Re: Is it Befitting for a Christian to be a Nudist?

On Feb 5, 1:03 pm, "Bill S" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes,  A Christian can be a nudist!.    Non-nudists love to throw the Adam
> and Eve naked story at the Christian.   This dispute was settled ages ago,
> and popes have remarked on the significance of this story.  Christians can
> go naked, they can show their crotches to each other, even their kids can
> see daddy's dick or mommy's muff without being "evil" and going to hell.
> Sin happens in the mind, and adultery or lust occurs in the brain long
> before it gets physical.   God created every part of the body, He did not
> create some parts dirty or vile.  What people do with their bodies is
> something they have to answer for on judgement day.  That's a Christian
> belief.  Good Christians don't condem others either, instead they pray.
> Good Christians don't follow scripture when they enact laws against those
> that practise other beliefs, again according to The Bible, that's Gods
> business.
>
> When Eve helped Adam eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge, they then
> realized they were naked and ashamed, and tried to cover their nakedness by
> tieing leaves together.   Their nakedness was not their un-clothed bodies,
> it was instead their realization that they went against God's rule not to
> eat from the tree of knowledge.  This was their first time defying God and
> they had no idea how this was going to affect them.   When they heard God in
> the garden, they hid themselves.  When asked by God why they were hiding it
> was because they knew they screwed up and didn't know how God was going to
> react when He figured it out.  They were "naked" because they did not know
> how this was going to work out. Naked as in totally un-prepared for God's
> anger.  They were ashamed because they went against God's rule.  God decided
> to send them out of the Garden of Eden to toil and labor under the hot sun,
> so he was nice and He made them hats and shoes with high SPF ratings.  God
> never told Adam and Eve to cover their crotches as one would believe from
> viewing too many puritanical art paintings.  An appropriate apron is a handy
> tool to lessen wear and tear on the body while working in the fields or
> sharpening farming implements.  With just the two of them to start
> populating the entire world, who are they to be modest for?  God's seen
> them, he built them, so this belief that God wanted us to be ahamed of our
> bodies and to cover them up is folly.  Adam and Eve, and God had more
> serious issues than modesty and vanity.
> Bill S in AZ (a Pagan)
>
> "Anna" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:8d4664a8-8bfd-4cd6-a2cd-814097681a58@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
> A Christian blogger asks - is it befitting for a Christian to be a
> nudist?
>
> Comments can be posted at the blogger's blog as well as here.
>
> http://www.boomerinthepew.com/2008/12/is-it-befitting-for-a-christian...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/8bopm6
>
> Is it Befitting for a Christian to be a Nudist?
>
> This is my 9th post, in an on-line study group reading of C.S. Lewis'
> "Mere Christianity".  Here is the landing page that contains all my
> posts.
>
> I find our culture peculiar, in that we refuse to talk about things of
> a sexual nature, yet the inhabitants of our culture obviously indulge,
> in a closet sort of way, in those things which they refuse to talk
> about openly.
>
> This sends very confusing messages to our children.  I can certainly
> attest that, in my childhood, sexuality was never, ever talked about.
>
> I come to this subject because sexual morality is the next subject in
> C.S. Lewis', "Mere Christianity".  In the opening paragraphs, he first
> touches on the subject of modesty, propriety, and decency, as opposed
> to chastity.
>
> I intend to cover chastity in my next post.  However, I think the
> subjects of modesty, propriety, and decency merit a discussion.
>
> Please read on...
>
> If you ever travel outside the shores of the United States, you are
> going to confront this issue.  Here are C.S. Lewis' thoughts on this
> issue:
>
> "The social rule of propriety lays down how much of the human body
> should be displayed and what subjects can be referred to, and in what
> words, according to the customs of a given social circle.  Thus, while
> the rule of chastity is the same for all Christians at all times, the
> rule of propriety changes.  A girl in the Pacific islands wearing
> hardly any clothes and a Victorian lady completely covered in clothes
> might both be equally 'modest', proper, or decent, according to the
> standards of their own societies:  and both, for all we could tell by
> their dress, might be equally chaste (or equally unchaste)."
>
> I agree.  My wife and I were traveling with friends in Austria a few
> years ago.  We spent three weeks admiring the beautiful Alps and
> immersing ourselves into the culture with all its great food, art, and
> and centuries old architecture.
>
> The last few days of the trip were spent at this incredible resort,
> high in the Alps.  After checking in, my wife and I hurried to take a
> relaxing dip in the underground hot tubs.  These hot tubs were
> stunningly beautiful, and most relaxing.
>
> My wife and I found ourselves alone, and enjoyed a great time of
> relaxation soaking our weary bones from three weeks of travel.
>
> Suddenly, our state of relaxation was broken when a family walked into
> the underground tranquility.  Into our room walked father, mother,
> young boy, and young girl.  All naked as jay birds!
>
> Needless to say, we were shocked (to ourselves of course), and gave
> each other a look of bewilderment.  Oh... so calmly, after staying an
> appropriate amount of time,  so as to not look shocked, we gathered
> our towels and went running upstairs to our friends to inquire about
> this state of affairs.
>
> Our friend, who was born in Austria, came down to the spa and read us
> a sign, in German, that read, "No Bathing Suits Allowed"!
>
> Culture shock to the extreme!
>
> Here, again on this topic, is C.S. Lewis:
>
> "When people break the rule of propriety current in their own time and
> place, if they do so in order to excite lust in themselves or others,
> then they are offending against chastity.  But if they break it
> through ignorance or carelessness they are guilty only of bad
> manners.  When, as often happens, they break it defiantly in order to
> shock or embarrass others, they are not necessarily being unchaste,
> but they are being uncharitable:  for it is uncharitable to take
> pleasure in making other people uncomfortable.  I do not think that a
> very strict or fussy standard of propriety is any proof of chastity or
> any help to it, and I therefore regard the great relaxation and
> simplifying of the rule which has taken place in my own lifetime as a
> good thing."
>
> So, do I think it befitting for a Christian to be a nudist?  I can
> only answer this for myself, allow you to understand my reasoning's,
> and implore you to seek your answer between you, your soul, and God
> almighty.
>
> For me, I will not be a nudist because:
>
>     * I am not certain that I would be able to keep my thoughts pure
> at all times.
>     * I am not certain that, if I am a nudist that I can keep from
> allowing a fellow brother/sister in Christ from stumbling.
>
>     * I would derive no pleasure from playing nude volleyball.
>
>     * I would certainly derive no pleasure from seeing some of my
> friends nude, nor would they me!
>
> On the other hand, the Bible gives great latitude, under Christ, for
> what is lawful.  We simply must remember that we don't get to pick and
> choose from God's word.  The Sermon on the Mount makes it clear, if we
> lust in our heart, then we have committed adultery.
>
> ----
>
> Comments:
>
> AndyC said...
>
> You are right on several fronts:
>
> -It is a funny cartoon.
> -Some will be less than pleased that you posted it.
>
> -While propriety is situational, our feelings towards a particular
> situation  is internal. I would not be a nudist because of how I would
> feel doing so.
>
> -If you engage is such behavior, you have to think about why you are
> doing it. Being a nudist, are you doing it out of some feeling of
> purity and freedom, or are you doing it because you can and you know
> it will shock some segment of the population. If it is the second,
> there is no propriety there.
>
> Laurie said...
>
> You're ahead of me in the reading now. But I found your summary
> helpful. I appreciate Lewis' handling of the subject and, from what
> you've posted, find myself in agreement. Becoming a Christian changed
> the way I dress. I no longer choose to dress in a way that draws
> attention to my sexuality. It's not right to publicize myself in that
> way or to risk enticing others to lust. It's really kind of shocking
> to look back and realize how much of my personal style as an
> unbeliever revolved around looking "understated but sexy".
>
> As far as being a nudist goes, not only do I think it goes against the
> grain, (Sinners should have clothes on. Adam knew it and God
> reinforced the notion by clothing him Himself, in more durable
> garments.) It’s just plain unsanitary.
>
> David A. Porter said...
>
> I love that statement....sinners should have clothes on! LOL!
>
>   Rich Bordner said...
>
> David,
> hmmmm....I agree in spirit. This is one of those areas where certain
> relativeness reigns between cultures.
>
> But, the underlying rules are the same: propriety and not exciting
> lust. This is what we need to pay attention to. Seems like both you
> and Lewis recognize this.
>
> However, I am concerned that many would use the "cultural relativeness
> of social propriety" argument to justify indulging in their own sinful
> desires. As Paul argued in Romans 1, we sinners tend to be like that;
> we tend to suppress the truth in unrighteousness and put the cart
> before the horse (or, really, we just shoot the horse) for selfish
> gain.
>
> Rick said...
>
> There is no place in the bible that condemns nudity, other than where
> the serpent got away with his greatest lie - telling Adam and Eve that
> their bodies were hideous and needed to cover themselves. God does not
> make mistakes. When they hid from him because they were "naked", he
> did not say "oh me, you're right. let me fix that...". He wanted to
> know who told ...
>
> read more »

Bill S.....i know you gave it your best shot....and i do realize that
genesis can be interpreted in many ways to suit the lust of
humans.....so i stand by my reasoning that God was not concerned about
anything at the time he found them after they had disobeyed him and
eat the fruit....then you go on to say he made them hats and
shoes....where did you get that information from another
nudist.....now you make it seem that they were needing to go plow the
fields of WHAT....and so i know it would be nice if everyone would
believe the nudist and then the nudist could say....by the way the
clothing God made left the genitals uncovered....iows....the legs were
covered and the stomach was covered....Bill i gotta tell ya this kind
of crap is only told by nudist and this is the reason nudist are the
most uncredible folks on planet earth in  the minds of the 99 plus
percent of textiles....i know it is hard for a nudist to look at
themselves as they spend all of their times worrying about closure of
beaches and laws to regulate nudist camps....but hey why even mention
what the Christian situation is....most of you guys are not Christian
anyhow and to argue such a stupid idea only serves to make the nudist
be totally without any credibility.....no Pope or reliable leader has
ever said that social nudity was ok....they have said along with
Falwell that the body is beautiful wholesome and pure and i know of no
one on earth that disagree with that...so your argument seems to be
erroneous in many ways....but nudist have better things to do than
misrepresent what Christian leaders have said and what the Bible did
not say....regards...jz