Topless Danes

[LightHorseman]

The Spirit of God dwelling in a woman who contains it does exactly that - keeps them covered except for her husband and he apreciates having them just for him as well.

So, in other words, God DOESN'T actually cover them up?

 

[Angel4Truth]

God did cover up adam and eve - context is everything.

 

[LightHorseman]

God did cover up adam and eve - context is everything.

I'm pretty sure he didn't, actually... infact, I'm quiote certain that Adam and Eve covering THEMSELVES up is what tipped God off that they'd eaten the forbidden fruit.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Maybe you should actually read Genesis

 

[LightHorseman]

tell you waht, you cite me chapter and verse where it says "god covered Adam and Eve" (or even her breasts) and I'll go away.

Or would that be breaching someone's privacy as well?

 

[Tissue]

Genesis 3:21 - 'The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.' (NASB)

 

[Angel4Truth]

Thanks for posting that tissue - you got it before i could get back and post it.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I'm pretty sure he didn't, actually... infact, I'm quiote certain that Adam and Eve covering THEMSELVES up is what tipped God off that they'd eaten the forbidden fruit.

tell you waht, you cite me chapter and verse where it says "god covered Adam and Eve" (or even her breasts) and I'll go away.

Or would that be breaching someone's privacy as well?

Genesis 3:21 - 'The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.' (NASB)

Bye bye horseman.

 

[LightHorseman]

Um... that isn't what was being intimated, and my initial is still correct... Adam and Eve initiallly covered THEMSELVES.

 

[LightHorseman]

Nor does the cited passage mention covering of breasts.

I'll leave you to your sanctimonious piety now.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Um... that isn't what was being intimated, and my initial is still correct... Adam and Eve initiallly covered THEMSELVES.

I thought you said if chapter and verse where God covered them could be shown you would go away? You said :

tell you waht, you cite me chapter and verse where it says "god covered Adam and Eve" (or even her breasts) and I'll go away.

Reminder from your own signature :

If you have to lie to support your position, ask yourself if your position is really worth supporting?

 

[Armistead]

I think it's a cultural issue. Look at the many tribes in Africa and eslewhere where all run around naked. They have done it for generations. They haven't been raised or taught that sex is dirty and body parts are bad, so nakedness doesn't effect them or the sight of it cause hormones to rage.
Looking at a boob is as normal as looking at a foot.

In Europe, it's more of equal rights. A boob is a boob, man or woman. IF men can do it, why can't women. Most lifelong residents in Europe are use to nakedness and don't go nuts at the sight of them, ect. It's now becoming a way of culture.

In America, a woman shows her boobs, cars wreck.

I think best to keep em covered. I don't mind looking at nice boobs, but most of em need to be covered. Certainly, breastfeeding should be allowed anywhere.

 

[TheReasoner]

I think it's a cultural issue. Look at the many tribes in Africa and eslewhere where all run around naked. They have done it for generations. They haven't been raised or taught that sex is dirty and body parts are bad, so nakedness doesn't effect them or the sight of it cause hormones to rage.
Looking at a boob is as normal as looking at a foot.

In Europe, it's more of equal rights. A boob is a boob, man or woman. IF men can do it, why can't women. Most lifelong residents in Europe are use to nakedness and don't go nuts at the sight of them, ect. It's now becoming a way of culture.

In America, a woman shows her boobs, cars wreck.

I think best to keep em covered. I don't mind looking at nice boobs, but most of em need to be covered. Certainly, breastfeeding should be allowed anywhere.

QFT

 

[TheReasoner]

Genesis 3:21 - 'The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.' (NASB)

That was only after they had covered themselves, which was a direct result of sin.

 

[Iskra]

I think it's a cultural issue. Look at the many tribes in Africa and eslewhere where all run around naked. They have done it for generations. They haven't been raised or taught that sex is dirty and body parts are bad, so nakedness doesn't effect them or the sight of it cause hormones to rage.
Looking at a boob is as normal as looking at a foot.

In Europe, it's more of equal rights. A boob is a boob, man or woman. IF men can do it, why can't women. Most lifelong residents in Europe are use to nakedness and don't go nuts at the sight of them, ect. It's now becoming a way of culture.

In America, a woman shows her boobs, cars wreck.

I think best to keep em covered. I don't mind looking at nice boobs, but most of em need to be covered. Certainly, breastfeeding should be allowed anywhere.

I live in Scandinavia and I can tell you that toplessness is not a big deal on beaches. Here and at least in northern Germany pretty much all beaches are open for nudity/toplessness and the nudist beaches have signs saying "no clothes only". It's needless to say that Scandinavian beaches are not filled with wide eyed men, instead people are used and doesn't bother.

So it is really a question of tradition, USA has a society with body obsession that probably is a result from making to much of a deal about nakedness and bodies.

 

[*Starlight*]

God didnt cover them up for no reason.

In Genesis God covered them up because they wanted to be covered.

 

[IamRedeemed]

Well, would you walk into church topless? If not, why not?

Whatever the "standard" is, it is what it is - men are sexually turned on by that -
As far as I can see, God covered the body after the fall.
Scripture is clear about MODESTY - 1/2 nude is not modesty. Men lust after a woman's body (boobs, butt & frontal) so is causing people to lust or look sexually ok as a Christian? no it's not.

So I think we know better than to approve of this type of stuff whether the standard is fair or not; double or not.
There's lots of double standards - it still doesn't make something right on that basis alone. (ie. rebellion).

God created us sexual beings - and most women are NOT sexually excited when they see a male naked or shirtless... men on the other hand are visually stimulated sexually. This is just simple biology 101.
Since that's so, its our job as women to comply with Godly standards regarding sexual enticement. We know what turns guys on.

 

[IamRedeemed]

Actually God covered them in animal skins.

They covered themselves with leaves and hid.

They did so because they were ashamed.
They knew they had sinned against God.

But God covered them because they we no longer innocent,
not because He was their puppet.

In Genesis God covered them up because they wanted to be covered.

 

[Nadiine]

I live in Scandinavia and I can tell you that toplessness is not a big deal on beaches. Here and at least in northern Germany pretty much all beaches are open for nudity/toplessness and the nudist beaches have signs saying "no clothes only". It's needless to say that Scandinavian beaches are not filled with wide eyed men, instead people are used and doesn't bother.

So it is really a question of tradition, USA has a society with body obsession that probably is a result from making to much of a deal about nakedness and bodies.

I disagree completely.
I believe they're desensitized to immorality - the problem is with their familiarity with open nudity. It's not a cultural issue - the nudist people are fine with full nudity too; does it make full nudity fine?
NO.

God warns us about having our consciences dulled to wrongdoing. What's worse is, those Scandanavian people just take their tops off wherever they vacation or visit and it imposes on other people who are not like them and who don't appreciate nudity.

 

[Nadiine]

Actually God covered them in animal skins.

They covered themselves with leaves and hid.

They did so because they were ashamed.
They knew they had sinned against God.

But God covered them because they we no longer innocent,
not because He was their puppet.

No doubt that's how God is viewed by plenty of people - God is their puppet on their string... He reacts to what they do, He obeys them, He adheres to their wishes & makes it right if they think it is... He judges the way THEY view everything - so if they say something is "good", then IT IS becuz they say so.

No doubt that's how God is viewed as we see in that statement, God just did what they wanted & followed their lead.