I found this one interesting. I checked the forum on this site and found they have no forum but would recommend other forums. so much for spiritual discussion on this one.

http://gotquestions.org/Christian-nudist.html


Question: "Can a Christian be a nudist? What does the Bible say about nudity?"

Answer: There is nothing essentially sinful about nudity (Genesis 2:25). Adam and Eve did not realize they were naked after the Fall (Genesis 3:7-11). Before the Fall, they were naked, and it was good (Genesis 1:31). Sin is what caused nakedness to become a problem. Sin introduced lust, immorality, and perversion into the human race. As a result, we can no longer look at a nude person of the opposite sex in a pure manner. God made clothing for Adam and Eve to resolve this problem (Genesis 3:21). If God approved of nakedness, He would have simply told them that being naked was okay, and they did not need to feel embarrassed or ashamed. The fact that God clothed Adam and Eve indicates that God expects us to be clothed. Nude beaches, nudist colonies, and all other forms of public nudity are not honoring to God. A Christian should definitely not be involved in nudist "activities."
Recommended Resource: The Answers Book by Ken Ham.

========== End Copy ==================

So far, he started off correct by quoting the bible, (Genesis 2:25) and from there on, made assumptions, not what the bible really said.

He first said "There is nothing essentially sinful about nudity (Genesis 2:25)." So far so good. Then promptly contradicted it.

Did God "resolve this problem" of nudity? Was clothing the real answer? Was that the only thing we got out of the sin of Adam and Eve is nudity discovered and shame found?

Is finding nudity again without shame not honoring God? Do we have to still be in shame and fear to honor God? Is going back to being unashamed of God's creation bad?

I would love to hear more of this writers information. He never mentioned the "Second Adam" which is Jesus the Christ who redeemed us. Is that forgotten or not understood?

God redeemed the whole creation, not just humanity, but the creation as a whole. Including naked man and woman.

Now there is ONE thing mentioned that we may want to discuss:
"If God approved of nakedness, He would have simply told them that being naked was okay, and they did not need to feel embarrassed or ashamed."

Is that true??? Why did God follow through with the clothing? What did it mean? What was God telling us? Does that also mean the same thing for the New Testament church?

Boyd Allen
"May the Lord protect our nudity from the sight of those who will not benefit, and may he allow us to be seen by those who will."

You might be able to reach them through email. It seems to me to be contradictory.... Starting off with "it is not sinful" and ending with "we should not be naked".

The Naturist Christian forum put together a wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturist_Christians. Boyd's site is referenced there also!

I can't figure out why Ken Ham would have even addressed this issue, the purpose of his ministry is to explain scientifically the creation theory (as taught us in Genesis) in regards to what we find in nature. I have listened to his radio spots for several years. He seems most comfortable dealing with survival needs of the different creatures in our care. What certain creations have to help their survival, and why it is neccassary for them. (or us) Basicly, why God made the different creatures/vegetation the way He did. That said, it seems to me that he would have been more in line with the purpose of his own ministry to explain the human body's ability to adjust to it's environment to a certain extent, even in the absence of clothing.

Since I did not see the other posts and I am not familiar with Ken, I did not realize he had that kind of view. This would be interesting and somewhat confusing to come to this kind of conclusion.

Of course, I don't think there is a scientific reason for the literal creation week of Genesis, but then again, I have not read his ideas.

I am not caring really how long or short of a time span it took God to create the heavens and earth. I'm just thankful he did and that he is in charge! And God made us naked too and said "very good" and I'm am thankful for that too!

But if anyone gets all caught up in trying to figure out the creation week via scientific reasoning, instead of realizing it's written in poetry style, may be mixed up anyway.

Day one, day two, could be time spans, eras, millenias, or "step one, step 2".

Sometimes stories are told in series, like some of our TV shows. Day one, a story is told about God and how he looked around and saw the earths demise and wanted to do something about it. Day two another story was told with far more detail than we see written here. Then day three, another story told with even more detail, until the last day. Imagine each story that was told each night to a group of hungry listeners and their children eating up every word.

We think way differently than the "Eastern" way of thinking and we can not understand fully the meaning behind this way of writing and story telling.

If we get literal over this, then we are really limiting God in a major way.



Boyd Allen
"May the Lord protect our nudity from the sight of those who will not benefit, and may he allow us to be seen by those who will."

I don't understand.

How does it "limit" God to say that He indeed did creat the entire universe in a literal week, instead of saying that Genesis is written with poetic license?

Dosn't it show greater power, and require more faith to believe, for Him to have spoken everything into existance almost instantly, instead of the process going on for perhaps thousands of years?

Also, scripture does say that it was indeed an actual, literal week. We were talking before about how they determined days "way back then". Well, one thing that I've always understood was that when the Bible says "...and the evening and the morning were the..." -insert day of choice here- that it means one literal day, not just some indistinct period of time, such as "the day of the Lord". If that is true, then Moses would have been led very specifically to use those particular words so that it would be known exactly how long the whole thing took.

Anyway, that's how I see it...

Later
God Bless
Kevin