Can you refute this argument for the permissibility of public nudity?

GaveMeJoy

Well-Known Member
Nov 28, 2019
993
672
38
San diego
✟41,977.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
GaveMeJoy said:
The Bible is very clear regarding many things are objectively sinful for all people in all times.

For the reader themselves. But not to be judged by anyone else.

1 Corinthians 2:15
The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.
Speaking the truth in love is different then standing in judgement of another person.
 
Upvote 0

NBB

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2013
3,549
1,537
44
Uruguay
✟445,478.00
Country
Uruguay
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That's a list of who you're not allowed to have sex with.

Why would be a list of persons to not have sex with, if it says 'your father, and then mother, and etc' isn't it obvious that men shouldn't sleep with their fathers? i think its too obvious, so i think this actually it is about being naked.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The argument goes:

During the exodus, 600,000 'men on foot' left Egypt and spent years wandering through a desert. There are 20 or more commands related to bathing; bathing wasn't an option. Given the multitude and insufficient water sources (cf. Num 20:11), bathing could not have been private. Bathing underwear had not yet been invented. Therefore, it follows that public nudity was not sinful.

Responses?
Bathing would not have been mixed and I still doubt they would remove their clothes and still would have special garments for bathing, more so for women but men as well. However, in the desert where water is scarce bathing practices would be different.

I'm a Canadian living and working in SEA and we have lots of water around us (most of it is surrounded by the ocean). When I go to the beach I often see women bathing there, not swimming or cooling off or anything recreational but actually washing. They do so fully dressed in a type of sarong that covers the whole body, they will only go maybe knee-deep and kneel in the water (they don't go deeper) and go through their washing routine presumably washing all places needed (I don't know the specifics) but the clothes remain on.

I also live close to the mountains and the same ritual happens anywhere there is running water, often more like a waterfall or a river where current is not dangerous but women will bath fully clothed and you would never see a post-pubescent woman bathing without clothes. (men are generally similar but get away with fewer clothes). Also, these bathing routines are never mixed, I myself may be able to see that they are bathing because there is no privacy and everything is in close proximity, but men and women still don't bath together and there is no nudity.

Western mindset is so used to a private bathroom and taking showers on demand completely naked that they don't know what it would be like not to live with those luxuries so much so that they can't think of even how to bath without being completely naked. I would actually think people rarely got naked in that world even in sex. consider Jacob marrying the wrong women and he didn't figure it out until the day after the wedding night, Lot getting so inebriated that although he was able to sexually perform he did not recognize his own daughters, or Judah thinking his daughter in law was a prostitute. These accounts speak to being covered, even in sex, not being fully naked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy Hale
Upvote 0

Nancy Hale

Active Member
Dec 29, 2019
226
157
Nevada
✟24,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You've misunderstood quite a bit, including the source you used when referring to feet.
I understand how Jesus meant washing the feet, but He also asked it as a question and I would think it safe to assume He was using an example they could all understand to explain something that was more difficult to understand. So for this purpose it would be more relevant than using bathing practices of today.
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,875
USA
✟580,110.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The argument goes:

During the exodus, 600,000 'men on foot' left Egypt and spent years wandering through a desert. There are 20 or more commands related to bathing; bathing wasn't an option. Given the multitude and insufficient water sources (cf. Num 20:11), bathing could not have been private. Bathing underwear had not yet been invented. Therefore, it follows that public nudity was not sinful.

Responses?
Sounds as though you are Roarasaching the scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

A_Thinker

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 23, 2004
11,911
9,064
Midwest
✟931,284.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Hebrew language reflects the societal norms of the time. They were extremely prudish and the language even lacked terms for body parts and functions. They resorted to euphemisms and "uncover the nakedness of ...." is one of them. It refers to "having sex with ....".
Such reinforces the idea that there was not, typically, public bathing ...
 
Upvote 0

A_Thinker

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 23, 2004
11,911
9,064
Midwest
✟931,284.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Would it be a sin if like Adam and Eve some were unaware of the sexual nature of the nudity? That is was a normal behaviour? Were all those tribal people in National Geographic 60 years ago sinners or just blissfully ignorant of insecure people's idea of sin? What if when God asked Adam and Eve who told you you were naked.. they said Christian missionaries.
Your post makes a further point regarding "nakedness" and God's people.

The scriptures make much of the undesirability of nakedness in a fallen world ... from the point of Adam and Eve's expulsion from Eden. Such that God made coverings for them.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Certainly you are not suggesting that there haven't been mass migrations of people ... ???

Not at all but it is telling that, other than the Bible, there is no physical or historical evidence of the Exodus. If it did take place it must have been on a much smaller scale and perhaps over a period of time.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Archivist
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

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,441
8,394
up there
✟303,760.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The scriptures make much of the undesirability of nakedness in a fallen world ... from the point of Adam and Eve's expulsion from Eden. Such that God made coverings for them.
At their request. It was their choice to cover up.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Archivist
Upvote 0

Thera

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2019
507
336
Montreal
✟52,709.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
In Relationship
My difficulty though is that it seems many didn't adhere to this aversion, and also that the Bible required it in ways that are surprising to me. For example, a leper's skin would have to be inspected before being declared clean. A leper might be female; priests were male...
We have male gynaecologists. It can be done with someone else present to ensure no immorality, and it's certainly not public nudity.

Certain privileges were granted only to those who were circumcised; how would you confirm this?..
Didn't you watch the movie called the Fockers, where the mother kept the evidence of his bris? Unless one was a foreigner to Israel, circumcision would be assumed, as it was celebrated for all males after birth by the entire village. For the foreigners, I guess they could get a certificate from the rabbi after it was done (unless they wanted to freak people out with proof like Gaylord's mom offered!)

And fishing was often (if not almost always) done in the nude (cf. Peter's naked fishing, though I've seen a stronger source too).
People still wore pants. Shirtlessness for males is not nudity.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
The argument goes:

During the exodus, 600,000 'men on foot' left Egypt and spent years wandering through a desert. There are 20 or more commands related to bathing; bathing wasn't an option. Given the multitude and insufficient water sources (cf. Num 20:11), bathing could not have been private. Bathing underwear had not yet been invented. Therefore, it follows that public nudity was not sinful.

Responses?


Totally ridiculous! They didn't have to disrobe to bathe---they went in clothes and all and washed their clothes as well. And there was sufficient water for the Lord God provided them all with water, including for bathing.
Exo 20:26 Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.
Exo_28:42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:
Lev_18:7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Lev_18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.
Lev_18:9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.
Lev_18:10 The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.
Lev_18:11 The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Lev_18:12 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman.
Lev_18:13 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister: for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.
Lev_18:14 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine aunt.
Lev_18:15 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Lev_18:16 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness.
Lev_18:17 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; for they are her near kinswomen: it is wickedness.
Lev_18:18 Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life time.
Lev_18:19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
Lev_20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Lev_20:17 And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.
Lev_20:18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
Lev_20:19 And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister, nor of thy father's sister: for he uncovereth his near kin: they shall bear their iniquity.
Lev_20:20 And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his uncle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless.
Lev_20:21 And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless.
And yet you still think public nudity was OK with God?
 
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

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
People still wore pants. Shirtlessness for males is not nudity.

Shirtlessness for females is not nudity depending on where you are and what you are doing. It is perfectly legal for women to breastfeed in public in 49 US states (Idaho is the only exception) and women don't have to make any effort to cover their breasts while doing so. In some states, such as New York, it is legal for women to go topless anyplace that men can go topless.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Chris V++

Associate Member
Supporter
Mar 16, 2018
1,624
1,431
Dela Where?
Visit site
✟667,601.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
How we bathe today is different from just a couple hundred years ago, so why anyone would use today's practices to make an argument about something so long ago is beyond me.
I read somewhere that further back/in deserts sand was used, just rubbing it on their skin to get off dirt and whatnot. I don't remember where I read it though.
Jesus said if you wash your feet, the whole body is clean.
I don't think applying today's standard to a past time can or should be used to prove anything.
I remember learning in grades school that desert native American tribes bathed the same way. Salt kills bacteria and they use sand to blast surfaces to clean and strip them,so it seems possible. Plus I wonder how much of the Jews' desert 'wandering' involved being stationary once camps were established. Could wandering be figurative/metaphorical? I'm sure they were nomadic but did they pack up and move on daily?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy Hale
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,441
8,394
up there
✟303,760.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The scripture doesn't say that God provided coverings at Adam/Eve's request ...
They were the ones who tipped God off by hiding their nakedness. Had they not done so He wouldn't have bothered.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The scripture doesn't say that God provided coverings at Adam/Eve's request ...
Adam and Eve had already made garments of leaves; God replaced them with garments of animal skin.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
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

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
9,576
7,775
63
Martinez
✟893,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The argument goes:

During the exodus, 600,000 'men on foot' left Egypt and spent years wandering through a desert. There are 20 or more commands related to bathing; bathing wasn't an option. Given the multitude and insufficient water sources (cf. Num 20:11), bathing could not have been private. Bathing underwear had not yet been invented. Therefore, it follows that public nudity was not sinful.

Responses?
We may take our lead from Arab women of today who go in fully clothed.
dead-sea-israel-june-7-2014-a-group-of-arab-women-in-traditional-arab-E2CJJ9.jpg
 
Upvote 0