Men should wear shirts at the beach

Near · May 12, 2017

blackribbon said:
I don't see the need for men to cover up because modesty is related to sexual thoughts and women really aren't as prone to lusting over visual images as men...it is just a fact of nature. I am much more likely to notice and focus on some cute little kid than a good looking man...

If it's the case that modesty is only related to sexual thoughts then why is it the case that men ought not see other men's nakedness?

Genesis 9:
20Then Noah began farming and planted a vineyard. 21He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent. 22Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness. 24When Noah awoke from his wine, he knew what his youngest son had done to him.

25So he said,
“Cursed be Canaan;
A servant of servants
He shall be to his brothers.”

From that passage, it seems the being naked, even among men, is not good. So, I don't think modesty is really all about lust prevention. It just seems to be an elementary principle, we ought to wear clothes and not reveal nakedness, and the more clothed, the better.

Also, women experience sexual attraction. So, I think you may be wrong about that fact of nature.
I was reading from this article actually, and it's articles like this one that inspired me to make the thread.
Shirtless Guys: What Every Christian Girl Should Know
Here's a quote from a women:

Personally, I have committed to guarding my eyes against shirtless guys. If I’m driving by a shirtless runner, I look the other way. If I see an ad featuring a shirtless guy, I look away. I avoid swimming in crowded places where shirtless guys are unavoidable. I’m careful about which movies I watch and avoid any that feature shirtless guys.

I challenged you to ask yourself these probing questions to find out where your heart is.

blackribbon · May 12, 2017

It does not say why it was a problem that the sons saw the nakedness of their father. I personally believe it had more to do with him being drunk than him being without clothing. How on earth would a man know who had looked at him when he was passed out and been so offended about it. There is more to the story that we don' t know or are missing. Either Noah was doing something to be ashamed of in his drunken state or this son did something to him.

I am a nurse. It is part of my duties to look at complete bodies when they are hospitalize to keep their skin healthy and assess their health state. I can not believe that I am doing evil because I see multiple naked bodies during a shift. I actually am doing evil if I don't look because that is how people develop pressure ulcers, especially older people.

I also do not believe that most women look upon a shirtless man and feel lustful thoughts. We are not wired to be visual that way. There is a reason why there are multiple magazines out there with naked women and (to my knowledge), only one with naked men....especially, since I suspect that more magazines in general are bought by women. Most women will tell you what they find sexiest about their husband are his eyes or something he does (like when he plays with their children).

God created the naked body. It is good. Initially If you read Genesis 3, they were not aware that they were naked until after they sinned....so I suspect that part of feeling shame about being naked has to do with sin and being aware of it. God made clothing to protect Adam and Eve from the elements when they had to leave the Eden. Being naked was not a sin though.

There is nothing holy about clothing and sinful about nakedness. Everyone of us was created by God naked. We came into this world naked. We cloth babies to keep them warm and catch the contents of their diapers, not because it is shameful for a baby to be naked. Nakedness is not the problem. It is our heart and our thoughts that have an issue with nakedness. There is no great command anywhere about wearing clothing...and pulling out a single story which also included other sins (such as the gluttony of being drunk and most likely disrespect for ones parent) is not enough to base a theology on. I'd say that unless you are free of all the major sins such as selfishness, all forms of gluttony, gossip, judging others, etc..., being excessively concerned about the outward appearance of other people should be pretty low on the priority list of how you spend your thoughts and time.

Dave-W · May 12, 2017

blackribbon said:
It does not say why it was a problem that the sons saw the nakedness of their father. I personally believe it had more to do with him being drunk than him being without clothing.

I am in a bible study with a few Hebrew scholars. Last Saturday we looked at this very passage in conjunction with the Leviticus 18 list of forbidden relationships. It said an interesting thing:

Leviticus 18:7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness.

"uncover nakedness" was a euphemism for having sex with someone.

So was it possible that Ham was actually seeing his mother (or having sex with her)?

Cearbhall · May 12, 2017

Near said:
Speedos are for weirdos.

How constructive and convincing.

blackribbon · May 12, 2017

Dave-W said:
I am in a bible study with a few Hebrew scholars. Last Saturday we looked at this very passage in conjunction with the Leviticus 18 list of forbidden relationships. It said an interesting thing:

Leviticus 18:7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness.

"uncover nakedness" was a euphemism for having sex with someone.

So was it possible that Ham was actually seeing his mother (or having sex with her)?

Or possibly watching his parents have sex...with the other brothers covering them up because it was somehow visible to others?

Near · May 12, 2017

blackribbon said:
How on earth would a man know who had looked at him when he was passed out and been so offended about it. There is more to the story that we don' t know or are missing. Either Noah was doing something to be ashamed of in his drunken state or this son did something to him.

I think we can tell from the passage that it was Noah's nakedness, him appearing without clothing, which Ham make a spectacle of. As far as I can tell, he went to his father, and made fun of the fact he was drunk and naked. The fact that his two brothers had clothed Noah, while looking away from their father tells us that he shouldn't have been naked. It has to do with honoring their father, I'd think, since generally speaking, seeing a person naked is not good, and in the context described, it's shameful.

blackribbon said:
I am a nurse. It is part of my duties to look at complete bodies when they are hospitalize to keep their skin healthy and assess their health state. I can not believe that I am doing evil because I see multiple naked bodies during a shift. I actually am doing evil if I don't look because that is how people develop pressure ulcers, especially older people.

As for your profession, I think context is important, and for medical purposes seeing a naked human body isn't wrong. In ancient Israel, when preforming circumcision on people, the male private parts are exposed, so if there's a specific reason for nakedness such as a medical procedure, I think there's an exception. However, patients are entitled to privacy, and they aren't just nude all the time for everyone to see. There are procedures that are followed to ensure that patients feel respected, and not exposed to everyone who passes by including visitors, and non-medical professionals. There's a curtain for a reason, and doors. Right?

blackribbon said:
I also do not believe that most women look upon a shirtless man and feel lustful thoughts. We are not wired to be visual that way. There is a reason why there are multiple magazines out there with naked women and (to my knowledge), only one with naked men....especially, since I suspect that more magazines in general are bought by women. Most women will tell you what they find sexiest about their husband are his eyes or something he does (like when he plays with their children).

Couldn't it be the case that the ratio of such magazines out there is due to marketing and a male-dominated business world, and social-engineering? The world we live in can have an affect on how our brains develop. Also, if it's the case women aren't wired to be visual, why was I able to find a quote from a women that dealt with issues regarding shirtless men? Perhaps it's the case that not all women are visual, but some are, or there could be a different ratio.

blackribbon said:
God created the naked body. It is good. Initially If you read Genesis 3, they were not aware that they were naked until after they sinned....so I suspect that part of feeling shame about being naked has to do with sin and being aware of it. God made clothing to protect Adam and Eve from the elements when they had to leave the Eden. Being naked was not a sin though.

There is nothing holy about clothing and sinful about nakedness. Everyone of us was created by God naked. We came into this world naked. We cloth babies to keep them warm and catch the contents of their diapers, not because it is shameful for a baby to be naked. Nakedness is not the problem. It is our heart and our thoughts that have an issue with nakedness. There is no great command anywhere about wearing clothing...and pulling out a single story which also included other sins (such as the gluttony of being drunk and most likely disrespect for ones parent) is not enough to base a theology on. I'd say that unless you are free of all the major sins such as selfishness, all forms of gluttony, gossip, judging others, etc..., being excessively concerned about the outward appearance of other people should be pretty low on the priority list of how you spend your thoughts and time.

Well, they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and I guess they realized it was bad to be naked, and good to be clothed. They actually clothed themselves first, using loin clothes, but then God clothed them even more, with animals skins. There was no indication that it was to protect them from the elements. If that were so, I think God would have just made us look like apes, with fur all over to protect us from the elements. While babies can be naked, since they're babies, I think we can't say the same thing about grown adults roaming around cities nude. Those people should be ashamed of themselves. I also think it's a bit unreasonable to say that a person can't talk about a "lesser" issue if he hasn't mastered all the other areas of life that are supposedly more important.
Also, there is something about clothing that is holy. We wear clothing, and animals do not. We are set-apart from the animals who don't wear clothing. When we're with Jesus in heaven, we'll all be dressed in white clothing. Also, I didn't say specifically that it was sinful to be naked, although if there's some underlying perverted reason, then that's sinful. I said it was shameful, and that's different.

Near · May 12, 2017

Dave-W said:
So was it possible that Ham was actually seeing his mother (or having sex with her)?

If you read the passage, it's about Noah(the father, not mother) being naked, and Ham is there making fun of him it seems, and his brothers cover up the nakedness of Noah, and look away while doing so. So clearly, it's about literal nakedness.

Dave-W · May 12, 2017

blackribbon said:
Or possibly watching his parents have sex...with the other brothers covering them up because it was somehow visible to others?

Perhaps - but according to the text Noah was pretty loaded at the time, possibly even passed out.

Dave-W · May 12, 2017

Near said:
If you read the passage, it's about Noah(the father, not mother) being naked,

That is where Lev 18.7 comes in, leaving the door open for it to be mom and NOT dad ....

Near · May 12, 2017

Dave-W said:
That is where Lev 18.7 comes in, leaving the door open for it to be mom and NOT dad ....

I don't quite understand what you mean. Noah was a man, and the passage clearly shows that Noah was simply nude, and this is evident because his two other sons covered him up. The mom was not in this situation, and if what you described happened, I'm pretty sure they would have straight up killed Ham.

Dave-W · May 12, 2017

Near said:
I don't quite understand what you mean.

It is simple. Moses wrote both Genesis and Leviticus - same word usage and same euphemisms.

In Lev 18 the son seeing (or having sex with) a naked mom says it is the FATHER's nakedness. So Mrs Noah being naked was NOAH's nakedness.

Near · May 12, 2017

Dave-W said:
It is simple. Moses wrote both Genesis and Leviticus - same word usage and same euphemisms.

In Lev 18 the son seeing (or having sex with) a naked mom says it is the FATHER's nakedness. So Mrs Noah being naked was NOAH's nakedness.

There's a completely different context.
Who was drunk? Noah.
Noah is being referred to, and is drunk. And the the two brothers looked away from what exactly? Their mother's nakedness? She wasn't the one that was drunk.
I think a plain reading of the text is necessary. We aren't speaking of Lev 18 here, and what in one passage may mean one thing, in another passage with a detailed description, it means something else.

Take a close look at the actual passage from Genesis 9:
21 He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent.

22Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside.

23But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness.

24When Noah awoke from his wine, he knew what his youngest son had done to him.

It seems undoubtedly clear that literal nudity is refereed to, not incest, or a mother's nakedness. Shem and Japheth covered Noah's nakedness, he is specifically named and mentioned as being the naked drunk one, not his wife. When Noah awoke, he knew what Ham did to him, not to his wife. I don't see how one comes to the conclusion that it wasn't Noah that was nude, but Noah's wife.
I don't think incest was what Shem and Japheth were turning their faces from either. It was simply their father's nakedness. Secondly, if it were their mother, then my point still stands. It's not good to be nude, and people ought to be clothed.

blackribbon · May 12, 2017

Near said:
There's a completely different context.
Who was drunk? Noah.
Noah is being referred to, and is drunk. And the the two brothers looked away from what exactly? Their mother's nakedness? She wasn't the one that was drunk.
I think a plain reading of the text is necessary. We aren't speaking of Lev 18 here, and what in one passage may mean one thing, in another passage with a detailed description, it means something else.

Take a close look at the actual passage from Genesis 9:
21 He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent.

22Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside.

23But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness.

24When Noah awoke from his wine, he knew what his youngest son had done to him.

It seems undoubtedly clear that literal nudity is refereed to, not incest, or a mother's nakedness. Shem and Japheth covered Noah's nakedness, he is specifically named and mentioned as being the naked drunk one, not his wife. When Noah awoke, he knew what Ham did to him, not to his wife. I don't see how one comes to the conclusion that it wasn't Noah that was nude, but Noah's wife.
I don't think incest was what Shem and Japheth were turning their faces from either. It was simply their father's nakedness. Secondly, if it were their mother, then my point still stands. It's not good to be nude, and people ought to be clothed.

Where else in the entire Bible does it say that nakedness is a sin? And if the act of being naked where others can see is the sin, then it was NOAH's sin...not his son's sin at all and he had no right to be angry (so another sin).

Joshua_5 · May 13, 2017

blackribbon said:
Where else in the entire Bible does it say that nakedness is a sin? And if the act of being naked where others can see is the sin, then it was NOAH's sin...not his son's sin at all and he had no right to be angry (so another sin).

Read the first chapters of Genesis again. Adam and Eve hid from God because they were naked, and God made them clothes. Nakedness in our sinful state is a shame.

Noah should not have been drunk, but his son should not have taken advantage of his drunkenness. Similar law applies today with men who seduce drunken women (it can be classified as rape). The woman shouldn't be drunk, but her drunkenness doesn't give anyone a licence to abuse her.

Joshua_5 · May 13, 2017

Paidiske said:
View attachment 196426

Well, you could always try the burkini... but no doubt someone would find something to criticise it for!

For the ultimate in modesty, there should be a version that covers the face also - just in case someone is looking!

Joshua_5 · May 13, 2017

blackribbon said:
This burkini is actually kind of see-thru while the swimsuit covers just fine.

That is so ironic! Having never seen a burkini before, I would never have guessed.

blackribbon · May 13, 2017

Joshua_5 said:
Read the first chapters of Genesis again. Adam and Eve hid from God because they were naked, and God made them clothes. Nakedness in our sinful state is a shame.

I think that is a lot of assumptions. Why would being naked be not a sin before sin came into the world...and suddenly a sin after sin? They were ashamed but that doesn't mean it was appropriate shame.

Joshua_5 said:
Noah should not have been drunk, but his son should not have taken advantage of his drunkenness. Similar law applies today with men who seduce drunken women (it can be classified as rape). The woman shouldn't be drunk, but her drunkenness doesn't give anyone a licence to abuse her.

REALLY....you think that looking at someone who is sleeping naked (got that way by themselves because of their own bad behavior) is "abuse"? ... and how did Noah even know that someone looked at him? ... what exactly was "DONE to him" that would justify that much anger. Again, the anger isn't appropriate to someone simply looking at you naked... There is more to this story that we are missing.

Joshua_5 · May 13, 2017

Near said:
That seems like a put down. I don't think you should assume that about me.

As I said before, if any man wants to wear no shirt, they have the freedom to do so, but it wasn't always the case that men didn't have to wear a shirt, or covering over their upper body.

I don't think what you said is relevant to modesty.
As for what personally bothers me, I don't think that's relevant either.
While you're posting a few pictures trying to make a point, I could provide photos of women and men, dressed immodestly in swim apparel, but I don't want to do that for obvious reasons.
What's considered proper swim attire is a social construct, and I think it's best for a christian to apply modesty anywhere including a beach, so if that means wearing more clothing, or designing one's own apparel to appear more modest, so be it. Taking a step back from cultural norms and looking at things from a perspective that aims to strive for modesty is what Christians should do. Now, I'm sorry if anyone thinks that I'm choke-holding anyone trying to force my views and religion down their throats, but I think I'm allowed to speak my view on the matter.

I do agree that many Christians could be a bit more modest, including men with other men in changerooms (I wish some would just wear a towel around their waists!). I'm not really sure how shirts on men are more modest - I did go through a stage when I was a kid where I felt a bit naked without my shirt, but men are different to women, and we should behave like it. In some societies, its even normal for women to not wear shirts. I wouldn't go this far, but there has to be a balance between practicality and modesty. So long as there's a valid (non-selfish) reason for sacrificing some modesty, its part of life.

On a slightly different note, modern society is very different from bible times. The women likely didn't have coverings for when breast feeding, there likely weren't enclosed toilets, the whole nation of Israelite men was circumcised (on a few occasions) - try getting that done for so many in a private booth! While I believe modesty is important, modern society is very sterilised from what I think is normal and healthy, and we need to be careful that our concern with modesty isn't just "being a sissy".

No issues with you speaking your views.

Joshua_5 · May 13, 2017

blackribbon said:
I think that is a lot of assumptions. Why would being naked be not a sin before sin came into the world...and suddenly a sin after sin? They were ashamed but that doesn't mean it was appropriate shame.

Why would God provide clothes, if the shame was not justified in their fallen state?

blackribbon said:
REALLY....you think that looking at someone who is sleeping naked (got that way by themselves because of their own bad behavior) is "abuse"? ... and how did Noah even know that someone looked at him? ... what exactly was "DONE to him" that would justify that much anger. Again, the anger isn't appropriate to someone simply looking at you naked... There is more to this story that we are missing.

Its abuse the same way as inappropriate contentography is abuse. Glancing at a inappropriate contentographic magazine to realise what it is before you throw it in the bin, is not abuse. Once you have realised, but continue to look through it, it is abuse. Ham was guilty of something similar to the latter.

blackribbon · May 13, 2017

Joshua_5 said:
Why would God provide clothes, if the shame was not justified in their fallen state?
Its abuse the same way as inappropriate contentography is abuse. Glancing at a inappropriate contentographic magazine to realise what it is before you throw it in the bin, is not abuse. Once you have realised, but continue to look through it, it is abuse. Ham was guilty of something similar to the latter.

He provided clothing because they were being banished from Eden into the elements of the not so perfect world. He used animal skins to keep them warm or to protect them from the sun.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree....I don't think the real sin was that he looked at his dad naked...and that certainly wasn't a sin worthy of cursing his son (Noah's grandson) for multiple generations.

Men should wear shirts at the beach

In Christ we rise

Not a newbie

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Well-Known Member

Not a newbie

In Christ we rise

In Christ we rise

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

In Christ we rise

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

In Christ we rise

Not a newbie

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Not a newbie

Active Member

Active Member

Not a newbie

Similar threads