christian nudism

Whether man would have continued naked had he not sinned the Word of God does not explicitly state. However, we do note that after the first human pair sinned Jehovah God made clothes for them, slaughtering animals to provide the skins. (Gen. 3:21) Certainly that was a change from their original nakedness. But since these clothes were provided by the Creator himself, who would dare claim that Adam and Eve would have been better off without them? Certainly throughout the Scriptures we note that God’s servants wore clothing, and oftentimes it is described.

More than that, man is the only creature on earth that has need of clothing, and that for at least three sound reasons. First, as a protection from the elements and nature, from heat and cold, from rough terrain or thorns, and so forth. Secondly, there is the matter of beauty and comeliness. Clothing adds to the appearance, helps give one a measure of confidence and serves to cover one’s unseemly parts, even as the apostle Paul notes at 1 Corinthians 12:23. And thirdly, there is the matter of modesty. Thus we read at Revelation 16:15 that Christians should take care lest they lose their garments and be exposed to shame. True, this refers to spiritual garments, but the illustration would be without force if the nude state were to be preferred to the clothed.

Further, the Scriptures admonish Christian women to be chaste and modest in their attire: “I desire the women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind.” (1 Tim. 2:9) It would be stretching credulity to believe, as claimed by the nudists, that men and women of the world are of such a high moral tone that in the presence of nude women they would not be likely to transgress along the line Jesus mentioned at Matthew 5:28: “Everyone that keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

 

Adam, Eve, and King David would agree with you. Kind David danced naked for God.

 

I dont have much to add- - but interesting thoughts from all of you Christian folk
jj:sunny:

 

Actually David was "celebration dancing" because he had come home from a successful mission to kill a pile of ppl...and he danced until his clothes fell off. just sayin'...it wasn't like he started out naked...he just ended up that way.
And lets not forget that David was said to be a "man after the Lord's own heart".
That bugs a lot of ppl; but, not me. It shows me that God definitely loves those of us that aren't perfect.

 

I don't see Adam and Eve's covering themselves as being suddenly ashamed of their bodies , but being ashamed of their sin of disobedience in eating of the forbidden fruit. Before the fall they had no idea what being naked was--like innocent children. The fruit gave them that knowledge, although it didn't suddenly make nudity sinful; it never was before.

They covered themselves with leaves in a feeble effort to blend in with the foliage and hide from God. God asked "Who told you that you were naked?" He was not concerned about their nakedness, but about how they realized that they were naked--knowing that they had eaten of the forbidden fruit. Although God knew that they had sinned and eaten of the forbidden fruit, he wanted them to admit to it, but all Adam did was blame Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent.

God did not clothe them with skins to cover their nakedness that had suddenly become offensive to Him as many choose to believe, but He did it (1) As a symbolism of the future sacrifice of the innocent Lamb of God for all of man's sins. (2) Because He was casting them out of a perfect environment into a harsh, cruel world that He had just cursed with thorns and other hazards to the body. He never said that the human body is sinful and must be kept covered. There are verses talking about sexual sin, but none of them say that simple non-sexual nudity (Yes there IS such a thing) is sinful.

It is quite possible for both males and females to be nude together without any sexual activity going on. What goes on in people's minds I have no idea. For many years now I have participated in mixed social nudity, and only once have I seen a man aroused; he was asleep by the pool and apparently having a pleasant dream. I doubt that I would get aroused even if I was still able.

One year I was at a nudist resort during a whole week of a teen convention with nudist teen boys and girls who spent the whole week nude together without any hint of inappropriate behavior, Yes, even teens can be nude together without sexual behavior. Also, I never saw one teen boy who was aroused at any time.

So, men and women, teenagers and children can be nude together without any inappropriate behavior, and children are NOT harmed by seeing nude people. Children are natural-born nudists and only learn to be ashamed when their parents and society brainwashes them into believing that nudity is wrong, gross, offensive, shocking, and other ridiculous things. A mind that learns the difference between sexual nudity and non-sexual nudity can easily enjoy social nudity without a hint of sexual activity; I've seen it happen many times for many years.

Despite what some (or many) here believe, being socially nude in mixed company is not sinful. What is sinful is what goes on in a person's mind while dressed or undressed. Clothing can make a woman look very sexy, but I don't think a totally nude woman is anywhere near as sexy looking as one in certain clothing that is meant to entice and arouse. People are taught that being nude is sinful but can't prove it by God's word without taking scripture out of context and giving it a meaning that was never intended.

 

Christian nudists gotta wear leaves. It's a fact.

 

blasphemy!!!!

 

GOD:ADAM AND EVE TAKE YOUR CLOTHES OF, DUDE! gET NAKED OR GET THE HELL OUT OFHERE!!!

 

Well, if you think Christian nudism is a somewhat strange concept, check this out: http://christiannymphos.org/ It's a site for Christian women to share sexual info about how to have better sex with their husbands. Not a bad idea, imho....

 

OMG This site is tha shit!!! I'm going to go there every day and take the piss out of them so much. These paople are just not serious.

Wtf: Position of the week: The Thigh Master/ The Backdoor Bufett. Shiit! Ayaya! These people are serious about getting children, eh!

 

The thigh master's one of our favorite things to do when we need a quickie-and we're pretty serious about kids-we've already got 3 of them (little screaming ones, that is) Actually, they seem to be real serious about what they're doing on that site-I just found it a little while ago.....

Just shows that all religious people aren't necessarily hung up about sex......I'm certainly not

 

Are you a christian who visits this reguarly? How does the thigh master go?

 

I wish my wife was as naughty as some of these chicks on this site-those positions are really neat.....and they seem to be pretty serious...some of these chicks on there are complaining that their husbands don't slam it to them nearly often enough....these girls seem to be pretty open about sex, seems to me.....

 

I'm a Christian, but I just went to that site for the first time after I saw the link here-if you want to know how the thigh master works, send me a pm-it'll probably be a little too graphic for this thread.

 

I agree that many people react with lust to nudity, but it is a logical fallacy that avoiding nudity makes you more able to resist lust.
In fact, we are conditioned to associate nudity with sex and that conditioning can either never be taught (raising your kids as nudist) or can be reversed (becoming a nudist).

I doubt that even someone conditioned to lust after nudity would react to all people equally. If you are a straight guy, do you lust after men when you take a shower at the local gym? If you see the nude bodies of people who are affected by extreme old age, morbidly obese, amputees, badly scarred people, are you still going to react with lust? What about physicians and other health care workers who must see patients in the nude? Morticians? Painters and art students doing life studies of the nude model? If your career demands it, you will learn to react to nudity without lust. The few who don't make the transition usually get jailed for acting out their lust.

I am sure that some people are so stubbornly lecherous that no amount of retraining will correct this fetish. And the success of the phone sex business is proof that you don't even have to see a woman to lust after her.
But I think the evidence is clear: most people can learn to dissociate nudity from lust. For nudist couples, words, shared experiences and touch can inspire sexual desire. And just to be clear, the sexual desire of a couple is not inherently lust. Lust is defined as inordinate desire; not all desire is inordinate.

To your other point, adding additional rules ( "a fence" in your words) to the basic teachings of Christ does not improve your chances of obeying those teachings. Even if avoiding nudity prevented lust (which I have demonstrated it does not), it would not address the underlying problem: living for selfish gain rather than considering the needs of others or even your own long-term best interest.
It is better to correct your improper reaction to nudity rather than spending a lifetime avoiding it. When you see someone who is beautiful and nude, you can react with gratitude to God and appreciation of beauty from an aesthetic point of view rather than trying to possess the beauty for yourself (as if that were even possible).

 

English seer, artist and poet William Blake(wrote the famous 'Jerusalem' hymn etc) was an advocate and indeed a practitioner of Christian nudity. He and Mrs. Blake would by all accounts, sit in their garden naked and read Milton's 'Paradise Lost'. (probably I think the parts about Adam and Eve prior to the fall)This earned Blake a reputation as at best eccentric, and at worst insane by the bougeoise London society of the late 18th century.

I believe there were also what were known as 'Adamist' cults during the civil war period in england, some of whom believed in a return to the edenic state, and thus to nudity, and practiced it.

Fair play in my opinion.

My God bless yr skin.

 

I am a naturist and a Christian living in South Africa. There so much to say regarding being a naturist an a Christian. For my views please have a look at my blog and comment, it can only expand my knowledge of the subject.
[SIZE=medium]http://naturisminsouthafrica.blogspot.co.uk/[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]http://naturisminsouthafrica.blogspot.com/[/SIZE]
Have a blessed day
Peter

 

Absolutely correct. Christians can of course be nudists with a perfectly clear conscience.

 

A prime example of 'begging the question.' You start by assuming what you are trying to prove true is in fact true, and then use your assumption to prove that your assumption is true.

Let's start with the state of affairs before the serpent tempted Adam and Eve.
1. Adam was nude.
2. Eve was nude.
3. Adam was comfortable with his and Eve's nudity.
4. Eve was comfortable with her and Adam's nudity.
5. God was comfortable with Adam and Eve's nudity.
Conclusion: there is absolutely nothing wrong with nudity in the eyes of man, woman, or God.

Stuff happens. They submit to temptation. They eat the fruit.

New state of affairs.
1. Adam is ashamed of his nudity.
2. Eve is ashamed of her nudity.

What was AOK a few short moments ago is now cause for shame and embarassment. What changed?
1. God? Don't think so.
2. Nudity? Nope. Bare assed naked is still bare assed naked.
3. Adam and Eve? They are who they were in all respects save one. Now they have eaten the fruit, and suddenly their perception of the state of nudity has radically changed, and what was sweet and innocent is now repugnant and lewd.
Conclusion: the fruit was toxic. As the gift from the serpent, and as forbidden by God, it cannot have had merit of any sort and must have been a source of evil. It poisoned them into believing nudity is shameful, even though in the eyes of God it was clearly not.

To think otherwise is to think that God deceived his children and that the gift from the Prince of Lies rescued them from God's deception. It makes a whole lot more sense to think that 'knowledge of good and evil' is a blatant lie.

Are you really, actually, truly comfortable with that?

My opinion is unfit for mixed company.

 

I've never heard this put so succinctly so giving it a bump. The potential for lust is always there as it is at any textile beach but my overwhelming instinct is to appreciate the beauty of the female form and how well he made me capable of feeling such exultation.