Prove me wrong: modesty/skin exposure

[Sam91]

Yes, the verses in Revelation are perhaps the best verses against nudity.

I have at least two responses, but I'll start with just one: defend your conflation of toplessness with nudity.

If my breasts are exposed the top half of me is naked. In UK female changing rooms, most women turn away and try to put bras on without exposing themselves. There will only be 1 in a group, or less, who do not follow this rule. Also, we women avert our eyes too from that display.

Maybe in other societies women act differently with each other, but whether they do or not being topless is nudity to me and many others.

 

[Archivist]

This wasn't in the presence of women, but only his fellow fisherman.

Scripture compels us to some degree of modesty.

Actually He was on a boat in plain sight of anyone on shore.

Leviticus 18



6"'None of you shall approach anyone who are his close relatives, to uncover their nakedness: I am Yahweh. 7"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, nor the nakedness of your mother: she is your mother. You shall not uncover her nakedness. 8"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife: it is your father's nakedness. 9"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home, or born abroad. 10"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son's daughter, or of your daughter's daughter, even their nakedness: for theirs is your own nakedness. 11"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife's daughter, conceived by your father, since she is your sister. 12"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister: she is your father's near kinswoman. 13"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister: for she is your mother's near kinswoman.14"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother, you shall not approach his wife: she is your aunt.15"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law: she is your son's wife. You shall not uncover her nakedness. 16"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife: it is your brother's nakedness. 17"'You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter. You shall not take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are near kinswomen: it is wickedness.18"'You shall not take a wife to her sister, to be a rival, to uncover her nakedness, while her sister is yet alive.

None of which days anything about women going topless.

 

[blackhole]

If my breasts are exposed the top half of me is naked. In UK female changing rooms, most women turn away and try to put bras on without exposing themselves. There will usually only be 1 in a group, or less, who do not follow this rule. Also, we women avert our eyes too from that display.

Maybe in other societies women act differently with each other, but whether they do or not being topless is nudity to me and many others.

"To you" is not "to God."

 

[Sam91]

"To you" is not "to God."

You said 'defend your conflation' not 'prove that God views this as'. Therefore, I proved that many women view topless as naked even in a context away from men and sexuality.

It wasn't kind to be abrupt when the post was of a sensitive nature. I've forgiven you though.

I also remember reading Ezekiel with my daughter who was 10 at the time. She became very uncomfortable and in Ezekiel 23 breasts are mentioned with reference to prostitution-like behaviour.

Biblically, they are only mentioned as praiseworthy for nursing and within a context of marraige. Therefore, it is wise and fruitful to keep them covered.

 

[Kenny'sID]

All that shows is that missionaries destroy alot of cultures in Jesus name.

And if the cultures were cannibalistic in nature?

Since by your comment it appears you may not get the point, Cannibalism and running around halve naked, something you are saying we should not mess with as missionaries, are both not biblical attributes.

 

[blackhole]

And if the cultures were cannibalistic in nature?

Since by your comment it appears you may not get the point, Cannibalism and running around halve naked, something you are saying we should not mess with as missionaries, are both not biblical attributes.

Every culture, including dedicated Christian sub-cultures, are sinful in some way.

Extrapolating that a culture is mostly ungodly, and taking every way in which they behave differently from us as being sinful behavior, is a non-sequitur.

 

[A_Thinker]

Actually He was on a boat in plain sight of anyone on shore.

It was early on the morning ... and no women are recorded as being in the area ...

 

[blackhole]

It was early on the morning ... and no women are recorded as being in the area ...

Argumentum ex silentio.

 

[A_Thinker]

Argumentum ex silentio.

I think that you've gotten off-track of the point of this discussion ... if you're insisting that Peter's nakedness would have been okay with Jewish women looking on.

None of the Aramaic cultures testify to this ... nor to women being publically topless.

 

[blackhole]

I think that you've gotten off-track of the point of this discussion ... if you're insisting that Peter's nakedness would have been okay with Jewish women looking on.

None of the Aramaic cultures testify to this ... nor to women being publically topless.

I'm not the one who made the comment about Peter, I'm just pointing out that you're arguing from silence.

My response to this idea was posted previously, showing that male-male nudity is also shameful.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Every culture, including dedicated Christian sub-cultures, are sinful in some way.

Extrapolating that a culture is mostly ungodly, and taking every way in which they behave differently from us as being sinful behavior, is a non-sequitur.

Problem is, it's what many think is the biblical thing to do with parts of their culture, and what may help save their soul by trying to change what is ungodly, whether you would think it's not ungodly/a damnable sin or not.

As far as changing parts of their culture that are not sin, I doubt that is happening, but to do as Fire dragon seems to suggest and not change the part that is sin, is ridiculous when we all make those changes as a Christian.

It's like "dude, part of this tribes culture is damnable sin, but we should just leave them be because we don't wan to mess with something so sacred". What about their soul, is that not sacred?

Yes, we all sin, but Christianity by it's very nature, forces those saved to change many worldly cultures every time, like sleeping around, spouse swapping, getting drunk, and the list never ends...those are all a part of the worlds culture. So, why would changing parts of someone else's culture be any different?

 

[blackhole]

As far as changing parts of their culture that are not sin, I doubt that is happening, but to do as Fire dragon seems to suggest and not change the part that is sin, is ridiculous when we all make those changes as a Christian.

Yes, any part of a culture that is sinful should change.

It seemed as though you were presupposing toplessness is evil, based on the fact that their culture practices it and that their culture isn't as godly as ours.

In reality, not everything they do differently is sinful.

 

[FireDragon76]

And if the cultures were cannibalistic in nature?

Since by your comment it appears you may not get the point, Cannibalism and running around halve naked, something you are saying we should not mess with as missionaries, are both not biblical attributes.

I don't think bronze age Hebrew culture is the measure of all things.

BTW, characterizing native peoples as cannibals is highly bigoted and ignorant.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Yes, any part of a culture that is sinful should change.

It seemed as though you were presupposing toplessness is evil, based on the fact that their culture practices it and that their culture isn't as godly as ours.

Of course, not everything they do differently is sinful.

Right, evil because of at least the perception some of us have of Gods word.

 

[blackhole]

Right, evil because of at least the perception some of us have of Gods word.

If their culture accepts it as normal (thus, no perception of evil), are you suggesting that the entire culture should change their otherwise not-sinful (assumed, for the sake of argument) attire because of one missionary (or even a few)?

 

[Kenny'sID]

I don't think bronze age Hebrew culture is the measure of all things.

What does Hebrew culture have to do with anything? As I understand it, sinful is sinful.

BTW, characterizing native peoples as cannibals is highly bigoted and ignorant.

As is stating I did something that I absolutely did not. Curious, how did you get that out of anything I said? Show me the post please. Or did you simply need it at the moment so it appeared in your mind. lol

 

[Kenny'sID]

If their culture accepts it as normal (thus, no perception of evil), are you suggesting that the entire culture should change their otherwise not-sinful (assumed, for the sake of argument) attire because of one missionary (or even a few)?

Except it's not just one missionary. Actually I'm comfortable with stating the vast majority feel just as I do, it's a sin for women to run around topless in public.

 

[blackhole]

Except it's not just one missionary. Actually I'm comfortable with stating the vast majority feel just as I do, it's a sin for women to run around topless in public.

That's not the question I posed. Culture X is evil. Culture X also does not believe toplessness is a sin. Culture X changes, because of missionaries; they get converted. The missionaries are not the majority, the citizens of culture X are. X's majority does not believe it's wrong to go topless unless the missionaries convince them that it is.

 

[Sketcher]

1Ti 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
1Ti 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

The woman is to be in silence.

1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

But not at home.

Thus, 1Ti 2:8-12 is speaking about conduct while at a church service.

Immodesty is rooted in the sin of pride. That's never OK, in service or out.

 

[blackhole]

Immodesty is rooted in the sin of pride. That's never OK, in service or out.

Okay, but use the correct text to show that idea; 1Ti 2 is about church service.