the middle east area.
Shouldn't women then dress like this?


Than this:

I think the latter is too revealing that it can cause men to lust..
Isn't that the standard we are all worried about?
So, why not be consistent with the point and start wearing veil?

[Brackenzee]

Fightinglamb: I'm not saying that nudity is not sensual, but it does not necessarily need to be sexual. We've fetishized the body because we've put all these social constraints on society that we must always be wearing clothing unless we're alone or making love to our spouses. This obviously hasn't made us desire sex any less: all it has done is make us associate any nudity with sex. So that some people get offended if a woman feeds her baby in public, even if there was obviously no sexual intent behind baring the breast.

Moreover, I would argue that even the attitude towards actual sexuality is backwards. Yes, we need to honor God and use our sexuality in a moral manner, this is absolutely true. However, we've inherited from the Puritans a sort of hyper-paranoia about sex, so that any expression of sexuality or sexiness is considered sinful and--for example, a teenager going through their natural sexual awaking is made to feel guilty for his or her growing interest in sex. It's even been argued by some fundamentalists that it's a sin to even enjoy sex with your spouse, even in an honest attempt to procreate. And that attitude does nothing but pile guilt and condemnation on the heads of people growing up in the church, making them more likely to have a crisis of faith as they grow older.