Christian Nudism

[Lord Herdsetk]

I think its interesting that Adam and Eve being nude in front of each other was intimacy at first, but then later it was shamefulness after they ate of the tree of knowledge. Who were they to be ashamed of? The only beings that would know they were naked were themselves and God. If Adam and Eve were intimate, and God created them (therefore knowing EVERYTHING about their unmentionables as well as the rest of their bodies), how could it be sinful?

It was more so their knowledge that they were exposed that was shameful to them than them actually being exposed. In other words, if you're with a group of people who aren't going to abuse the fact that their exposed to each other, I can't really say its wrong. I wouldn't want to do that, but I don't see how its morally wrong.

Let's look at an example.

Let's say you have a group of people secluded from society who have been raised nudists from birth. They have no knowledge whatsoever of people wearing clothes. They do not engage in any kind of sexual immorality. Are they living in sin?

 

[timbo3]

Yes, it is indeed interesting that after Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, that there would be drastic changes, such as their conscience now cognizant of their nakedness and wrong. Prior to their crossing the boundary concerning the "tree of knowledge of good and bad", they saw no need to cover themselves.(Gen 2:17, 25) However, imperfection, as a result of disobedience to God's simple command, now brought upon Adam and Eve a realization of their nudity, setting in motion a series of significant events.

The immediate effect of their transgression was shame. Hence they used fig leaves to make loin coverings for themselves. Both Adam and his wife went into hiding in between the trees of the garden when they heard the voice of Jehovah God. Upon being directly questioned by God as to what she had done, the woman stated that she had eaten because of being deceived by the serpent. In pronouncing sentence upon her, Jehovah indicated that pregnancy and the giving of birth to offspring would be attended by increased pain; she would crave for her husband, and he would dominate her.(Gen 3:7-13, 16)

In imperfection, our desires are often distorted rather than properly balanced and gauged by the righteous standards set by our Creator, Jehovah God. Thus, before the defection of Adam and Eve, though nude, sexual desire was not a noted desire. However, after Adam and Eve's rebellion, this changed immensely, with even angelic spirits coming to the earth, materializing as humans for the sole purpose of having relations with "the daughters of men."(Gen 6:4)

The seeing of "flesh", especially of a woman, created a strong sexual urge. That is why Jesus gave this directive: "I say to you that everyone that keeps on looking at a woman (even though fully clothed) so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."(Matt 5:28) How much more would this create a wrong sexual desire when naked, and if the opportunity becomes available, use it to commit "adultery".

Our Creator, Jehovah God, is fully aware of the changes that occurred as a result of Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden. It is just like a car, at one time flawless when manufactured, now has some faulty front end parts, causing it to wander all over the road. Until a proper repair is made, the car exhibits the need to maintain a strong handle on the steering wheel by the driver, constantly making needed adjustments to offset the dangerous wandering. Our inborn sexual desires, unless carefully held in check, can easily get out of hand through visual means especially for males toward females.

Under the Mosaic Law, the high priest was to ensure that his "private parts" were not exposed during his walking up to the altar.(Ex 20:26; "private parts", Hebrew ervah, meaning nudity, especially the genitals or prudenda [Mid-17th century. From Latin , from, ultimately, pudere “to make or feel ashamed” (source of English impudent ). Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005]) Imperfection has brought a lack of self-restraint or erotica and therefore inappropriate contentography is as big some major sports, with literally thousands of websites.

The apostle John wrote that a true Christian should "not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world."(1 John 2:15, 16)

 

[Balugon]

It is worthy of mention that Adam and Eve tried to hide themselves from God in the Garden. This would show that they weren't thinking 100% clearly. And if trying to hide from God was illogical, then putting on clothing to try to hide themselves may also not have been based in truth. As for the realization of being "naked", there is more than one meaning to the word naked. After eating the fruit, they had a much more glaring and noticeable nakedness that happened to them, and that was that they were now not protected from any wrath God may have justly chose to bring upon them for their sin. Before that, they had been perfectly safe and had no knowledge of what being on a person's bad-side could entail.

Also, Adam and Eve would have had to have sexual interest in each other to some degree from the beginning, because God gave them the command upon creating them to 'go multiply.' And seeing as how Adam and Eve were still the only two humans after the initial Fall, there is no reason they would have needed to put on clothing as they were married, so the clothing being put on cannot be explained from that.

It also worthy of note that Christ died so that we might start to grow back in our holiness again. What the first Adam lost in the Garden, the last Adam regained at the cross. We have the Holy Spirit inside of us, the same Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead, which is more than enough power to help us walk in holiness. We are a new creation, no longer slaves to sin. And we have been given 'the mind of Christ.' We are called to clean up this world so that it looks beautiful like the Garden again. Part of my calling is to restore the respect and innocence toward the human body that was in the beginning. It is able to be viewed innocently; you would be surprised how strongly non-Christians nudists react to people who are creepers who stare too much at certain body parts while visiting the nudist park. Needless to say, you don't see them at the nudist park again. And if non-Christian nudists can act that righteously, it only goes to show that Christians should be able to stand at an even higher position.

As for Christ and modesty, Christ did not walk around in his glory either. He could have, but he chose not to. He had a mission to accomplish, and having to face the officials/police of his day because of nudity simply would not have been worth the extra lives that were changed when he was able to minister to them. Paul said: "7 ... Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak." (1 Corinth. 8:7-9). While Paul knew of a freedom, he chose not to exercise it around those who couldn't handle it. But the freedom still existed. In the same way, there is nothing wrong with nudity. Male doctors seeing female genitalia on a regular basis, and male nurses working in the baby delivery ward see the same as well, and we don't hear of unimaginable amounts of rape cases. Why is this? Because God made the body and it isn't as sexual as American society plays it up as. I bet those gynocologists go home sometimes and say "The last thing on earth I want to see right now is another [female genitalia]." If the sight of something is always around and is part of daily life, it becomes part of natural life. Like the trees, people pass by tons of them every day and don't think twice about it. But because society has made the human body taboo, it becomes this big fiasco when it shouldn't be. As well with what Paul said, I don't exercise my freedom around everyone. I try to be respectful of other people, even if they are in my own apartment. My friends mean more to me than that small freedom does. Though I will say, it's getting used to nudity being around that helps to set guys free from being so hung up on female body parts, and so it certainly is an advantage when friends in general start to realize this truth and are able to grow to a new level in holiness and security concerning the opposite sex.

And, seeing as how there are so many Christians now, we have the opportunity to diversify our ministries to be able to focus more on different people groups. Which means I can focus a bit more on people who are okay with nudity, and the more conservative Christians can focus more on the more conservative audience of people. No ground necessarily lost.

 

[Lord Herdsetk]

I would like still like to hear your opinion on my example though, about the group of nudists who had never been exposed to the rest of society.

From what little I've heard from nudists, they say that once everyone is naked its kind of like no one is naked. It seems like those desires kind of melt away, or remain the same, so I've been told. Regardless if this is true or not, sexual desire is a paradox. Its impure to have strong sexual desires for a woman, but that's exactly thing that helps drive two people together. Surely there is a difference between earnestly yearning for a woman and simply lusting after her. You're a married man, how did that happen? If there is no difference, it makes God's wish for the human race to go out and multiply a paradox. We have to have sex to multiply but we sin if we are sexually drawn to a woman.

I won't deny that lust happens often in men, myself included, but it kind of makes the nudist = more sexual desire point moot. It happens regardless. If you're with a group of people who don't abuse the fact that they're all exposed, is it worse than being in a group of attractive women who are clothed? I'm really not defending nudism or attacking it, I'm just trying to give us all food for thought.

On a side note, how much have we been able to figure out about the Nephilim? They're giants, but who are they from? Some theories say angels, but some say Seth. The Qumran fragment 4Q417 refers to them as 'children of Seth'. I guess angels can take human form and have sex with humans but it seems odd.

 

[Balugon]

Its impure to have strong sexual desires for a woman

First off, I believe a lot of Christians misinterpret Christ when they read about lust. While lust does mean desire, one can desire something in more than one way. A person can look at a cheeseburger and start to get hungry, but it doesn't that the person is going to act upon that hunger. The hunger was just a biological response to some degree. BUT, a person can also look at a cheeseburger and say "I WANT THAT CHEESEBURGER NOW!" and they can actively want that cheeseburger and choose to start plan how they might get that cheeseburger. When the free-will/conscious mind takes up the biological feeling/urge and starts to act on it, this is the kind of lust that Jesus was talking about, imo. So when a guy sees a woman, if he becomes a bit sexually aroused, that is a biological response, and it has nothing to do with choices. It is when the guy goes from merely acknowledging the arousal's existence to changing over and starting to say "Man, if that woman would come over here, I'd show her a good time. heh heh," that the sexuality involved becomes sin. The man chose to truly pursue and want the woman, even if it was only in his mind, and so Jesus was saying "If you're willing to have sex with her if the opportunity were to come up (or you're choosing to have sexual fantasies about her), it's no different than doing it in real life as far as sin is concerned." In the Gospels, we see Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane (however it's spelled) and he is saying 'God, if it's possible, let this cup pass from me.' Jesus didn't want to go through the horrible suffering he was going to (or whatever it was he was talking to God about), but he died on the cross for us anyways. It wasn't that his body was cringing at the thought of what was in store for him that was sin, it was Jesus' reaction to his body/emotions, it was the choices Jesus made, that determined whether Jesus sinned or not.

And honestly, if you're at an appropriate nudist park (all AANR parks are supposed to be, because AANR focuses on having family-friendly parks), you will have a very good reason as a man not to start to think too many sexual thoughts, ...if you know what I mean. And so guys have a natural deterrant to some degree while at the parks, because they don't want to be caught being the one who has an ... And I've never seen another guy with one while I was there. That is one of the biggest things that clicks in one's mind on a person's first visit, if they are at a big enough nudist park where there is a decent number of men and women- that this supposed "super sexual urge" that is supposed to happen doesn't, and that they don't have "the guy issue" the whole time they are there. It's rather convincing evidence for only a day worth of exposure to a new environment. And with mentioning that there are appropriate nudist parks, I will mention, just like there are false churches, there are also false nudist parks. Some parks and resorts will call themselves "nudist" as a mask for sexual activities, often swingers clubs (partner-swapping), and so people have to be careful that they go to a resort that has a good reputation. Typically the first place to start is to make sure the club is listed on AANR's (American Association for Nude Recreation) website, and then probably ask on one of the major nudist message-boards what nudists' opinions of the club have been.

And as for the Nephilim, I'm not totally sure where they came from. I believe that Pharoah's magicians were able to water into blood, and if they could do that, and blood has DNA, then it would make sense that demons could create/fashion human sex cells to impregnate a woman if they wanted to. But I don't waste a huge amount of time on it.

EDIT: And as for your example of the secluded people, I'd simply point back to Adam and Eve. God didn't have a problem with it; it was his original design. God never changed; we chose to start covering up. But we have the freedom in Christ to do things God's way again (and because people's prayers help holiness/appropriateness stay in sinners too, they also can behave appropriately), and so I don't see any issues there. There used to be more nude tribes before the Christian missionaries showed up and forced them to put clothes on. I've also heard that in different parts of the world, a woman covers different parts of her body if she is caught nude. I've heard that some women will cover like just their bellybutton, while others might only cover their face. So apparently the concepts of modesty and shame vary.

 

[Lord Herdsetk]

That's pretty much my thoughts Balugon, regarding action vs reaction. My body is going to be aroused if I see a pretty woman, but I can stop myself from thinking about having sex with her or the like.

 

[Soulgazer]

That's an opinion too. Another is that you are not truly "saved" until you can look upon a person and see neither clothing nor flesh, but the motivating spirit inside. Is it the flesh that is evil, or is it the mind that looks upon the flesh as an object of desire?

 

[timbo3]

On a side note, how much have we been able to figure out about the Nephilim? They're giants, but who are they from? Some theories say angels, but some say Seth. The Qumran fragment 4Q417 refers to them as 'children of Seth'. I guess angels can take human form and have sex with humans but it seems odd.

The Hebrew word Nephilim literally means "Fellers; Those Who Cause Others to Fall Down." It evidently stems from the causative form of the Hebrew verb na·phal´ (fall) as found, for example, in 2 Kings 3:19; 19:7. The King James Bible reads at Genesis 6:4 as "giants".

At Genesis 6:1, it is noted that "when men started to grow in numbers on the surface of the ground and daughters were born to them", then it occurred that "the sons of the [true] God began to notice the daughters of men, that they were good-looking; and they went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose."(Gen 6:2)

Who were these "sons of the true God " ? It is not humans, for our Creator, Jehovah God, placed within humans a sexual desire as a way of procreation. Thus, these "sons of the true God" are angels that came to the earth, materializing and taking on human bodies.

Genesis 6:4 says that "the sons of the [true] God continued to have relations with the daughters of men and they bore sons to them, they were the mighty ones who were of old, the men of fame." These "sons of the true God" or angels, violated that which was natural.

Jude wrote of "the angels that did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place", and then saying that these angels "had committed fornication excessively and gone out after flesh for unnatural use" just as the inhabitants of Sodom and Gommorah.(Jude 6, 7) These angels materialized for wrong reasons, not to accomplish the will of God, but for their personal sexual satisfaction with "the daughters of men". The result of this unnatural union were Nephilim, giant children who caused ordinary humans to fall down in death.

The apostle Peter wrote of the angels (or "spirits in prison", 1 Pet 3:19) "who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days."(1 Pet 3:20) Thus, before the flood of Noah's day, a number of angels left their "original position" in heaven to materialize as men in order to ' commit fornication excessively ', going "after flesh for unnatural use", bringing forth a crop of rebellious and wicked giant sons that went throughout the land causing death and destruction.

These Nephilim though died when the Noachian Flood came in 2370 B.C.E., and the materialized angels returned to the spirit realm, never able to materialize as humans again, for Jehovah God now prevented these wicked angels or demons from doing so, imprisoning or restricting them.(1 Pet 3:19)

 

[Soulgazer]

@Timbo;
There is also a theory that postulates that this myth comes down from the contact of Homosapiens and Neanderthals who were coexisting and competing for resources in the peninsula area. Earlier theories that the Neanderthal were exterminated are giving way to a theory that they were homogenized by interbreeding. It is quite possible that some Neanderthal tribes looked upon Homosapien women as more attractive than their own species, particularly where the two species were commonly in contact with each other.

@Nudismingeneral:

Clothes are no more essential than having a woman wearing a burka. We are entirely free of the law, which means that we get choices based on societal acceptance and our own common sense. If you feel you must live by the Law, you lose the price of Christ. Don't place yourself back in bondage.

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]121.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He who is enslaved without his volition, will be able to be freed. He who has been liberated by the grace of his master, and has sold himself [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]([/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]back[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]) [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]into slavery, shall no longer be able to be freed.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif](Ex 21:5-6 [but also Lev 25:10[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]], Ph 116; hyperlinear) ~Philip

[/FONT] [SIZE=-1]21:7[/SIZE]That disciple therefore whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. So when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his coat about him (for he was naked), and cast himself into the sea.~John

 

[Cactus Jack]

Interesting note- I find well dressed women far more sexually attractive than naked women. Likely because I have known nudity my entire life, and in it never any sex. Yet dressed people commonly engage in risque behavior.

Is there a correlation? I dunno.

You tell me.

 

[Soulgazer]

Interesting note- I find well dressed women far more sexually attractive than naked women. Likely because I have known nudity my entire life, and in it never any sex. Yet dressed people commonly engage in risque behavior.

Is there a correlation? I dunno.

You tell me.

There is no general "norm" for sexuality; I have heard it said that a Chinese woman surprised in the shower will cover her feet instead of her breast. I don't know how true it is, but world wide, it was not uncommon for women to go bare-breasted. In some parts of ancient India, a woman would cover her breast to indicate that she was a prostitute.

I had a sociology/anthropology professor illustrate differing norms with a joke: "what do you call a viking who rapes three women and sacks two villages before breakfast? A= well adjusted!".

Sexuality in the west was not suppressed until Queen Victoria. There was a "Free Love" movement in the 1860's, just as there was in the 1960's. It was quite common in the 1700's for a woman's portrait to be hanging in the family room, with one breast exposed. The Victorian age brought in an age of sexual repression, and straight laced clothes that covered women from ankle to chin. This didn't go away until the invention of the Bikini. Praise God.

 

[Rev.Ross]

There is nothing unorthodox about being nude. God created Adam and Eve nude. We are born nude into this world through our mother's exposed vagina. David danced before the Lord nude. Prophets of God prophesied nude. Jesus was crucified nude for our sins.
My wife and I sleep nude, pray nude, sometimes shower nude together, and we have sex nude. There is nothing at all unorthodox about that. I think the church should reinstitute the practice of the early church of nude baptism, This would signify the new birth better than wearing coveralls. Our created bodies are good not evil. Nudity is not inappropriate contentographic.
Just some food for thought, Rev. Ross

 

[FreeInChrist88]

There is nothing unorthodox about being nude. God created Adam and Eve nude. We are born nude into this world through our mother's exposed vagina. David danced before the Lord nude. Prophets of God prophesied nude. Jesus was crucified nude for our sins.
My wife and I sleep nude, pray nude, sometimes shower nude together, and we have sex nude. There is nothing at all unorthodox about that. I think the church should reinstitute the practice of the early church of nude baptism, This would signify the new birth better than wearing coveralls. Our created bodies are good not evil. Nudity is not inappropriate contentographic.
Just some food for thought, Rev. Ross

Agree! Thanks for sharing!

 

[A Catholic Friend]

Some people are nudists and some are not. It's a preference. No one has to be a naturist.

 

[Francis Drake]

I get nude at least about once a day. I consider it a necessity.

Me too, my annual bath time!

 

[DennisTate]

What does everyone think about this? Are the two doctrines compatible? If not, why not? If so, why so?

The metaphor of Christians being open about our sins of the past in order to encourage and inspire others is the better way to view this.

The Bible is very open about the sins of King David, King Solomon, Moses, the Apostles Peter, Thomas and Paul......... and we can learn a lot from this.

On a practical level...... it is pretty difficult for us guys to not lust if a woman is wearing no clothes!

Matthew 5

27 Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29 And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell.

30 And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell.

31 It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.

 

[Darkhorse]

On a practical level...... it is pretty difficult for us guys to not lust if a woman is wearing no clothes!

Actually, it isn't difficult at all, once a guy escapes from the "nudity = sex" fallacy.

Our society conditions us to associate sex with nudity in inappropriate contentography, in strip clubs and similar "entertainment", in jokes, and in forbidding casual nudity in non-sexual situations.

When a person is sufficiently exposed to nudity in a non-sexual situation, the connection between nudity and sex weakens and eventually slips away. It's simply the loss of a conditioned response.

Of course, a guy's sex drive doesn't fade away, but it's dissociated from situations where nudity is present, providing that sexual activities or stimuli are not present.

How do you think medical personnel deal with frequent exposure to nudity?
It isn't their "extensive training"; orderlies don't get extensive training, and they may have been collecting bottles along the roadside a month before. But they deal with nudity all the time.

 

[nolidad]

What does everyone think about this? Are the two doctrines compatible? If not, why not? If so, why so?

You and your spouse can be as nude as you wish-----in front of each other alone! In front of others is sin!

 

[lismore]

What does everyone think about this?

They wouldn't last long in Scotland. I'd say about fifteen minutes before hypothermia. God Bless