Why is nudity wrong?

Darkhorse

just horsing around
Aug 10, 2005
10,078
3,977
mid-Atlantic
Visit site
✟288,141.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Adam and Eve were nude, but there was not sin for brief period and hence nudity meant nothing since "sexual desire" didn't exist.

Actually, sexual desire did exist, given by God. At the end of Genesis 1 (before the fall), He commanded Adam & Eve to "Be fruitful and multiply"; the only way for humans to do that is sex...


I am a Christian, and I can easily see myself becoming an actual nudist someday.

I am also a Christian, and I've been a nudist for 38 years.


God made animal skins for Adam & Eve to wear, to cover their sin, before they were cast out of the Garden. After the Fall of Man, nudity was a reminder of our sin.

God clothed them with animal skins to show them that a "blood sacrifice" was necessary to "cover" or atone for sin, pointing to Jesus in the future.
Leather and fur also protected them from cold and the "thorns and thistles" in the curse.


I just dont want to see everyones junk flying around, especially when I go out for dinner. ;)

I've eaten in nudist restaurants several times, and nobody's "junk flies around". Nudists carry a large towel everywhere, and they sit on it to keep seats, benches, etc. clean.

If a person has problems with lust when they're clothed, they will have lust problems with nudity. If they keep their lust under control when everyone has clothes on, nudity is no problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustMeSee
Upvote 0

technofox

Newbie
Jun 12, 2007
1,409
69
Earth
✟17,131.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Darkhorse said:
Actually, sexual desire did exists, given by God. At the end of Genesis 1 (before the fall), He commanded Adam & Eve to "Be fruitful and multiply"; the only way for humans to do that is sex...

I am also a Christian, and I've been a nudist for 38 years.

God clothed them with animal skins to show them that a "blood sacrifice" was necessary to "cover" or atone for sin, pointing to Jesus in the future.
Leather and fur also protected them from cold and the "thorns and thistles" in the curse.

I've eaten in nudist restaurants several times, and nobody's "junk flies around". Nudists carry a large towel everywhere, and they sit on it to keep seats, benches, etc. clean.

If a person has problems with lust when they're clothed, they will have lust problems with nudity. If they keep their lust under control when everyone has clothes on, nudity is no problem.

Wow great post and quite frankly I agree. Lust can happen regardless of the level of clothing. Cleavage can be more distracting than a bare breasted woman, because cleavage leave something to the imagination, whereas bare breasts may not. It all depends on each individual as to whether nudity or lack of nudity (or a combination thereof) can lead one to sin; however, one should not intentionally dress in a way that they know for sure would cause others to sin.
 
Upvote 0

The Nihilist

Contributor
Sep 14, 2006
6,074
490
✟16,289.00
Faith
Atheist
Cleavage can be more distracting than a bare breasted woman

Weird, right? I see cleavage and my brain just doesn't get it. It's like "Hey! Hey, what do you think is down there? It could be anything! You think it's treasure? I bet it's treasure! Get a better look, see if you can tell!" I do not understand why this happens.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,884
6,556
71
✟318,690.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Short answer: it ISN'T! :D

I find it wrong if carried to an extreme, just as I find anti nudity wrong carried to a similar extreme.

I'm not going nude when frying bacon or using a chain saw.

I'm going to get rude with anyone saying I should not be nude when bathing.

In a few years I might play nude volleyball, but now I'm still in the mode when if I play sports I play seriously and I don't like the idea of having my sex organ flopping arround when I may dive wildly for a dig.
 
Upvote 0

AnotherAtheist

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence
Supporter
Aug 16, 2007
1,225
601
East Midlands
✟123,826.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Weird, right? I see cleavage and my brain just doesn't get it. It's like "Hey! Hey, what do you think is down there? It could be anything! You think it's treasure? I bet it's treasure! Get a better look, see if you can tell!" I do not understand why this happens.

Christina Hendricks could be hiding enough treasure to get the western world out of the financial hole it's in.
 
Upvote 0

JustMeSee

Contributor
Feb 9, 2008
7,703
297
In my living room.
✟23,339.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Why is nudity wrong?

Why is it unacceptable for me to display certain parts of my anatomy in public, while other parts of my anatomy such as my ears are perfectly acceptable to display?

Is this (in my eyes dubious) morality based on our societal religious heritage, or does it have another source?
I am guessing it is largely due to religious and societal heritage, perceived hygienic reasoning, and location-specific attire expectations.

No shirt, no shoes, no service. :thumbsup:
 
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

KathleenM

Newbie
Oct 14, 2009
3
0
✟7,613.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In the book of Genesis, God gave Adam and Eve clothes. He gave them clothes because of their sin. They were became aware of their nakedness and were ashamed. This allows us to know that God made the first blood sacrifice, that that animal was a symbolic of Jesus in the new testament. It was a sign of Gods grace.
The fact that God gave them clothes to cover up in the first place, should be an indicator that we should be wearing clothes, that nudity isn't right.

When God made Adam and Eve, man and woman, he made them so they would respond to each other in particular ways. Because of this, we must wear our clothing in an appropriate way, that we will not allow a brother or sister to lust, and sin. Nudity encourages lust, where clothes, if wore correctly, will not. There are many verses in the bible about clothes, and how we should present ourselves, modestly.

Look to the bible for examples:
Adam, Moses, Joseph all wore clothes.
Jesus himself wore clothes. And who more should Christians aspire to be like, than our Lord himself.
 
Upvote 0

FreeInChrist88

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2009
2,925
283
✟37,716.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The fact that God gave them clothes to cover up in the first place, should be an indicator that we should be wearing clothes, that nudity isn't right.

That is one view that many take. To me, it seems anecdotal at best. How do we really know what God's true intention was for clothing Adam and Eve once He banished them from the Garden? Scripture doesn't provide the reason.

When God made Adam and Eve, man and woman, he made them so they would respond to each other in particular ways. Because of this, we must wear our clothing in an appropriate way, that we will not allow a brother or sister to lust, and sin. Nudity encourages lust, where clothes, if wore correctly, will not.

There are many verses in the bible about clothes, and how we should present ourselves, modestly.

Look to the bible for examples:
Adam, Moses, Joseph all wore clothes.
Jesus himself wore clothes. And who more should Christians aspire to be like, than our Lord himself.

Is there any clear-cut verse that says that clothing is required by God and that clothing will inhibit lust? Just because scripture mentions that certain individuals wore clothing doesn't necessarily imply a moral standard. A universal moral code is something like the 10 commandments where right and wrong are stated without any ambiguity.

People interpret a lot of scripture through the eyes of their culture. If their culture (church or secular) says the nude body is a sex object and will always incite lust, then they will "cherry pick" verses from the Bible to support that view. Often these verses have no direct and clear association with the taboo.

Why can't we just see the issue as it is? The Bible does not prohibit nudity. If our society is sexually overcharged and nudity causes certain ones to stumble, then that group needs to exercise appropriate caution. If someone else can experience non-sexual social nudity without lusting (and it is possible), then let them go for it.
 
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
4,507
921
America
Visit site
✟265,291.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Nudity is not always wrong. It depends on circumstances. It would be wrong to intentionally arouse someone that you should not. It would be wrong to intentionally offend someone with it. Some things that were said about scripture passages were reading things not said into them. But that is commonly done. Incidently, nothing in the Bible has Yahweh God requiring any of us to ever have something we wear on our feet.
 
Upvote 0

FaithLikeARock

Let the human mind loose.
Nov 19, 2007
2,802
287
California
✟4,662.00
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
It's not really. If you truly READ Genesis, and has already been said, MAN decided nakedness was shameful, not God. Nakedness without care was a side effect of the innocence of man before the fall. Hence why young toddlers take all their clothes off and no one bats an eye.

The issue is that human beings have associated certain body parts with sex, and assume that nakedness would only encourage lust and rape and what not. But if human psychology has proven anything, it's that the more you try to hide and shame something, the more people want it. Really if we WERE all nude, then we'd probably stop treating it like it's taboo. The more society questions after cut of clothing and labels everything that's not knee length skirts and turtle necks as "sexual", the more those wishing to rebel will wear them. Remove the concept of clothes altogether and what are they going to do? Probably wear clothes to spite the norm, but unless we somehow 100% revert to a point where wearing baggy clothes is sexier than wearing nothing at all (doubtful - humans can be dumb, but not that dumb), it's not like it'll do any harm. Point is: wearing clothes doesn't keep people from lust. I'm pretty sure most men don't care if Scarlett Johanson is wearing a burqa, they'll still think she's really attractive. It doesn't fix the problem. Instead, if we're talking sin, it introduces a new problem, which is pride and greed. As now we have a culture where everyone wants to be wearing the latest fashions, and clothes are so outrageously priced that monetary greed comes into play. So we now have a so-called solution (which God endorsed BTW) which does nothing to stop one sin and encourages two others.

EDIT: There is only one good reason why nudity might be wrong - because there are some people I would rather not see naked, and I don't think a societal shift would change that much. Like my grandparents. Or my brother. Or close friends who I love dearly but the idea of seeing them naked makes me want to hurl my lunch. Maybe if society functions like that for a while, but for the first few years I'll be locking myself in my house.
 
Upvote 0

FreeInChrist88

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2009
2,925
283
✟37,716.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It's not really. If you truly READ Genesis, and has already been said, MAN decided nakedness was shameful, not God. Nakedness without care was a side effect of the innocence of man before the fall. Hence why young toddlers take all their clothes off and no one bats an eye.

The issue is that human beings have associated certain body parts with sex, and assume that nakedness would only encourage lust and rape and what not. But if human psychology has proven anything, it's that the more you try to hide and shame something, the more people want it. Really if we WERE all nude, then we'd probably stop treating it like it's taboo. The more society questions after cut of clothing and labels everything that's not knee length skirts and turtle necks as "sexual", the more those wishing to rebel will wear them. Remove the concept of clothes altogether and what are they going to do? Probably wear clothes to spite the norm, but unless we somehow 100% revert to a point where wearing baggy clothes is sexier than wearing nothing at all (doubtful - humans can be dumb, but not that dumb), it's not like it'll do any harm. Point is: wearing clothes doesn't keep people from lust. I'm pretty sure most men don't care if Scarlett Johanson is wearing a burqa, they'll still think she's really attractive. It doesn't fix the problem. Instead, if we're talking sin, it introduces a new problem, which is pride and greed. As now we have a culture where everyone wants to be wearing the latest fashions, and clothes are so outrageously priced that monetary greed comes into play. So we now have a so-called solution (which God endorsed BTW) which does nothing to stop one sin and encourages two others.

This! Well said. :thumbsup:

EDIT: There is only one good reason why nudity might be wrong - because there are some people I would rather not see naked, and I don't think a societal shift would change that much. Like my grandparents. Or my brother. Or close friends who I love dearly but the idea of seeing them naked makes me want to hurl my lunch. Maybe if society functions like that for a while, but for the first few years I'll be locking myself in my house.

That's a pretty normal response. As one gets accustomed to non-sexual family and/or social nudity, that eeeeeeeeew factor goes away.
 
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

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,643
14,530
Here
✟1,196,492.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Why is nudity wrong?

Why is it unacceptable for me to display certain parts of my anatomy in public, while other parts of my anatomy such as my ears are perfectly acceptable to display?

Is this (in my eyes dubious) morality based on our societal religious heritage, or does it have another source?

It's not wrong.

Certain pockets of society view it as wrong for various reasons, but none that I've heard have held any water.
 
Upvote 0

FreeInChrist88

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2009
2,925
283
✟37,716.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Why is nudity wrong?

Why is it unacceptable for me to display certain parts of my anatomy in public, while other parts of my anatomy such as my ears are perfectly acceptable to display?

Is this (in my eyes dubious) morality based on our societal religious heritage, or does it have another source?

I read somewhere that much of the Church's aversion to nudity started with St. Augustine. Prior to his conversion to Christianity, Augustine had an illegitimate son and then lived with the boy's mother out of wedlock for 15 years. According to what I read, once he converted, he adopted a godly view of sexuality. But more than that, he went over board by creating all kinds of taboos. Apparently nudity was one of those taboos. I guess he believed that nudity = sex.

I understand that the prior to Augustine, many water baptisms were conducted in the nude.

Just to be clear, I'm only echoing something I read. And I can't even recall where I saw it. I haven't adequately researched the issue so I'm not sure how much of it is true. I would be very interested to hear from someone who has looked into this and find out if there is any validity to the Augustine origins.
 
Upvote 0

Girder of Loins

Future Math Teacher
Dec 5, 2010
2,869
130
30
United States of America
✟18,961.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The reason nudity is wrong is by social standards. I honestly have nothing against nudity, but others do. The male and female reproductive organs are considered something sexual in today's society so it is unacceptable(for lack of a better word) for those parts to be shown or flaunted, I think. However, in a society where it is not, I'm cool with it. Honestly, I think a lot of civilization's problems could be cured with the absence of clothing(not a sexual joke!!!!)
 
Upvote 0

7angels

Newbie
Dec 8, 2011
303
27
✟10,049.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
according to the word nudity is not wrong in and off itself. it is how it is used. at one time alcohol was illegal and some people still used it alcohol but most did not not but then alcohol became legal and now it is widespread. temptation is a dangerous thing when we have no self control or we allow our self control to be over ridden. the same thing will happen if nudity is made legal. sex will start to run rampant through society. just look at history because it is full of examples.

i am not against nudity but i do like to keep temptation from coming to pass if possible. if a person submits to temptation over and over again even if they think they have everything under control will eventually lead a person to fall sooner or later. even if you happened to be an exception to the rule and can handle being around nudity without temptation the word still teaches that we are to be an example to those around us and should a person see you nude when they think it is wrong and follow your example because they saw you do nude and decide that it must then be ok will end up sinning in God's eyes and God will hold the person who lead to the sinner's downfall responsible. so either way christians need to stay beyond reproach.

i hope this helps explain to you that nudity is not wrong but we as christians need to remain above repute in our walk with Christ.
 
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

thispoorman

Do justly, love mercy, walk humbly with thy God
Feb 13, 2012
119
40
North Carolina
✟13,909.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
I agree and disagree with 7Angels. I'm not sure that widespread nudity would lead inevitably to widespread fornication; like many other posters, I suspect rather the reverse. Perhaps "nudity/fornication" is equivalent to "having a drink/drunkenness": it's not the thing in itself, but the abuse, that is sinful.

I agree, with Paul, that we must not lead our brothers into sin. I will never be nude, if my nudity causes a brother or sister to sin. Not that it would. ;)
 
Upvote 0