Question:
I am what you call a closet-nudist. I am nude whenever I can be - but only in the privacy of my own room. I read, study Scripture, pray, exercise, listen to music, surf the web, etc. all nude.
My philosophy behind it is this: when God created us, He said "It is good". When mankind rebelled against God, they hid out of fear (of God's judgment), not shame (check the Hebrew). How can something that God created suddenly be evil? When He expelled them from the garden, He clothed them in animal skins - symbolic of the animal-sacrifice system to later be instated, and ultimately a symbol of Christ's sacrifice and ultimate atonement. I believe He clothed them out of natural necessity, not moral necessity. He was placing them in a harsh environment (read God's curse on the ground - thorns and thistles), so in His mercy He provided protection. When God sent manna to the Israelites in the desert, did He expect them to always be eating? No. In the same way, just because God provided clothing for Adam and Eve, I don't believe He expects us to always wear them.
Some may argue that the perversion (due to the Fall) of God's natural creation makes it impossible to be nude for the sake of being nude and not sin. Well, to that I say, Christ has made us a new creation. We are no longer under sin, we are under grace. That Edenic "shalom" is restored. Our bodies are the perfect temples of the Holy Spirit. Would you put a giant cloth over the Temple of God? I didn't think so. I think it is offensive to God that we are ashamed of His creation.
So, with this philosophical back-drop, I celebrate God's creation in it's natural state - albeit in the privacy of my own room. The reason is because Paul spoke of not causing a brother to fall. This means that, even if we know something is permissible, if it causes a brother to sin against his conscience, we should avoid that activity while in their presence. However, just because it causes someone to stumble, doesn't mean it is all-together sinful. If I was at a friends house, and they invited me to swim in their pool, and I said, "I usually don't wear a swim-suit when I swim. Is it okay if I don't wear one now?", it would cause my brother to stumble if he said, "No." However, if he said, "Sure, go ahead." Then I am not causing a brother to fall.
But here's the issue: lust. Being a teenage guy, I obviously struggle with lustful thoughts. My chief concern is being drawn into sin by being in the presence of a nude young lady. Now, I've read that in social nudist situations, the struggle with lust is greatly reduced, because it is a much less sexually-charged environment. So, I have been praying (ever since I began my closet-nudism) for wisdom and discernment regarding whether or not I should participate in social nudism. If I felt God's peace about being able to do it without lusting, then I would do it. If I knew I would be drawn to sin, I would not go.
I don't know why I wrote this. I'm not really even asking for advice. I'm just unloading. I want so desperately to enjoy God the way He made me, and the way it was meant to be, but unforturnately sin gets in the way. But Jesus is more powerful than sin, and His blood has made me a new creature, and He is working to change the desires of my heart - to change them from my sinful desires to His beautiful original desires.
I guess I shall ask: can anyone relate?
I welcome support, rebuke, criticism, even "persecution" here in this forum. I'm interested in what everyone has to say about this.
I'll be watching...
BTW here is a site I visit often: www.figleaforum.com (don't worry: there are NO pictures - only articles). There are some really good articles there that further explain the philosophy of Christian nudism.
Answer:
Here is my super-unintelligent response:
If God had intended for us to be naked after the fall, He would not have made clothes for Adam and Eve.
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by Nate If God had intended for us to be naked after the fall, He would not have made clothes for Adam and Eve.
Clothes also serve to protect people from their environment, not just to cover their body.
I am not arguing for nudism though, haha.
Answer:
Originally Posted by slap_j Clothes also serve to protect people from their environment, not just to cover their body. To be fair, he made that arguement here: I believe He clothed them out of natural necessity, not moral necessity. He was placing them in a harsh environment (read God's curse on the ground - thorns and thistles), so in His mercy He provided protection. When God sent manna to the Israelites in the desert, did He expect them to always be eating? No. In the same way, just because God provided clothing for Adam and Eve, I don't believe He expects us to always wear them. He also mentioned how the animal skins fore-shadowed the sacrificial system of the future...hmm...
Answer:
Originally Posted by Epaphras To be fair, he made that arguement here
Oh, didn't see that, haha.
Answer:
I think you have a lot of good points, but the ultimate issue for me with nudism is making your fellow members of the Church stumble and placing a stumbling block in the way of non-believers.
So, with this philosophical back-drop, I celebrate God's creation in it's natural state - albeit in the privacy of my own room. The reason is because Paul spoke of not causing a brother to fall. This means that, even if we know something is permissible, if it causes a brother to sin against his conscience, we should avoid that activity while in their presence. However, just because it causes someone to stumble, doesn't mean it is all-together sinful. If I was at a friends house, and they invited me to swim in their pool, and I said, "I usually don't wear a swim-suit when I swim. Is it okay if I don't wear one now?", it would cause my brother to stumble if he said, "No." However, if he said, "Sure, go ahead." Then I am not causing a brother to fall.
I think it would be poorly chosen to ask "I usually don't wear a swimsuit when I swim. Is it okay if I don't wear one now?" I think your private nudity is alright (unless, to be brief in respect to CGR's rules, that constant nudity opens you open to private immorality), but whereas a Christian who cuts meat out of their diet or who refrains from alcohol or who doesn't watch television may have only discomfort in revealing that conviction, nudity is in an issue in every society. I don't care if it's Ancient Greece, the Sub-Saharan present, or turn-of-the-century New York, clothing and nudity are huge issues.
The Greeks performed sporting events nude, but you would not attend a banquet nude. Many sub-Saharan tribes have much less clothing than we do, but still hold that after a certain age certain body parts must be clothed. And good luck walking around the Modern West nude in an average city.
If a friend invites you to swim, toss on a bathing suit. Nudity is such a huge debate that they might just wonder "Why didn't he save the speech and just hop in the pool? He doesn't object to clothing on moral grounds."
Nudity speaks to sexuality, and to insecurities. Your nudity might cause others to stumble in regards to self-loathing or exploring their own image-based aversions to nudity. Additionally, what if an unexpected guest shows up? What if there is a girl in the pool?
I don't eat meat. I'm not (yet?) a so-called "vegan," and I'm not really that militant anymore. But I find meat distasteful (with your Genesis research, I'm sure you would be able to infer the Biblical opinion of meat consumption in past eras as necessity-based, but I don't wish to discuss that here). However, I ate some chicken while on a mission trip the summer before this currently-ending one. I was in Mexico City, and while I was able to avoid meat in most meals (because some of the church-members there surprisingly applaud a meat-free diet as more healthy and had quick alternatives), one sweet older woman brought us all fried chicken for dinner after a hard day of work.
How does this apply to nudity? The idea of Christian nudism bothers me greatly because it seems like a very basic roadblock between communication between a "Christian nudist" and the world. If a Christian nudist wishes to exercise his apparel choice at every opportunity, he may find himself unable to engage others because his conviction creates a major barrier.
I don't care for meat, but if I have to eat a whole cow just to share the love of God with a stranger, I will.
However, a nudist may say "I would never let my nudism get in the way of the Gospel!" Very good! Then practice it in private, and wear clothes whenever in the presence of others.
Social nudism is dangerous, because you open yourself up to a lot of clashes. You don't know the convictions, histories, and orientations of everyone in that socially nude situation. It seems like way too big of a can of worms to open up.
Answer:
Originally Posted by *guest* If I was at a friends house, and they invited me to swim in their pool, and I said, "I usually don't wear a swim-suit when I swim. Is it okay if I don't wear one now?", it would cause my brother to stumble if he said, "No." However, if he said, "Sure, go ahead." Then I am not causing a brother to fall. I may simply be an uneducated fool, but how does your friend saying "No you cannot swim in my pool naked" constitute him stumbling? If anything it woud be protecting himself or anyone who may be around from stumbling.
Answer:
I think he ment that if he did it when his friend said no, it would be causing his friend stumble... but if his friend said it was ok, he wouldn't be..

though I assume it would be a guy friend, since how can you know for sure if a female would be driven to lust by seeing you nude or not?
Answer:
Originally Posted by Becky how can you know for sure if a female would be driven to lust by seeing you nude or not?
Maybe he has so many bellybuttons he looks like a telephone switchboard.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Becky I think he ment that if he did it when his friend said no, it would be causing his friend stumble... but if his friend said it was ok, he wouldn't be.. I got you. It just wasn't very clear there. It read as though his friend saying no caused him to stumble.
Answer:
Love is supposed to dictate our actions as believers.
In our culture, nudity is a sexual thing. Like it or not, it is. As such, being nude in a group would be:
1. Immodest. We are commanded to be modest in the text of scripture.
2. To defer to the weaker brother. People in the church struggle with lust, (men and women) homosexual desires, and all kinds of sinful urges.
3. creating a wedge in your future marriage. Women are jealous too dude, do you think your future wife would want you parading around other women nude? Would you want your future wife to be a stripper? She will probably view this similarly to that, and could well cost you more than it would gain.
4. Most assuredly not fleeing from lust.
In short, communal nudity would be foolhardy, costly, and probably sinful.
Answer:
Originally Posted by *guest* I am what you call a closet-nudist. I am nude whenever I can be - but only in the privacy of my own room. I read, study Scripture, pray, exercise, listen to music, surf the web, etc. all nude. I don't really have a problem with this. Peter at least sometimes did his chores in his underwear or nude (see John 21) and this was around John. In private, I cannot imagine how there could be immodesty. If it does not incite lust, then I see no problem with doing this.
Originally Posted by *guest* My philosophy behind it is this: when God created us, He said "It is good". When mankind rebelled against God, they hid out of fear (of God's judgment), not shame (check the Hebrew). In Gen 2:10, Adam says he is afraid because he is naked. Just prior to this, Adam and Eve sewed fig leafs together. In Eden, there was not harsh weather. Besides, fig leafs would not help with that. In their sin, Adam and Eve hid their nakedness.
Originally Posted by *guest* How can something that God created suddenly be evil? By committing sin, which the man and woman did.
Originally Posted by *guest* When He expelled them from the garden, He clothed them in animal skins - symbolic of the animal-sacrifice system to later be instated, and ultimately a symbol of Christ's sacrifice and ultimate atonement. These are indeed reasons for replacing the fig leaves with animal skins.
Originally Posted by *guest* I believe He clothed them out of natural necessity, not moral necessity. He was placing them in a harsh environment (read God's curse on the ground - thorns and thistles), so in His mercy He provided protection. When God sent manna to the Israelites in the desert, did He expect them to always be eating? No. In the same way, just because God provided clothing for Adam and Eve, I don't believe He expects us to always wear them. The problem is, you are starting from the misinterpretation that the only reason in Eden we see clothes is to be cast into a hard world.
Originally Posted by *guest* Some may argue that the perversion (due to the Fall) of God's natural creation makes it impossible to be nude for the sake of being nude and not sin. Well, to that I say, Christ has made us a new creation. We are no longer under sin, we are under grace. That Edenic "shalom" is restored. Our bodies are the perfect temples of the Holy Spirit. If this is the case, why does the Bible still stress modesty?
Originally Posted by *guest* Would you put a giant cloth over the Temple of God? I didn't think so. This is somewhat ironic, as that is exactly what you are supposed to do to the Temple of God.
Originally Posted by *guest* I think it is offensive to God that we are ashamed of His creation. So it is offensive to be ashamed of our sin, or of the Holocaust? These are in God's creation.
Originally Posted by *guest* So, with this philosophical back-drop, I celebrate God's creation in it's natural state - albeit in the privacy of my own room. The reason is because Paul spoke of not causing a brother to fall. This means that, even if we know something is permissible, if it causes a brother to sin against his conscience, we should avoid that activity while in their presence. However, just because it causes someone to stumble, doesn't mean it is all-together sinful. If I was at a friends house, and they invited me to swim in their pool, and I said, "I usually don't wear a swim-suit when I swim. Is it okay if I don't wear one now?", it would cause my brother to stumble if he said, "No." However, if he said, "Sure, go ahead." Then I am not causing a brother to fall. The problem is, getting permission does not equate to righteousness. It is an issue that must be settled Biblically, which you have yet to do.
Originally Posted by *guest* But here's the issue: lust. Being a teenage guy, I obviously struggle with lustful thoughts. My chief concern is being drawn into sin by being in the presence of a nude young lady. Now, I've read that in social nudist situations, the struggle with lust is greatly reduced, because it is a much less sexually-charged environment. So, I have been praying (ever since I began my closet-nudism) for wisdom and discernment regarding whether or not I should participate in social nudism. If I felt God's peace about being able to do it without lusting, then I would do it. If I knew I would be drawn to sin, I would not go. The problem is, seeing a person of the opposite sex naked for recreational activities is something that is not shown to be Biblically permissable at any point I've seen.
Originally Posted by *guest* I don't know why I wrote this. I'm not really even asking for advice. I'm just unloading. I want so desperately to enjoy God the way He made me, and the way it was meant to be, but unforturnately sin gets in the way. But Jesus is more powerful than sin, and His blood has made me a new creature, and He is working to change the desires of my heart - to change them from my sinful desires to His beautiful original desires. The purity of redemption is likened to clothing many times (2 Cor 5) comes to mind.
I hipe my thoughts can be edifying to all.