Narrative, Shem and Japheth were blessed for coming to the defense of their dad's honour. Instead of joining Ham in
his boasting, they reverently covered their father's shame.281
189. Exodus 20:26--The Priest's nakedness wasn't to be exposed because it'd create dissonance
between his social function, in which he was to be viewed as sexually impartial, and his biological standing as a sexual being.
The Priest's costume symbolized his societal role; to be exposed in that circumstance would be inappropriate and
Deflecting.282
Rita Poretsky writes: "Personhood, first sexual energy, and physical nakedness might be either in
synchrony with social institutions or in disharmony. . . . Nakedness is a nakedness of self in a social context, not simply
a nakedness of body." 283 On the other hand, it was quite appropriate for David to dance basically naked in public
to observe the return of the Ark of the Covenant (II Samuel 6:14-23).
190. Leviticus 18:6-19--Here and throughout the Old Testament and Torah, the manifestation "uncover the
nakedness of" (as it's literally translated in the King James Version) is a euphemism for "have sexual relations
with." The prohibitions don't refer to nudity per se.
284
191. I Samuel 19:23-24--Jewish prophets were commonly nude--so commonly that when Saul stripped off
his clothes and prophesied, no one considered his nakedness remarkable, but everyone immediately assumed that he
must be a prophet also.
192. II Samuel 6:14-23--King David danced almost naked in the City of David to celebrate the return of the
ark, in full view of all the citizens of the city. Michal criticized his public nudity and was rebuffed.
King David wasn't just nude--he wore a "linen ephod," a type of short apron or close-fitting, armless,
outer vest, stretching at the most down to the hips. Ephods were part of the vestments worn by Jewish priests. They
Concealed nothing.285
193. Isaiah 20:2-3--God directly commanded Isaiah to loose the sackcloth from his hips, and he went nude
and barefoot for three years. The prophet Micah may have done the same thing (see Micah 1:8).
194. Song of Solomon repeatedly expresses gratitude for the naked body.
195. Every Biblical organization of nakedness with shame is in reference to a sin already committed. One
cannot hide from God behind literal or figurative clothing. All stand naked before God.286
196. Nakedness cannot automatically be equated with sexual sin.
Linking nudity with sexual sin, to the exclusion of all else, makes as much sense as insisting that fire can
only be connected to the destruction of property and life, and is so immoral. Sin comes not from nakedness,
but from how the state of nakedness is used. Ian Barbour writes: "No part of man is evil in itself, but merely in its
Abuse. The inherent good of the material order, in which man's being fully participates, is, as we shall see, a
corollary of the doctrine of development." 287
Pope John Paul II agrees that nudity, in and of itself, isn't sinful. "The body in itself constantly has its
own inalienable human dignity," he says. It's only obscene when it is reduced to "an object of 'enjoyment,' meant
for the gratification of concupiscence itself." 288
197. Nakedness cannot automatically be associated with lust.
It's not reasonable to cover the apples in the marketplace only because someone might may be tempted by
gluttony, nor is it necessary to prohibit money because someone might be overcome by greed. Nor is it reasonable to ban
nudity, just because someone might be tempted to lust. Furthermore, admiration for the attractiveness of a member
of the other sex, nude or otherwise, cannot be equated automatically with lust. Just if desire is added does
Gratitude become lust, and for that reason sin. Even then, it is the person who lusts, not the object of lust, who has sinned.
times if it is unneeded for societal protocol or physical comfort would be to armour oneself in a way that may block was never rebuked for bathing, but David for lusting (II Samuel 11:2-12:12). Pope John Paul II writes:
"There are circumstances in which nakedness is not immodest. If someone takes
his boasting, they reverently covered their father's shame.281
189. Exodus 20:26--The Priest's nakedness wasn't to be exposed because it'd create dissonance
between his social function, in which he was to be viewed as sexually impartial, and his biological standing as a sexual being.
The Priest's costume symbolized his societal role; to be exposed in that circumstance would be inappropriate and
Deflecting.282
Rita Poretsky writes: "Personhood, first sexual energy, and physical nakedness might be either in
synchrony with social institutions or in disharmony. . . . Nakedness is a nakedness of self in a social context, not simply
a nakedness of body." 283 On the other hand, it was quite appropriate for David to dance basically naked in public
to observe the return of the Ark of the Covenant (II Samuel 6:14-23).
190. Leviticus 18:6-19--Here and throughout the Old Testament and Torah, the manifestation "uncover the
nakedness of" (as it's literally translated in the King James Version) is a euphemism for "have sexual relations
with." The prohibitions don't refer to nudity per se.
284
191. I Samuel 19:23-24--Jewish prophets were commonly nude--so commonly that when Saul stripped off
his clothes and prophesied, no one considered his nakedness remarkable, but everyone immediately assumed that he
must be a prophet also.
192. II Samuel 6:14-23--King David danced almost naked in the City of David to celebrate the return of the
ark, in full view of all the citizens of the city. Michal criticized his public nudity and was rebuffed.
King David wasn't just nude--he wore a "linen ephod," a type of short apron or close-fitting, armless,
outer vest, stretching at the most down to the hips. Ephods were part of the vestments worn by Jewish priests. They
Concealed nothing.285
193. Isaiah 20:2-3--God directly commanded Isaiah to loose the sackcloth from his hips, and he went nude
and barefoot for three years. The prophet Micah may have done the same thing (see Micah 1:8).
194. Song of Solomon repeatedly expresses gratitude for the naked body.
195. Every Biblical organization of nakedness with shame is in reference to a sin already committed. One
cannot hide from God behind literal or figurative clothing. All stand naked before God.286
196. Nakedness cannot automatically be equated with sexual sin.
Linking nudity with sexual sin, to the exclusion of all else, makes as much sense as insisting that fire can
only be connected to the destruction of property and life, and is so immoral. Sin comes not from nakedness,
but from how the state of nakedness is used. Ian Barbour writes: "No part of man is evil in itself, but merely in its
Abuse. The inherent good of the material order, in which man's being fully participates, is, as we shall see, a
corollary of the doctrine of development." 287
Pope John Paul II agrees that nudity, in and of itself, isn't sinful. "The body in itself constantly has its
own inalienable human dignity," he says. It's only obscene when it is reduced to "an object of 'enjoyment,' meant
for the gratification of concupiscence itself." 288
197. Nakedness cannot automatically be associated with lust.
It's not reasonable to cover the apples in the marketplace only because someone might may be tempted by
gluttony, nor is it necessary to prohibit money because someone might be overcome by greed. Nor is it reasonable to ban
nudity, just because someone might be tempted to lust. Furthermore, admiration for the attractiveness of a member
of the other sex, nude or otherwise, cannot be equated automatically with lust. Just if desire is added does
Gratitude become lust, and for that reason sin. Even then, it is the person who lusts, not the object of lust, who has sinned.
times if it is unneeded for societal protocol or physical comfort would be to armour oneself in a way that may block was never rebuked for bathing, but David for lusting (II Samuel 11:2-12:12). Pope John Paul II writes:
"There are circumstances in which nakedness is not immodest. If someone takes