The deteriorating perception of nudity

[other one]

an artist rendering of the description in Rev.1

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Oh how some stretch at the tie that binds.... or are not tied at all-

Gen 3:10

10 So he said, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself."

NKJV

Gen 3:21

21 Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

NKJV

To cast off the clothes is to cast off the provision of God for acceptance... if you can be naked before God

and others and not be ashamed then I suggest perhaps it is not the same God that was before Adam and Eve

or the same heart which was not thoroughly soaked in sin- What God has done let no man undue! Love, Steven

God made them naked, they stayed naked for their entire time in the garden, which was spent with God.

Clearly God did not have an issue with their nudity.

The issue with nudity is man's issue, not Gods.

We will all stand naked before God...and none of us will care.

 

The first biblical reference to nudity is connected with shame.   Nudity is always connected with shame in the Bible.  Uncovering or exposing a person's body was considered a shameful and reprehensible act. 

 

The practice of modesty that is a hallmark of Torah-observant Judaism down through history comes from an understanding of the Bible's commandments to avoid public nudity.

 

The only eyes that should see a person's nude body is their spouse (or possibly a doctor).

 

When Adam realized he was nude, he hid from God.  God made Adam and Eve clothing.  He did not encourage them to remain nude.  The clear implication from Scripture is that they were covered in the glory of God prior to their fall in the garden.  The presence of sin robbed man of that covering and as a result man was ashamed.

 

There is no place in Scripture from which anyone can build a case for public nudity being acceptable, beautiful, or normal.  The human body is a beautiful thing, but nudity is not. It is shameful and while it might be extolled in pagan/secular literature or art, such is not in accordance with the way of the Lord.

[TsukinoRei]

1 Samuel 18:3-4 "And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." 

 

 

 

How did Jonathan do this without getting naked?

 

Is there any suggestion that this was anything but a nice thing for Jonathan to do?

 

 

The clothing made for Adam and Eve was a chagowr.  

 

 noun [masculine] belt, gridle (distinct from אֵזוֺר waist-cloth, Che^{Jer, in Pulpit Comm. (1883) 333}; Jerem^{Life and Times (1888) 161} RS^{JQ Jan. 1892, 289 ff.}) — חֲגוֺר for sword 2 Samuel 20:8(yet read probably חָגוּר, Th We Klo Dr), compare 1 Samuel 18:4; article of commerce Proverbs 31:24 (collective? or of a richly adorned girdle?).

חֲגוֺרָה noun feminine girdle, loin-covering, belt — חֲגוֺרָה Isaiah 3:24; חֲגֹרָה 2 Samuel 18:11; 2 Kings 3:21; suffix חֲגֹרָתוֺ 1 Kings 2:5; Plural חֲגֹרֹת Genesis 3:7; — girdle, loin-covering Genesis 3:7 (J); as article of women's dress Isaiah 3:24; belt of warrior 1 Kings 2:5; 2 Kings 3:21 (׳חֹגֵר ח), compare 2 Samuel 18:11. — On חֲג֖וֺרָה Isaiah 32:11 see חְגַר 1

 

 

http://biblesuite.com/hebrew/2290.htm

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

Romans 14:14

"I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean."

 

 

We are called to be clothed in righteousness, not to overly concern ourselves with the bits of sewn cloth we cover our bodies with.  If a person is dancing before the Lord with joy and worship, and we're worried about their plumber butt and low neckline then we're vain and empty and the one with half their butt hanging out is in the presence of God!

[Guest shiloh357]

Quote

1 Samuel 18:3-4 "And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." 

 

 

 

How did Jonathan do this without getting naked?

It says they made a covenant.  The covenant tradition of giving someone your robe was common.  It was the outer robe and it often had the name of the family on it.  When Jonathan gave David that robe it was symbolic of the familial relationship they now had.  The Bible doesn't go into detail because the original audience would not have needed this kind of explanation.

 

It was important because Jonathan was the son of Saul and this kind of familial "brotherly" relationship would have been an extreme privilege for David.  David was walking around in the coat of the family of Saul and this coat would have had the King's family coat of arms upon it. 

 

Jonathan didn't get naked because it was only the outer robe and more of cloak than robe.  His regular robes would have remained on.   This goes back to understanding the historical/cultural context in hermeneutics I mentioned to you earlier, which you simply brushed aside.

 

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

God didn't make them loin cloths.  They did, in Gen. 3:7.  They sewed those loin cloths themselves.   God made them coats that would have completely covered in them in Gen. 3:21.  You need to read the Bible a little closer.  God's standard of modesty is well known in Scripture and our norms for modesty are informed by Scripture, not imposed on Scripture.

 

 

Quote

Romans 14:14

"I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean."

 

 

We are called to be clothed in righteousness, not to overly concern ourselves with the bits of sewn cloth we cover our bodies with.  If a person is dancing before the Lord with joy and worship, and we're worried about their plumber butt and low neckline then we're vain and empty and the one with half their butt hanging out is in the presence of God!

 

 

That is a misapplication of that verse.  Paul is referencing man-made special fasting days and traditions in Romans 14.  He is not discussing modesty and He would have been opposed to the kind of immodesty that we see in the world, today. 

[Guest man]

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

[TsukinoRei]

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

 

 Once again demonstrating that the Bible has not maintained integrity of message across translations.

[Guest man]

 

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

 

 Once again demonstrating that the Bible has not maintained integrity of message across translations.

 

 

 

What translation do you use?

[TsukinoRei]

 

 

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

 

 Once again demonstrating that the Bible has not maintained integrity of message across translations.

 

 

 

What translation do you use?

 

 

Several comparatively.  No single one can be trusted on its own. When there is clearly disagreement between them I look to the Greek and the Hebrew.  Even then I am willing to change my mind about the most likely interpretation when presented with new information.  This is how I am able to not mind when others disagree with me.  My buttons only get pushed when my intentions or my intelligence are called into question, and when these attacks are deceitfully referred to as an adequate argument against academic points.  Dishonesty and injustice are my pet gripes.    You haven't done those things to me yet, which I appreciate very much.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.  Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

 

 Once again demonstrating that the Bible has not maintained integrity of message across translations.

 

Wrong.   The loin cloths are in verse 7.  The loin cloths were what Adam and Eve made for themselves.  The coats of skins made for them by God is in verse 21.  The problem is not in the translations.  The problem is with your misreading of the text.

[OneLight]

 

 

 

 

It wasn't much of a covering, it still left Eve topless.

 Why would God clothe her in that fashion if He thought it was sinful?  Strict standards of covering clearly don't come from God, but rather come from cultural norms and then are imposed upon scripture.

 

Genesis 3

21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

 

Once again demonstrating that the Bible has not maintained integrity of message across translations.

 

  

What translation do you use?

 

 

Several comparatively.  No single one can be trusted on its own. When there is clearly disagreement between them I look to the Greek and the Hebrew.  Even then I am willing to change my mind about the most likely interpretation when presented with new information.  This is how I am able to not mind when others disagree with me.  My buttons only get pushed when my intentions or my intelligence are called into question, and when these attacks are deceitfully referred to as an adequate argument against academic points.  Dishonesty and injustice are my pet gripes.    You haven't done those things to me yet, which I appreciate very much.

 

The Hebraic word used in Genesis 3:21 for what was made is kthnuth, which means tunic-of (H3801).

A tunic is a coat or robe, covering the whole body.

 

Genesis 3:21

Hebrew:

u ∙iosh ieue aleim l ∙adm a ∙l ∙ashth ∙u kthnuth our u ∙ilbah∙m

Word for word translation:

and ∙he-is-making^do Yahweh Elohim for ∙Adam and ∙for ∙woman-of ∙him tunics-of skin and ∙he-is-^cclothing ∙them