Men should wear shirts at the beach

[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. 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.

http://www.loughbrickland.org/articles/modesty.shtml

Proverbs 5:19). The exposure of the breast is envisaged as only legitimate between husband and wife, otherwise they are to be covered in the presence of men.

 

[Near]

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

I think you're failing to recognize where I'm coming from here.
I'm interested in what you honestly have to say here, what is your opinion on that?
I'll just say, I believe society is not our shining example of what is acceptable in the eyes of God. Women who cover the nipples but not the entire area of the chest with a shirt are being immodest still. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with american laws on public indecency. It has to do with modesty in the context of Christianity.

To be honest, I'm getting sorta annoyed by apparent lack of consideration of that last point by you, I mean, the questions you ask seem not to take into full account what I said previously.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think you're failing to recognize where I'm coming from here.
I'm interested in what you honestly have to say here, what is your opinion on that?
I'll just say, I believe society is not our shining example of what is acceptable in the eyes of God. Women who cover the nipples but not the entire area of the chest with a shirt are being immodest still. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with american laws on public indecency. It has to do with modesty in the context of Christianity.

To be honest, I'm getting sorta annoyed by apparent lack of consideration of that last point by you, I mean, the questions you ask seem not to take into full account what I said previously.

Isnt it bibically naked? Are you basically agreeing with me?

Naked means private parts. A guy shirtess isn't the same as a naked person. It just isnt revealing dignity.

 

[Near]

gee you quoted something there. I wonder what the significance of that was...

 

[Sammy-San]

gee you quoted something there. I wonder what the significance of that was...

To prove a point that society accepts nudity?

I could be wrong maybe immodesty isn't nudity.

 

[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.

Does the Bible define what is modest or not?

Is it fair to say bibically arms and lower legs are totally modest?

I read somewhere upper arms are immodest bibically.

 

[Near]

Isnt it bibically naked? Are you basically agreeing with me?

Naked means private parts. A guy shirtess isn't the same as a naked person. It just isnt revealing dignity.

Naked doesn't mean the same as immodest.
A women can wear a miniskirt with a sports bra, and I think that's immodest, she isn't wearing enough clothing. A man can wear a speedo, and nothing else, in public, and that would be immodest.

To prove a point that society accepts nudity?

I could be wrong maybe immodesty isn't nudity.

Nudity is immodest, but it isn't the only form of immodesty. One can wear revealing clothing, ex. lingerie, and it would be immodest. People at the beach, are for the most part in certain liberal areas, immodest, but not entirely naked, or entirely nude.

 

[Near]

Does the Bible define what is modest or not?

Is it fair to say bibically arms and lower legs are totally modest?

I read somewhere upper arms are immodest bibically.

I think the one thing I want others to take away from this is just to aim for modesty as christians.
If that's the goal, that's good. Whether or not the arms being revealed is immodest, that is up for debate, and if it's seriously a stumbling block to people, then I'd say they ought to be covered for the sake of everyone else. Applying more clothing out of love, because if we're doing something out of love, then we're doing the right thing as christians.
So, if anyone believes showing of the arms really is immodest, then I'll cover my arms for that person, and have a good conversation about that if the occasion arises.

 

[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. 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.

Would you say liberal society agrees with the Bible on what defines nudity?

 

[Near]

Would you say liberal society agrees with the Bible on what defines nudity?

I think that's the wrong question.
The right question is this, is liberal society fleeing further and further away from what God wants for them?
Yes.
Wicked commercials, wicked culture, and sinful agendas are plaguing the world, and certain groups of people are wearing clothing that is too revealing.
And like I said, I'm not setting the standard at being not nude, that standard is set to modest. So there's not much a point in discussing nudity so much, rather than immodesty.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think the one thing I want others to take away from this is just to aim for modesty as christians.
If that's the goal, that's good. Whether or not the arms being revealed is immodest, that is up for debate, and if it's seriously a stumbling block to people, then I'd say they ought to be covered for the sake of everyone else. Applying more clothing out of love, because if we're doing something out of love, then we're doing the right thing as christians.
So, if anyone believes showing of the arms really is immodest, then I'll cover my arms for that person, and have a good conversation about that if the occasion arises.

So midriff is immodest for reasons beyond lust?

 

[Sammy-San]

I think that's the wrong question.
The right question is this, is liberal society fleeing further and further away from what God wants for them?
Yes.
Wicked commercials, wicked culture, and sinful agendas are plaguing the world, and certain groups of people are wearing clothing that is too revealing.
And like I said, I'm not setting the standard at being not nude, that standard is set to modest. So there's not much a point in discussing nudity so much, rather than immodesty.

So immodesty doesn't have to do with exposing private parts? Or semi private parts?

 

[Near]

So midriff is immodest for reasons beyond lust?

I believe so.

 

[Near]

So immodesty doesn't have to do with exposing private parts? Or semi private parts?

imagine a person born with no private parts or nipples.
If they were totally nude, would it be modest for them to just walk around town nude?

 

[Sammy-San]

I believe so.

Is a woman in a sleeveless dress exposing her shoulders immodest?

 

[Sammy-San]

I believe so.

Dignity?

 

[Near]

Dignity?

if i was in a crowd of straight men, and I was nude I would not feel very dignified.
think of the emperor's new clothes.

 

[Near]

Is a woman in a sleeveless dress exposing her shoulders immodest?

no.
what do you think?

 

[Sammy-San]

if i was in a crowd of straight men, and I was nude I would not feel very dignified.
think of the emperor's new clothes.

How is midriff immodest? Why do you think it isn't nude?

 

[Sammy-San]

no.
what do you think?

What makes it not immodest? Shoulders and arms still reveal dignity?

What about partial immodest? I would argue a one piece swimsuit is partially immodest.