Was God a nudist?

pasdevetements · #1 05-26-2003, 12:29 AM

I was wondering what all of your thoughts are on nudism in relation to the existence of God, possibly dealing with the never ending battle between evolutionism and creationism.

For example, in the Bible, it says that Noah brought 2 of each animal with him in the Ark for 40 days and 40 nights. It says NOTHING about Noah, his sons, or his sons' wives taking CLOTHES with them. I've researched the Noah/Flood/BareGenitals theory, and in my opinion and the opinion of my bare-assed colleauges, we think that either Noah was a nudist...or Noah did not exist at all...

I've also researched fossil records regarding the Paluxy River tracks, in which dinosaur tracks and human tracks lay fossilized side by side. I just thought I should share one vital fact that I came across while researching these tracks. As I knelt down to take a plaster mold of a metatarsal footprint, I noticed something very peculiar; and that is naked paleotontology is hardly as exciting when you have gential herpes.

The schoolchildren passed me by, pointing and laughing at my God-given (Architect-given?) STD, and after being arrested and ridiculed by the local police, I was released from jail with only the no clothes on my back.

And so, in conclusion, I say that God exists, Noah might, and that since we are born into this glorious world naked, we should leave this glorious world in the same manner.

On that note, I will be in my room awaiting a slow and painful death, "pas des vetements".

Merci beacoup,
Monsieur "Man with No Clothes Or Lack of Faith in a Supreme Creator"

pasdevetements · #2 05-26-2003, 12:29 AM

I was wondering what all of your thoughts are on nudism in relation to the existence of God, possibly dealing with the never ending battle between evolutionism and creationism.

For example, in the Bible, it says that Noah brought 2 of each animal with him in the Ark for 40 days and 40 nights. It says NOTHING about Noah, his sons, or his sons' wives taking CLOTHES with them. I've researched the Noah/Flood/BareGenitals theory, and in my opinion and the opinion of my bare-assed colleauges, we think that either Noah was a nudist...or Noah did not exist at all...

I've also researched fossil records regarding the Paluxy River tracks, in which dinosaur tracks and human tracks lay fossilized side by side. I just thought I should share one vital fact that I came across while researching these tracks. As I knelt down to take a plaster mold of a metatarsal footprint, I noticed something very peculiar; and that is naked paleotontology is hardly as exciting when you have gential herpes.

The schoolchildren passed me by, pointing and laughing at my God-given (Architect-given?) STD, and after being arrested and ridiculed by the local police, I was released from jail with only the no clothes on my back.

And so, in conclusion, I say that God exists, Noah might, and that since we are born into this glorious world naked, we should leave this glorious world in the same manner.

On that note, I will be in my room awaiting a slow and painful death, "pas des vetements".

Merci beacoup,
Monsieur "Man with No Clothes Or Lack of Faith in a Supreme Creator"

#3 05-26-2003, 04:01 AM

First off, the Bible says that Noah brought two of each "unclean" animal and seven of each "clean" animal into the Ark.

Second, while the rain lasted 40 days and nights, it was nearly a year before they came out of the Ark, because it took that long before there was enough land for them to live on. This is assuming that they were going by a 12 month calendar. They went into the Ark in the second month and came out in the first month of the following year.

Whether or not Noah and his family wore clothes is anyone's guess. How would they wash their clothes on the Ark?

Rik · #4 05-26-2003, 04:09 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
[qb] Whether or not Noah and his family wore clothes is anyone's guess. How would they wash their clothes on the Ark? [/qb]

You'd think all that water around them might have been useful for washing clothes. I don't know how they'd have managed for washing powder though.

[img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img] Rik

gamblefish · #5 05-26-2003, 05:36 AM

Maybe they coulda used animal fat...but of course there were no dryers so...nevermind.

Say...what do you suppose the inside of that ark smelled like? PHEW!!!

#6 05-26-2003, 06:28 AM

Perhaps God put all the animals into hibernation so that food for them wouldn't be necessary, and there wouldn't any waste. Of ourse, there would be the animal smell. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

#7 05-26-2003, 06:49 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
[qb] First off, the Bible says that Noah brought two of each "unclean" animal and seven of each "clean" animal into the Ark.

Second, while the rain lasted 40 days and nights, it was nearly a year before they came out of the Ark, because it took that long before there was enough land for them to live on. This is assuming that they were going by a 12 month calendar. They went into the Ark in the second month and came out in the first month of the following year.

Whether or not Noah and his family wore clothes is anyone's guess. How would they wash their clothes on the Ark? [/qb]

Going by the statistics given in the bible about the size of the ark it has been proven that it would not be possible to fit all these animals plus a year's supply of food inside. Just another fairytale that can't be substantiated in real life.

David77 · #8 05-26-2003, 07:58 AM

There are TWO stories of Noah and the ark in Genesis.
One states that there was one pair of each kind of animal.

The other states that there were seven pair of clean animals and one pair of unclean animals.

One story says that it was 40 days and 40 nights. The other states it was 370 days.

One says it was a dove. The other says it was a raven.

This is one example of what bible scholars call "couplets" in the bible.

Other couplets are;
Two differing stories of creation.

Also there are two stories of the covenent between the diety and Abraham.

Another example; One story says Seth was the first child. The other story says Cain was the first child.

The reason for couplets in the Bible?
It is because each of the two tribes, Isreal and Judeah, had their legends different, so they just incorporated BOTH stories in the bible, so take you pick! (I don't "literalize" any bible story).

(Incidentally, each of these two tribes had their own name for God and different concepts for God).

Frank R · #9 05-26-2003, 08:08 AM

Going by the statistics given in the bible about the size of the ark it has been proven that it would not be possible to fit all these animals plus a year's supply of food inside. Just another fairytale that can't be substantiated in real life. [/QB][/quote]

It has also been proven that a bumble bee cannot fly due to the shape of their wings.
Until it was actually found, the city of Troy was considered a myth.
When Henry Hudson returned to England with a "cure" for scurvy (Vitamin C), the medical establishment of his day laughed him off as everyone knew that scurvy was a disease and not just lack of vitamins. The number of times a "proven fact" has been found to be wrong would take thousands of pages to cover so let's just say we have a difference of opinion and leave it at that.

Trailscout · #10 05-26-2003, 08:58 AM

Those interested in the ability of the ark to carry a pair of specimens (probably immature)of each "kind" of terrestrial animal, (a genetic grouping generally between a species and genus in scope), can look to Noah's Ark FAQ for further explanation.

For those of us who are Christian or Jewish, we need to answer the question, "Do we need to emulate the biblical patriarchs in every cultural respect? In particular, as it concerns social and/or familial nudity?

I won't go into detail, but it can be shown that the patriarchs did some things that are clearly wrong, Rachel worshipped pagan gods (her idols were secretly packed in her saddle bags as she left her home in Haran), Jacob used trickery and his brother's lack of food to dupe him into swearing off his birthright. King David committed very public sins. So to those who insist that we imitate every behavior of the characters in the Bible, down to the clothes they wore, I will simply say that their actions were just as often an example of what not to do as what to do.

Rather than try to discover whether Noah was a nudist, I think we should ask with all seriousness is God a nudist?

God's nudism is not a hard case to prove:

Adam and Eve were created nude and remained nude and in God's perfect will until they sinned.

God's reply to Adam's body shame was, "Who told you were naked?" God was not asking how Adam found out that he was naked, God is questioning the entire premise that being without clothing is a state of lack or "nakedness".

When God dressed Adam and Eve, this did not inaugarate a covenant of clothing. There was never a subsequent command to wear the skins of animals used in sacrifice. Sin causes the need for atonement, not the need for clothing.

King Saul prophesied in the nude all day long and the public reaction was not "For Shame!". Instead, the onlookers commented that his nudity was typical of a prophet.

Isaiah prophesied nude for three years to warn of impending captivity of the Jews. It does demonstrate that people in Israel generally wore clothes, or Isaiah's nudity would have no shock value, but it also demonstrates that God had no problem using nudity to make a point. If non-sexual nudity were truly shameful (as Adam thought), then God wouldn't have insisted on it. Jesus himself was briefly nude at the conclusion of the Last Supper as he washed the disciple's feet.

There are passages in which God admonishes priests to take precaution against accidental exposure of their bodies in temple worship, but that was because of mockers or hecklers in the congregation, not because God himself objected to the unclothed body. There are also passages in which modern renderings of the Torah admonish us not to

quote:
uncover the nakedness of...

some close relative. In a textile society, which the Hebrews had become, if a man is alone with a woman and removes her clothing, that is generally a sexual context. That same woman might blamelessly work in a vineyard nude or partially nude, and there is the famous example of the apostle Peter innocently working nude in his fishing boat. The latter cases are examples of nonsexual nudity that were a given in Hebrew culture.

If you are Jewish or Christian, do not assume that body shame is an intrinsic part of your faith. Only a very prejudicial reading of scripture will teach body shame. Look at the verses for yourself. God created us without clothes and called it very good. Only the need to avoid hostility of people with a warped view of the body or the need for protection from harsh weather create the need for clothing in our present world.