Topless Danes

[Nadiine]

Okay. I'll bite one last time. But I think I'll let the gloves slip a little this time as I feel you've been very disrespectful, boasting and arrogant Nadiine. Aas one Christian to another, I don't think this is a Godly approach to our differences. As your brother in Christ I would encourage you to be more humble and less arrogant and boastful.

There. I'll put the gloves back on now.

I would encourage you to stop judging my heart and attitude as arrogant too. This is my debate style and this is aserious issue.

I'm standing for biblical standards of modesty - not puritanical Amish garb & head to toe uniforms; simply modest apparel as is fitting for a Christian who is representing Jesus Christ as Lord - nothing 1/2 naked or falling out.

If you want to judge that as arrogant, then that's on you. I'd be more concerned about judging what I was promoting while using a Christian icon publically.

 

[Tissue]

You keep going back to culture- WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOUR CULTURE HAS TURNED EVIL? Do we live by cultural laws or God's laws? Holding up people of other cultures merely negates what God says.

And this seriously shows that you cannot be reasoned with.

We've quoted Scripture, giving a great argument for an alternative definition for what is traditionally known as "modesty". We've given you arguments for societies other than our own. And yet, you do not rebut the actual argument, you only reiterate your own that does not address our's in a rational, direct way.

This topic will never be resolved. Best of luck to anyone who tries to continue with it.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Wisdom imo is bowing out when others wont hear truth. God bless all - unsubscribing.

 

[Nadiine]

Since I think it's pointless to belabour the same arguments, I'm going to skip alot of your replies that would only cause me to repeat the same arguments and I'll just agree to disagree with you for the reasons I've already stated in full detail.

I will reply to different things that lead to other aspects less covered:

Respectfully, I reserve my right to disagree with your generalization of the subject. I have heard what you have said, but I am not about to bow down and accept what you say just because you use the bible a lot

Ok, first off here, you SHOULD be using the Bible alot if you are not. The Bible's standard principles cover nudity in several ways - outside "modesty" definitions in biblical times when Paul wrote it - God Himself considered an exposed thigh too much "nakedness"... I think you have a standard set right there that toplessness is NOT within God's parameters of what is modest or decent for women.
The rest is just the elaboration - stumbling others/tempting with a partially naked female body....
or lewdness..

I think people are forgetting in this that there is a whole population of young adults and even unmarried adult men who don't have sex every day or whenever they want it, that the exposed female body DOES excite them and lead them to sexual lust/ thoughts...

I can't believe that the only thing that excites males in European cultures is female genitalia & that's it.

Again, until you can speak for every single male that watches topless women in what they think or feel while seeing them, I don't think you can corner the market on this being modest CHRISTIAN conduct to go topless.

Well, Nadiine. This is one place I think you're wrong. You assume - it's an assumption - that I follow the world. You assume - again, an assumption - that breasts are universally a temptation. Yet I have shown you clear evidence of situations and cultures where this is not the case. Cases you have failed to address. Oh sure, you have cited the bible repetitively. But you haven't addressed the issue.

Basically, you're saying God is wrong when He claimed a man would be satisfied with his wife's breasts - why not her genetalia??? or her reproductive system that bears the offspring?

And even IF a female's breast isn't viewed by SOME men as any sexual organ, SINCE WHEN IS THAT LICENSE TO GO 1/2 NUDE? It doesn't. My butt isn't exactly a sexual organ either - but men are predominantly aroused with that part of the female anatomy - so, we don't go around cutting holes out of our pants to show off our rear ends - thong bikini bottoms are not MODEST.

I am not and have not been saying that temptation is OK. I am not saying that fornication is OK. Very far from it. Flee from temptation and don't fornicate!
I am not saying that legalization makes things OK. What I am saying is that there are cultures where toplessness is natural and breasts therefore do not induce sexual arousal the same way it does in your own culture.

Again, even IF this were the case, partial nudity is NOT MODESTY - not by biblical standard. If pygmy tribe women in the back 40 jungles in Uganda want to go that way, let them go that way, it doesn't make it FINE for the world or Christians to copy it becuz they do it.
God will judge all that based on His perfect knowledge of what they knew or didn't know.
Other countries DO know better - like Amsterdam knows prostitution & street drugs are wrong but still legalize & accept it anyways.

When I was drafted to the army I didn't get to leave the army camp for a few weeks during boot camp. None of us were allowed to leave. When we did, it was very apparent on all the guys that seeing any woman after not seeing a woman at all for several weeks, was arousing. It didn't matter what clothes they had on. It was a woman. That was enough. It didn't take bare chests. It didn't take miniskirts or half a ton of makeup. It took a member of the opposite sex. As most of the recruits were 18-20 year olds, the hormone levels were high. So that may have assisted. However - sexual arousal is not dependent on toplessness. Nor does toplessness encourage sexual arousal in all cultures.

Going thru your post, this is exactly what I was getting at earlier, not everybody in topless cultures have sex regularly w/ a wife... seeing her 1/2 naked is a gauranteed stumbling block to a ...hor*y male.
So.... we help those struggling men out by ..... GOING TOPLESS? Is that not contributing further to the enticement to see any sexual organs?
It's even MORE enticing, therefore, it's immodest for men to see nude women.

The whole point is men's VISUAL hardwiring. The same isn't true for women seeing men. This is why female toplessness is not ok.

If they travel to the wrong places, then it could in fact be fatal. Yes.

That isn't immodesty tho - that is man's personal standard - the actions taken against others which God didn't set., not God's.
ie. it's not "immodest" if you ignorantly travel into a violent gangtown wearing 'enemy colors', it's dangerous and possibly STUPID.../ignorant, not immodest.

Yes, it is. Here it is immodest in that it triggers sinful thoughts and emotions. A Burqa causes anger, and to some it actually causes arousal. Though I should specify that I am not one of those.

Look, you cannot call a burka "immodest" - the clothing the women wore in Paul's day, were head to tow robes/gowns... that is what a burqa is in what it covers.

The fact that others get religious hatred is the other person's fault and problem, they are covering themselves up and living to their religious standard of their god.

If a burqa is sinful, then I can assure you, you'de end up having to go completely naked so as not to sin with apparel - then you've sinned by way of immodesty.
As that article I quoted points out, there has to be a standard set.

To some degree modesty is culturally relative. We must certainly dress in a manner that would be considered modest for the occasion and in the judgment of our culture.
For example, 19th century society considered it improper for a woman to expose any of her leg in public.

Applying principles of Christian liberty, a Christian woman of that day should not have worn a knee-length dress, for this would have brought reproach upon her and the Lord. However, there must be a minimum of modesty that is absolute. Otherwise, if society condoned total nudity, Christians could walk around nude.
If so, we could delete I Timothy 2:9 from the Bible as irrelevant.

I can understand that. Especially in the US. You have an immense focus on while attempting to repress human sexual nature. I have never seen anyone focus more on sex than an American who's trying not to focus on it. During my last visit there was only one thing on your major newschannels. Brittany Spears' sister had gotten pregnant. That was it. Before that there was of course Janet Jackson's breast. And before that Clinton's sin.
The focus your nation has on sex is immense. In TV shows, news, ads... It's everywhere. More so than here. Yet it is all shushed. Like it's taboo to talk about. And herein lies a great big temptation for a lot of young men. And women I'm sure. It's something everyone feels. Everyone has hormones raging at a certain age. It's a part of being human. Yet how can young men and women learn to deal with that if there is no talking about it? If sex is constantly a hush-hush topic yet at the same time takes up such a HUGE space in the media and advertisement business? This isn't about toplessness, but could illustrate why it's such a big issue in the US. We have a lot of sex in our advertising, while less than you I think. And many of our sex-focused ads are from the US. We have sex on TV, but most of it is from the US.

Um... it sounds to me like you're attributing toplessness to a less sex-obsessed society!???

This country is obsessed with sex, you're right. But that isn't because we don't open toplessness which would somehow curb it.
If you look at our sex saturated tv shows, the women here have huge balloon breast implants, wide open cleavage with boobs hanging out, skin tight clothing or short skirts and alot of sexual gesturing & inuendo (subject matter)... our movies are FULL of graphic, premarital sex as a norm. too.

& the girls boobs practically hang out here... they also get alot of tattoo's, wear lowrise pants with thong panties that show over the top...
so imho, they pretty much ARE topless already and very revealing everywhere else; not much is left to a man's imagination.

But I've seen European commercials and they were filthy and i was shocked.

This statement doesn't support toplessness however.

Women can be too. Though fewer are, yes. Personally I don't think there's anything wrong in lusting for your spouse, but that's a different topic.
I don't care much for what's in either. I tend to dislike whatever is popular actually. And I think society is focusing too much on sex. But - breasts become an object of sexual attention more because they are covered up and hidden away as a norm than for the fact that they are breasts. It's like legs. If you start telling people legs are a sexual thing, have all the women cover their legs. Talk in roundabout ways of legs on TV all the time, men are going to find legs alluring

NO, this is false. IF this were true, then having women go totally nude and daily exposing their genitals to men SHOULD be able to curb their lust for female sex organs too.

That is NOT the issue or way to stop it. YOu'r remedy when applied to drug habits would be:
"if drugs are a problem, just legalize them & give it to them - once they CAN have it and have it regularly, then it stops being a problem."

Can we say that about nudity? prostitution? drugs?
Do we use that mentality with children who prefer sweets & junk food? Just keep giving them as much junk food whenever they want it... eventually they'll crave healthy fruits & vegies.


Is that God's standard? No it's not. God never said "the more you fill yourself with any vice you have, the less you will want it"
This is a statement that goes against God's principles for us.

Originally Posted by Nadiine
Completely taking off the top is hardly going to make him lust/focus LESS on sex is it?
In a roundabout way through social adaptation it could. It depends on where the focus is more than anything else.

Again, if it can cure lust to have women take their tops off, then going completely nude is the even BETTER solution isn't it? Why go 1/2 the way - just show it all & put it all out there.
Where does this end? This is opening the door to FULL nudity - there's no reason not to go fully nude with that mentality. (nor any argument to stop it)

[You see that because of where you are from. For some I am sure it may be a me-ism thing. Everything is a selfish issue to someone.

When someone is only thinking of their own rights and freedoms to do whatever they want, IT'S ME-ISM 100%.
Those women in Thailand weren't the least bit concerned about what other men visiting from other countries were thinking when they saw them topless.

Christians as a whole are taught to put others first - pay attn. to what appears to be wrong or looks bad.. etc. We're supposed to be like that.

Yes, I agree. But you seem to think that the issue is binary. That either something causes universal sexual temptation, or it isn't an issue at all. This simplification makes a lot of your points invalid. The issue isn't binary. There are complex factors involved.

I do think that the majority of men are aroused by female boobs, yes. Especially when they aren't married or having regular sex to release those urges.
You even stated earlier that when the guys didn't have sex for awhile, they viewed women very sexually -
we have to HELP men out, not lead & entice them to more lust & thoughts about sex.

I'm sorry but I do not believe that the majority of men in topless cultures have ZERO attraction to women's boobs as a sexual object for pleasure.
Do they ignore her breasts during sex just like youde ignore someone's feet during sex if U didn't have a foot fettish?
Are they as universal as a woman's kneecap - no attraction? I have a real hard time believing the majority of european men don't find them sexually stimulating at all.
And even if 10% did, THAT'S ENTICING THEM TO LUST.

I just can't view this any other way. I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on this.

 

[TheReasoner]

Since I think it's pointless to belabour the same arguments, I'm going to skip alot of your replies that would only cause me to repeat the same arguments and I'll just agree to disagree with you for the reasons I've already stated in full detail.

I will reply to different things that lead to other aspects less covered:

Ok, first off here, you SHOULD be using the Bible alot if you are not. The Bible's standard principles cover nudity in several ways - outside "modesty" definitions in biblical times when Paul wrote it - God Himself considered an exposed thigh too much "nakedness"... I think you have a standard set right there that toplessness is NOT within God's parameters of what is modest or decent for women.
The rest is just the elaboration - stumbling others/tempting with a partially naked female body....
or lewdness..

I think people are forgetting in this that there is a whole population of young adults and even unmarried adult men who don't have sex every day or whenever they want it, that the exposed female body DOES excite them and lead them to sexual lust/ thoughts...

I can't believe that the only thing that excites males in European cultures is female genitalia & that's it.

Again, until you can speak for every single male that watches topless women in what they think or feel while seeing them, I don't think you can corner the market on this being modest CHRISTIAN conduct to go topless.


Basically, you're saying God is wrong when He claimed a man would be satisfied with his wife's breasts - why not her genetalia??? or her reproductive system that bears the offspring?

And even IF a female's breast isn't viewed by SOME men as any sexual organ, SINCE WHEN IS THAT LICENSE TO GO 1/2 NUDE? It doesn't. My butt isn't exactly a sexual organ either - but men are predominantly aroused with that part of the female anatomy - so, we don't go around cutting holes out of our pants to show off our rear ends - thong bikini bottoms are not MODEST.



Again, even IF this were the case, partial nudity is NOT MODESTY - not by biblical standard. If pygmy tribe women in the back 40 jungles in Uganda want to go that way, let them go that way, it doesn't make it FINE for the world or Christians to copy it becuz they do it.
God will judge all that based on His perfect knowledge of what they knew or didn't know.
Other countries DO know better - like Amsterdam knows prostitution & street drugs are wrong but still legalize & accept it anyways.


Going thru your post, this is exactly what I was getting at earlier, not everybody in topless cultures have sex regularly w/ a wife... seeing her 1/2 naked is a gauranteed stumbling block to a ...hor*y male.
So.... we help those struggling men out by ..... GOING TOPLESS? Is that not contributing further to the enticement to see any sexual organs?
It's even MORE enticing, therefore, it's immodest for men to see nude women.

The whole point is men's VISUAL hardwiring. The same isn't true for women seeing men. This is why female toplessness is not ok.


That isn't immodesty tho - that is man's personal standard - the actions taken against others which God didn't set., not God's.
ie. it's not "immodest" if you ignorantly travel into a violent gangtown wearing 'enemy colors', it's dangerous and possibly STUPID.../ignorant, not immodest.


Look, you cannot call a burka "immodest" - the clothing the women wore in Paul's day, were head to tow robes/gowns... that is what a burqa is in what it covers.

The fact that others get religious hatred is the other person's fault and problem, they are covering themselves up and living to their religious standard of their god.

If a burqa is sinful, then I can assure you, you'de end up having to go completely naked so as not to sin with apparel - then you've sinned by way of immodesty.
As that article I quoted points out, there has to be a standard set.



Um... it sounds to me like you're attributing toplessness to a less sex-obsessed society!???

This country is obsessed with sex, you're right. But that isn't because we don't open toplessness which would somehow curb it.
If you look at our sex saturated tv shows, the women here have huge balloon breast implants, wide open cleavage with boobs hanging out, skin tight clothing or short skirts and alot of sexual gesturing & inuendo (subject matter)... our movies are FULL of graphic, premarital sex as a norm. too.

& the girls boobs practically hang out here... they also get alot of tattoo's, wear lowrise pants with thong panties that show over the top...
so imho, they pretty much ARE topless already and very revealing everywhere else; not much is left to a man's imagination.

But I've seen European commercials and they were filthy and i was shocked.

This statement doesn't support toplessness however.


NO, this is false. IF this were true, then having women go totally nude and daily exposing their genitals to men SHOULD be able to curb their lust for female sex organs too.

That is NOT the issue or way to stop it. YOu'r remedy when applied to drug habits would be:
"if drugs are a problem, just legalize them & give it to them - once they CAN have it and have it regularly, then it stops being a problem."

Can we say that about nudity? prostitution? drugs?
Do we use that mentality with children who prefer sweets & junk food? Just keep giving them as much junk food whenever they want it... eventually they'll crave healthy fruits & vegies.


Is that God's standard? No it's not. God never said "the more you fill yourself with any vice you have, the less you will want it"
This is a statement that goes against God's principles for us.


Again, if it can cure lust to have women take their tops off, then going completely nude is the even BETTER solution isn't it? Why go 1/2 the way - just show it all & put it all out there.
Where does this end? This is opening the door to FULL nudity - there's no reason not to go fully nude with that mentality. (nor any argument to stop it)


When someone is only thinking of their own rights and freedoms to do whatever they want, IT'S ME-ISM 100%.
Those women in Thailand weren't the least bit concerned about what other men visiting from other countries were thinking when they saw them topless.

Christians as a whole are taught to put others first - pay attn. to what appears to be wrong or looks bad.. etc. We're supposed to be like that.


I do think that the majority of men are aroused by female boobs, yes. Especially when they aren't married or having regular sex to release those urges.
You even stated earlier that when the guys didn't have sex for awhile, they viewed women very sexually -
we have to HELP men out, not lead & entice them to more lust & thoughts about sex.

I'm sorry but I do not believe that the majority of men in topless cultures have ZERO attraction to women's boobs as a sexual object for pleasure.
Do they ignore her breasts during sex just like youde ignore someone's feet during sex if U didn't have a foot fettish?
Are they as universal as a woman's kneecap - no attraction? I have a real hard time believing the majority of european men don't find them sexually stimulating at all.
And even if 10% did, THAT'S ENTICING THEM TO LUST.

I just can't view this any other way. I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on this.

I guess we'll have to.

I would encourage you to go on a missions trip to a place like the jungles of South America or Papua New Guinea though. It will be very giving to tell people about the Lord, helping them, and also seeing for yourself a different culture. It can open you up for a deeper understanding of the bible and Christianity.

Unsubscribing to the thread.

 

[Nadiine]

I guess we'll have to.

I would encourage you to go on a missions trip to a place like the jungles of South America or Papua New Guinea though. It will be very giving to tell people about the Lord, helping them, and also seeing for yourself a different culture. It can open you up for a deeper understanding of the bible and Christianity.

Unsubscribing to the thread.

Seeing that doesn't change my views on what God calls modesty. As if it will somehow make me see that toplessness is what God wants for us?

In the OT, the exposed thigh was naked exposure, ... I guess God got more liberal when the NT came, and moved up to toplessness instead...????

Did it occur to you that they are doing wrong in the back jungles and just haven't changed that custom which they should?
Why do you make it that it's RIGHT just becuz some people do it in South Africa?

The bible is loaded with things God's people were doing that He judged. Principles they rejected and rebelled against.... did it occur to you that THEY are the wrong ones?

Again, LOOK AT OTHER CULTURES TO MAKE YOUR MORAL VIEWS. That is not biblical, it's following the world to assess what is MORAL.
If I used this standard in the OT, then I could conclude that Baal worship in God's temple was ok... was it?
no.

GOD's standard prevails first - we don't follow cultures. And since you do, then it goes to show me that you follow the world's standards to decide what is right moreso than biblical standards. (or interpret biblical teachings by the world's standards to decide what it means).
both problematic to say the least.

 

[white dove]

It is not about following my own culture more than I am following God. It is about understanding human beings. Understanding what makes us 'tick' - in regards to this thread, what makes us tick sexually. And why.
This world isn't black and white. A few months ago I would get sick if I ate any starches. Flour, potatoes, sugar...

Where is your biblical back-up? I'm sorry, I just read the last couple pages where you have posted and I don't find any solid biblical back-up for any of your posts - just your opinion. So, how do your posts match up with others who have used numerous citations from God's word, if you do indeed follow God moreso than culture (or dare I say, moreso than these other posters)? Based on your posts, you are contradicting yourself at this point and have no biblical leg to stand on.



You are right - this is relative. Here, you say this (and I'm glad you said it b/c it's very true):

The focus your nation has on sex is immense. In TV shows, news, ads... It's everywhere. More so than here. Yet it is all shushed. Like it's taboo to talk about. And herein lies a great big temptation for a lot of young men. And women I'm sure. It's something everyone feels. Everyone has hormones raging at a certain age. It's a part of being human. Yet how can young men and women learn to deal with that if there is no talking about it? If sex is constantly a hush-hush topic yet at the same time takes up such a HUGE space in the media and advertisement business? This isn't about toplessness, but could illustrate why it's such a big issue in the US. We have a lot of sex in our advertising, while less than you I think. And many of our sex-focused ads are from the US. We have sex on TV, but most of it is from the US.

...though I would argue that a slew of other countries are also very-much sex-obsessed. I totally agree that there are double messages here - blatent sexual images are splayed virtually everywhere in commercial media (to the extent of hardcore and softcore porn - Hello, Girls Gone Wild...) but yet... there is almost no open dialogue with children and their parents or educators in health to discuss sexuality which is something that is so incredibly important to everyone. Sex-craziness is out there, it's done and it doesn't appear to be going anywhere. So what do we do? Let's talk to our children about the messages they receive -or will receive- in this world and how to respond to their own sexuality. I recall my grade school health class as..Okay, girls... this is what a menstrual cycle is... Not, Okay... pretty soon, you will be feeling some changes going on in your body. This is NORMAL... God only knows what they told the little boys! And then, in high school, health class was, Okay, ladies and gents... this is what genital herpes looks like. Be afraid...be very very afraid. Not... Okay, class... today we're going to talk about sexual desire and your options on how to deal with them. Also, these are your risks for unwanted pregnancies and developing disease if you are not practicing safer sex... Let's look at the numbers, shall we? Many parents don't do their jobs in this department. It's more like, don't ask don't tell. But, that's ideally when the "village" comes in in the form of licensed educators, but whatever. That's a whole other topic and I'm sorry for getting too much into that.




Why I've included this post of yours is to confirm that, yes, we do have to consider the context from which we are speaking as well as the context that we're speaking to. I believe you mentioned earlier that we must consider culture and be respectful to the extent that we do not cause others to stumble within that culture - How would allowing toplessness in a society that views breasts as sexual, sensual and just plain "things to leer at" reinforce this biblical standpoint? We know that we live in a sex-crazed society, that those with worldly views will more than likely reinforce their worldly ways by tolerance of that which encourages worldly behavior (such as lusting). Soo... where is the Christ-like view in all of this? Where is the Spirit-led discernment to see clearly through this haze?


Sexual temptation is a HUGE problem these days. Access to visual images which stimulate sexual fantasy and encourage sexual conduct is rampant. How could someone possibly entertain the thought of encouraging this further by condoning something as blatently immodest as toplessness... someone who purports to having other people's best interest at heart?

1 Corinthians 10 - please see the last paragraph, esp. the last verse. It does not only limit itself to food consumption.



In my haydays, I have entertained the thought of going topless at beaches that were nowhere near my area of residence (I had to have some kind of moral code). To be honest, I used to tan and I hated the tan lines. But, I never did this. Why? That is an added benefit not everyone deserves to view! Nadiine had mentioned this earlier to which you stated to back that she may just have some kind of issue (a dissatisfaction, I believe you were hinting at) with her own breasts. Come on now. I believe she was referring to the godly union between husband and wife - that only a husband deserves to view (and appreciate fully) his wife's breasts. Even the Song of Solomon clearly refers to a lover's breasts as precious and as something that is to be desired. As such, it makes no sense to reveal them for others to see. I love my breasts - they're beautiful. I appreciate them. I regard them as a blessing (and a curse! ;P ), as an added "perk" for my beloved... and as a part of me that is just too special to flaunt. I'm not an idiot. I know that many males love breasts, to the extent of staring at them fully-clothed. Why throw 2 hunks of cheese at a congregation of mice?



[blur]Not saying men are mice.[/blur] Not saying all men are mice.

 

[Nadiine]

My concern is the same as yours... all we seem to hear from people is "I don't interpret the bible that way"... well please show me where you derrive that then by their current customs and within the rest of the context of scripture on female conduct and dress...

What SUPPORTS toplessness? Nothing. All they do is say "I don't see it your way", yet they offer NOTHING that teaches opposite what I'm interpreting - quite the contrary in fact.

Also, if we consistently use their arguments in all other controversial matters, then we have to conclude that whatever any society does as a "normative", must be right becuz it's their culture.
And also, that the more you see or experience whatever vice you happen to have, the less it's a problem for people. I think we can use legalized alcohol to prove that the more you get of it, it doesn't help or stop anything.

He's also attributing the USA's sex addiction to lack of toplessness... I'd love to see his proof for that one.
I've always believed that certain types of sins invade countries (spiritual warfare goes into this territorial aspect which I won't get into) -
Certain nations have religious spirits, others violence and hatred, others of a sexual nature, etc.

Anyways, other countries who don't legalize toplessness don't have the USA's obsession w/ sex and it seems to me that the more this country feeds on the naked females, the more they want (the opposite of seeing it enough makes you not care about it).
(ie girls gone wild).

I didn't find enough from his arguments to base anything factual on, like you, I felt it was just all his opinion, yet he completely lacked any biblical supports which as a Christian, he needs to have.

I agree w/ the problems we all see, just not the sources or remedies for them.

 

[white dove]

What SUPPORTS toplessness? Nothing. All they do is say "I don't see it your way", yet they offer NOTHING that teaches opposite what I'm interpreting - quite the contrary in fact.

I actually appreciate when people use that argument b/c it really has no basis. I'm sorry, Jesus didn't say that taking Heroin and dropping LCD was bad so.... that means I can take it?! OKAY!! You mean God didn't say that I can't play Russian Roulette so that means I can!? YEY! Pointless. And it pokes a hole straight through the core of their stance. I actually would like for that particular poster to use verses to back himself up on that. At least we'd all have some mutual starting point then.

Also, if we consistently use their arguments in all other controversial matters, then we have to conclude that whatever any society does as a "normative", must be right becuz it's their culture.

Exactly. And where does it all end?

 

[Nadiine]

I actually appreciate when people use that argument b/c it really has no basis. I'm sorry, Jesus didn't say that taking Heroin and dropping LCD was bad so.... that means I can take it?! OKAY!! You mean God didn't say that I can't play Russian Roulette so that means I can!? YEY! Pointless. And it pokes a hole straight through the core of their stance. I actually would like for that particular poster to use verses to back himself up on that. At least we'd all have some mutual starting point then.


Exactly. And where does it all end?

Well, it doesn't end does it?

I agree with your earlier points too. It isn't enough to say "God has to spell this out or else I can decide whatever I want about it"... unfortunately, they violate other bibical principles in the process of attaining the freedom to do whatever they decide is good for them.

Sounds like the book of Judges relived, "and every man did as he saw was right in his own eyes".

I've come to the conclusion that people want the Lord, but they want Him like fast food, their way, when they want it.
I want God, but I refuse to abide by all the standards & teachings I read in there. (that's a whole other thread if I get started going down that trail).

I'll try to make a few more comments to your earlier post when I have a little more time
=)

 

[dies-l]

Well, it doesn't end does it?

I agree with your earlier points too. It isn't enough to say "God has to spell this out or else I can decide whatever I want about it"... unfortunately, they violate other bibical principles in the process of attaining the freedom to do whatever they decide is good for them.

Sounds like the book of Judges relived, "and every man did as he saw was right in his own eyes".

I've come to the conclusion that people want the Lord, but they want Him like fast food, their way, when they want it.
I want God, but I refuse to abide by all the standards & teachings I read in there. (that's a whole other thread if I get started going down that trail).

I'll try to make a few more comments to your earlier post when I have a little more time
=)

I am jumping in a but late here, so I am sorry if I only rehash what has already been said. But, I just have to say that I think that there is a qualitative difference between our opinions of toplessness and many other "moral" issues. I would argue that a woman's decision to wear or not to wear a shirt is not, in and of itself, a moral decision. It can, however, be linked to sinful actions & attitudes, and in our culture it often is. For example, I believe we are called to obey the authorities, so obviously it is sinful to wear fewer clothes than the law requires. Furthermore, many women choose to wear revealing attire to draw attention to their bodies and to lead men into lust. On the other hand, it is conceivable that a woman would want to go topless, in a culture that allows it, for less nefarious reasons. In some cultures, the thought of covering one's breasts might seem like an absurd idea.

The point is that it is incredibly important to the discussion that the Bible does not say anything on the topic. Biblical principles would tell us that we should not lust after one another or lead others into lust. But, the idea that female toplessness leads men into lust is cultural, not universal. In some middle eastern cultures, it is believed that seeing any flesh on a woman will lead men to lust, and in those cultures, it probably will because that is what the culture dictates. In our culture, it is probably wise for women to keep their shirts on because our culture seems to overly associate breasts with sexuality. By the same token, in any culture a woman can be nearly completely covered and attract the same kind of negative attention. The Bible tells us to avoid thinking or provoking lustful thoughts and instructs us to dress modestly, but it does not define for us what this means. So, it seems clear to me that there is an understanding that cultural norms certainly come into play in making these determinations.

And, so, I don't see how we can pass judgment on another culture for having differing understandings of what modesty is. I like the fact that here in the U.S., we don't have women walking around topless. Trust me, I really do not want to see women other than my wife in that much detail. But, if the Danish culture sees things differently, I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[Nadiine]

I am jumping in a but late here, so I am sorry if I only rehash what has already been said. But, I just have to say that I think that there is a qualitative difference between our opinions of toplessness and many other "moral" issues. I would argue that a woman's decision to wear or not to wear a shirt is not, in and of itself, a moral decision. It can, however, be linked to sinful actions & attitudes, and in our culture it often is. For example, I believe we are called to obey the authorities, so obviously it is sinful to wear fewer clothes than the law requires. Furthermore, many women choose to wear revealing attire to draw attention to their bodies and to lead men into lust. On the other hand, it is conceivable that a woman would want to go topless, in a culture that allows it, for less nefarious reasons. In some cultures, the thought of covering one's breasts might seem like an absurd idea.

The point is that it is incredibly important to the discussion that the Bible does not say anything on the topic. Biblical principles would tell us that we should not lust after one another or lead others into lust. But, the idea that female toplessness leads men into lust is cultural, not universal. In some middle eastern cultures, it is believed that seeing any flesh on a woman will lead men to lust, and in those cultures, it probably will because that is what the culture dictates. In our culture, it is probably wise for women to keep their shirts on because our culture seems to overly associate breasts with sexuality. By the same token, in any culture a woman can be nearly completely covered and attract the same kind of negative attention. The Bible tells us to avoid thinking or provoking lustful thoughts and instructs us to dress modestly, but it does not define for us what this means. So, it seems clear to me that there is an understanding that cultural norms certainly come into play in making these determinations.

And, so, I don't see how we can pass judgment on another culture for having differing understandings of what modesty is. I like the fact that here in the U.S., we don't have women walking around topless. Trust me, I really do not want to see women other than my wife in that much detail. But, if the Danish culture sees things differently, I don't see anything wrong with that.

The question is, is it the CHRISTIAN culture doing it? Or the nonChristian?
Of course we can't expect the lost to act modest or moral or obey God's laws... Christians however are not to be in the same category of morality.

We have given scripture to this effect and to show that it's not ok to follow cultures just becuz they decide something is ok.
Do we claim Amsterdam is fine in prostitution & street drugs?

We don't decide what's moral becuz a culture deems it so, we go by God's principles & laws. I keep seeing this mentality go on and it's disheartening to me that Christians are so apathetic to public nudity.

Biblically breasts ARE sexual and the majority of men ARE stimulated visually by them.
And again, we're ignoring the fact that it isn't ONLY "danish" men who see them that way - & what of little kids who see them like that who do have those sexual feelings?
What of my husband in Thailand who had women take their tops off at the hotel pool? How is this moral conduct, let alone Godly?

And could you please provide scripture to support this instead of your opinions alone? Until I see more biblical support, just saying "modesty is relative" is not supportive of toplessness - if so, then complete nudity has to be modest as well - and anything else anyone one else deems moral.

 

[karisma]

It's discrimination against women. Breasts are not sexual organs, they are hardly different from a mans. To be equal between the sexes, women must be allowed to go topless anywhere a man can be. If you personally don't want to go topless: don't.

 

[dies-l]

The question is, is it the CHRISTIAN culture doing it? Or the nonChristian?
Of course we can't expect the lost to act modest or moral or obey God's laws... Christians however are not to be in the same category of morality.

We have given scripture to this effect and to show that it's not ok to follow cultures just becuz they decide something is ok.
Do we claim Amsterdam is fine in prostitution & street drugs?

We don't decide what's moral becuz a culture deems it so, we go by God's principles & laws. I keep seeing this mentality go on and it's disheartening to me that Christians are so apathetic to public nudity.

The problem is that I have yet to see that Scripture actually says anything about this. That is the difference between this issue and, for example, drugs or prostitution.

In all fairness, I am not arguing that it's "ok to follow cultures just becuz [sic] they decide something is ok." I am arguing that that there is nothing wrong with other cultures who choose to accept guidelines that are different from our own when Scripture does not offer any teaching to contrary, either in plain text or that can clearly be extrapolated from principles. I am certainly not arguing that we ought to follow the Danes (in fact, if you read my prior post, you will see that I outright stated that I don't think that we should). I am only saying that there is nothing morally wrong with the standard the Danes have chosen to follow in this regard.

Biblically breasts ARE sexual and the majority of men ARE stimulated visually by them.

Biblically, many body parts are described in a sexual way. For example, the Song of Songs describes at the very least mouths, cheeks, and arms, as well as breasts in a sexual way. Does this mean that you would suggest that we go the whole way and require women to dress as they do in some extremely conservative Muslim cultures?

The majority of people can be stimulated by just about any part of the human body. Once again, we have to ask what is it about breasts that warrants unique treatment, unless you really are suggesting we follow conservative Muslim culture, in which case men can still use their imagination.

And again, we're ignoring the fact that it isn't ONLY "danish" men who see them that way - & what of little kids who see them like that who do have those sexual feelings?
What of my husband in Thailand who had women take their tops off at the hotel pool? How is this moral conduct, let alone Godly?

It seems that the question should be how is it immoral and unGodly?

Likewise, it would seem that if toplessness is obscene to your husband's sensibilities, then the onus is on him to avoid putting himself in situations with people who have different sensibilities, not on the people of Thailand to follow the standards of conservative Americans. As to your first point,. I would say that anyone who is uncomfortable with public toplessness should not go to Denmark if the Danes choose to allow it. As for your point about children, what about children who see clothed women and have sexual feelings?

And could you please provide scripture to support this instead of your opinions alone? Until I see more biblical support, just saying "modesty is relative" is not supportive of toplessness - if so, then complete nudity has to be modest as well - and anything else anyone one else deems moral.

The argument that is being made here is that there is no biblical basis for our attitudes about sexuality, and that our attitudes are more cultural than anything. How do you expect me to cite Scripture as proof that Scripture does not provide instruction on this question? It seems more appropriate to ask the person who claims that Scripture condemns it to back up her opinion with Scripture.

The issue is not about deciding for ourselves what is moral. The idea is that I don't believe that it is appropriate to judge other cultures as sinful regarding issues about which the Scriptures lack clear direction.

 

[catlover]

It's discrimination against women. Breasts are not sexual organs, they are hardly different from a mans. To be equal between the sexes, women must be allowed to go topless anywhere a man can be. If you personally don't want to go topless: don't.

When you come down to it, they are udders...

 

[karisma]

When you come down to it, they are udders...

Udders have more than one teat.

 

[Nadiine]

When you come down to it, they are udders...

This is typical of people today, downplaying the beauty and design of God's creation - the woman's breasts are spoken of highly in scripture (AS a sexual organ).

Interesting how you lower them to cows udders. Is it any wonder why we see the worldviews we do today? Instead of great value, we should view them as animal udders and expose them for anybody - No wonder you see no reason why we shouldn't expose them and treat them so commonly and in low regard.

I'm worth alot more than that, God created us as such - its too bad you don't hold the body in higher esteem.
Read the Bible on the female body sometime, you might be enlightened.

 

[karisma]

Breasts are not sexual organs, by definition.

 

[Tissue]

Why must it be assumed that describing them as "cow udders" is lowering it? Everything God made is beautiful, is it not?

We are greater than the animals because of our free will, and being made in the image of God, but I'm pretty sure the cow's disadvantage doesn't affect its udders.

 

[Nadiine]

The problem is that I have yet to see that Scripture actually says anything about this. That is the difference between this issue and, for example, drugs or prostitution.

Do you see any scripture FOR IT?? I don't. And again, this was previously covered, it IS found in scripture by the customs when Paul wrote it.

Not to mention the stumbling issue which I won't go into yet again - I'm a little of having to repeat scriptures...
But, in reading your post, I"m not seeing any verses you're offering here.
The entire thing is more opinion & an attempt at reasoning to support it - I've used reasoning above within scripture teachings that goes against it.

Do we have ANY examples of topless Christian females of the church? Any scriptures telling us public female nudity is admirable?
I'd like to see those if people want to claim Christians can go topless - it wasn't Jewish custom at any time and Paul would not be promoting that at the time of his epistle - IF he was, he would have specified that the women could be LESS MODEST than what they already were by taking 1/2 of it off in public.

THe principles are clearly in keeping with drawing attn. AWAY from the body/outward appearance/material wealth.

I am only saying that there is nothing morally wrong with the standard the Danes have chosen to follow in this regard.

I'd like to see this biblically supported.

How do you know it's GOD'S opinion that it's moral? You don't - esp. since you specified that you can't know what the standard is since it wasn't detailed enough in scripture to even give support; it looks like you want it both ways on this one.

You cant know what's modest becuz the Bible doesn't spell it out enough, yet claim that public nudity is moral....??

Biblically, many body parts are described in a sexual way. For example, the Song of Songs describes at the very least mouths, cheeks, and arms, as well as breasts in a sexual way. Does this mean that you would suggest that we go the whole way and require women to dress as they do in some extremely conservative Muslim cultures?

It means that as modern cultures, we are far from where I think God wants us to be in dress, yes.
We're just used to immodesty in our cultures, so the longer time goes by, the more [LESS] we learn to accept - to the point now where partial nudity is now ok.
Christians also have the Holy SPirit leading them - so why is toplessness not a leading standard of common Christian conduct?

Where did Paul write that being nude or 1/2 naked was permissible and modest? I'm not even asking for head to tow gowns as was custom in Israel, just no nudity.

The majority of people can be stimulated by just about any part of the human body. Once again, we have to ask what is it about breasts that warrants unique treatment, unless you really are suggesting we follow conservative Muslim culture, in which case men can still use their imagination.

Again, this fails to support toplessness as modesty or moral - it's more opinion & observation that don't support it.
If men get aroused with the obvious body parts we all see, then how is going even FURTHER to undressing the female body arousing them LESS? It is lending itself to MORE arousal and visual excitement the more they see of her. That's just a biological fact of nature - and that is directly spoken about in scripture that we do not tempt or stumble others.

It's just plain common sense; if men get excited by seeing a little of a female's body, then the more you uncover, the more the arousal you will create (the wrong kind which brings attn. to her body)...
Why is everybody missing that?

Likewise, it would seem that if toplessness is obscene to your husband's sensibilities, then the onus is on him to avoid putting himself in situations with people who have different sensibilities, not on the people of Thailand to follow the standards of conservative Americans.

First off, I said nothing of what my husband thought or felt about it, I simply stated it as a fact that happened.
It was his first time there, in Thailand and at the hotel.
How could he have known or anticipated that???

So.. now people shouldn't go anywhere naked people go? I think this defeats your support of toplessness doesn't it?
People who find it immodest and sexually enticing are then forced to stay locked up in their homes, away from any public pools & beaches or wherever else they decide they have to strip? I'd consider that selfish to impose on others.

No, the ONUS is on both of them. He needs to look away, but she caused his attn. to be drawn and the issue he's forced to deal with correctly. She is equally responsible for baiting and attracting men's eyes when exposing over 1/2 her body.

Paul gave that as a standard, so SHE has a responsibiity; had Paul kept silent, you'de have more of an argument on onus.

But I hardly envision that at poolside, 2 Christian girls are lounging at the pool topless with Bibles, ready to witness Christ to anyone there.:o Does anyone associate toplessness while witnessing Christ to people? hardly.

The argument that is being made here is that there is no biblical basis for our attitudes about sexuality, and that our attitudes are more cultural than anything. How do you expect me to cite Scripture as proof that Scripture does not provide instruction on this question? It seems more appropriate to ask the person who claims that Scripture condemns it to back up her opinion with Scripture.

That's the point, you have none. You don't have ANY examples of this in their culture, and they were fully covered when Paul wrote his epistle on modesty in moderation - was Paul encouraging them to strip their tops off?

The issue is not about deciding for ourselves what is moral. The idea is that I don't believe that it is appropriate to judge other cultures as sinful regarding issues about which the Scriptures lack clear direction

The issue isn't deciding what is moral? Ok what is it then? If Christians can't decide what is modest or moral, then how are we going to know how to conduct ourselves or guide others?

Back to "if the Romans go naked, let's not judge that as wrong"... what's next? Just becuz some cultures do something, it does NOT make it ok.

I'd still love to see examples of prominant Christian leaders and theologians who promote partial female nudity as a biblical principle that's acceptable and "modest". I know of zero.