-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I looked up the word 'modest' in a number of Greek dictionaries. It has the meaning of 'well ordered' or decorous.
In other words it is stressing to pull up your pants and tuck in your shirt rather than a sexually alluring style; although the latter is implied, it's just not the emphasis of the meaning.
In other words it is stressing to pull up your pants and tuck in your shirt rather than a sexually alluring style; although the latter is implied, it's just not the emphasis of the meaning.
God created man in His own image, and did not mention creating clothes for man to wear as a necessary part of that image (Genesis 1.26-27). Moreover, God created man male and female (Genesis 1.26), and created both halves of man naked (Genesis 2.25). Indeed, while they were in their state of innocent nakedness, God called man "good" (Genesis 1.30) and blessed them (Genesis 1.28). In his initial state of innocence, neither man nor wife was ashamed to be naked in the others presence (Genesis 2.25), and, more importantly, neither felt any shame walking and conversing with God in this state (compare Genesis 2.15-16, 2.23 and 3.8-11). God had also commanded man to be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1.28) without giving any command as to the wearing of clothing after children were born. Although the entrance of sin changed the situation before any children were born, the Scriptures nowhere state anything which would imply that, if man had reproduced before sin came, clothing would have been required for the children's sake. Neither is there anything in Scripture which even vaguely supports the tradition taught by some churches that man was covered with a "robe of righteousness" so that Adam and Eve could not see each others bodies. This passage clearly says that they were "naked" -- not partially clothed in an opaque spiritual garment -- and were not ashamed (Genesis 2.25).
However, after sin came, Adam and Eve (who previously had been "man," one being, male and female) understood they were naked and believed they needed clothing, and sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves (Genesis 3.7). When God observed their shame, and their attempt to cover their bodies in shame, He provided animal skins for them (Genesis 3.21). These skins were a better covering in the practical sense that they would not wilt like leaves. The use of animal skins was also designed to teach them that only God could provide an adequate covering for their sin and that covering of their sins required the shedding of blood (Hebrews 9.22-23).
It is traditional to infer from God's act of providing Adam and Eve coats of skins that He has ever since required people to wear clothing, and generally this inferred requirement is then associated with some man-made standard of decent or modest dress which God is said to enjoin in this passage. But it is just as natural to read this passage as teaching that, when man noticed his own shame and incorrectly concluded that the shame arose from his body rather than from the sin in his spirit, God accommodated him by making him durable clothing to help him overcome that shame and come to Him, even though He knew that clothing was not the ultimate solution. However, the remainder of this essay will assume that clothing was, at least in part, God's idea and that, in making clothing for Adam and Eve, He made it a requirement for everyone.
Does God Regard The Human Body As Evil? The simple answer to this question is "no." When God created man, male and female, He called His creation "very good" (Genesis 1.31). It later says that the man and his wife were "naked" (Genesis 2.25) without qualifying the first verse to say only that God saw that all of his creation except these naked bodies was "very good." From this, it can only be concluded that God regarded the bodies of the man and his wife that He had created as "very good" even though they were naked. Moreover, it should be observed that after the entrance of sin in Chapter 3, God never told either Adam or Eve that they were naked, and never said anything to them which even inferentially endorsed Adam's declaration that the problem that separated him from God was a lack of clothing (as in, "I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself"). God created the human body good, and in this passage never gave any even slight indication that this "good" body, of itself, had been rendered evil by the entrance of sin.
From What Source Did The Requirement Of Clothing Arise? As has already been suggested, the answer to this question is stated quite plainly on the face of the passage. The serpent had tempted the woman, and through her, the man, with the lie that, if they ate the fruit, they would "be like God, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3.5). This was a lie because it was only partially true but was presented as wholly true. The truth in it was that man did not yet know evil. But it was a lie because man already knew all good, since he walked with God intimately and was already just like God -- created in His image. (Genesis 1.25). Thus, the only thing man stood to "gain" from eating the forbidden fruit was the knowledge of evil. When he did so, he willfully exchanged the truth of God for a lie and became a fool (Romans 1.18-23).
When man became a fool and received the knowledge of evil, the first thing the man and his wife (now truly separate) noticed was that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together to make loin cloths for themselves (Genesis 3.7). They then hid from God (Genesis 3.8). Adam explained the reason that he made loin cloths and hid from God by saying that he was "afraid" (note, not "ashamed" or "embarrassed") because he was naked (Genesis 3.10). He knew God had said that if he ate the fruit he would surely die, but he had believed the serpent's lie that this was not true and now sought another explanation for the fear he felt. The fear was really a response to the judgment Adam knew God had said He would bring on his sin, but Adam believed the fear arose from what God might do to him because of the uncovered condition of the "good" body God had made for him. This was the reasoning of a fool, and God showed it to be so by asking whether Adam had come to know that he was naked because he had eaten of the forbidden tree (Genesis 3.11).
The issue was Adam's sin, not his clothes (or lack of them). The requirement for clothing sprang from Adam's (and Eve's) incorrect identification of their sin with their bodies and their consequent unreasonable fear of leaving those bodies uncovered before God. They sought to cover their sin (something only Jesus could do) by covering their bodies with fig leaves.
Before moving on from this passage, one further comment should be made. God's first commandment to man was to be fruitful and multiply, replenish the earth and subdue it (Genesis 1.28a). The second commandment was to take dominion over the animal creation (Genesis 1.26, 28b). The third and last commandment given to Adam in innocence was not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2.17). When Adam gave his obedience to a snake, he abandoned the commandment to exercise dominion over the animals. When he then ate the fruit he abandoned the command not to eat the fruit. This left only one command he could fulfill: the command to be fruitful and multiply. While Scripture nowhere straightforwardly declares this, it appears likely that his insistence on clothing -- specifically, "loincloths" -- after he sinned was an attempt to hide from God the very parts of his and his wife's bodies which would make it possible for them to fulfill this first commandment. Stated another way, now that Adam and Eve had abandoned God's purpose for themselves and become fools, they appear to have mistakenly believed that the reproductive parts of their bodies were evil, quite possibly because reproduction was the one part of God's purpose they could still accomplish. Historically, however, Adam and Eve have not been alone -- most of the great religions of the world have either outright taught that sex and the sexual parts of the body are offensive to God or have had major sub-movements within them that taught this. Christianity, unfortunately, is no exception.
I ask this question, however: Which is better to believe -- God, who called our bodies good, or the corrupt conscience of Adam, who had become a fool and was hiding from God? Unfortunately, Christianity as a whole has traditionally insisted that the fool Adam expressed the mind of God in this matter!
However, after sin came, Adam and Eve (who previously had been "man," one being, male and female) understood they were naked and believed they needed clothing, and sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves (Genesis 3.7). When God observed their shame, and their attempt to cover their bodies in shame, He provided animal skins for them (Genesis 3.21). These skins were a better covering in the practical sense that they would not wilt like leaves. The use of animal skins was also designed to teach them that only God could provide an adequate covering for their sin and that covering of their sins required the shedding of blood (Hebrews 9.22-23).
It is traditional to infer from God's act of providing Adam and Eve coats of skins that He has ever since required people to wear clothing, and generally this inferred requirement is then associated with some man-made standard of decent or modest dress which God is said to enjoin in this passage. But it is just as natural to read this passage as teaching that, when man noticed his own shame and incorrectly concluded that the shame arose from his body rather than from the sin in his spirit, God accommodated him by making him durable clothing to help him overcome that shame and come to Him, even though He knew that clothing was not the ultimate solution. However, the remainder of this essay will assume that clothing was, at least in part, God's idea and that, in making clothing for Adam and Eve, He made it a requirement for everyone.
Does God Regard The Human Body As Evil? The simple answer to this question is "no." When God created man, male and female, He called His creation "very good" (Genesis 1.31). It later says that the man and his wife were "naked" (Genesis 2.25) without qualifying the first verse to say only that God saw that all of his creation except these naked bodies was "very good." From this, it can only be concluded that God regarded the bodies of the man and his wife that He had created as "very good" even though they were naked. Moreover, it should be observed that after the entrance of sin in Chapter 3, God never told either Adam or Eve that they were naked, and never said anything to them which even inferentially endorsed Adam's declaration that the problem that separated him from God was a lack of clothing (as in, "I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself"). God created the human body good, and in this passage never gave any even slight indication that this "good" body, of itself, had been rendered evil by the entrance of sin.
From What Source Did The Requirement Of Clothing Arise? As has already been suggested, the answer to this question is stated quite plainly on the face of the passage. The serpent had tempted the woman, and through her, the man, with the lie that, if they ate the fruit, they would "be like God, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3.5). This was a lie because it was only partially true but was presented as wholly true. The truth in it was that man did not yet know evil. But it was a lie because man already knew all good, since he walked with God intimately and was already just like God -- created in His image. (Genesis 1.25). Thus, the only thing man stood to "gain" from eating the forbidden fruit was the knowledge of evil. When he did so, he willfully exchanged the truth of God for a lie and became a fool (Romans 1.18-23).
When man became a fool and received the knowledge of evil, the first thing the man and his wife (now truly separate) noticed was that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together to make loin cloths for themselves (Genesis 3.7). They then hid from God (Genesis 3.8). Adam explained the reason that he made loin cloths and hid from God by saying that he was "afraid" (note, not "ashamed" or "embarrassed") because he was naked (Genesis 3.10). He knew God had said that if he ate the fruit he would surely die, but he had believed the serpent's lie that this was not true and now sought another explanation for the fear he felt. The fear was really a response to the judgment Adam knew God had said He would bring on his sin, but Adam believed the fear arose from what God might do to him because of the uncovered condition of the "good" body God had made for him. This was the reasoning of a fool, and God showed it to be so by asking whether Adam had come to know that he was naked because he had eaten of the forbidden tree (Genesis 3.11).
The issue was Adam's sin, not his clothes (or lack of them). The requirement for clothing sprang from Adam's (and Eve's) incorrect identification of their sin with their bodies and their consequent unreasonable fear of leaving those bodies uncovered before God. They sought to cover their sin (something only Jesus could do) by covering their bodies with fig leaves.
Before moving on from this passage, one further comment should be made. God's first commandment to man was to be fruitful and multiply, replenish the earth and subdue it (Genesis 1.28a). The second commandment was to take dominion over the animal creation (Genesis 1.26, 28b). The third and last commandment given to Adam in innocence was not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2.17). When Adam gave his obedience to a snake, he abandoned the commandment to exercise dominion over the animals. When he then ate the fruit he abandoned the command not to eat the fruit. This left only one command he could fulfill: the command to be fruitful and multiply. While Scripture nowhere straightforwardly declares this, it appears likely that his insistence on clothing -- specifically, "loincloths" -- after he sinned was an attempt to hide from God the very parts of his and his wife's bodies which would make it possible for them to fulfill this first commandment. Stated another way, now that Adam and Eve had abandoned God's purpose for themselves and become fools, they appear to have mistakenly believed that the reproductive parts of their bodies were evil, quite possibly because reproduction was the one part of God's purpose they could still accomplish. Historically, however, Adam and Eve have not been alone -- most of the great religions of the world have either outright taught that sex and the sexual parts of the body are offensive to God or have had major sub-movements within them that taught this. Christianity, unfortunately, is no exception.
I ask this question, however: Which is better to believe -- God, who called our bodies good, or the corrupt conscience of Adam, who had become a fool and was hiding from God? Unfortunately, Christianity as a whole has traditionally insisted that the fool Adam expressed the mind of God in this matter!
P
You sure went out in supposition land for that one, didn't you? When did Adam hide from God? After he had eaten fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Why did he hide if it was good? Do you hide when you do something good?
There is nothing to say that Eve had children before she partook of the sinful fruit. There were no others! Created both halves of man naked? Both halves? You are saying He did it one piece at a time? You think He should have created man with clothes on? You are telling us that because they were naked He called them good? Surely it had nothing to do with His creation? Do you read what you type?
What in the world are you talking about? I don't know where you got all this stuff, but you're building doctrine on guesses. The bible does not support what you are saying.
There is nothing to say that Eve had children before she partook of the sinful fruit. There were no others! Created both halves of man naked? Both halves? You are saying He did it one piece at a time? You think He should have created man with clothes on? You are telling us that because they were naked He called them good? Surely it had nothing to do with His creation? Do you read what you type?
What in the world are you talking about? I don't know where you got all this stuff, but you're building doctrine on guesses. The bible does not support what you are saying.
M
Of course not, these clothing should not be worn by Christian. Modest apparel symbolizes the decency you show in your dressing sense. It doesn’t mean that you have no right to appear modern, just wear those clothes that don’t expose your inner body part. Like you can see on Leelach.com where all clothes are design in such aspect that it appears stylish without losing its modesty.
They hid. Part of the sin is that they lost their trust in God afterwards. They were afraid of what would happen. Instead of depending on God to help them with their sin, they became self-centered and fled. They were afraid... much like a child who hides after doing something wrong.
You're taking it out of context. "Others" as in in relationship with each other. Both halves as in male and female. When we are born we have no clothes on... such is God's way.
Job said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return." The Psalmist says that God knows us inside and out. And Paul says "For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account."
You're taking it out of context. "Others" as in in relationship with each other. Both halves as in male and female. When we are born we have no clothes on... such is God's way.
Job said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return." The Psalmist says that God knows us inside and out. And Paul says "For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account."
Last edited: