I just want to ask this question because when God created us we were naked (I assume) and probably there's not even a leaf covering our genitals like how children's books portray it. But then when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they got ashamed of being naked. So does our awareness and concern of being nude came from Satan? Or is it even bad at all that we are concerned about being naked? Because the bible mentioned like it was kind of a big deal that we have discovered that we are naked and we got ashamed of it. If there is nothing to be ashamed of, then maybe we should go to church naked to honor the purity of humans, like what God had intended right? But on the opposite we wear our best clothes to church. So this is kinda ironic to me.. Does God consider naked good or bad? Or does it even matter at all?
-
1Are you going to start a Nudist Church? LOL – Mawia Nov 08 '13 at 10:23
-
1@Mawia lol.. was just wondering =) – FFCoder Nov 08 '13 at 10:27
-
2This question appears to be off-topic because it is an is x a sin question, and is, therefore primarily opinion-based. – David Stratton Nov 08 '13 at 12:34
-
possible duplicate of In which denominations is naturism unacceptable? – Affable Geek Nov 08 '13 at 15:29
-
Nudity isn't but lustful thoughts are (I could quote scripture). The two go hand in hand due to animal instinct - no matter what any naturalist says. Controlling thoughts is distinctly different than not having them. – The Freemason Nov 08 '13 at 18:47
-
Toddlers can be naked on the beach without feeling shame. Adam and Eve had this innocence at first, but when they became aware of their bodily peculiarities, they felt shame and wanted to cover themselves. This phenomenon, which is called ‘original sin’, is experienced by children too when they get older. – Constantthin Sep 08 '19 at 08:58
2 Answers
Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame. (Genesis 2:25, NIV)
The first couple were, at first, roaming about without any clothes on. It was as natural as wearing clothes. Wearing or not wearing wouldn't have any difference at all. Sex was already introduced, as God already told them to multiply (Gen 1:28) but nudity and its shame was never felt. Something awful happened after they ate the forbidden fruit; they were now afraid to meet God for the first time.
But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?” He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.” And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” (Genesis 3:9-11, NIV)
Adam had been naked always, but never felt uncomfortable with it. Something made Adam feel uncomfortable with nudity. From Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible,
This also was not the true reason; he was naked from his creation as to his body, and it caused no shame in him, nor any dread to appear before God; he conceals the true cause, which was sin, that made the nakedness of his body shameful, and had stripped his soul of its native clothing, purity and holiness; and therefore it was, he could not appear before a pure and holy Being:
After paying heed to the Devil's voice, they are now under sin, of whose origin is the Devil. Their souls are now stripped off of holiness, and as a result, imparted with unholiness. Their mind is now sinful, their heart is now sinful. Before the fall, there was no lust in their heart, but now they are overtaken by lustful thoughts, which made them uncomfortable when naked.
Nudity itself is not a sin, we were created naked. Does it mean we should go to church without clothes? If you can stay with a pure mind and worship God without any hindrances, it's totally fine, but that is not easy. We need to cover ourselves modestly, so that our minds should not be distracted by lustful desires.
It is not the nudity which is sin, but it is our lustful eyes which we cannot control, is sin. Sin starts inwardly from the heart, and if not suppressed, manifested through the body and commits sin outwardly.
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28, NIV)
- 16,108
- 29
- 78
- 138
-
While I don't disagree with very much of this at all, what's with the "especially women"? – Andrew Leach Nov 08 '13 at 12:38
-
@AndrewLeach Something I thought the readers should understand without explicit explanation. LOL – Mawia Nov 08 '13 at 12:39
-
-
@AndrewLeach I think women are far less tempted by men. Most men, 99% I'd say, are tempted when they see naked women, but it's not the same with women, it's much less. – Mawia Nov 08 '13 at 12:46
-
4
If you can stay with a pure mind and worship God without any hindrances, it's totally find, but that is impossible-- For you maybe it's impossible. There are many places in the world where people go about daily business naked or very nearly so, and it's no hindrance. Be careful not to turn your own cultural perspective and expectations into laws for other people. – Flimzy Nov 08 '13 at 14:34 -
@Flimzy That makes sense. Didn't come to mind about those bushmen. Anyway, do you think they don't have any attraction to each other at all? (appearance might have some impact?) – Mawia Nov 08 '13 at 15:07
-
@Mawia: I'm sure they do have attraction to each other; otherwise the culture would die out within a generation. But I'm attracted to women at my church, who wear clothes... so that's not really relevant to anything... – Flimzy Nov 08 '13 at 15:08
-
2I think a strong argument could be made, in fact, that clothing can pose more of a hindrance, in terms of lust, and distraction from worship. If everyone at church was naked, after the first couple weeks of shock, there would be nothing interesting to look at. I'd already know every size, shape, color, of every body party of all 800 people in my church. Any lustful excitement would be lost quickly. By wearing clothes, there's the potential for a "fashion show" every week. Not to mention, a lustful mind is always left with something to imagine, and a fantasy to create, rather than worshiping. – Flimzy Nov 08 '13 at 15:14
-
1@Flimzy You have good points. I changed my wordings to be less definitive. – Mawia Nov 08 '13 at 15:17
-
1
-
You are saying lust is sin right? So how do Copulate without lust? I'm pretty sure its not love that makes us want to have sex with one another. – FFCoder Nov 09 '13 at 03:54
-
@FFCoder I believe that it is possible to copulate without lust, of course, not in our present nature. Before the fall, Adam and Eve could have copulated only in obedience to God's command, not because of lust. After the fall, human is now obsessed with sexual pleasure, maybe because that's the only pleasure they can find now in this world. The fall might have enhanced the sexual pleasure as well. It could be a part of the curse also, because God told to Eve that she will still desire her husband despite the pain of labor. – Mawia Nov 09 '13 at 07:34
Nakedness, is to be uncloaked, God created man cloaked in His righteousness:
Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness…
Nakedness is vulnerability, when man elected to eat of the “tree of knowledge of good and evil”, he moved out from under the covering of God’s righteous judgment in pursuit of his own. Man became aware of his nakedness and spiritually became vulnerable.
Physical nakedness is only a shadow of eternal nakedness, which is being uncloaked before the Lord. Here legitimate “fear” governs, we recognize our nakedness before God, our true vulnerability to God and we rightly fear God. This fear is met with God’s love and He covers us with His righteousness, Jesus Christ.
Is nudity a sin? One could make the case that spiritual nakedness is the original sin!
- 3,269
- 5
- 20
- 31
-
While I agree with your statement up to the last statement, I feel that the original sin was disobedience of God. I am in spite of that disagreement giving you an upvote. – BYE Nov 08 '13 at 16:00
-
@CecilBeckum, While the majority of Christianity would agree with you, it seems to me that it was misplace "faith". It seems man trusted in the words of the serpent rather than the word of God. – Rick Nov 08 '13 at 16:02
-
@ Rick God did not say man would die the day he lost faith in him, but said that the day you eat of the tree you will surely die. It was not the eating of the tree physically which incurred the death penalty, otherwise death would have been immediate. It was the disobeying God that invoked that penalty. – BYE Nov 08 '13 at 16:12
-
@CecilBeckum, Spiritual death (faith transgressed) was immediate, thus the realization of their nakedness. – Rick Nov 08 '13 at 16:19
-
@ Rick I'll have to research that more because as I understand Spiritual death that refers to the second death described in Revelation, but certainly they were immediately changed from pure to impure. – BYE Nov 08 '13 at 16:46
-
Your quoted reference, and thus your answer upon which it is based, is irrelevant to the question wearing clothes, because in the passage "clothed" and "covered" are metaphores for "bestowing". It's a bit like how "My husband showered me with gifts" doesn't literally mean he caused gifts to rain down upon me, it's just a fancy way of saying "My husband gave me lots of gifts". – Bohemian Feb 26 '19 at 16:23