Men should wear shirts at the beach

[LutheranGuy123]

The subject of the thread is naked/nude as in without clothing...case closed.

Wow.

And I was using a Biblical argument to state that nudity is not shameful. Then someone said that Adam and Eve covered themselves because nudity became shameful, so I pointed out how that misconception arises due to the English language changing without the Bible translation changing.

Also, there is no reason to act so condescending to others. It's incredibly rude.

 

[Sammy-San]

Well, if someone is nude, and proud of it, then they're clearly insane. I remember going to a day-care center as a kid. All the kids played, and were alright over there, but one kid named Steven who was about 4 or 5 liked to strip down and run around. The other kids and I climbed on top of couches so that he couldn't touch us. We knew, even as children, there was something wrong with naked people.
People wear clothes, animals don't wear clothes.
People who intentionally wear overly revealing clothes are not smart.

Is it "base"?

What is eros love?

So, moving from the base to the pure, we have eros, storge, philia, and agapé. This is not to denigrate eros as sinful or impure. Sexual love is not inherently unclean or evil.

 

[Near]

Is it "base"?

What is eros love?

Nudity is just improper, and completely inappropriate in public. Is nudity base, as in a form of "eros"?
No, because a retarded child can be nude running around in a hospital and it would have nothing to do with sexuality.
I'll also point out, I don't consider "eros" to be a form of love at all. So, the statement "sexual love is not inherently unclean or evil" has no meaning in my book. There is no such thing as sexual love. There's a love for sex, and sex between a husband and wife who love each other, and sex between people who don't love eachother, as with the case of marriage-kidnappings.

 

[Sammy-San]

Nudity is just improper, and completely inappropriate in public. Is nudity base, as in a form of "eros"?
No, because a retarded child can be nude running around in a hospital and it would have nothing to do with sexuality.
I'll also point out, I don't consider "eros" to be a form of love at all. So, the statement "sexual love is not inherently unclean or evil" has no meaning in my book. There is no such thing as sexual love. There's a love for sex, and sex between a husband and wife who love each other, and sex between people who don't love eachother, as with the case of marriage-kidnappings.

That isn't love?

By that logic, a husband and wife kissing isn't love?

 

[SnowyMacie]

That isn't love?

By that logic, a husband and wife kissing isn't love?

Not a joke, I've seen someone say on here that it's a sin for husbands and wives to lust after one another.

 

[Sammy-San]

Not a joke, I've seen someone say on here that it's a sin for husbands and wives to lust after one another.

Isn't that not the bibical definition of lust?

 

[SnowyMacie]

Isn't that not the bibical definition of lust?

They meant it like sexual desire/attraction for your spouse is a sin as sex is only for procreation and so you should only have sex if you intended to procreate and it's therefore sinful to have sex because you are sexually attracted to your wife or husband.

 

[Near]

That isn't love?

By that logic, a husband and wife kissing isn't love?

Correct.
Profound, right? Why think a couple kissing is "love" itself? What about locking lips is love?

In baseball, two men may have a deep brotherly appreciation for eachother, and one may slap the other on the ass (I don't personally do this, and I think it's weird but it's what they do).
What about slapping ass is love?

What about bestiality? That must be a form of love in ancient greco-roman views.

Western conceptions of love derived from ancient greco-roman philosophy define what many think of as love, which is not the biblical way to think of love.

 

[Sammy-San]

Correct.
Profound, right? Why think a couple kissing is "love" itself? What about locking lips is love?

In baseball, two men may have a deep brotherly appreciation for eachother, and one may slap the other on the ass (I don't personally do this, and I think it's weird but it's what they do).
What about slapping ass is love?

What about bestiality? That must be a form of love in ancient greco-roman views.

Western conceptions of love derived from ancient greco-roman philosophy define what many think of as love, which is not the biblical way to think of love.

They express physical closeness and pleasure.

What's with all this vulgarity?

 

[Near]

They express physical closeness and pleasure.

What's with all this vulgarity?

The only vulgar thing I mentioned was bestiality.
Slapping ass is not sexual. It's not an uncommon practice in sports.
Locking lips, is another word for kissing, which you had no problem mentioning.
So, just like how locking lips, aka kissing, is not love itself, slapping ass, between one man and another, in a brotherly manner, is not love itself.


I don't think I'm being vulgar by merely mentioning the things I've said, and if you're trying to take some moral high ground here, you can take that elsewhere.

Getting back to the main topic, people should still wear clothes, and there's a point to it.
There's nothing "eros"-like about being nude in and of itself, and lust is not the primary reason for why we ought to cover ourselves up.

 

[Sammy-San]

The only vulgar thing I mentioned was bestiality.
Slapping ass is not sexual. It's not an uncommon practice in sports.
Locking lips, is another word for kissing, which you had no problem mentioning.
So, just like how locking lips, aka kissing, is not love itself, slapping ass, between one man and another, in a brotherly manner, is not love itself.


I don't think I'm being vulgar by merely mentioning the things I've said, and if you're trying to take some moral high ground here, you can take that elsewhere.

Getting back to the main topic, people should still wear clothes, and there's a point to it.
There's nothing "eros"-like about being nude in and of itself, and lust is not the primary reason for why we ought to cover ourselves up.

Why is kissing not love? Is hugging not love?

Are you saying wearing no shirt is nudity or what society defines as nudity?

 

[Near]

Why is kissing not love? Is hugging not love?

Because, kissing is just a physical act, and so is hugging. No type of physical act is love itself. Perhaps an act can be done out of love, but those acts themselves are not love themselves.

1 Cor 13: 4-7
4Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love deals with benevolence, good-will, and care towards others.
Sexual desire, is not love at all, nor is it a form of love. There's no reason to think, biblically speaking, that kissing or hugging are love.

I can prove it by demonstrating that something such as kissing or hugging can be done without love.
One: kissing between two straight men who are acting.
Two: Hugging between two people who boxing.
If hugging or kissing can be done without love, then logically, those acts on their own are something apart from love itself.

I think I've explained myself clearly, but I'm wondering why you'd think mere physical acts such as hugging or kissing are love.

 

[Sammy-San]

Because, kissing is just a physical act, and so is hugging. No type of physical act is love itself. Perhaps an act can be done out of love, but those acts themselves are not love themselves.

1 Cor 13: 4-7
4Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love deals with benevolence, good-will, and care towards others.
Sexual desire, is not love at all, nor is it a form of love. There's no reason to think, biblically speaking, that kissing or hugging are love.

I can prove it by demonstrating that something such as kissing or hugging can be done without love.
One: kissing between two straight men who are acting.
Two: Hugging between two people who boxing.
If hugging or kissing can be done without love, then logically, those acts on their own are something apart from love itself.

I think I've explained myself clearly, but I'm wondering why you'd think mere physical acts such as hugging or kissing are love.

Greetings are not love?

 

[Paidiske]

No, because a retarded child can be nude running around in a hospital and it would have nothing to do with sexuality.

Any child running around anywhere, nude, can be innocent and have nothing to do with sexuality.

Also, the use of the word "retarded" for children with disabilities is highly offensive.

 

[Near]

Greetings are not love?

They are not love.
I can prove that greetings are not love themselves by illustrating how a greeting can be done without love, and honestly this is getting old.

When I go to work, and someone says "Sup bro."
I reply, "Sup."
Only for formality, and because I don't want to be perceived as rude. I don't feel the need to go out of my way most of the time merely to greet anyone actually. It's a mere pleasantry.

I really don't see the point of your questions though, what are you getting at?

 

[Near]

Any child running around anywhere, nude, can be innocent and have nothing to do with sexuality.

Also, the use of the word "retarded" for children with disabilities is highly offensive.

Well, we agree then.

Also, I didn't explicitly refer to children with disabilities as retarded.
I said retarded, and that can refer to a stupid kid that likes Hitler a lot, and one who likes to hurt animals for fun.

 

[Sammy-San]

Even as a kid I remember feeling weird about not wearing a shirt at the pool. So, I wore a shirt at the pool as a kid.
Women are supposed to wear tops, and cover themselves at the beach. I think they should be even more modest though, but I want to address the issue of men here.
We shouldn't be showing off our bodies, and we should cover ourselves.
Try wearing a rash guard and trunks.
Speedos are for weirdos.

Women showing their breasts isn't considered indecent exposure or nudity-the nipples are.

Are you really saying shirtless men are nude?

 

[Paidiske]

Well, we agree then.

Also, I didn't explicitly refer to children with disabilities as retarded.
I said retarded, and that can refer to a stupid kid that likes Hitler a lot, and one who likes to hurt animals for fun.

Retarded - as it is generally used - refers to people whose development is, in some sense, delayed. It is a very old-fashioned term and these days is considered derogatory. It is best avoided; if you wish to link childhood nudity with neo-Nazism or budding sociopathy, you'll need to be more exact in spelling it out.

 

[Near]

Women showing their breasts isn't considered indecent exposure or nudity-the nipples are.

Are you really saying shirtless men are nude?

But, you're going off of certain standards formed by liberal society, not ancient Christianity.
If I posted a picture on here of a nude women, with the nipples and private area blurred out, that would be wrong of me to do for more than one reason. Our laws aren't going far enough when it comes to indecent exposure, and obscenity.
When it comes to shirtless men, I'm just saying, it's good for them to wear shirts rather than expose themselves, as a matter of modesty.
I'm advocating for going above the modern liberal standards of modern culture, and I want to speak to Christians, not skeptical liberal anti-theists on the matter. So, as christians, we ought to consider modesty, and think of better ways to be modest, and different from our ever god-departing society.

 

[Sammy-San]

But, you're going off of certain standards formed by liberal society, not ancient Christianity.
If I posted a picture on here of a nude women, with the nipples and private area blurred out, that would be wrong of me to do for more than one reason.
When it comes to shirtless men, I'm just saying, it's good for them to wear shirts rather than expose themselves, as a matter of modesty.
I'm advocating for going above the modern liberal standards of modern culture, and I want to speak to Christians, not skeptical liberal anti-theists on the matter. So, as christians, we ought to consider modesty, and think of better ways to be modest, and different from our ever god-departing society.

Displaying nudity? That brings me to my next point.

So the fact that breast exposure is not considered being nude is a sign of society being liberal and accepting nudity?