Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked

[roseproject]

If part of the fall of man, I’m assuming, includes humans feeling ashamed or embarrassed without garments on, how about people from different tribes who wear practically nothing or nothing at all at times? They don’t seem to feel self-conscious about it at all. You’re thoughts?

Thanks in advance

 

[ThinkingSapien]

how about people from different tribes who wear practically nothing or nothing at all at times? They don’t seem to feel self-conscious about it at all. You’re thoughts?

Yes, I visited tribes on nude beaches in Hawaii and tropical areas. There is no apparent shame in nudity. Shame appears to be a learned response. Then there was also the gym changing rooms and showers. No one cared there either. If you are around naked people long enough (and naked yourself) you’ll find that at some point you loose your ability to feel shame (if you had shame to begin with). Though from the looks of people that don’t take care of their bodies I am glad I don’t have to see everyone naked.

 

[glendab]

Well, have you been to the beach lately? If everyone is naked or nearly naked, then it is normal to be naked and if everyone is okay with it, so will you be unless you are the one who knows better. But if you go to the beach, what will you wear?

Glenda

 

[ThinkingSapien]

unless you are the one who knows better.

I don’t think that equating nudity with shame is knowing “better.”

But if you go to the beach, what will you wear?

Depends on the beach. On some beaches being naked is illegal. On some beaches it is mandatory.

 

[cjforJesus]

Yes, I visited tribes on nude beaches in Hawaii and tropical areas. There is no apparent shame in nudity. Shame appears to be a learned response. Then there was also the gym changing rooms and showers. No one cared there either. If you are around naked people long enough (and naked yourself) you’ll find that at some point you loose your ability to feel shame (if you had shame to begin with). Though from the looks of people that don’t take care of their bodies I am glad I don’t have to see everyone naked.

modesty is a normal and natural virtue. The beauty of the body in its natural state is a gift to the spouse and enjoyed in marriage. Children do not learn to be modest, as they reach an age where they realize it is not appropriate to expose their genitals to the public.

I believe on the contrary one has to learn to be immodest and it seems more a matter of vanity or as in indigenous tribes a response to a very hot climate.

 

[grannymh]

The title of this thread “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked…” refers to the necessary details of Original Sin.

The opening verses of Genesis, chapter three, present the facts of a broken relationship between humanity and Divinity. Verse 7 is not necessarily shame of one’s bare anatomy. It is the necessary guilt which comes from the deliberate act of disobedience, that is, Adam, the creature, scorned God, his Creator.

When Adam and Eve lived in harmony with God because they lived in obedience to God, creation was seen as good. Genesis 1: 31. When the act of disobedience occurred, Adam and Eve did not feel right in God’s presence. Their understandable reaction was to hide from God’s presence. Genesis 3:10

When reading Genesis 3: 7, we can feel the shock wave following the disastrous effects of Original Sin. There is a natural desire to protect ourselves or maybe cover ourselves. Or maybe in the case of Adam and Eve to cover up their sinfulness.

Ages ago, a friend of mine decided to give up beer for Lent. This meant that she did not buy her normal beer supply from the small neighborhood store. Obviously, the owner was concerned about this change in habit. So my friend told him about giving it up for Lent, mentioning God. The store owner suggested that if she was worried about God seeing her sneak some beer during Lent, she should drink it in the basement.

There was no basement in the Garden. If there had been one, I am sure Adam and Eve would be there in a New York minute. They knew they had sinned. They understood their own guilt and thus did what was possible to hide their sin – cover themselves because being naked, God would see their sin filled choice.

 

[glendab]

Granny brings up some good points. But I’d like to add a twist. They weren’t ashamed of the lack of clothing, they were ashamed of their actions and being broken by their sin, they only noticed their outward appearance. God noticed too and gave them clothes to wear. But it didn’t take away their shame for their sin remained and they were still cursed by God.

Nakedness wasn’t the sin. So it makes no sense to think their nakedness was what was wrong. Their disobedience was the sin. Noticing the lack of clothing was something else and simply a manifestation of their new state of consciousness.

Nakedness isn’t a sin. Immodesty is. If being naked were a sin, we’d all have to shower clothed.

Glenda

 

[roseproject]

Granny brings up some good points. But I’d like to add a twist. They weren’t ashamed of the lack of clothing, they were ashamed of their actions and being broken by their sin, they only noticed their outward appearance. God noticed too and gave them clothes to wear. But it didn’t take away their shame for their sin remained and they were still cursed by God.

Nakedness wasn’t the sin. So it makes no sense to think their nakedness was what was wrong. Their disobedience was the sin. Noticing the lack of clothing was something else and simply a manifestation of their new state of consciousness.

Nakedness isn’t a sin. Immodesty is. If being naked were a sin, we’d all have to shower clothed.

Glenda

I do realize that clothing isn’t so much about covering the good body that God made us, but is more about guarding against our tendencies (and other’s) tendencies to think impurely and selfishly about each other’s bodies, and to help keep each other pure, right?

If this is so, are sinful tendencies in regards to how we think about each other’s bodies also, to an extent, dependent on cultural differences than by simply our fallen, human nature? Does what make a person modest in one civilization and another different?
I guess what I’m trying to rule out is the heresy of people believing that sin is simply a result of changes in civilization and the likes of that
It would seem that people who live their lives not wearing much don’t feel self conscious about it at all. They seem spared of this type of self consciousness. Of course, pretty much all tribes practice pagan religions and don’t know that true God, so…is it perhaps a result of being separated AND unaware of God (since Adam and Eve felt the need to cover themselves out of shame before God)? I’m pretty much thinking as I’m writing haha

 

[cjforJesus]

If part of the fall of man, I’m assuming, includes humans feeling ashamed or embarrassed without garments on, how about people from different tribes who wear practically nothing or nothing at all at times? They don’t seem to feel self-conscious about it at all. You’re thoughts?

Thanks in advance

Of course they do no mind because they are taught this out of necessity and they do not have the knowledge of God yet. There lives are primarily based on survival.

Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.

 

[PseuTonym]

modesty is a normal and natural virtue.

There are at least two different meanings associated with what we write as “modest.” You do not have a very persuasive argument if you rely upon a feature of English language vocabulary. Consider an analogy. You compare two floor plans. One plan is a rectangle and the other is an equilateral triangle. You could point out that either all the angles are 60 degrees or all of the angles are 90 degrees. When we are choosing angles, shouldn’t we choose the right angles?

I believe on the contrary one has to learn to be immodest

Are you relying upon a hidden assumption that people are innately good, so that if a behavior of human beings is learned then we have reason to suspect that the behavior is not good?

or as in indigenous tribes a response to a very hot climate.

I like your focus on reality, apparently at the cost of arguing against your own unwritten thesis statement.

I am seriously wondering whether there is anything to be gained by creating arguments in support of a position that one already holds. It is simply too easy to find a way to reach a conclusion that one wishes to reach. Meanwhile, infinitely many faulty arguments that reach some conclusion provide no reason to doubt that the conclusion is true. Faulty arguments simply fail to provide any information about whether or not the conclusion is correct.

How can one determine that an argument is actually reliable if one does not look for flaws in it? One cannot even proofread a document for trivial typographical errors unless one looks for errors. You cannot attempt to revise an argument to remove a flaw until after you are aware that the flaw exists.

 

[cjforJesus]

There are at least two different meanings associated with what we write as “modest.” You do not have a very persuasive argument if you rely upon a feature of English language vocabulary. Consider an analogy. You compare two floor plans. One plan is a rectangle and the other is an equilateral triangle. You could point out that either all the angles are 60 degrees or all of the angles are 90 degrees. When we are choosing angles, shouldn’t we choose the right angles?

Are you relying upon a hidden assumption that people are innately good, so that if a behavior of human beings is learned then we have reason to suspect that the behavior is not good?

I like your focus on reality, apparently at the cost of arguing against your own unwritten thesis statement.

I am seriously wondering whether there is anything to be gained by creating arguments in support of a position that one already holds. It is simply too easy to find a way to reach a conclusion that one wishes to reach. Meanwhile, infinitely many faulty arguments that reach some conclusion provide no reason to doubt that the conclusion is true. Faulty arguments simply fail to provide any information about whether or not the conclusion is correct.

How can one determine that an argument is actually reliable if one does not look for flaws in it? One cannot even proofread a document for trivial typographical errors unless one looks for errors. You cannot attempt to revise an argument to remove a flaw until after you are aware that the flaw exists.

I am going by the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic church regarding modesty.Modesty is a virtue that is to be encouraged and fostered. In areas where the heat is extreme and access to textiles is limited then it could easily be expected that loin cloths or nudity(more common in young children) would be acceptable in a cultural context.

I believe St John Paul 2 presided over a Mass where some on the native women were topless.It is a cultural issue in that sense but cannot compare to people wishing to display their bodies on a nude beach.In that case it is primarily vanity or seeking a full body tan which again is vanity.

I cannot imagine how any of the Church fathers or theologians would respond to this.