Why is public nudity condemned by most Christians when it is never condemned in the Bible and/or Jesus?

[acouple]

Hi everyone and hope you are doing well. 

My husband and myself are active members of both the Christian and the nudist communities and unlike other Christians we do not see a disconnect between the two. The Holy Bible which all Christians "say" that they follow, does not directly condemn public nudity or lists it as a sin (as other actives clearly are). It is important not to confuse (as many do) public nudity with the activities (that ARE listed as sins) while people are naked. 

We do believe God never said He was ashamed of Adam and Eve while naked and only supplied clothing for them because He knew that they would need them once they were kicked out of the garden. Like God, we also believe clothing should be used to protect the body and not to hide it. 

Let us know your thoughts and we can have an honest and open discuss here on the forum. 

Have a great day and hope to hear from you!

[studiot]

9 minutes ago, acouple said:

Hi everyone and hope you are doing well. 

My husband and myself are active members of both the Christian and the nudist communities and unlike other Christians we do not see a disconnect between the two. The Holy Bible which all Christians "say" that they follow, does not directly condemn public nudity or lists it as a sin (as other actives clearly are). It is important not to confuse (as many do) public nudity with the activities (that ARE listed as sins) while people are naked. 

We do believe God never said He was ashamed of Adam and Eve while naked and only supplied clothing for them because He knew that they would need them once they were kicked out of the garden. Like God, we also believe clothing should be used to protect the body and not to hide it. 

Let us know your thoughts and we can have an honest and open discuss here on the forum. 

Have a great day and hope to hear from you!

Why don't you ask the man who wrote the bible ?

 

This is a science site, how do you expect us to know ?

[Phi for All]

19 minutes ago, acouple said:

We do believe God never said He was ashamed of Adam and Eve while naked and only supplied clothing for them because He knew that they would need them once they were kicked out of the garden.

I thought it read more like Adam and Eve, after gaining the knowledge by eating the apple, knew that showing off their genitals was evil, so they made belts out of fig leaves. This was before God's judgement, right?

[iNow]

38 minutes ago, studiot said:

Why don't you ask the man who wrote the bible ?

*men

It’s more of anthology collected from multiple authors across multiple timelines 

[studiot]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

*men

It’s more of anthology collected from multiple authors across multiple timelines 

Did you only read my first line ?

[Phi for All]

59 minutes ago, acouple said:

It is important not to confuse (as many do) public nudity with the activities (that ARE listed as sins) while people are naked. 

I always thought the real sin committed in that story was God lying to Adam and Eve about dying on the day they ate from the tree. How could being naked be evil if God created them that way, and how is it more evil than an outright lie? "In the day that you eat of it, surely shall you die" didn't happen, never would have happened, yet God threatened them with it. You can interpret the lie out of it if you try, but the Hebrew in Genesis 2 seems pretty clear.

[acouple]

49 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I thought it read more like Adam and Eve, after gaining the knowledge by eating the apple, knew that showing off their genitals was evil, so they made belts out of fig leaves. This was before God's judgement, right?

So, you are saying that they were actually sinning when they were running around in the garden naked, I don't believe anything in the garden was sinning before the fall. Maybe one of the first sins committed by them was body shaming, which is what society considers a sin let today. Also, since A & E were the only ones on earth at the time, are you saying it is a sin to be naked in front of our spouses? 

thanks for getting into the discussion Phil for Al

30 minutes ago, iNow said:

*men

It’s more of anthology collected from multiple authors across multiple timelines 

very true iNow, and the amazing thing is when all of them were collected, they all seem to support one another

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, acouple said:

Hi everyone and hope you are doing well. 

My husband and myself are active members of both the Christian and the nudist communities and unlike other Christians we do not see a disconnect between the two. The Holy Bible which all Christians "say" that they follow, does not directly condemn public nudity or lists it as a sin (as other actives clearly are). It is important not to confuse (as many do) public nudity with the activities (that ARE listed as sins) while people are naked. 

We do believe God never said He was ashamed of Adam and Eve while naked and only supplied clothing for them because He knew that they would need them once they were kicked out of the garden. Like God, we also believe clothing should be used to protect the body and not to hide it. 

Let us know your thoughts and we can have an honest and open discuss here on the forum. 

Have a great day and hope to hear from you!

We had a thread eerily similar to this one in September: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127885-hi-everyone-my-husband-and-myself-are-going-to-try-to-share-this-profile-and-we-will-see-how-that-works/

Are you a sock of we2? 

If not, you will find the issue has been discussed at some length already in that thread.

 

Edited December 15, 2022 by exchemist

[Phi for All]

8 minutes ago, acouple said:

So, you are saying that they were actually sinning when they were running around in the garden naked, I don't believe anything in the garden was sinning before the fall.

No, I think it's weird that being naked was evil, since they were supposedly created that way.

8 minutes ago, acouple said:

Also, since A & E were the only ones on earth at the time, are you saying it is a sin to be naked in front of our spouses? 

I'm saying that the only evidence to work with is your bible, and what's written there suggests that God was OK with nudity. However, when Adam & Eve gained knowledge of good and evil, the first thing they did was make belts to cover their groins, which would seem to suggest that flashing your genitals is evil. So God created humans with an evil nakedness, then bore false witness long before he made it part of the 10 Commandments.

 

[acouple]

8 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I always thought the real sin committed in that story was God lying to Adam and Eve about dying on the day they ate from the tree. How could being naked be evil if God created them that way, and how is it more evil than an outright lie? "In the day that you eat of it, surely shall you die" didn't happen, never would have happened, yet God threatened them with it. You can interpret the lie out of it if you try, but the Hebrew in Genesis 2 seems pretty clear.

i think it is in how the word has been changed over the years when "sinful" men have gotten involved. The word in the manuscripts does not have a meaning of "fall over with no proof of physical life", rather more of a spiritual dying. 

[Phi for All]

11 minutes ago, acouple said:

very true iNow, and the amazing thing is when all of them were collected, they all seem to support one another

Except when they don't, which is most of the Gospels and Letters. Those accounts are all over the place.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Did you only read my first line ?

No, I read the whole post. I assume you’re trying to make a point here, but it’s unclear what that point is. 

[swansont]

2 hours ago, acouple said:

My husband and myself are active members of both the Christian and the nudist communities and unlike other Christians we do not see a disconnect between the two. The Holy Bible which all Christians "say" that they follow, does not directly condemn public nudity or lists it as a sin (as other actives clearly are

Genesis 3:7 (and subsequent passages) certainly hints at it.

Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

 

[acouple]

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

No, I think it's weird that being naked was evil, since they were supposedly created that way.

I'm saying that the only evidence to work with is your bible, and what's written there suggests that God was OK with nudity. However, when Adam & Eve gained knowledge of good and evil, the first thing they did was make belts to cover their groins, which would seem to suggest that flashing your genitals is evil. So God created humans with an evil nakedness, then bore false witness long before he made it part of the 10 Commandments.

 

So you are saying that you think God didn't have a problem with nudity, however A and E (or created humans) did? I agree and that is our point from the very beginning of this thread. We will take God's side over man's every time. 

3 hours ago, exchemist said:

We had a thread eerily similar to this one in September: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127885-hi-everyone-my-husband-and-myself-are-going-to-try-to-share-this-profile-and-we-will-see-how-that-works/

Are you a sock of we2? 

If not, you will find the issue has been discussed at some length already in that thread.

 

OMG, we forgot all about that profile and thread we posted on here. Now we have a bunch of reading to do to get caught up to speed. 

Thanks for posting!

[studiot]

@exchemistI declaire you sockhunter extra ordinaire.

 

2 hours ago, iNow said:

No, I read the whole post. I assume you’re trying to make a point here, but it’s unclear what that point is. 

Yes, I have yet to see any science in this thread.

I thought that the Religion section here was supposed to host scientific aspects of religion, not religous content.

 

3 hours ago, acouple said:

and the amazing thing is when all of them were collected, they all seem to support one another

There are huge discrepancies beween certain 'books', particularly in the old testament.

Scientifically we can trace this to the fact that in the centuries BC there were two widely separated centres of jewish culture where the books were authored.
Alexandria and Jerusalem.
Further the Alexandria versions were written in Greek and the Jerusalem ones in Hebrew
Most of our translations stem from the Greek version, I suspect because there were more Greek scholars than hebrew ones , years ago.

There is a postgraduate course somewhere in Kent where you can study these things.

 

Also the point about 'sin' is what led to the legal doctrine of 'criminal intent'.

Can an idiot sin if she is incapable knowing what sin is ?

 

[exchemist]

3 hours ago, Phi for All said:

No, I think it's weird that being naked was evil, since they were supposedly created that way.

I'm saying that the only evidence to work with is your bible, and what's written there suggests that God was OK with nudity. However, when Adam & Eve gained knowledge of good and evil, the first thing they did was make belts to cover their groins, which would seem to suggest that flashing your genitals is evil. So God created humans with an evil nakedness, then bore false witness long before he made it part of the 10 Commandments.

 

The whole story is an allegory of loss of innocence, exemplified by development of self-consciousness about exposing one's private parts. We consider the animals innocent - doing what they do without hangups about right and wrong. Small children ditto. Whereas adult human beings are moral creatures, with a responsibility to act morally.

Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil is symbolic of this double-edged transition: the gain of adult knowledge involves sacrificing childlike innocence. 

The story is clear that it is Adam and Eve themselves who decided they needed to hide their private parts, due to loss of innocence. So there is no suggestion that flashing your genitals is evil. That was a hangup they introduced for themselves. 

Edited December 15, 2022 by exchemist

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, acouple said:

OMG, we forgot all about that profile and thread we posted on here. Now we have a bunch of reading to do to get caught up to speed. 

 

Well I certainly hope you stick around this time as long as you did last time, to discuss the topic that you opened.

[acouple]

39 minutes ago, exchemist said:

The whole story is an allegory of loss of innocence, exemplified by development of self-consciousness about exposing one's private parts. We consider the animals innocent - doing what they do without hangups about right and wrong. Small children ditto. Whereas adult human beings are moral creatures, with a responsibility to act morally.

Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil is symbolic of this double-edged transition: the gain of adult knowledge involves sacrificing childlike innocence. 

The story is clear that it is Adam and Eve themselves who decided they needed to hide their private parts, due to loss of innocence. So there is no suggestion that flashing your genitals is evil. That was a hangup they introduced for themselves. 

yes, we are in complete agreement here. 

Toddler humans have no shame when they run around naked and do quite naturally. Only when adult humans shame them do they finally give in a put clothes on. 

We raised our son and daughter as nudists and always thought of it as normal behavior until the human's laws told them different 

[exchemist]

11 minutes ago, acouple said:

yes, we are in complete agreement here. 

Toddler humans have no shame when they run around naked and do quite naturally. Only when adult humans shame them do they finally give in a put clothes on. 

We raised our son and daughter as nudists and always thought of it as normal behavior until the human's laws told them different 

OK but regarding nudity in society today, please also see my response to your original thread on this, in September. 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Yes, I have yet to see any science in this thread.

Of course, we’re in violent agreement here. I do, however, remain unclear why you asked me if I’d read your entire comment as a reply to my correction of your use of the word “man” in the singular, when the more precise statement would have “men” in the plural. 🤷‍♂️ 

Edited December 15, 2022 by iNow

[studiot]

Why would a truly irreligous scientist know or care how many persons or persons 'wrote' the bible or how many books, chapters, gospels, appendices, apochripahas etc it has ?

 

I'm sorry if my oblique references were too obscure for you.

 

[zapatos]

49 minutes ago, acouple said:

We raised our son and daughter as nudists and always thought of it as normal behavior until the human's laws told them different 

Did they get arrested or something?

[iNow]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I'm sorry if my oblique references were too obscure for you.

You’ve merely evaded my actual question. Cool. Whatever. 

[TheVat]

4 hours ago, acouple said:

 

OMG, we forgot all about that profile and thread we posted on here. Now we have a bunch of reading to do to get caught up to speed. 

Thanks for posting!

You forgot you joined here three months ago and had a chat on this topic?  Ok.  

Why would a supreme and omniscient creator being concern itself with dress codes?  This would seem a low priority for the highest consciousness in the universe, one which transcends time and space.  The Bible could recount personal revelations of some holy men, but surely you can see it's possible that some of the content is just fables and allegories used to maintain social order in nomadic desert tribes.  And it IS a desert, so the pragmatic value of clothing (compared to tropical/subtropical forest-dwelling peoples) is undeniable.