I thought I would start a new thread for our friend here who has joined us to show us the way. Here is the original email copy, "quotes" will show his comments:

"So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that
he has cannot be My disciple."

Then forsake your clothing.

"Can you deny yourself your pleasure of being naked?
Can you fosake this pleasure to follow Christ? You
MUST forsake ALL if you want to follow Him and have
Him forever."

Exactly what are we to deny ourselves? Everything? Do you have no pleasure what-so-ever? Do you enjoy life? Do you enjoy God's beautiful nature? Do you enjoy good food?

"You may think your nakedness is not a lust problem for
you, but what about those who you cause to lust
because of your nakedness, or because of the nakedness
of those whom you have convinced to be naked? You've
already been warned about anyone who causes one of His
little ones to sin. Are you going to continue to
promote a lifestyle that can cause many of His little
ones to fall into sin?"

First of all, we are not immuned to lust. No one is. In fact, we can lust after women that are clothed. In fact, more women clothed are lusted after than they are nude! I don't think Playboy has the corner on lust. Even church members have lust one for another, even in your own church!

I am not here to "convince" anyone to be naked. We are here to give an account, and "apologetics" of our beliefs. We discuss our naturism, our life in Jesus Christ and how we can better use what God has given to us freely. Have you ever seen a "sin" site do that??

I am going to post a reply here that my wife, Gwin, has written:

*************** Gwins post **********

Unfortunately the scripture you are using needs to be understood in the context of which it was written. One of the biggest mistakes we make today is to apply a 21st century perspective to the writings of the bible that does not parallel the situations being addressed.

1 Corinthians chapter eight is addressing a very specific situation in which the weak believer is having feelings of being sinful if they eat meat sacrificed to idols. These people were probably used to the pagan practice of eating part of the sacrifice to draw himself or herself closer to the deity to which it was sacrificed. This would have been engrained into their thinking so that even after conversion they might feel that they were trying to draw closer to the paganism from which they had been called.

Paul points out that the eating of this food cannot do anything to draw a person closer to anything or anyone. He also points out that to “deliberately “partake of such foods in front of such a week person could cause him to turn away from following Christ. If he saw a converted person doing so he might feel that he was unworthy to be a Christian because he could not do so with out feeling he was still honoring the idol. Paul continues to state that in such a case he would never eat meat.

This apparently was a very wide spread problem for many of the gentile converts. When Paul meets with the elders a Jerusalem and gives an account of his ministry to the gentiles, the topic is again addressed. Acts 15:29. Four things are listed as prohibitions for the gentile converts; the eating of food offered to idols, the consuming blood, the consuming of the meat of strangled animals, and sexual immorality. Each of these things was directly related to the worship habits of the Greek-roman world. The sexual immorality referred to here was the practice of using temple prostitutes.

It is interesting that the very common practice of public nudity is not mentioned in this list of prohibitions.

As I pointed out the "sexual immorality" referred to is that of using temple prostitutes. I personally have no problems with avoiding temple prostitutes. The commonly noted fact that Hebrew priest had to be covered when offering sacrifices also addresses this issue. Anyone even vaguely familiar with Hebrew practices knows that the only people who would have been in a position (within the inner courts) to see up the Priest's skirt were other men, as women were not allowed that close. The practice of temple prostitutes included homosexuality. The Israelites were called out of this and God wanted no opportunity to be given for them to drag such unacceptable behavior into the new order.

Lets be honest with the scriptures.

If someone were truly unable to be around nudity without sin, I would never be around him nude, in much the same way as I would not drink alcohol in front of an alcoholic. The key is "knowingly" do so. To deliberately force someone from continuing his walk with God because of a guilty conscience is unacceptable. Equally unacceptable is the idea of turning of people from coming to God, by being judgmental and legalistic.

Like Paul, I become as one clothed when I am with the clothed, and as one naked when I am with the necked, that by some means I can reach some. There are just as much if not more sexual immorality in the clothed world (yes, I dare say in your own congregation) as there is in the naturist world. The hypocrisy of this is not lost on the Naturist community. The only way these people will hear the gospel is if someone is sent to them. The only true remedy for lust or any other sin, is Jesus living in you.

Jesus offended many, and was the ultimate stumbling block to the religious leadership of his day. He ate with sinners and rubbed shoulders with the unclean of his world. I wonder how many would be offended by him if he were to walk among us today.

Think about it.


The old nature is dead,
positionally, "In Christ" at the cross, but
experientially we will not be seperated from it until
death. It is still very prone the sin of lust.
Therefore, we must not do anything to provoke lust in
the fallen sinful nature. We are to keep it in
submission, not allow it to lead us where it pleases.

********** end Gwins post **********

I would like to add another observation that you may be having issues with and you are not alone in this.

The scriptures were written to those who were "strong" in the faith, those who were into the "meat" of the word. They were asked to be considerate of those who were new to Christianity and are still carrying a lot of old baggage and beliefs and fears. They still had residual world thinking left in them (actually believing that the idols have power) and it takes time to free them out of it. So please don't get them upset and do something that would offend them. After all, they are still weak, still in the "milk" of the word.

So I am assuming then that you are talking to us who are strong in faith, eating of the "meat" of the word while you are like these people who are disturbed because they are still weak, still into the "milk" of the word (actually still believing that clothing can handle our spiritual problems).

Is that correct? Then we will not offend you by being nude in front of you. We will pray for you and encourage you to leave the worlds idea of "lust" behind and not ask you to do something that you are still weak and need further understanding and faith.



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."

Excellent study, Gwin! I'd love to hear more from you! Boyd, you're a lucky man to have such a wise woman at your side.

One additional comment about weakness and strength: Yes, we who are "strong" in this issue ought to make allowances for those who are not yet strong--but the Lord never intended for any of His children to stay weak. "But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." (II Peter 3:18) "We who are spiritual (Galatians 6:1) should not only bear with the weak, but gently lead and encourage them to develop their own strength and free themselves from bonds of legalism or shame-based fear into the glorious freedom that is our Kingdom birthright.

Exactly, though it is difficult at times, we do need to be patient with those who are weak in faith.

After all, I'm sure there are things we are weak in faith about and learn to realize that others are strong in faith and we depend on them for our spiritual growth.

boyd

Boyd are you aware of God's command that a woman is not to teach a man? Why did you have your wife trying to teach men in this forum?

1 Timothy 2:12
I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Quite frankly Steve, your condesending attitude is offensive and ignorant. The same Paul you quote also had Priscilla and Aquila at his side when he went to Corinth. Significantly, she is named first in Acts 18:18. Later, they (plural) invited Apollos to their house to teach him more fully the Scriptures, vs. 24. From your post, I can only guess that if you were in the place of Apollos, you would have turned down the invitation.

Further, your continued refusal to engage in any dialogue, but instead presume to have the only valid take on the truth. Your arbitrary discounting of Boyd's wife as having no standing, and with contempt for her is appalling and unchristlike. To me you are like the folks that Jesus warned the disciples they would meet, and when they do, to shake the dust off their feet and leave. You are not an honest man when coming here. You seek nothing. You only condemn. I for one, will give you no more hearing.

Michael

Are you aware of the command to love your wife as Christ loves the church? the church teaches, helps, encourages, gives comfort.

From your postings, I can tell you are not married. You have no idea what a woman does or is capable of doing. In fact, you are rather quick to judge a person rather than hearing out what is said. Did you read any of what she says? Does the truth end when a woman speaks? Are you going to ignore her even if the Truth is standing there in front of you? Are you going to be like Balaam and his donkey? (Numbers 22:21-33) Are you refusing to listen just because a donkey spoke to him? He was so outraged that it didn't occure to him that a donkey was talking!! Are you that out of focus? You did not even acknowledge what I wrote in there!

Would you have ignored Mary when she ran back to tell the others that the Christs has risen? She was the first to give the gospel (good news: The Lord has risen). I'm not even going to go over why Paul wrote what he did (he wasn't married either). You haven't the foggiest idea of the culture of that time. You do not know the historical reference behind that comment.

Read what she has to say, maybe in spite of it all, God is speaking through her!

At least give her the credit that even a donkey (Sorry about that Gwin) deserves!

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 can tell you are not married. You have no idea what a woman does or is capable of doing." You can tell? You mean you can tell just like you are sure that exposing your nakedness is pleasing to God and not serving the flesh? Married for 27 years now to a very successful woman whom I love.

God's Word speaks to all generations and not just to certain cultures in certain periods of time. He gave the command because of the order of authority He set up in creation: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve." and also because of Eve's being deceived.:

12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Do you greet your Christian sisters and brothers with a holy kiss, as the New Testament admonishes on several occasions (Romans 16:16; I Corinthians 16:20; II Corinthians 13:12; I Thessalonians 5:26; I Peter 5:14)? Or is this something that was "appropriate for the culture of that time, but not for us"?

And if you interpret all the Bible as literally as Paul's teachings about a woman's place, what of the seventh-day Sabbath? There is no support in Scripture for the change from Sabbath to Sunday; do you keep Sunday?