Christian Nudists

Purity Clarity Parkes

Active Member
Jun 4, 2017
69
66
34
Melbourne
✟15,369.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
When I read Genesis 3, I get no sense that God thought that it was sinful to be nude, and God seemed perfectly at ease with them being nude in the Garden of Eden. After eating the fruit, Adam and Eve simply "realized" that they were naked, and covered themselves up. This tipped God off that they had eaten the fruit, but there is no statement that nudity was sinful and against God's wishes. Sure, God makes clothes for Adam and Eve, but gives them no Commandment that they have to wear those clothes. The clothes seem to have the sole function of preventing the "shame" of embarrassment.

The quotes you give don't really show that nudity is sinful. They do show that nudity can be embarrassing, but those just seem to be cultural attitudes or symbolic statements, not statements of morality.


eudaimonia,

Mark
An excellent argument, Mr Mark. You really must teach my philosophy class to construct coherent, decisive arguments.

However, I have a series of questions to pose to yourself.

A) Would you immediately cease being a Nudist if you were to learn that it is a sin?

B) Is shame brought about by that which is not sinful (aside from the Devil’s attempts to make you feel this way about that which God deems right)? If not, would that mean that Adam and Eve were ashamed because their nudity was sinful?

C) Are not the nouns ‘shame’ and ‘embarrassment’ synonyms?

D) What evidence is present to suggest that the aforementioned scriptures are only, ‘...cultural attitudes or symbolic statements’ (end of Paragraph Two) and not moral statements?

Thank you very kindly, brother. I trust that the Lord will give us the wisdom and grace to do that which is right in his sight; and that we shall be able to have a genial debate on what appears to divide some members of the Church.

May God Bless you and your Family.
Have a nice day ~
~ Sincerely Purity Clarity Parkes
 
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Shame is normal and healthy in our state, you just don't want to be without feeling any shame doing things naked in front of people or sexual things. That is just not alright.
I don't mean that you would feel shame doing things with your wife for example, that is intimate and ok, but just exposing yourself to the public is another...
No... shame is not "normal"... shame is never God's will for His children... ever.

Shame always indicates that something is wrong.
 
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
First I am not a nudist, but I fail to see the harm. How are they inflicting their nudity on anyone when they only live this way in their own home or at private locations where everyone willingly participates?
By that logic, there would be nothing wrong with them holding orgies either, as long as they are in private and everyone willingly participates.
As I read Jon's comments, he's not equating nudism with sex... but he is pointing out that there's an error in Comana's argument in support of nudism. And on that point, he's right. If nudism is "OK" for the reason that everyone "willingly" participates, then we are left in a position where other activities may also be excused by the same point... that there is "willing participation."

So, Jon, I would never defend nudism based on "willing participation"... but rather on the simple fact that the Bible--honestly and carefully interpreted--does not forbid social nudity. The Bible does forbid illicit sexual activity. So, that is the basis upon which we can allow social nudity but still condemn orgies.

David
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
An excellent argument, Mr Mark. You really must teach my philosophy class to construct coherent, decisive arguments.

However, I have a series of questions to pose to yourself.

A) Would you immediately cease being a Nudist if you were to learn that it is a sin?
Of the committed Christian nudists that I know, ALL would stop if it could be demonstrated from God's Word that it is sin.

B) Is shame brought about by that which is not sinful (aside from the Devil’s attempts to make you feel this way about that which God deems right)? If not, would that mean that Adam and Eve were ashamed because their nudity was sinful?
Shame is always an indication that something is wrong. Shame is never God's will for His children. It is never God's will for us to be ashamed of our bodies, for that shame is literally an insult to our Creator (as it was when Adam and Eve first sinned).

Interesting that you say, "(aside from the Devil’s attempts to make you feel this way about that which God deems right)" as if that was just a corner case and doesn't count in the discussion... because THAT is exactly what happened (I believe) in Eden after Adam and Eve sinned. God asked Adam, "Who told you that you were naked?" The only entity that could be is Satan... he was there; he had opportunity; he had motive (to attack the Creator); and Eve had already decided to listen to him and follow his counsel. What better way to attack the goodness of the Creator than to incite the image-bearers to be ashamed of that very "image"?

No, their nudity was not shameful. The fact that they felt fear (and shame? the text doesn't say so...) because they were naked was the direct result of their disobedience to God (not their bodies). Their shameful behavior was in rejecting the command of God rather than continuing to exist in the form that God created them... without clothing... without shame... without sin.

The other erroneous assumption behind your question is this... "Guilty by association" is never a reliable way to determine whether something is sinful or not. That's simply not biblically sound... ever. If we want to declare something to be wrong, we need to be able to support it with direct biblical statements. And in this case, the "association" itself is really weak... because it's self-evident that their sin had nothing to do with their nakedness. And we have a direct statement that God intended for them to be naked, and that He approved of that condition, for it was exactly how He created them... and He even made a point of including the observation in His word (Genesis 2:25).

C) Are not the nouns ‘shame’ and ‘embarrassment’ synonyms?
Adam and Eve are never described by God or by themselves as "ashamed" in Genesis... that's something we read into the text. The only place that "shame" is mentioned was that they were naked and "UN-ashamed." When Adam sinned, he explained his actions by saying that he was "afraid," not "ashamed."

This makes any assertions that we might make based on the "shame" in the account to be VERY weak assertions.

"Embarrassment" isn't even in the text, so it has no place in our discussion except as a possible characterization of what they may have been feeling. Even that's a stretch, though, since the entire concept of "embarrassment" is something of a socially derived feeling... that requires societal standards and expectations to define. Since it was just the two of them in all of humanity, I don't think that was even possible yet.
D) What evidence is present to suggest that the aforementioned scriptures are only, ‘...cultural attitudes or symbolic statements’ (end of Paragraph Two) and not moral statements?
Culture is never the measure of morality. If we can't find it in God's Word, then we have no business claiming something is immoral.

I think your question has to be turned back on you, though... what evidence do you have that there is any moral directive in the account of the sin of Adam and Eve?

For something as common as our bodies (everyone has one) and something as common as clothing (it started right here in this account), it is utterly incomprehensible to suggest that God didn't know how to directly tell us His expectations regarding clothing and nudity, so that He left it to us to just "figure out" by inferences, associations, and assumptions.

I like to say it this way...

Narrative is not Imperative.
Narrative without Imperative is not Normative.

In other words, just because a story is in the Bible doesn't mean that we have a moral obligation to mimic the story in any way. Sometimes God gives a story, then issues a command... but if He does not, then we need not treat the story as a moral command.

Here's an example of a Narrative+Imperative (story+command) right in the Creation account.

Genesis 2:22-24
God created Eve from Adam's side (vss 22-23). God then gives the command (vs. 24) establishing the marriage and the nuclear family (husband/wife). He even commands them to have sex ("one-flesh").

That's Narrative+Imperative. That's How God uses stories to give commands. And if we don't find the command, we cannot assert that the story should be taken as a command.

Can you think of any theological or moral teaching that does not follow this approach to discerning morality?
 
Upvote 0

RestoreTheJoy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 13, 2018
5,088
1,643
Passing Through
✟450,057.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
This may be strange to most people, but I would almost always rather be completely nude, especially in nature. I'm 27 and I've been somewhat of a closet nudist for the last 10 years of my life. Theres nothing sexual about it for me, it just makes me feel happy and free. I'm never naked in front of anyone who is offended by it. It's usually just my wife and close friends who aren't bothered by nudity.

My question is, do you think there's something wrong with me? Is this sinful behavior, or do you find nothing wrong with it? Thanks.

Joel
Well, that's fine, but there are also laws against public indecency. You are required - as a Christian - to obey "Caesar" too. So keep your activities to yourself, and there should be no issue.

Honestly, I think it's odd, strictly from a health standpoint. I don't want to come sit on furniture that someone has had his junk and his bottom directly on, due to what else might be lurking there.
 
Upvote 0

Darkhorse

just horsing around
Aug 10, 2005
10,078
3,977
mid-Atlantic
Visit site
✟288,141.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well, that's fine, but there are also laws against public indecency. You are required - as a Christian - to obey "Caesar" too. So keep your activities to yourself, and there should be no issue.

Honestly, I think it's odd, strictly from a health standpoint. I don't want to come sit on furniture that someone has had his junk and his bottom directly on, due to what else might be lurking there.

The OP specifies that he is never nude where others would be offended, just with his "wife and close friends". Do you consider that public indecency?

Almost all nudists go out of their way to not offend non-nudists. Beaches where nudists gather are either well-marked to warn non-nudists, or so remote and well-hidden that virtually no one goes there unless they know about the nude use. Nudist resorts are also well-marked and shielded from public view. Nudists don't mind being seen, but they don't want to inadvertently offend anyone.

As for the health issue, nudists always carry a towel to sit on, which is mostly symbolic, since they keep very clean. They have to - they can't hide dirty parts in clothes.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One could ask: "What is the attraction of clothes?"
When I was doing construction work we had to wear clothing for protection. Even though they were hot to wear. I try to do yard work now in shorts and I run into all sorts of problems with injury and allergic reactions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I believe, that when one enters into a church / a Holy place and kneels in front of God, to pray, to celbrate mass, to worship Him, together as a congregation or by oneself in this place then, we should do so with the utmost respect, honour, dignity, and modesty. We should be clothed. Fully concentrating on God.

This would be impossible with the congregation standing there butt naked with all their bits on show!

Please, dont tell me the priest / celebrant is butt naked too!
 
Upvote 0

Darkhorse

just horsing around
Aug 10, 2005
10,078
3,977
mid-Atlantic
Visit site
✟288,141.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
When I was doing construction work we had to wear clothing for protection. Even though they were hot to wear. I try to do yard work now in shorts and I run into all sorts of problems with injury and allergic reactions.


I agree completely. Construction sites are no place for nudity.

The workers wear hard hats, gloves, eye & ear protection, fall protection, steel-toed shoes, and other protective clothing for several reasons: power tools, welding, sharp objects, heavy objects, chemicals, electricity, heat, flames, and more.
Even with protective clothing, construction remains one of the more dangerous occupations.


I have worked for years in chemical labs, which always had eyewash fountains and emergency showers. Safety eyeglasses were always worn, often with chemical gloves and extra clothing (lab coats).

Ironically, lab safety also has a reverse side to clothing.
At the beginning of every semester, the professor gave a safety lecture, which included:
"If you get a dangerous chemical splashed all over you, your clothes are coming OFF! Deal with it!"


Certain sports (football, baseball, rodeo events, ) as well as cold are other situations where nudity is impractical and/or dangerous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Darkhorse

just horsing around
Aug 10, 2005
10,078
3,977
mid-Atlantic
Visit site
✟288,141.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I believe, that when one enters into a church / a Holy place and kneels in front of God, to pray, to celbrate mass, to worship Him, together as a congregation or by oneself in this place then, we should do so with the utmost respect, honour, dignity, and modesty. We should be clothed. Fully concentrating on God.

This would be impossible with the congregation standing there butt naked with all their bits on show!

Please, dont tell me the priest / celebrant is butt naked too!


I agree, to a certain extent. God deserves our utmost respect, and our worship should be focused totally on Him, not anything else.

If people feel that clothing is essential to their worship, they should certainly wear it. Most do.

However, some people do not feel the need to hide their bodies from each other, and hiding them from God is totally futile!

God designed our bodies, and sends every person into the world wearing His Divinely-designed suit. If this were not His will, it wouldn't happen.

Difficult as it may be to believe, nudists are not distracted from worship by everyone being nude. They are totally accustomed to it.
Are you distracted by women in church having their faces exposed? Some religions and cultures are; are they wrong?

While there's nothing wrong with wearing clothes, are you implying to God that His designer outfit is offensive? Do you really want to go there?


Yes the pastor leading the worship is also nude. You can see him in the video here and make fun of his fat belly, as others have done. (Great Christian charity, right?)

 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I believe, that when one enters into a church / a Holy place and kneels in front of God,... we should do so with the utmost respect, honour, dignity, and modesty. We should be clothed. Fully concentrating on God.
Exactly why do you consider any part of the human body to be disrespectful, dishonorable, undignified or immodest? They are--each and every part--designed and made by God. How could they possibly dishonor Him simply by being visible?

This would be impossible with the congregation standing there butt naked with all their bits on show!
This unfounded assertion reveals not the truth about body parts or worship, but rather your own distorted perception of those body parts.

If God is not offended by those "bits" while a person is in the shower, why would He be offended by them in a worship setting (have you ever sung praises or prayed to God while in the shower?)? If God is not offended by visible body parts, should we as Christians be offended by visible body parts?
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Even with protective clothing, construction remains one of the more dangerous occupations.
That is why I quit after 20 years. A ceiling fell on me and I was not hurt but it made me realize how dangerous the work was.

We know that 40,000 years ago they first started to make sowing needles out of bone. This was when man was able to come up out of Africa to the colder climate in the north. The Bible says that Adam and Eve first clothed themselves with Fig. This most likely means that they used the fiber from the fig tree to make clothing for themselves. We know that fig tree clothing is more decoration then protection. That is why they talk about fig leaf religion. We can assume that the clothing God made for man was a protective covering. To study the history of clothing is difficult because it just does not hold up over time. When they find human remains the clothing has decomposed and leaves so thin of a layer that they can not make much out of it.
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Exactly why do you consider any part of the human body to be disrespectful, dishonorable, undignified or immodest? They are--each and every part--designed and made by God. How could they possibly dishonor Him simply by being visible?


This unfounded assertion reveals not the truth about body parts or worship, but rather your own distorted perception of those body parts.

If God is not offended by those "bits" while a person is in the shower, why would He be offended by them in a worship setting (have you ever sung praises or prayed to God while in the shower?)? If God is not offended by visible body parts, should we as Christians be offended by visible body parts?

Being naked in private singing to God is totally different to being naked with scores of others, singing to God. Its undignified and disrespectful. You are putting your desires before those of God. You are idolising your nakedness first. Putting your needs first.

A place of worship, a house of God, demands respect.

All through Christian history people were clothed when going into God's house.

Running around naked in God's house is a 'modern' idea.
 
Upvote 0

holo

former Christian
Dec 24, 2003
8,992
751
✟77,794.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Being naked in private singing to God is totally different to being naked with scores of others, singing to God. Its undignified and disrespectful. You are putting your desires before those of God. You are idolising your nakedness first. Putting your needs first.

A place of worship, a house of God, demands respect.

All through Christian history people were clothed when going into God's house.

Running around naked in God's house is a 'modern' idea.
God has a house?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dayhiker

Mature veteran
Sep 13, 2006
15,557
5,287
MA
✟220,067.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
If its OK to worship God naked in private then its OK to worship God naked in public. I don't believe God has a different standard for public and private. At least I don't recall that anywhere in the Bible.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Being naked in private singing to God is totally different to being naked with scores of others, singing to God. Its undignified and disrespectful. You are putting your desires before those of God. You are idolising your nakedness first. Putting your needs first.

A place of worship, a house of God, demands respect.

All through Christian history people were clothed when going into God's house.

Running around naked in God's house is a 'modern' idea.
You seem very sure of your position.

Do you know how much scripture there is to support your assertions?

Exactly none.

Have you ever done a serious and honest study of God's word specifically on this topic? I have. And to my surprise, there's nothing there to support what you and I both have been told all of our lives about nakedness.

And I sure hope that as a Christian you are more committed to God's Word than you are to a traditional (but unbiblical) beliefs.
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Exodus 28:42
You shall make for them linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. They shall reach from the hips to the thighs;

Exodus 20:26
And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.’

1 Corinthians 12:23
And on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty,

Revelation 16:15
(“Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!”)
 
Upvote 0

MyChainsAreGone

Image Bearer
Apr 18, 2009
690
510
Visit site
✟36,686.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
L2W,

Thanks for your response and use of Scriptures.

These were the passages that I too had always heard that taught us to "stay clothed."

But that's why I used the phrase "serious and honest" about studying this from the Scriptures... when studied seriously and truly honestly (being willing for the passages to NOT support our own presuppositions), I found that they failed to support any sort of nudity taboo.

Let me illustrate... by commenting on each of the scriptures you referenced.

Exodus 28:42
You shall make for them linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. They shall reach from the hips to the thighs;
This is a command that the passage itself limits to the Aaronic priestly line. Not all Israel had to follow it... not all the Levites, even. And interestingly, it only applied to the Aaronic priests when they were serving at the altar. That's clear from Exodus 28:1-4. It is reiterated in Exodus 28:40-43.

So... this is not a passage that teaches about clothing for all people at all time... it was just for the Aaronic priests and only while they were serving at the altar.

Exodus 20:26
And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.’
This one was more general (applied to everyone), but when you ask some "why?" questions, the purpose and meaning is more difficult to nail down.

If this were a particular rejection of any exposure of the body, then ALL steps should have been banned. Yet, it was only steps up to an altar. Why? The answer has to be something that is about the Altar and what's going on there.

And then, there's the meaning of the word "nakedness." Why would that word be used when the people weren't actually naked?

Let me address the second question first... The Hebrew word, ervah is the word translated here as "nakedness." I've thoroughly studied this word's usage throughout the OT... and the consistent usage of it is that it's not just "simple exposure" of body parts, but also the active usage of the exposed body parts... and that usage is usually sexual.

Now the first question... why was the "steps" prohibition only applied to an altar? I think the answer here lies in the fact that the nations around Israel at that time engaged in orgiastic idol worship. God gave Israel a number of laws designed to contrast their worship of YHWH with the false worship of their neighbors.

So, the most compelling answer to the "why" questions is that God did not want the worship by lay people (or the priests) to even hint at being like the orgiastic worship of their neighbors.

This means therefore that these passages are not about some sort of hostility that God holds towards the exposed human form, but about the purity of His people's worship.

1 Corinthians 12:23
And on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty,
First of all here, the word translated "unpresentable" doesn't actually mean that... the word is aschema which really just means "ugly" for all practical purposes (a = not or bad; schema = design or form). So... some body parts are not as visually attractive as others... we can all acknowledge that. And, to Paul's point, those "ugly" body parts have become all the more important to use because of their function.

But if you would suggest that this passage defends or commands the covering of those "ugly" body parts, then you'd also have to conclude that Paul is teaching that there are people in the body of Christ (the church) which also should be "hidden" and not acknowledged publicly. But that notion is exactly contrary to what Paul is teaching! He's actually suggesting that we bestow greater honor (and acknowledgement/visibility) on people who would not get it naturally as a result of their function within the church!

So... this passage cannot be teaching that certain body parts are "unpresentable" or must be covered.

Revelation 16:15
(“Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!”)
The really odd thing about this passage is that rather than proving that public nudity is wrong, it actually proves that public nudity was pretty normal when Jesus spoke these words.

You see, people typically owned only a very few garments... many times, only one (and Jesus told people that if they had two, they should be willing to share with someone who had none). And in order to not soil that one garment they had, when working in the fields (as in Jesus' word picture here), they typically worked nude while doing the hot and sweaty work. That way, they could just jump into a stream or river at the end of their work day, air dry, and put their clean clothes back on.

It evidently was also common enough that they didn't even bother taking their clothes with them to the fields where they were working... or else Jesus' words would make no sense. Why would Jesus need to tell people to keep their clothes with them while in the field if it was not pretty common for people to be working in the field without them?

It's also worth noting that the translation you quoted is adding something to the text when it says "keeping his garments ON"... because the original text just says "keeping his garments"... meaning "keeping them close by" rather than back at the house where the thief is ransacking their belongings. Jesus was not telling them that they had to work clothed, but that it was wiser to have your clean clothes close by while working naked! It wasn't a problem to be "exposed," it was a problem to get caught unprepared by the thief (THE point Jesus was trying to make) and for that to be obvious to everyone else because you're stuck wandering around without any clothes when you were not working and when most everyone else was clothed. Jesus' point? Don't be unprepared. It was NOT a teaching about the morality of nudity.

I'm sorry for the long responses, but it so happens that these passages have been misused for so long to promote a nudity-taboo that it takes a bit more than "but that passage doesn't really mean what you think it means." to make the case.

Oddly enough, it wasn't just these four passages that fell apart under close scrutiny and failed to support a biblical "nudity-taboo," but EVERY passage ever used to promote a biblical "nudity-taboo" teaching fell apart in the same way when subjected to honest interpretational scrutiny.

And one more point... it's very important to go beyond just the English translations of the Scriptures and look at the original language words, because the English translations sometimes introduce a bias of what the translator thinks it means, rather than just what the original text says.

I've done a paper on the word ervah in Hebrew that you can review if you like... it deals more fully with both of the first 2 passages you mentioned.

Nakedness in the OT

I've also done a paper that deals with last two passages... it exposed how modern translations have great difficulty in transparently translating passages that have anything to do with nudity unless it seems to portray an antagonism towards it. It is interesting to observe that the KJV is a lot less squeamish than the more recent translations.

Squeamish Translating

Read them and see if you think I'm not being faithful the the actual meaning of the Scriptural texts. If you feel I'm in error, I'm happy to hear any correction.

David
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Exodus 28:42
You shall make for them linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. They shall reach from the hips to the thighs;

Exodus 20:26
And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.’
Those instructions applied ONLY to the priests.
 
Upvote 0