My wife and I had another discusion about this, yesterday. Unfortunately it ended like usual, with hard feelings. I know this isn't good, but it always happens. Most of the time we avoid the subject. We did agree that I should meet with our pastor, to discuss it. I don't know what good it will do, because I'm sure it won't change her opion. I'll let you know what happens.
You may have mentioned this before, but if you did, I have forgotten, so forgive me...
What are you wife's objections? My own wife, Myra, had VERY strong objections to nudity in general, but when I calmly mentioned an interest in social nudity, she agreed to research exactly what the Scriptures had to say on the subject.
Over time, she came to understand that there was no passages that spoke against nudity, social or otherwise. We did this search together, and while I had to guide a bit, due to my understanding the contexts of certain passages from my own research, I had to let Myra make her own decision, or nothing would have been accomplished.
We agreed to go to a resort during an open house, when she would not have to undress, and the results were surprisingly(to her) possitive enough that she agreed to return again, knowing that the second time she WOULD have to get undressed. That second trip we became members. She has since come to find our times at resorts very relaxing and enjoyable.
Sorry to go on and on, but I do have a point. Myra had some of the most intense aversions to nudity that I had come across, and still is not confident about her physical appearance. The only thing that allowed her to make these changes were prayer. She knew that I enjoyed being nude around the house, and that I was interested in "going social". Her loving consideration to have me be happy was a driving force in her going, but it was the complete lack in warning from the Holy Spirit that allowed her to continue.
She was listening intently for any clue to any warning that what we were doing was wrong, and only when there was NONE was she finally convinced. She had to do it herself. No discussion from me, our pastor, or anyone else would have been enough to convince her that it was okay. She knew all the scholarly arguements- that was easy. But she had to be convinced in her own mind, and only experience could do that.
It was patient persistance on my part that got us to that point. Every so often I would bring the subject up, as you seem to, and we would discuss it. Like you, at first these discussions would often end badly, then that all changed, and for exactly what reason I still don't know. All of a sudden it wasn't such a sticking point between us anymore.
I guess what I'm saying is to keep patiently doing what you are doing. You can never force you wife to accept social nudity- yours or anybody elses. She will have to come to that herself. She may never. If she dosn't, she dosn't. But, if you can continue these discussions, you may get to the point where she has to admit, if she's honest with herself, that the Bible does not condemn nudity.
I'm sure that your wife has reasons as to why she feels the way that she does, and she may not even consciously know what those reasons are. There are many, many reasons why many women are against nudity, and you know your wife's best. Keeping those reasons in mind, you may be able to help her to come to what I, and this is my opinion here, feel is a proper Biblical view of the body- that it is a glorious gift of God, and that there is no reason what-so-ever that it should be an object of shame, or that it needs to be hidden away.
Unfortunately, your pastor may not be much help here, either. Many, but thankfully not all, pastors hold to very old standards when it comes to nudity, and seem very unwilling to adjust their thinking. My own pastor eventually agreed with the points that I made to him concerning nudity, but still disagreed with my activities, which to me is some sort of cotradiction. "Nudity isn't forbidden, but it's not okay to be naked" just dosn't make sense to me.
Anyway, I'm sorry to made you have to read all of that...
I hope and pray that you and your wife can come to some sort of agreement about this. If she were to try social nudity, she just might find that she enjoys the freedom, on many levels, that it gives.
God Bless, and take care
We'll be praying for you.
Kevin
Thanks, Kevin it does help to know that others have been in this position. My wife believes it to be unbiblical, since the fall of man. She is a more mature Christian then myself so its hard to discuss this subject on an equal plane. I've read alot about the subject on the web, mostly on Boyd's site. When I bring up points I have learned, she discredits it because it was from the internet, and believes the scriptures are being twisted. I pray for a change of my heart if this is wrong, I don't believe it is. Today we had a discussion again, and it actually went well. She said today that it might not be wrong, but what good does it do. I pointed out the issues of body acceptance, pornograghy, and teenage sexual curiosity. It's funny how close you can feel to people you have never met. I check this site every day, and feel I know many of you. I appreciate your caring and prayers.
Glad to have been able to help you, but like Kevin said, no ammount of logic or authority will change anyones mind until their eyes are opened. Only God can do that.
It's funny how "from the internet" suddenly became the reason something is untrue. If she went to her churches website, would she discredit that too because it's "on the internet"?
I understand that there is a lot of garbage out there, but keep in mind, there is a lot of garbage in public libraries, television, magazines, book stores, and the list goes on. Even in some churches, the pulpit is full of stuff that makes for great cults. It's not the location of the material, its whether it can stand up to the truth.
As long as she can open her bible and find the same thing that we find, then it doesn't matter where it came from. Keep in mind, when I first put it on the internet, it was first in my mind, then in my heart, then on paper and typed out in the home PC. It was then compiled and edited, edited, and edited again (Thanks to John Kundert FLF for his editing skills), and edited again, along with lots of meditation, prayer, and study. THEN I put in on the internet.
Then edited it some more.
When during the time it came from local PC to internet did it become fouled? People don't always understand that not all things written on the internet was written in haste and not thought out. Much work was behind these things. Yes, some is still garbage long after the great work was put into it, but just being on the internet doesn't some how taint it. Otherwise, great works of evangelists are going to waste because it is seen on the internet.
Even the bible, ALL the current translations and then some, are on the internet!
I am not preaching to this group here, but I thought it would be good to write this here because it will give you something to consider if someone does say something like that. You will be ready to give an answer.
Of course, one problem though. This was written on the internet!
Biblical reasoning (theology) doesn't seem to work....
January 9 2005, 8:47 PM
On this subject of nudity, I have been seeing Scripture and doing theology and preaching my sermons all these years through the colored lenses of my upbringing. I have had to go back to the actual words of Scripture to review just what I have been blinded to by my indoctrination. I have had to do this same thing for other subjects that I thought my education was "right" about, and many times I discovered that I had been believing and spreading "teachings" that either were falsely reported as "clear from Scripture" or were interpretations that had little or no Scriptural basis at all. Upbringing and membership in a denominational group has almost a manipulative power to blind us to the actual words of Scripture, allowing us to see only the specific interpretations earmarked by that group's precepts and policies. This comes very close to being sin -- a sin of placing our good standing with men above our good standing with God.
The insights I've been gathering back in Genesis are amazing! I am now working on a theology around what the wording in Genesis about the FALL actually teaches, and it will take some time before I release it. However, what I want to share right now is that when the shame of sin caused Adam and Eve to invent "aprons" to cover their genitals, they were not hiding them from God but from each other! God wasn't even around at that point, nor was anyone else there to see them but animals. THEN, after finding and confronting them, God clothed Adam and Eve in whole-body-length "coats" or "tunics" made from slain animals, covering much more than the genitals.
If it was God's actual intention that these "coats" were to hide their nudity, instead of serving for protection or, even more needful, serving for sacrificial skins to cover the shame of their sin [atonement literally means "covering"], then from whom was their nudity being hidden? It was not from God, nor from the animals, nor from strangers (who didn't yet exist), but from one another!!! In other words, if the skins were really for the purpose of keeping their nudity hidden, God was teaching that married couples should stay hidden from one another's eyes. Not just the genitals should be hidden, but everything except the face and feet should be covered up with big "coats." WOW! If this was what those original "coats" were supposed to teach us to do, to really keep almost all of our naked skin hidden from our spouse's eyes, then almost all of us married people are sinning each time we see each other undress, or (HEAVEN FORBID!) get nude to have sexual intercourse together.
Unless the original "one-flesh" relationship also ceased through our sin, which can be supported by nothing anywhere else in Scripture, this reasoning is blatantly erroneous. I challenge any believer who holds to this extreme view to try to be consistent with it in their marriage. To maintain just that one misinterpretation will require a rejection of many other Scriptures that describe a continuation of God's original design: "The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame."--Gen 2:25 (NIV). Anyone who maintains this argument had better start by tearing out the Song of Solomon from the pages of Scripture as top priority, in order to help "God" stay consistent with Himself. Of course, I am being facetious, but this is exactly the kind of thing I mean about being so indoctrinated by a cultural mindset that we cannot even see what our own misinterpretation of Scripture will lead to.
No, these "coats" for Adam and Eve were for protection or, much more likely, for atonement, but absolutely not for covering nudity (which at that time was marital nudity only). And since it cannot logically or Scripturally be true that their purpose was for covering nudity in the first place, this specific act of God with the animals skins cannot be used to prove that it is against His will for our bodies to be naked in social situations beyond the first little society of Adam and Eve.
I have said all of that to say this.... Regardless of how logical or even Scriptural we are in our arguments, we cannot convince someone who refuses to change their opinion. Their reasons for tenaciously holding their traditional views on nakedness may not really be centered in an actual searching of the Scriptures, although they help themselves to a broad claim of Scriptural support. Their traditional upbringing, even if flawed Scripturally, may simply be more comfortable for them to hide in. The reasons for this may be deeply rooted body shame, or a history of having their bodies abused, or a past misuse of nudity for sexual promiscuity. There may be other fears. But no amount of reasoning from actual Scripture will change their minds. God knows their hearts and knows how to enlighten any darkness. So, our prayers are more powerful than our arguments, and that is the case in every situation where arguments arise.
This may be the case with your wife, and it may be the case with mine, because I am in the same boat with you. My new insights into Scripture on this subject of Christian naturism are epiphanies to me, and trials to my wife, when I share them with her. At the same time I have found other people, women included, who are really open to these new insights from Scripture, and respond to me with validating personal experiences or stories they've heard from others about the lack of sexual lust or shame with normal nudity. It's just that my sweetheart can't see it... not right now anyway.
Of course, I'm praying for my relationship with my wife to stay healthy while I pursue my avid study of naturism. It is extremely important that our one-flesh union not be harmed by our not seeing eye-to-eye on everything. So far we've been able for 33 years to ride out all our disagreements doctrinally and in practical areas without damage to our love. She is my best friend, and I always want it to be that way. I hope you have and maintain that love and care for each other in your marriage, too. God bless us everyone, Lord, and especially our wives!
I am glad to see someone in a pastorial position to sit down and reconsider what he or she is saying or teaching.
We do allow ourselves to be enfluenced by the doctrine of "the committee".
Here is an example of extremes in life and how it still affects me today.
I am a member of the Worldwide Church of God (based in California) started by Herbert W. Armstong (189x-1996) back in the late 40's.
The teachings was heavy in prophecy, and I mean specific prophecy, times etc. Example: 1994 in Prophecy as a title of one book.
But it doesn't stop there. What the real basis was that we are "Isreal" (scattered around the world) and we as descendants of Isreal must be obeying God's original laws of Moses. That includes the seventh day sabbath (Saturday) and the laws of clean and unclean meats.
After all, the bible does say with specific words and laws that eating pork is a sin and that the sabbath is the seventh day....not the first day!Am I right folks??
YET, there is not specific command anywhere in the bible that says Sunday is the sabbath! Am I right again?
And again, there is no command anywhere in the bible that says nudity is a sin.
Yet, it is no problem for people to say eating pork is OK when there is no bible law that says it is. (Yes, I know about the sheet, but that is another story...literally). And they also say that Sunday is the Sabbath, ironically using the Ten commandments which points to Saturday, to support it!
There is no logic here!
Now here is my issue:
I have grown up all my life in this church (parents joined about two years before I was born) and have avoided "unclean" meats religiously. About 10 years ago, our church made some changes. Oh yeah....LOTS of them! We found out we were wrong...dead wrong! And of course, the laws of the clean and unclean meats went out the window. But not easily. People like me who have avoided pork all his or her life are still hanging on to those feelings of doubt. I still avoid pork, but not religiously as I did before, but because of my feelings and of course, my taste buds and my body's tolerance to the stuff. I have yet to try these sea spiders and bugs (they call them shrimp, lobsters and crabs, but they are spiders and bugs to me).
Can you see the problem here, or better yet, the connection? We may help people see the truth of naturism, body, freedom in Christ, and so on. But the "being nude" part, though it is OK and they can totally see the truth and agree whole heartedly that what we say is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and still have aprehensions about being nude or seeing others nude. Like me eating them "sea spiders".
BTW, I do eat pork on occasion without guilt, but if I had a choice between a good old ham sandwich or a beefy burger, I'll take the beefy burger anytime.
But I don't go out of my way to order a pizza with "The Works" on it. I still prefer my Veggie Pizza with hamburger on it.
We need to first understand where they are coming from. When our church first started to teach the new understanding, many, nearly two thirds of our congregation quit. One told me that she had to quit because she is afraid that the church will "ask her to leave because she refuses to eat pork"! I told her that one, the church has no desire to kick her out and eating pork is not the goal nor the obligation of a Christian. If she doesn't want to eat pork, so what!! Thats not the point. I said I don't either (at the time). It took me years to get comfortable with eating pork. But our church (which threatened disfellowship with just about everything....how did we grow??) had to change their policy on our legalism. Legalism is a dangerous thing that the churches of the US is falling into. That is why I never teach that we must be nude before God to please God. Some Christian Naturists teach that! Very few thankfully. But I think that some of our aprehensive mates may think think that if they agree that naturism or nudity is OK by the bible (agreeing 100%) that somehow they are required to be nude when they are still very uncomfortable with it. Like me and my pork (natures garbage disposals) and crabs (sea spiders).
Do you see our potential problem? I can empathise with these people if that is the issue. But like some that left our fellowhip over the doctrines has another problem, which I think is even worse than being uncomfortable. They DO see the truth but because they have been taught this information and they have lived it, they are not about to change now! They refuse to accept the saving grace of Jesus Christ and instead try to "work out their own salvation" on their own with useless acts of man.
Legalism is a dangerous thing. But we cannot be guilty of being legalistic about naturism. That is why I say in my articles that wearing clothing is not wrong, it's just not going to save us, but niether will naturism.
It is a freedom in Christ that we use to express his saving grace and showing the world that we are back in his grace and back in his garden. We are no longer under the penalty of Adam and Eve. If we say that we are still under the penalty of Adam and Eve, then we are saying Jesus Christ never died for our sins and we are not under his grace. All that Jesus did was useless.
Read the article The Second Adam to give you the rest of the story.
Re: Personal experience of bible logic and theology
January 10 2005, 10:01 PM
Boyd, I went through a similar phase of my life where my desire to follow the letter of the Torah threatened to override my desire to live according to the spirit.
As I saw it, one must obey each commandment as given by Moses or risk living a life of just doing whatever you please (to God's displeasure).
I must quickly add that I recognized that salvation came by grace and my ability to obey the law came by grace.
Somewhere along the way, God showed me to look for the intent of each law. Each precept is timeless and worthy of our study, but not so we can carry out a specific behavior, but to teach us about divine principles.
I have a friend who would not put a quarter in a collection plate on the Sabbath, because that was work, but would cheerfully take that same quarter to a phone booth and call a friend on the Sabbath. The absurdity of this hair-splitting taught me that we will lose sight of the forest for the trees with an attitude like this.
I am still deeply committed to the Sabbath principle. I think scripture is clear enough that we need a day of rest. An article came out in a heath magazine a couple of years ago suggesting that very thing. But I do not feel compelled to observe the Sabbath principle according to the formula laid out in Leviticus. However, if we do not put aside a 24-hour period for rest and the worship of God due to work, we should ask ourselves, "Is God getting a significant portion of my week? And am I taking time for rest and meditation during the week?" There is an eternal element to the law, an underlying principle we must be very diligent to find.
Is it possible to be legalistic about naturism? I suppose. I think it is wise to recognize that being nude is good for us and times of private nudity is something that we should include in our daily routine. And times of social nudity are a worthy goal if we have access to naturist venues or secluded outdoor settings.
God may have tasks for us that cut into the time we might like to be nude. Some of us live with or in close proximity to textile relatives. We have duties to our church and other matters. Our relationship with the Lord is supreme above all other concerns, so nudity must often take a back seat to things of the Spirit. But that is not to say that being nude cannot be a thing of the Spirit itself.
God does not forbid us from eating on a regular basis! It is part of a godly life. We might have to go on a fast from food or nudity temporarily for spiritual benefit, but it should not be the norm.
That is correct. Jesus summed it all up when he said "Love God with all your heart, mind, stregnth and soul, and the second is like it, to love your neighbors as yourself.
When you look at the ten commandments you will find all the elements in there. If you love your neighbor as yourself, you would not need a commandment to say, "Thou shalt not kill". That is in the negative. Speaking in the positive, "Love your neighbor as yourelf and the thought of hating, let alone enough to kill will not have to be addressed".
The same with the sabbath issue. When you look back to the creation, note it written after each day, "the morning and the evening was the first [second, etc.] day. But on the seventh day, God rested and made it holy. Notice that it never said anything about the ending of the day. Each and every previous day without fail had a beginning and ending. Not so for the sabbath.
God is still resting to this day and we have been invited to enter into that rest. Had Adam and Eve took of the Tree of Live instead, they too would have entered into that rest. Notice that it never mentioned Adam and Eve as participaters of that sabbath rest.
We have that opportunity. Therefore, since we are in the eternal rest in Christ, we no longer depend on a single day of the week, but each and everyday of our lives are a sabbath to us.
Yes, we do need to rest, and it is convenient to "rest" on a Sunday. I'll give you some insider information on this theory: People who "rest" on Sundays are not in the leadership of the church! In fact, those of us who are part of the leadership teams are usually exhausted by the end of the day while the others come in late and leave early. So much for a "Sabbath rest" on either Sunday or Saturday!
But what you say is very true. Rest. Be with God and your family at least one day a week!
Why not just tell her that it's something that you enjoy? It dosn't have to have any grand reason other than that. All of the things that you mentioned are true, don't get me wrong, but I see them more as side-benefits than as reasons to be a nudist.
I'm a nudist because I want to be: I enjoy the feeling, I enjoy the freedom (no wet bathing suit!), I enjoy the fellowship, and I enjoy the closeness to God's creation without any barriers. Of course, I have also found that being a nudist has given me a clearer view on how God views our bodies (and therefor us), which brings me closer to Him, but that was after, and not a reason that I became a nudist.
And if you really want to get your wife, just tell her that in studying about nudity, it will give her good skills in discerning what the Bible REALLY says, not just what everybody has told her that it has said...
Another resource that you might investigate is the Fig Leaf Forum. Last month's issue was a "Nudism 101" issue, and went over all the issues that you seem to be experiencing very well. All the Scriptures that deal with nudity were listed and discussed, using meanings of the original Greek and Hebrew words to show intended meaning. That may be of some assistance with your wife's reluctance to believe the rest of us word-twisters.
I think I am echoing your thoughts if I were to say that
people who are ready for nudity don't need much explanation and only a little bit of encouragement.
One summer day I found myself alone on a solitary beach, several miles from any other people. The sun was warm, the breeze was rattling the palm trees and I saw blue water lapping gently on golden sand.
I didn't have to stop and mull it over. My clothes were off in a few seconds and I was nude and running joyfully into the sea. I felt completely decent and comfortable, deliriously happy and sensed the intimate presence of the Lord all around. This is as close to Eden before the fall as I have ever felt.
I agree, it is adviseable to individually study what the Bible has to say about nudity. We should not fail to test what our pastors and teachers say in light of our own knowledge of scripture, lest we fall into the same errors they do.
But our loved ones need to have something like that experience I described on the beach. Some people may be so hardened against nudity that they will not get to that degree of freedom, but for many of us, it is only when nudity feels right, that we are ready to be open-minded to what the Bible really has to say about it.
You are quite right in what you said, but that isn't why I replied...
Your description of your deserted beach made me think of something (besides being rediculously jealous!!). The best examples are the movie Castaway, and the new TV series Lost.
In both cases there is a person or group of persons all by themselves on a deserted island, in Tom Hanks' case for several years. His is the best example, but it follows for all of them- they all make great effort to remain dressed.
Hanks' lonely character has been all by himself, with nobody to talk to except a volleyball, for years, and when we see at the end of this long, lonely time of solitude, what is the first thing that is very... well, obvious to me? He's dressed. Not as much as before, but he's still dressed...
All alone on a beautiful tropical island for years, and he still feels the need to cover himself... hide from something...
I know that Holleywood had to do this to make both this movie and all others with similar plot lines acceptable, but my point is- there ARE people who would do tis if in the same situation!! WHY?!
I recently learned what happens when an office building or such is suspected of being contaminated, like by a chemical or biological agent... you know, the whole anthrax type stuff.
Anyway, they take all the people out to this big tent in the parking lot, have them all strip and shower. By doing that there is something like a 96% chance that any contamination will be removed. But... some people refuse. They are told that if they DON'T, they may DIE, but it makes no differance.
These people would rather die, quite literally in this case, than to be seen naked by their co-workers. To me, that's just crazy. Have we become such a body conscious culture that we have instilled THAT into our lives? That it's better to die than be seen naked?
In this case, people would rather die than switch. They are willing to die for a cause that may kill them and they feel protected by that cause.
I would rather live and be naked, than die with clothes on.
Some people die in a summer heat wave and are still dressed. they cannot figure out how to get cooler. "We stripped down as far as we could!" (still have shorts and t-shirts on ). I would dare someone to arrest me in a heat wave where people are dying! I would ask them, "Would you rather I die? Am I that unimportant? Are humans so disgusting we would rather they die than expose their bodies so they may live?"
It is confusing. The Tsunami disaster has some blaming issues too. There are forcasters that actually warned people of the Tsunami, but was ignored. Some refuse to warn because they were fired for disrupting business and tourism when a Tsunami did not hit at other times.
However, they were blamed again for not saying anything when it did hit. So what do you do?
And of course, the US gets blamed for everything!
Do we strip naked to protect us only to find that we would have not been hurt anyway if we stayed dressed? Or do we stay dressed, learning our lesson last time that we did not get hurt, only to get hurt because we stayed dressed?
Is it better to warn people of disaster and fail and risk public humiliation, or do you keep quiet and risk public humiliation for not saying anything?
Even the old testament has warnings against prophets who predict things and are not right about it. A test of a prophet is the outcome. If it did not happen, then they are a false prophet.
I met with our preacher about my nudity. A thread on it is below. I found him to be very naive about the subject and mainly saw it as bad because of possibly bad influence our nudity might have on others. He was totally unaware of what the Bible actually taught on it. (Most of any "bad" influence possible is due to lack or or bad teachings on the subject by those in religion.)
My wife and I actually went to psychologist when we were living in NJ. One of the "problems" to be ironed out was my wanting to be nude in our fenced back yard. The psychologist wasn't sympathetic to my cause on this at all.
So, unless members in your church have voiced some objections, I wouldn't recommended going to your preacher or any of the elders unless they're very well versed people. Also, you need to pick any psychologists or counselors carefully. So much Biblical and psychological thought is based on misinformation by so-called experts and not based on actual research on the effect of nudity on the public and on children.
Think the best thing is a scriptural search on your own using a Bible search tool, like Biblepro or similar, or just a concordance. If she's willing to go onto the internet, the best I've seen of a record of someone else's Bible search is Rockel's on http://www.execpc.com/~jrockel/sbs/bsn/index.html. The latest issue of Fig Leaf Forum also is pretty good. It isn't compartmentalized like Rockel's site is though, just one LOOOONG treatise on the subject.
Recently I wrote five fairly large churches an anonymous e-mail expressing interest in membership, but candidly said that I was a naturist. I got three responses, one ambiguous, two negative.
Here's my letter (edited to eliminate names):
Dear Pastor xxxxxx,
I am interested in your church. Your church is well-known to many in xxxxxx County and for a good reason. Its members reportedly have more freedom to serve the Lord than at more traditional churches.
It seemed prudent for me, as a prospective member to privately tell you that I am a nudist as well as a Bible-believing Christian. This is not something I discuss publicly, but dispite my silence, in the course of
making myself accountable to a pastor, teacher or other mentor, others in that group may learn of my habit of visiting a family-oriented nudist park in the mountains. I do not seek to call attention to this part of my life, but I wanted to ask you if xxxxxxxxxxx church would let a
member quietly enjoy visits to a wholesome family-oriented nudist park without fear of condemnation or being barred from service to the church.
If you want to learn more about the phenomenon of Christian naturism,
please feel welcome to visit:
I would like to add that I believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of scriptures, I have been saved since I was a teenager, and I believe in moral purity, including premarital celibacy and marital fidelity.
I would like your honest opinion as to whether xxxxxxxxx church would be a good church home for me. If not, I bear you no ill will. I am simply looking for a church where members are given latitude to make their own decision in this area, provided they do not make this a divisive
issue within the congregation.
One pastor wrote me and made no direct reply to my letter, but simply said, "why don't you come visit us and find out if we are the church you are looking for". Not sure what to make of that response.
One church leader said that nudism is wrong and I should stop immediately.
At a third church, a pastor's aide wrote that I was welcome to visit, but "deeper community and leadership involvement would not be allowed given your lifestyle choice of Christian naturalism".
Is there a Bible verse against bird-watching?
These are all evangelical churches, two independent, one is a charismatic denomination.
I guess this is a common problem. I haven't met with our pastor, yet. I guess I don't feel like it will accomplish anything. I'll just drop the subject, again, and live vicariously thru the members of this forum, who are able to enjoy this lifestyle, I do swim nude in our pool. Thank you, everyone for your interest and caring.
i had the same issue...i decided my marriage was more important...she doesn't want to see naked people...that's cool with me...i'm free to do my thing...most nudist venues don't want me...i want to buy land next to a state park that can't be developed where i can have a personal retreat
