2

A few years back there was an interesting topic on StackExchange related to the question of "Does the Bible command women to cover their breasts?"

In studying Genesis 3:21, where God made aprons for Adam & Eve, I can't find any definitive answer to the question of whether aprons, being translated from כתנת (kĕthoneth), refers to also the top of the body or just to a covering around the waist. Considering the warm climate of Eden where fig trees could grow, the former translation of it referring to the covering of the top part of the body seems rather awkward.

A possible connection between the ancient Israelites and the Minoans, who lived in very close proximity, are discussed here.

A PG-13 video of Minoan attire can be found here. As the video. points out, it is difficult to reconstruct the meaning without taking into account and reflecting upon an observer's own social bias (14:23 minutes in). In other words, some people will only interpret the art as myth expressed in art work. While others will depict the attire as exclusively worn by those involved in goddess worship. Still others will interpret it as reflecting both religious and standard everyday fashionable attire, just like modern clergy attire reflects the cultural attire of ancient Rome. The latter seems to be the most natural interpretation, in my opinion.

If this latter interpretation is true, than what is rather shocking about Minoan fashion attire is how out of place it seems in our culture. (Well, at least in most traditional settings.) For example, I would feel uncomfortable showing that video for a Bible class with men present. It might cause them to stumble with lust being stirred up.

Also, if the latter interpretation is true, is there any Biblical, or extra Biblical Jewish tradition, that would indicate the ancient Israelites dressed differently than their neighbors - i.e. the ancient Minoans?

Jess
  • 3,532
  • 5
  • 20
  • The video is not of "Minoan attire" but a representation of a goddess in Minoan and Mycenaean art. Your video does not indicate that regular Minoans dressed like that. We have a [history.se] site where you can ask about actual dress of Israelites and Minoans. – DJClayworth Nov 13 '21 at 00:40
  • 1
    I think in most hot environments toplessness was common when women worked outside. And when that's the case, it would not be seen as erotic nor immodest. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_nudity – curiousdannii Nov 13 '21 at 01:16
  • @DJClayworth, thanks for the critique. I adjusted my question to take into account your thought that the regular Minoans did not dress like that. But the video does not indicate that regular Minoans did not dress like that. It just mentions that some of the Minoans dressed up like that for religious rites. Some Minoans in the video dressed like that apart from religious rites. It could be like how pastors dress up in a suit and tie in doing religious services. And how other clergy wear stoles and chasubles that come right out of the tradition of what was once worn in the ancient Roman period. – Jess Nov 13 '21 at 01:22
  • @curiousdannii, Indeed, a good case can also be made, based upon ancient art depicting men rowing in boats, that in John 21:7 Peter actually did leave the boat au naturale. – Jess Nov 13 '21 at 01:34
  • Paul says (in relation to matters of appearance) 'Doth not nature teach ...'. Certain things are just natural. And throughout history and throughout the world, it is considered 'natural' for women to cover the upper body. It is rare for it to be considered otherwise. – Nigel J Nov 13 '21 at 02:02
  • 2
    @Nigel, I don’t know if that’s the case. In Greek culture there was the chiton, a finely woven, lightweight, translucent dress worn by sophisticated women. And in Africa and other places both men & women once went around without much on their bodies. – Jess Nov 13 '21 at 02:38
  • But these are isolated incidents. Generally, in history and worldwide, it is not the case. – Nigel J Nov 13 '21 at 03:08
  • @Nigel, I don't know what it's been in history. Besides Africa, there was also early America. The priest, Las Casas, who traveled with Columbus, wrote: "...on the whole, Indian men and women look upon total nakedness with as much casualness as we look upon a man's head or at his hands."

    When God provided clothing for Adam & Eve they were the only people around as husband & wife. The curse of the fall made them experience the desire to cover themselves before God, not necessarily because they needed to live clothed before each other. Modesty is more of a culturally conditioned reality.

     – Jess Nov 13 '21 at 05:04
  • I disagree. Since the Fall of mankind, clothing is an essential part of humanity for the sons of Adam. Just as humanity is not permitted to partake of blood (after the Flood). These are impositions placed upon humanity by righteous judgment. They are not 'cultural choices'. To recognise (and submit to) such matters is an integral part of genuine repentance. – Nigel J Nov 13 '21 at 09:26
  • A related question. –  Nov 13 '21 at 17:38
  • 3
    @NigelJ In the bush of Sierra Leone women strip to the waist at the community laundry, i.e. a wide spot in a stream, and the youngsters, both boy and girl are with them. When groups of men come upon them, neither group is uncomfortable (unless it's American missionaries, in my experience!). It is entirely cultural. – Mike Borden Nov 14 '21 at 00:34
  • @MikeBorden I disagree. Adam and Eve were ashamed. After they transgressed. Now, we should all be ashamed. This is a matter of repentance, regarding the purpose of humanity and the righteousness of God. – Nigel J Nov 14 '21 at 08:28
  • @NigelJ I thought they were afraid, not ashamed. – Mike Borden Nov 14 '21 at 12:23
  • @MikeBorden Adam hid because he was afraid. But he had already made an 'apron'. Why ? – Nigel J Nov 14 '21 at 16:57
  • 1
    @MikeBorden What troubles me most is the concept of some kind of idyllic paradise where natives go bare and and are (supposedly) 'innocent'. That undermines the truth of Adam's transgression and the truth of inherited sin. It is a myth. It is not real. – Nigel J Nov 14 '21 at 16:59
  • @NigelJ He felt exposed before God and he tried to fix it in the flesh? – Mike Borden Nov 15 '21 at 00:27
  • 4
    @NigelJ No one is talking about an idyllic paradise. But cultural standards do vary. In many places where women go topless it is highly inappropriate to not have shin-length skirts. Even Western/Anglo culture has oddities. What's acceptable at the beach is very inappropriate anywhere else (for both women and men.) A miniskirt is seen as much more sexy than shorts of the same or even shorter length. Some mothers breastfeed in private, others in public. And there can still be sin in all this. But there doesn't have to. In a tropical agrarian society women's toplessness doesn't have to be erotic. – curiousdannii Nov 15 '21 at 00:28
  • 1
    @curiousdannii I disagree. I am concerned about the undermining of God's judgment in Genesis and also about the apostolic requirement for modesty of dress. But your comments are indicative of widespread modern ecclesiastical attitudes. It is I that is in the minority, not yourself. – Nigel J Nov 15 '21 at 10:26
  • 1
    @Nigel Considering that 5 to 10% (depending on the survey) of the population identifies as gay or bisexual, every time someone undresses in front of the same sex (e.g. gym, doctor’s office, etc.) are they sinning by causing possible lust to occur? – Jess Nov 15 '21 at 21:38
  • @Jess I wouldn't know anything about that subject. So I cannot comment. – Nigel J Nov 16 '21 at 06:42

0 Answers0