NationStates Jolt Archive

Question:
So if compulsory nudity was part of [Multiland's] religion, do you reckon [Multiland]'d be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

I approve of and endorse this nekkid religion.

*removes pants*

Also, my thread now!

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

POLL COMING...

except after Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God provided them with clothes.

The poll needs the option "I'm naked right now".

...

Which I am not, for the record.

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

Nekkidness all the way!

except after Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God provided them with clothes.

Yeh, but He didn't make sure everyone else was born with clothes. And it was only so they could metaphorically cover the shame of their sin.

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothesWe are. Women's… intimate parts… are invisible because of the hair. Or, so I'm told. ;)

I reckon I'm already nekid.

This suprises nobody.

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

POLL COMING...

I actually made a somewhat similar argument to a friend once. She said that people wear clothes because of the shame of original sin. Based on her own suggestion that original sin had been done away with by Christ (she was a Baptist) it made sense logically that no one needed to wear clothes anymore, especially Christians.

Side note: WTF is up with this forum? Posts end up in the wrong order

EDIT: See?

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

Under the NBCyIPsW party you'd be able to!
Wasn't it Ifreann who set off the public nudity bill for Parliament in the first place?
I think it was just about the only bill that passed...

In answer to your question: try it.
I personally think that after a while if you ignored them they'd give in.

Ilaer

Please don't. Most people are not meant to be seen unclothed.

"Meant" by whom?

I reckon I'm already nekid.

I actually made a somewhat similar argument to a friend once. She said that people wear clothes because of the shame of original sin. Based on her own suggestion that original sin had been done away with by Christ (she was a Baptist) it made sense logically that no one needed to wear clothes anymore, especially Christians.

Additionally, if clothes are because of the shame of "original sin", we should logically be born with clothes.

Yeh, but He didn't make sure everyone else was born with clothes. And it was only so they could metaphorically cover the shame of their sin.

the point is tho, that wearing clothes isn't a sin.

so nudity shouldn't be mandatory, but optional. :)

Please don't. Most people are not meant to be seen unclothed.

That's only because they see too many "beautiful" people on TV. If everyone was naked and people on TV were not airbrushed, we'd be as unbothered about naked people as animals are about naked animals. As for hair argument: monkeys may have hair but you can still see their penises.

The poll needs the option "I'm naked right now".

...

Which I am not, for the record.

Of course not ;)

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

Please don't. Most people are not meant to be seen unclothed.

the point is tho, that wearing clothes isn't a sin.

so nudity shouldn't be mandatory, but optional. :)

But if it was mandatory as part of a religion, I'd have a better chance I reckon :)

Besides, not having mandatory suggests that it's O.K. to deliberately sin against God :P

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Don't tell me you are turning into some religious wacko. Before I read further into your post, prove that got exists. Oh yeah, you can't, because he does not. Therefore, I will not take the time to read you overly long post.

Don't tell me you are turning into some religious wacko. Before I read further into your post, prove that got exists. Oh yeah, you can't, because he does not. Therefore, I will not take the time to read you overly long post.

Then why bother posting in it?

But if it was mandatory as part of a religion, I'd have a better chance I reckon :)

Besides, not having mandatory suggests that it's O.K. to deliberately sin against God :P

and my point reasserts itself like an immovable pillar... a monument to be awed, touched upon and even... err... sorry, I just came from the favorite porn movie thread...

[one cold shower later]

*ahem*

as I said, God provided clothes, thus wearing clothes isn't a sin.

why need to put it into religion? Just make public Nudity legal

Don't tell me you are turning into some religious wacko. Before I read further into your post, prove that got exists. Oh yeah, you can't, because he does not. Therefore, I will not take the time to read you overly long post.

Got does exist. it's in the Dictionary... don't tell me you don't use the Dictionary?!?!





:p

I have yet to see a grossly obese, acne-covered monkey. And if I ever did, it wouldn't be a pretty sight either.

Chocolate is ugly to some people. Women are ugly to some people. Banning stuff because it's ugly is just daft.

and my point reasserts itself like an immovable pillar... a monument to be awed, touched upon and even... err... sorry, I just came from the favorite porn movie thread...

[one cold shower later]

*ahem*

as I said, God provided clothes, thus wearing clothes isn't a sin.

And as I said, He provided them so Adam and Eve could metaphorically hide their sin. If He wanted us to be clothed, we'd be born with clothes. Thus as we are born naked, God wants us to be naked so to be clothed is a sin against God (at least in my soon-to-exist denomination of Christianity)

That's only because they see too many "beautiful" people on TV. If everyone was naked and people on TV were not airbrushed, we'd be as unbothered about naked people as animals are about naked animals. As for hair argument: monkeys may have hair but you can still see their penises.

I have yet to see a grossly obese, acne-covered monkey. And if I ever did, it wouldn't be a pretty sight either.

I never said it should be banned. I just don't want to see it, thanks very much.

And your point is? I didn't ask whether people wanted to see it - that's irrelevant. I don't want to see dead animals. Doesn't mean I'm gonna post that fact in a thread asking whether someone would be able to get away with walking around killing chickens to eat. Because someone doesn't want to see something is not a reason for it not to be done.

Don't tell me you are turning into some religious wacko. Before I read further into your post, prove that got exists. Oh yeah, you can't, because he does not. Therefore, I will not take the time to read you overly long post.

When you open a thread titled "Walking around naked", this is the first thing you can think of to post?

Chocolate is ugly to some people. Women are ugly to some people. Banning stuff because it's ugly is just daft.

I never said it should be banned. I just don't want to see it, thanks very much.

And your point is? I didn't ask whether people wanted to see it - that's irrelevant. I don't want to see dead animals. Doesn't mean I'm gonna post that fact in a thread asking whether someone would be able to get away with walking around killing chickens to eat. Because someone doesn't want to see something is not a reason for it not to be done.

I was implying, in jest, that it would cause me great discomfort if you began such a movement.

Chill out.

And as I said, He provided them so Adam and Eve could metaphorically hide their sin. If He wanted us to be clothed, we'd be born with clothes. Thus as we are born naked, God wants us to be naked so to be clothed is a sin against God (at least in my soon-to-exist denomination of Christianity)again, you call clothing a sin when God provided Adam and Eve clothes for the purpose of hiding their nakedness.

so it's not a sin. and neither is being naked.

Then why bother posting in it?

you can't post in some-one else's post. This is called a thread.

See how religion makes you lose your understanding of the interwebs?

Got does exist. it's in the Dictionary... don't tell me you don't use the Dictionary?!?!





:p

well, it's a real word, but what it means is a being that is 100% fictional.

When you open a thread titled "Walking around naked", this is the first thing you can think of to post?
did you read the beginning of the OP?

again, you call clothing a sin when God provided Adam and Eve clothes for the purpose of hiding their nakedness.

so it's not a sin. and neither is being naked.

But THEY had sinned and wanted to hide it. It wasn't a sin for THEM to wear clothes because the sin they comitted meant they HAD to. But even if it was, God is entitled to change His mind and as we are born naked, I think God wants us to be naked and it's a sin to cover the body that God gave us as it suggests that it is shameful - which is another thing, Adam and Eve's bodies may have been, at that time, considered shameful by God because those two deliberately ignored a direct command from God.

you can't post in some-one else's post. This is called a thread.

See how religion makes you lose your understanding of the interwebs?
He never claimed that this(as in the thread) was a post.
well, it's a real word, but what it means is a being that is 100% fictional.

Prove it.
I don't think it's "un-Christian" to be a nudist though, so the whole thing is kinda moot.
You just say that so you won't have to get dressed :p

you can't post in some-one else's post. This is called a thread.

See how religion makes you lose your understanding of the interwebs?

I said why bother posting it - as in why bother posting what you posted. You can post in a thread. Mental hospital, dearie...

I actually made a somewhat similar argument to a friend once. She said that people wear clothes because of the shame of original sin. Based on her own suggestion that original sin had been done away with by Christ (she was a Baptist) it made sense logically that no one needed to wear clothes anymore, especially Christians.

Baptists in general don't believe in original sin, in the way you are thinking. We are all sinners, being "saved" doesn't change that, we are still sinners. If Adam and Eve wore clothes to hide their shame, we are all still shammed because we are all still sinners.

I don't think it's "un-Christian" to be a nudist though, so the whole thing is kinda stupid to debate.

Baptists in general don't believe in original sin, in the way you are thinking. We are all sinners, being "saved" doesn't change that, we are still sinners. If Adam and Eve wore clothes to hide their shame, we are all still shammed because we are all still sinners.

I don't think it's "un-Christian" to be a nudist though, so the whole thing is kinda stupid to debate.

That's not what I was debating. Read original post.

Side note: WTF is up with this forum? Posts end up in the wrong order

EDIT: See?

It happens when mods are having sex. Apparently, they liked this new religion.

But THEY had sinned and wanted to hide it. It wasn't a sin for THEM to wear clothes because the sin they comitted meant they HAD to. But even if it was, God is entitled to change His mind and as we are born naked, I think God wants us to be naked and it's a sin to cover the body that God gave us as it suggests that it is shameful - which is another thing, Adam and Eve's bodies may have been, at that time, considered shameful by God because those two deliberately ignored a direct command from God.

just like the rest of us?

just like the rest of us?

I haven't heard many accounts of God LITERALLY and DIRECTLY telling someone not to do something recently.

That's not what I was debating. Read original post.

funny, I didn't quote you, maybe, just maybe I wasn't talking to you.

as far as your newest theory....it's bunk and you know it.

I haven't heard many accounts of God LITERALLY and DIRECTLY telling someone not to do something recently.

do you think that God's expectations for us are so ambiguous that we can claim ignorance?

But THEY had sinned and wanted to hide it. It wasn't a sin for THEM to wear clothes because the sin they comitted meant they HAD to. read it. they didn't HAVE TO wear clothes due to the sin, they WANTED to. God provided the skins for clothes. thus wearing clothes is not a sin.

But even if it was, God is entitled to change His mind and as we are born naked, I think God wants us to be naked and it's a sin to cover the body that God gave us as it suggests that it is shameful - I've seen people cover their prized cars... not out of same, but for protection. God knew he was going to cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden, thus they won't be protected out there. the clothes were also for their protection.

which is another thing, Adam and Eve's bodies may have been, at that time, considered shameful by God because those two deliberately ignored a direct command from God.and the sin of nakedness is not the act of being naked, but the thoughts other's think when viewing a naked body.

I haven't heard many accounts of God LITERALLY and DIRECTLY telling someone not to do something recently.actually there are, it's just that people discount them as being "crazy talk"

We're not born with clothes because they would have to be clothes made (or a least designed), by God himself. They'd be so damn fashionable they'd blow our tiny minds.

We're not born with clothes because they would have to be clothes made (or a least designed), by God himself. They'd be so damn fashionable they'd blow our tiny minds.

You win!

It happens when mods are having sex. Apparently, they liked this new religion.

no. It's server problems.

no. It's server problems.

*whoosh* etc.

One thing I forgot to mention. My new denomination believes the Old Testament is NOT the inspired word of God so is therefore not accurate. Thus, whatever it says and however you interpret it, being clothed is still considered a sin.

no. It's server problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_of_humour

One thing I forgot to mention. My new denomination believes the Old Testament is NOT the inspired word of God so is therefore not accurate. Thus, whatever it says and however you interpret it, being clothed is still considered a sin.

you don't realize how stupid you are do you?

your entire basis for your new religion exists in a story in the OT that you have to take as a literal account to work.

One thing I forgot to mention. My new denomination believes the Old Testament is NOT the inspired word of God so is therefore not accurate. Thus, whatever it says and however you interpret it, being clothed is still considered a sin.

LOL

so the "sin" that you professed that caused clothing to be worn is now not accurate... that makes wearing clothes not a sin.

However, Jesus. God's son, wore clothes. he never preached anything about the saintliness of nudity.

thus it seems more and more that your denomination has less and less to stand on.

now if you just said that Nudity wasn't a sin and thus encouraged... then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

but following your logic...
we are born without beards. thus beards are a sin.
we are born without tools, so using tools is a sin.
we are born without knowledge, so learning is a sin.
we are born illiterate, ignorant and without any form of technology. thus we're all living in sin.

You... Um... Enjoy the thought of other people... Looking at you, don't you, Multiland?

First the "pictures of my penis" thread, now making up your own religion for the express purpose of showing your willy off.

Is there some reason for all this?

I would never want to be naked, especially not if anyone else could see me. That would be gross.

LOL

so the "sin" that you professed that caused clothing to be worn is now not accurate... that makes wearing clothes not a sin.

However, Jesus. God's son, wore clothes. he never preached anything about the saintliness of nudity.

thus it seems more and more that your denomination has less and less to stand on.

now if you just said that Nudity wasn't a sin and thus encouraged... then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

but following your logic...
we are born without beards. thus beards are a sin.
we are born without tools, so using tools is a sin.
we are born without knowledge, so learning is a sin.
we are born illiterate, ignorant and without any form of technology. thus we're all living in sin.

all of you are so going to Hell

all of you are so going to Hell

but the truely wicked ones get a tour of Heaven first. ;)

but the truely wicked ones get a tour of Heaven first. ;)

yes i see your name on that list ;)

yes i see your name on that list ;)

I get the daily blogs from several angels sent to my personal corner in the lake of fire...

I get the daily blogs from several angels sent to my personal corner in the lake of fire...

then you may have seen my boat go past you

then you may have seen my boat go past you

no... sorry... I only get to break surface once every 200 years... i've only been here for... 2 days.

no... sorry... I only get to break surface once every 200 years... i've only been here for... 2 days.

oh you got that package, poor thing

It happens when mods are having sex. Apparently, they liked this new religion.

With each other?

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

Well if the cops got to know you than I suppose you would be able to get away with it. If not than you will constantly be arrested and than released in an endless cycle. I'm sure seeing jail cells all over England will be an experience you can tell your kids about. ;)

Im gonna post a nude pic of me in spam, as its part of my religion :p


And also, cuz Kiryu Shi dared me to :p

With each other?

Of course. [violet] likes to watch.

Yes, I've heard about this.

Post them in the Babe thread, FTW.

Wait, did he tell you? that son of a biscuit, now that he has told everyone, I REALLY have to do it :(

Im gonna post a nude pic of me in spam, as its part of my religion :p


And also, cuz Kiryu Shi dared me to :p

Yes, I've heard about this.

Post them in the Babe thread, FTW.

*refuses to return to that thread*

Wait, im not THAT bad, am I? :p

Yes, I've heard about this.

Post them in the Babe thread, FTW.

*refuses to return to that thread*

Wait, did he tell you? that son of a biscuit, now that he has told everyone, I REALLY have to do it :(
*nods*
*refuses to return to that thread*

Just be glad there aren't IMG tags in Spam.

Wait, im not THAT bad, am I? :p

I am just not real into dudes, especially nude ones. I'm sure if Fass was here, after fuming about the spamminess of this thread he would head on over to see if you really did it. :p

<Wonders when Multiland will get arrested for (the UK equivalent of) indecent exposure.>

I am just not real into dudes, especially nude ones. I'm sure if Fass was here, after fuming about the spamminess of this thread he would head on over to see if you really did it. :p

Depends on if Zilam has some hair on his chest, I suppose.

Depends on if Zilam has some hair on his chest, I suppose.

SHould I?

Fass would prefer it.

Good :p. Should I do the happy trail down my torso to my crotch? :p

SHould I?

Fass would prefer it.

except after Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God provided them with clothes.

ahahahaha. Technically, Jesus provided them with clothes, having been appointed the most sympathetic, yet objecrive, judge possible of man.

Yep, I'm studying "Paradise Lost" right now.....:D

And yes, I'm pissed.

Fass would prefer it.

Don't know why, chest hair is fugly.

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

Except God as already told us we should be clothed, especially in public so your logic is a little flawed.

and my point reasserts itself like an immovable pillar... a monument to be awed, touched upon and even... err... sorry, I just came from the favorite porn movie thread...

[one cold shower later]

*ahem*

as I said, God provided clothes, thus wearing clothes isn't a sin.

God also according to that mythology originally provided the garden, the tree amongst others and the apple on the tree that could be eaten. Doing so however was a sin, maybe Adam and Eve messed up on the secret second
chance they were being given and did not realise that covering up what
god gave them with what god gave them would be a sin.

The Garden of Eden myth in terms of the apple , nudity shame etc has always
bothered me.
The tree was the tree of knowledge allegedly the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. Before they ate of it, they could not know what good and evil were
and by definition therefore could not knowingly do evil (not knowing what it was and all)
Having eaten of it, they realised they were naked and they were ashamed,
which would imply that human nekkidness was always shameful but they
were unaware of it. Does this mean that god was the first dirty old man
who made man and woman so he could look at them naked without them
realising there was anything wrong with being seen naked and then throwing
the mother of all wobblies when his very young creations covered up?

Except God as already told us we should be clothed, especially in public so your logic is a little flawed.

he also told "us" not to eat shellfish, pigs etc.

Lots and lots of christian sects do many things that are apparently
not precisely what is in the bible. They probably know his mind a bit better
than whoever wrote stuff down and Junii may well know better than anyone before.

All hail prophet Junii

Personally I like my clothes... but I say its a matter of opinion. Freedom of choice I guess. If you want pokey outie nipples 'cause your outside naked in the cold that's your decision.

So long as you dont try to make me strut about naked with ya it's alllll good. lol

God also according to that mythology originally provided the garden, the tree amongst others and the apple on the tree that could be eaten. Doing so however was a sin, maybe Adam and Eve messed up on the secret second chance they were being given and did not realise that covering up what god gave them with what god gave them would be a sin.
God made the tree. Yes. but God also instructed Adam and Eve not to eat the Fruit. the disobediance is the sin.

The Garden of Eden myth in terms of the apple , nudity shame etc has always bothered me. The tree was the tree of knowledge allegedly the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Before they ate of it, they could not know what good and evil were and by definition therefore could not knowingly do evil (not knowing what it was and all)
Having eaten of it, they realised they were naked and they were ashamed,
which would imply that human nekkidness was always shameful but they
were unaware of it. Does this mean that god was the first dirty old man
who made man and woman so he could look at them naked without them
realising there was anything wrong with being seen naked and then throwing
the mother of all wobblies when his very young creations covered up?except he also made the animals naked.

the condition of Adam and Eve was one that was thought of as complete innocence. so yes, you are right, they could do no evil. The shame they felt at their nakedness has been interpreted as some as being Pride and Vanity. After all, Adam and Eve were the first (and possibly only) humans around. thus the fact that they had no other men or women to compare to, could've made them feel either inferior or at least embarrassed (their bodies were different to each other.)

So many sunburned, naked people with skin cancer.... *eyes fall out*

God also according to that mythology originally provided the garden, the tree amongst others and the apple on the tree that could be eaten. Doing so however was a sin, maybe Adam and Eve messed up on the secret second
chance they were being given and did not realise that covering up what
god gave them with what god gave them would be a sin.

The Garden of Eden myth in terms of the apple , nudity shame etc has always
bothered me.
The tree was the tree of knowledge allegedly the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. Before they ate of it, they could not know what good and evil were
and by definition therefore could not knowingly do evil (not knowing what it was and all)
Having eaten of it, they realised they were naked and they were ashamed,
which would imply that human nekkidness was always shameful but they
were unaware of it. Does this mean that god was the first dirty old man
who made man and woman so he could look at them naked without them
realising there was anything wrong with being seen naked and then throwing
the mother of all wobblies when his very young creations covered up?
you aren't asking the right questions, because I can explain all this away allegorically.

the correct question is "did God originally intend bestiality?"

Gen. 3:15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

you have to pay attention up there. God says "it's not good for man to be alone" so He decides to make a mate for Adam, he then proceeds to make a bunch of animals for Adam to name and try to find a mate with, which didn't work out......only then does God make woman, after all the animals are found to be inadequate. (I bolded important parts, but you should read all of it)

Don't know why, chest hair is fugly.Depends whose chest hair it is.

Speaking of walking around naked, don't run from the cops through roadside brush and thorns when naked. :(

Depends whose chest hair it is.

Like Robin Williams?

Im gonna post a nude pic of me in spam, as its part of my religion :p


And also, cuz Kiryu Shi dared me to :p

Yes, I've heard about this.

Post them in the Babe thread, FTW.

Wait, did he tell you? that son of a biscuit, now that he has told everyone, I REALLY have to do it :(

*giggles*

Wait, did he tell you? that son of a biscuit, now that he has told everyone, I REALLY have to do it :(Do you do everything people dare you to then tell people they've dared you to do?

Like Robin Williams?I can't say I've seen his chest hair, but I don't think he'd look good.

Hmmm, Multiland, been done already! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digambar

Hmmm, Multiland, been done already! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digambar

Only the monks need to be naked in that religion. He's going for everyone naked.

Don't tell me you are turning into some religious wacko. Before I read further into your post, prove that got exists. Oh yeah, you can't, because he does not. Therefore, I will not take the time to read you overly long post.

Well, I can do that!

1. God is the most perfect being.
2. God who exists is more perfect then God who doesn’t exist.
therefore
3. God does exist.

God made the tree. Yes. but God also instructed Adam and Eve not to eat the Fruit. the disobediance is the sin.


They'd have to understand the difference between right and wrong,
good and evil, for there to be any reason for them to even think that
it was important to obey what this god guy told them.
That's assuming that disobedience to an apparently random rule
with no explanation of any kind could be considered to be wrong in any way.

The shame they felt at their nakedness has been interpreted as some as being Pride and Vanity. After all, Adam and Eve were the first (and possibly only) humans around. thus the fact that they had no other men or women to compare to, could've made them feel either inferior or at least embarrassed (their bodies were different to each other.)

Vanity and pride are usually not equated to shame except in as much as people might say
they ought to be ashamed of themselves for being so vain.

The fact remains that according to mythology god created man and woman
and he had them running around naked. Possibly for his own lecherous pleasure, history does not relate.
If it was gods preferred way for humans to be then who the heck is anyone
else to argue.

That one part of Junii's proposed religion makes sense so everyone feel free to
sign up.

Are you taking donations yet Junii, I'm sure I could dig up some old clothes for the bring and buy...
oh ummm might not be that popular in your particular christian spin off.

Let me see if I have some old but still in date sunblock for the bring and buy.

Body painting might help, if you can get weathershield body paint.

Well, I can do that!

1. God is the most perfect being.
2. God who exists is more perfect then God who doesn’t exist.
therefore
3. God does exist.

point 2 is debatable

Surely creating everything without even existing yourself is more perfect
than existing and creating everything, cos that's gotta be easier.

A comedian whose name I cannot remember had a wonderful piece about god creating heaven and earth
before going on to create light
He felt this was even more impressive than creating everything
creating it without light to see by

For the rest of us it may help to explain why things are less than perfect.

And the moral

If making or creating anything , or heck, even going down or up stairs, please turn the lights on first.

If you're gonna get naked, PLEASE tell other people nearby beforehand. Just in case.

except after Adam and Eve ate the fruit, God provided them with clothes.

But sin has been absolved by Jesus.

...I've been thinking. If God had wanted us to be clothed, we would be born with clothes - so as we are born naked, it's reasonable to assume that God wants us to be naked. So then it makes sense that it's a sin against God to wear clothes (at least when wearing clothes is not necessary for warmth).

Well I want to start a new denomination of Christianity. Part of it will be compulsory nudity (unless impractical, for example on freezing days) as to cover the body would be considered a sin against God. So that would of course mean that on hot days, members would be required to be nude - even in public.

Problem is that nudity law in England is not very clear - people have consistently been arrested for "indecency", only to be aquitted by a jury (but unfortunately no case law precedent has been set). BUT carrying an offensive weapon is also illegal. But I remember hearing about a Pagan woman avoiding conviction for carrying an Athame because it's part of her religion. So if compulsory nudity was part of my religion, do you reckon I'd be able to walk around naked in public without being hassled by cops?

I guess if sikhs can wear kirpans and muslims can wear hijabs etc...then you could be naked...freedom of religion i guess

Speaking of walking around naked, don't run from the cops through roadside brush and thorns when naked. :(

Personal experience speaking there? :p

you don't realize how stupid you are do you?

your entire basis for your new religion exists in a story in the OT that you have to take as a literal account to work.

No it doesn't. My basis is that we are born naked. That's about it. Course I've added a few personal things with loose scriptural backing (wow, it's like a proper religion already!)

If you're gonna get naked, PLEASE tell other people nearby beforehand. Just in case.

In case of what?

Except God as already told us we should be clothed, especially in public so your logic is a little flawed.

That's according to your religion (judging from your signature, you're Muslim). Not mine. There's nothing that has been found in the Holy Bible that SPECIFICALLY states that "Humans MUST be clothed", in totally unambiguous language. And of course the Qur'an, in my opinion, is just a rip-off of the Bible with things added to suit the personal views of the writer (who was clearly not a prophet)