Is non-sexual social nudity a Romans 14 issue? Or is it likely immoral as described the Bible?
I have been unable find anything in the Bible to suggest that literal physical nakedness (exposed genitalia, buttocks, or breasts) is considered by God to be immoral.
Is there anything that I should be aware of to refute my belief in light of what I understand here?
- When God clothed the 1st man and woman, they had fig leaves on their genitals, and fig leaf sap is extremely toxic to skin when exposed to light. This would have been God's wisdom being used as an act of mercy, not God commanding them to wear clothes.
- If they were clothed to prevent lust, this doesn't make sense because they were already married.
- There are other reasons to argue against this being a command from God, but there are way too many, so I won't describe them here.
- God tells Abraham that circumcism is a sign of God's covenant with Israel. All of the other signs that God gives are are visible.
- Aaron and his sons were washed in full view of the entire congregation, and then dressed in their priestly garments.
- Various people prophesied naked, one was explicitly commanded by God to be naked.
- Bathsheba was likened to an innocent sacrificial lamb after performing a God ordained purity ritual in view of others.
- God's condemnation of Israel's nakedness (ʿervâ) throughout the Old Testament prophets was not the same word for literal nakedness (ārôm), nor was it ever applied to individuals who were literally naked and innocent. It was usually applied to an entire nation.
- Naaman is told by God to go into the Jordan river to wash himself seven times. I hope no one thinks that they can go wash themselves in a muddy river (as it is today, and was at that time) and somehow keep their clothes clean.
- Jesus tells the people at Lazarus' resurrection to remove his grave cloths, yet never asks to give him clothes to cover his nudity.
- Peter fishes naked in full view of those at the shore, and then Jesus follows this by confronting Peter about denying Jesus as his Rabbi, yet ignores his public nudity.
- Paul and the writer of Hebrews goes out of their way to describe almost every single famous Greek athletic competition (Olympics, et. al.) where each competitor is strictly naked. All of the people listening to the letters read aloud would have only been able to imagine a group of naked men.
- Jesus is naked for his circumcism, his baptism (essentially a mikvah/mikveh), washing his disciple's feet, his crucifixion, and his resurrection (grave clothes left behind).
- We are told that the saints are clothed with:
- power on high
- the Lord Jesus Christ
- imperishability and immortality
- compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience
- modesty, self-control, and good deeds
- gentle and quiet spirit
- humility toward one another
- righteous acts of the saints
So, if the Bible tells us to wear God’s power, Jesus, eternal life, the fruits of the Spirit, and righteousness, but no literal clothing, why are Christians so concerned with modest clothing? Is it just an assumption that since society has conditioned us to associate nudity and sex that the Church condemns it because sexual immorality is wrong?
What do most Bible scholars and theologians honestly think of this issue? I don't know if there are any who have written on this issue, so I assume this is probably the third rail of Biblical scholarship.