Biblical Modesty | What is Nakedness? | What Body Parts Should Be Covered?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Modesty is important to me as a Bible Believer! I want to always go back to the Scriptures for my understanding of something, and then align my beliefs with the Word of God!

[@worldfamousgamer9191]

amen

[@cheryl1625]

You mentioned that God clothed them in robes hanging from the shoulders in Genesis, yet then you say there is no verse giving any clues about the upper body...? Apparently there is though.... in Genesis... There is also the priests garments that went over their "underware" britches, so there, too, we see their upper bodies covered... so... there are at least two examples in Scripture and both by God Himself, directly. And in the case of Adam and Eve, God covered them more than they covered themselves, setting the precedent for appropriate body covereage right there in Genesis. I think you are being perhaps narrow in your "nakedness" word search. There in Genesis when Adam talks about knowing he was naked so he hid himself, he already had on his "loin" covering, which you say is from the hips to the upper knee. He still said he was naked, he said he was naked so he hid himself...and he hid because he did not want to show himself before God in that manner, even with his loin cloth. He knew his attempt to cover his body was not sufficient or appropriate, and sure 7:54 enough, God made a more appropriate garment for him and for Eve. Just thoughts to ponder...

[@howardbabcom]

Some day, modern Christians are going to take the time to look at the early church and learn that genuine modesty had virtually nothing to do with being uncovered - just looking at the use of Roman baths and early baptismal liturgy shows this. Surely, the place to start should be with the manner this was understood in the days of the Apostles themselves.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Modesty in the sense of covering one’s nakedness, as we use it today, begins in Genesis, when man and woman realized they were naked and clothed themselves with leaves, and then later clothed by God in animal skins. The concept of covering one’s nakedness vs exposing one’s nakedness is all throughout the Scriptures, though the word ‘modesty’ itself is not used. 😊

[@howardbabcom]

@@WomenLivingTorahThanks for your reply. Do you believe the 'clothing' by God was to hide physical nakedness, or to resolve a deeper issue?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

It was certainly for the physical purpose of clothing and as a garment, as the Scripture itself says He gave them ‘garments’ and ‘clothed them.’ If He had other purposes and symbolism in mind regarding His actions (such as the shed blood covering knowledge of sin symbolizing Yeshua’s blood, as I have heard it suggested), for us, it is pure speculation unless Scripture explicitly draws the connection. (‘Deeper’ interpretations of the text certainly don’t have to be ‘wrong,’ but they are just speculation and should be treated as such and not held to dogmatically.) What we do know is that God did give the animal skins as a physical covering over physical nakedness, and that He continued this standard of keeping one’s nakedness covered as a principle throughout Scripture. 😊

[@howardbabcom]

@@WomenLivingTorah So, was their 'nakedness' only skin deep? The great Reformed preacher, George Whitfield, in his sermon 'The Seed of the Woman', notes that they had become naked 'not of body, but of soul', so something much deeper than physical nudity was at stake here (hence, God's messianic promise to them). This must be taken into account if we are to recognise and appreciate the view of the Christian church in the days of the ministry and after of the Apostles themselves. That, as I've sought to suggest above, is missing in the present church's view of these matters, to our detriment.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

While I do believe they were physically naked and became aware of it by their disobedience, certainly their ‘fleshly nature’ was also exposed by their disobedience. And yes, Genesis 3:15 gives us the first promise of the Seed that would crush the serpents head. 😊

[@churchindangerberean3518]

I lived in Italy for two years. They mostly wear clothes in styles very similar to ours. But when I covered myself to nurse, I was quickly rebuked and told that it was rude to hide my face from the baby while feeding. I was taught how to wrap the blanket to cover most of myself without covering his face. Then, I quickly realised that people had moved to a considerate distance to allow for privacy and intimacy with the baby, and looked the other way. After that, I tried to move to places that were more private in the first place so others would not feel the need to move (when possible).

[@athomeinthesouth01]

In Genesis 3:10, after they had sewed fig leaves and made aprons for themselves, Adam said to God, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and hid myself". They were still naked after they sewed fig leaves and made aprons and then it says, v.21, "God made tunics of skin, and clothed them".

[@SimonMurphy-g9m]

You missed the most important part Genesis 3:11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” It is about disobedience not about nudity

[@athomeinthesouth01]

@@SimonMurphy-g9m I did not miss the point. I realize it was about disobedience but was simply making the point that they were still naked even after they sewed fig leaves together.

[@xoneeleven]

I watched, and sent it to my wife. Shalom! (Mark Moseley)

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thank you for dropping by and sharing with your wife! I appreciate your encouragement. Blessings of abundant shalom to you, as well!!

[@philippeengammare6253]

Nudity is just our body as the nature (you can say God if you want) made it and is not a matter of shame. There is nothing wrong in nudity. We can consider that people who say nudity should be covered are insulted their god.

[@robertthompson5352]

The passage in Exodus is describing a outfit for Priests. God is describing how to put together a uniform for battle. In reading scripture it is important to read the entire chapter to get proper context. Other Priestly Garments 28:31-43pp - Ex 39:22-31 “Make the robe of the ephod entirely of blue cloth,

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Yes, I believe I mention in the video that this was describing the priestly garments, and so I wasn’t saying we should be wearing their garments. I was instead looking for all instances of ‘nakedness’ in Scripture that could give us some understanding of what exactly that term refers to. Scripturally, I don’t see a distinction between what constitutes nakedness for a priest between what is nakedness for anyone else. From the navel to the knees seems to be the consistent areas to which nakedness refers. 😊 Blessings!

[@NathanJudahJoy]

Someone can cover the entire body with tight clothes but exposing more nakedness, enemy had taken the garment industry 😢

[@tsvirogin3334]

Look at the Song of Soloman (Canticles or however they translate it into English). All of those body parts singled out for praise are the parts which should be covered, including the breasts, the hair and the legs. The word which you called soq is actually shoq (with a long o). Although there is some question whether the shoq refers to the upper or the lower leg, definitely the knees must be covered. You are drawing analogies for women's modesty from the priestly garments. First of all, it is important to understand that from a Biblical perspective, men and women are different. The rules for men are not the same as the rules for women. Second of all, notice that the priests in service did not only wear the trousers. They also wore a garment called a c'tonet which covered to the wrists and went down to the ankles. As for Adam and Eve, they initially made for themselves garments from fig leaves, whish are called hagorot. Today that word is used to mean a belt. It certainly does not mean an apron. When G-d came close and questioned Adam, he said that they hid because they were naked. So once the D-ivine presence entered, they could no longer fool themselves into thinking that they were dressed. They realized that they were naked even though they were wearing the fig leaf garments. The garments which G-d gave them have the same name c'tonet, (plural c'tonot aand when put together with the word for leather catnot `or) as the upper garment of the serving Priests, which as I have mentioned previously covers almost the whole body.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thanks for your comments! I am looking for all instances of nakedness mentioned that can give some semblance of a definition. I do not see a difference between nakedness for a man vs a woman in Scripture, although certainly men and women are different. As for the Hebrew words mentioned, I do not know or speak Hebrew, and so I must rely upon Biblical, Hebrew scholars for my information. Which I did in this video.... 😊 Blessings!

[@Vanessa-lima]

Thanks for your comment. Can you give me the verses for the women dressing? Thanks

[@ellysea6488]

Maybe the chest isn’t mentioned because breast primary purpose is to nurse babies. I think there’s a lot of shame around breastfeeding in public when there shouldn’t be. Babies gotta eat 😆 but I understand that we shouldn’t be flaunting it around 24/7 for the whole world to see. My babies never let me wear a cover to nurse so I just try to be discreet about it when I’m in public.

[@BruceKurtzer]

I cannot see in Genesis where it says anything about God using animal skin. I understand that the common belief is that God killed an animal to cover Adam and Eve and how that fits with Jesus sacrifice for us, but Genesis 3 only says that God used tunics of skin. I also understand that some modern translations use the words "animal skin" in Genesis 3 but no older translations do and the original Hebrew word can mean "hides, leather or skin". I am not saying He didn't use animal skin, I just don't want to read into it something that is not there and to be open to the fact that maybe there was another way. This is God the creator who had just finished creating everything, surely he could've created from nothing some form of skin, leather or fur covering without killing an animal. And if that is the case then maybe there is a possibly that our skin is our God given covering.

[@triumphantsoul9075]

John G. Paton was a missionary who evangelised a violent island where everyone, both men and woman, wear little to no clothing. In his book, The Story of John G. Paton or Thirty Years Among South Sea Cannibals, John G. Paton records this incident about a native man and woman who became Christians and then wanted to marry but feared they would be killed because there were a few men who wanted to marry the woman: "In a few seconds, Yakin entered and if Nelwang’s bearing and appearance were rather inconsistent with the feeling of worship (he was wearing a shirt, kilt and tommahawk, John G. Paton felt it inappropriate to wear an emblem of violence to church)- and what on earth was I to do when the figure and costume of Yakin began to reveal itself marching in? The first visible difference betwixt a Heathen and a Christian is that the Christian wears some clothing, the Heathen wears none. Yakin had determined to show the extent of her Christianity by the amount of clothing she could carry upon her person. Being a Chief’s widow before she became Nelwang’s bride, she had some idea of state occasions and appeared dressed in every article of European apparel, mostly portions of male attire, that she could beg or borrow from about the premises! Her bridal gown was a man’s drab-coloured great-coat, put on above her native grass skirts and sweeping down to her heels, buttoned tight. Over this she had hung on a vest and above that, again, most amazing of all, she had superinduced a pair of men's trousers, planting the body of them on her neck and shoulders and leaving her head and face looking out from between the legs - a leg from either side streaming over her bosom, arid, dangling down absurdly in front! Fastened to the one shoulder also there was a red shirt and to the other a striped shirt waving about her like wings as she sailed along. Around her head, a red shirt had been twisted like a turban, and her notions of art demanded that a sleeve thereof should have a loft over each of her ears! She seemed to be a moving monster-loaded with a mass of rags. The day was excessively hot, and the perspiration poured over her face in streams. She, too, sat as near to me as she could get on the woman’s side of the church. Nelwang looked at me and then at her smiling quietly, as if to say, “You never saw in all your white world, a bride so grandly dressed!” I little thought what I was bringing on myself when I urged them to come to church. The sight of that poor creature sweltering before me constrained me for once to make the service very short - perhaps the shortest I ever conducted in all my life! The day ended in peace. The two souls were extremely happy, and I praised God that what might have been a scene of bloodshed had closed thus, even though it were in a kind of wild grotesquerie!"

[@rohireformation168]

What you will need to do, is to look at the entire garment that the Priest wore, and remember that God was the one that designed that garment. Also the covering of the thighs were done by the beeches, which is the underwear. And the outer garment covered the whole body, also the holy women of biblical times wore Veils and those veils were not just for their heads but it was a extra covering for their upper body. and also consider when David took off his outer garment, he being in his under garment which history will show, was more than what many today use as their outer garments, was seen by his wife as shameful.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thanks for watching and commenting!! 😊

[@selahchunem8447]

In the Nation of ISRAEL, modesty, special require in women also required covering up the head in a gown. New Testament requirements: In a like matter, women should adorn themselves in modest apparel with shamefaceness and sobriety, not braided hair or gold, or pearls, or costly array ( clothing) 1Timothy 2:9 so then biblical requires modesty concerning not only what you should wear but also what you shouldn’t wear.

[@creativeeverydaylife]

Thanks for the video :-) In Genesis 3:10 Adam (and Eve) is hiding "And he said, I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself." - Adam is still naked (with the "skirt") so God gives them garments of skin. I therefor believe that chest, and down is to be covered to be modest. I where long skirts (down to the ankles) - to cover the lakes, to be more modest, personal style and so a wind may not uncover my ;-) I to cover "the t-shirt area" - if you know what I mean :-) Thanks for the video - have a blessed day! Shalom from Denmark

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thanks for sharing your perspective!! And for watching. I tend to take a more conservative route, as well. If you haven't watched the second video in this modesty series, I addressed the coats of skin versus aprons of leaves and also shared my personal application. Side note: my husband visited Denmark about 15 years ago! He loved it! I loved all the pictures. Haha ☺ Blessings to you!!

[@creativeeverydaylife]

@@WomenLivingTorah thanks for your reply :-) I watched the second video - and it looks like we have about the same approach to modesty. Thanks so much for your videos - they are an inspiration. Side note reply: That is so funny - nice that he loved it - we can be a bid closed to others - so I am happy your husband had a good visit :-) Hope you had a good Shabbat! Yah bless

[@D.L.W.]

Naturism is not an excuse to engage in extramarital sexual activities. It is not for the purpose of voyeurism or exhibitionism. It simply is not about sexual titillation. Those who pursue naturism for those reasons are not true naturists and they do not represent me, my actions, nor my beliefs. I believe that treating the Body as if it is an object of lust is dishonoring to our Creator. If-as I believe-our bodies are actually self-portraits of the Almighty, then can you see how our embarrassment over allowing it to ever be seen exactly as He made it would be an insult to Him? I believe that Satan’s suggestion to Adam and Eve that their nakedness was a problem (I believe Satan was the “who” of “who told you...?” in Gen. 3:11), was precisely for the purpose of insulting the Creator! Satan-the envious angel who himself wanted to be “like God”-influenced a fallen Adam and Eve to be ashamed of the one thing that was the mark of image-bearing which Satan himself did not possess... their bodies! Most Christians probably believe that being a naturist is a sin against God. Others might only believe it's a lifestyle choice... “to each his own” they might say. We as Christians demand that the body be covered for the purpose of preventing sexual lust. This very “rule” assumes that seeing an uncovered human body will have sexual impact... and that this is the only impact it can have! I affirm the creational goodness of the human body exactly as God made it. The unclothed body is not shameful, nor is it designed by God to be an object of lust. I believe that treating the Body as if it is an object of lust is dishonoring to our Creator.

[@angelajoy6789]

There are scriptures that speak of the breasts. Of course, for nurturing/nursing a child but it does speak of the sensuality of the breast. Principally, that can be connected to needing that area to be covered. Paul argues several times 'from nature' and I think by nature, we can see that almost every culture considers the loins and breasts (and other areas) being uncovered would be nakedness. There are other scriptures that speak of the uncovered thigh being shameful as well. We might be able to get some context if we have historical information on what was dressing like a prostitute in OT times as that is mentioned a few times as well.

[@triumphantsoul9075]

May our sons in their youth be like plants full grown, our daughters like corner pillars cut for the structure of a palace; -Psalm 144:12

[@cheryl1625]

Just curious...why do you bring up this Scripture verse...?

[@triumphantsoul9075]

@@cheryl1625 The pillars of a palace are extremely beautiful and in Job 42:15 says Nowhere in all the land were there found women as beautiful as Job’s daughters, and their father granted them an inheritance along with their brothers. The Bible says beauty in a woman is a blessing not a sin. Some modesty teachers go to extremes and make Christian women feel ashamed that God created them beautiful.

[@cheryl1625]

@@triumphantsoul9075 Oh I see. Yes, my Mom taught me the principle of modest beauty, that it is ok to dress in a pretty manner and that there is a way to be put together that is lovely and also not sexual/sensual. I agree with you. Women are beautiful, as this is how God made us. It gets muddy on this topic when we move from modestly to absolute masking on the one side, or from pretty to sexual/sensual on the other. Our sin nature factors into it for sure. I do think women are called by God to dress modestly. He alone is to receive our worship, not we pouring it onto ourselves. Much of our beauty industry does make women into goddesses. They take far more care for themselves and their image and their allure factor than they do about their character or relations with fellow believers. Anyways, yes, there is a balance, for sure. Thank you for that verse.

[@stephanietunc2240]

I saw someone said the calfs are thought as nakedness. But I don't feel that way. I do about my thighs, genital areas, tummy, breast, and shoulders. But calfs too??? Isn't that to much. I have a heat intolerance I don't go outside at all anymore because the heat is too much for me. When I was younger it wasn't but now it is. I swear God knows when I'm going outside he lowers the humidity so I can go outside I praise the lord for that. But the calves too??? Idk also I enjoy t shirts I show my arms. But thats not nakedness so I assumed the same for my calfves that do not Frame my body. And claves are sexy the thigh and torso is. So I'm really confused.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I spoke about calves in this video and left it open to personal study and discretion because there’s only one Scriptural reference I am aware of that could include the calf… but again, it may not be referring to the calf. Certainly, though, Biblical nakedness seems to be from the belly button to the knees! 😊

[@noemiflores3943]

Thank you for sharing. If I could ask what church do you belong too? Would love to come visit.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

We are Messianic, Torah observant Christian believers. 😊

[@NiviWord]

I think the scripture does say that breasts are an area of attraction for men. For eg. in Proverbs 5 19-23 it says not to be attracted to the breasts of an aduterous woman. So, if a woman is not covering her breasts then she is attracting another man. Women are told to be holy, Leviticus 20:19 so whatever is holy has a covering like the viel of a bride.

[@hoffmansforhim7365]

Great video! Thanks for sharing! Yes I'm suprised about the bare chest. I guess it also could be related to not causing our brother to stumble. In regards to lust.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I was surprised, too! Thanks for watching and commenting!! 💕

[@heyitssammij]

It may not be considered nudity due to nursing?

[@hoffmansforhim7365]

@@heyitssammij that's true. Good thought

[@prashanthudayakumar9870]

Thank you for this series and I appreciate the nuance and care in studying the verses. Well done except in the second half of this video referring to the chest area. I believe the verses can be used to express only what can be minimally defined as nakedness and not exhaustively as not all the body parts are covered in every single verse. In any case, Prov 5:17-19 refers to the chest area as well in the context of marital intimacy and exclusivity. The way you concluded this video with your last sentence might mean that churches planted in such cultures where the chest is exposed would allow that in their Sunday gathering and everyday life? I think that's a very dangerous way to end such a video as I don't believe the United States of America or the West itself fully believes (or practices) modesty for that body part. (eg. European history of clothing through the Christendom era that was influenced by Rennaissance). But this is not to discount the great stuff that your series covers and your heart for purity and teaching the same!

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thank you for your comment! 😊 I try to be very careful to distinguish between what the Scriptures say and what my opinions are. Scripturally, nakedness seems to be from the navel to the knees. That being said, I don’t think we should disregard cultural modesty and indecency. But I like to know what the Scriptures say and what they don’t say and be very honest about where my own opinions are from that point on. I hope you can understand that! In regards to the chest being in the context of marital intimacy, there are several parts of the body in Songs of Solomon that are mentioned in this same way. Lips, cheeks, eyes, feet, among other areas…. The point is that any part of the body can be delighted in in marital intimacy. I don’t see that Scripture makes a connection between modesty and what could be/can be sexualized (because then we would see more than just the navel to the knees being covered). Just some thoughts! Blessings! 😊

[@prashanthudayakumar9870]

@@WomenLivingTorah Appreciate the response. Effectively, what I mean is 'defining nakedness' is not the ultimate goal but observing how God responds to the nakedness to see how modest clothing needs to be modelled. So you did mention God's clothing of Adam and Eve with garments in Gen 3:21 which obviously covered from shoulder down (when cultural differences did not exist). The saints are seen in white robes in Rev 7:13. Someone in the comments also mentioned the full clothing of the priests that God himself designed (Exo 28) versus the undergarments that he commanded covering the 'nakedness' being from the hips to the thighs (also keeping in mind these were for men). Covering 'nakedness' (by undergarments) according to these definitions may not be the same as modest clothing that covers/presents our bodies in public contexts. So the focus should be on understanding what body parts are presentable (1 Cor 12:24) and practising what is acceptable modest clothing (not just undergarments). So isn't that convincing enough for a culture-agnostic view of 'modest clothing' (not a definition of nakedness) that should indeed be from shoulder down covering the chest area as well?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

You bring up some great points for consideration and further study. 😊 My first thought, however, is who defines what the presentable areas are? Since we don’t have the positive command, ‘cover from here to here,’ or the definite clarity, ‘these are the presentable parts,’ we can look to what the Scriptures say are a shame to expose, what the unpresentable parts are. From my studies, as I shared in the videos, the Scriptures only seem to associate the area from the navel to the knees with shame when exposed publicly. I don’t see any other body parts spoken of in this way, including the chest area, even though it can certainly be part of marital intimacy. In fact, off the top of my head, I can think of a couple Scriptures in which breasts are spoken of quite casually, and the ones I’m thinking of are always in context of nursing. It’s interesting…. As I mentioned in the series, and you also brought up, Adam/Eve’s tunics were given which cover more than the navel to the knees- and the tunics were given devoid of cultural context. But while the Scriptures make clear that Adam/Eve made aprons because they knew they were naked, we can only speculate as to why God clothed them further in animal skin tunics. Was it to set a standard of modesty? Or was it to protect them against the elements they would now have to face outside of the Garden? We don’t know because the Scriptures do not say. I do try to be careful to delineate what the Scriptures say and my own thoughts on the matter. In practice, I am conservative with what I cover, but I try to be honest about what I believe also. You bring up a great point to consider further! Thank you! 😃

[@jgard6280]

Thank you for talking about this important topic! The simple fact that God tells us in Genesis 3:21 that He clothed them in those tunics proves that Adam and Eve's torsos and shoulders were also considered "nakedness" in God's eyes. If the torso and shoulders were not part of "nakedness" then God would have given them only skirts to the knees to cover their buttocks and thighs. BUT, God called the tunics their clothing in response to them being naked. God always gives standards for commands about how to be holy. The shoulders and torso are most definitely and clearly part of his standards of modesty.❤️

[@WhatsTheFruit]

You all have such wonderful points, and I am glad we can discuss this in such a civil way. I do wish that the Bible was more straight forward with the guidelines regarding modesty. I respect @WomenLivingTorah for being careful not to add to scripture. From spiritual perspective, we may be able to find that we should cover our upper bodies since the breasts (at a minimum) are a common source of lust. Leggings also a big source of lust! I hear a lot of men talk about that since they are so commonly worn where I live. Also on a spiritual note, I also make sure that I cover well past my shoulders, so that no matter what I do, nobody can see my armpits. Though not commonly thought of as pubic hair, armpit hair does come during puberty, so it makes sense that that area should not be for public viewing 🤷‍♀️. Another argument for longer sleeves: the side breast area is not always hidden with shorter sleeves Logically and to play it safe, if we are supposed to cover to our knees, we should also cover to our elbows. I'll admit i haven't started practicing that since it is not straight forward in the bible, but I am working towards it. Since this is not straight forward in the bible, I cannot insist everyone follows these. But it's good to talk about to encourage eachother towards modesty and purity 😊

[@BeeHappy968]

Good point on the bare chest. I believe the reason it’s so sexualized in our culture is because Hollywood made it so.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Possibly!! 😊 Thank you for watching and commenting!

[@IronPyromancer]

It's a puritan thing, I believe. From the Netherlands, to England, and from England it spread to the rest of the Western World.

[@IronPyromancer]

@@dariowestern I definitely wouldn't hold the puritans as a standard of judgment for the rest of the Dutch

[@thomasmcfarland5019]

The concern may have been more at the back than the front. No toilet paper meant incomplete cleansing after elimination. That condition was shameful.

[@triumphantsoul9075]

In Esther Chapter 1, Queen Vashti is dethroned because she refuses to let her husband's drunken friends ogle her. This shows there are lots of women who don't feel proud when men leer at them. Instead, they feel angry, disgusted, humiliated and scared. Modesty teachers never acknowledge this. I recommend watching Reclaiming Beauty on the Botkin Sisters website and reading A Disposition on Meekness and Quietness by Matthew Henry for Bible verses that combat excessively strict and excessively long modesty dress codes.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I agree that there are lots of women who don’t seek out the lust of men. Nor did I ever give the impression of believing the opposite. 😊 I also believe that there are many good men who choose to not indulge lust over women who are not their wives. 😊 What is nakedness seems to have Biblical precedence. How that understanding is then applied into personal dress standards is as YHVH leads. 😊

[@nathangiesbrecht2263]

Check out Modest Clothing -4 Biblical Principles. (Pastor Jesse Smith)

[@righteousfroce1254]

Wouldn't a man chest be more indecent exposure since they can't even breastfeed so there's no reason for them to walk around barechest.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts!! As I mentioned in your other comment, I don’t see that Scripture makes a distinction between nakedness for males versus females. It seems to be the same. 😊 Blessings!!

[@righteousfroce1254]

​@@WomenLivingTorahI think women have as much right to go swimming topless as a man.

[@GlorytoGodYaweh]

@@righteousfroce1254please don’t play dumb that female breasts titillate men.

[@WhatsTheFruit]

​@@righteousfroce1254 I hear that argument a lot: if men can go swimming topless, women should be able to too. Rather than lowering women's standards, let's encourage men to raise theirs and cover up instead.

[@batyaseguin6307]

Also married woman cover their hair numbers 5:11-29

[@batyaseguin6307]

@@dariowestern completely not true.

[@batyaseguin6307]

@@dariowestern No. I do not eat anything biblically unclean. I also only eat Kosher meat. Blood is forbidden so even if it is a Kosher animal like a cow or chicken, it has to be killed a certain way and all of the blood drained out. Checked for disease. If there are tumors or disease, they sell it to the USDA. And they buy and sell it to gentiles. I do not wear any mixture of wool and linen and I do not work on Shabbat or any other biblical Holy Days.

[@batyaseguin6307]

@@dariowestern In addition Saturday is Shabbat not Sunday.

[@anuara.6249]

Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and God* is well acquainted with all that they do. And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards God, that ye may attain Bliss. Holy Quran, chapter 24; Al Nur ( The Light) verse 30 & 31. * Allah Subhana Wata'ala; Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

[@triumphantsoul9075]

And in all the land there were no women so beautiful as Job's daughters. And their father gave them an inheritance among their brothers. - Job 42:15

[@TillNight]

Exodus 28:42

[@samuelperry5541]

Look at Leviticus 18 you'll get the full meaning!!!!!!

[@vladvalentinov]

Imagine green color, created by God, and, therefore, beautiful to look at, is prohibited by society to pay attention to, and deemed to cause sin of lust, unless looked upon during sex with the spouse. The ban would only create an unhealthy attraction towards green color, and its exclusive association with sex, even though the color has nothing to do with sex but is a part of nature. That is what society did to the naked human appearance. When God made male and female, in the Garden they were naked and not ashamed of God. God called His creation “very good”. Adam and Eve, after sinning, had no issue staying naked with each other (they were married after all), but not with God. They made clothing to cover up from Him. God pointed out that only death can cover their sin, so He did so by sacrificing the animal. As Christians, we have our shame paid for by the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus. But even before our condition has been reconciled, humans had no issue with nakedness; neither did God. The Bible and secular history mention nakedness as a normal condition. Being without clothing used to be shameful, as it indicated lowest social status, but other than that, people were working in nude, doing sport, sleeping, and even prophesying per God’s request. What changed, and what did it lead to? Certain forces made nakedness a taboo, and have associated it with sex. Just like with a forbidden fruit, nudity became a highly desirable and valuable commodity, to a point of shameful obsession hardly anyone, even devout Christian men, can get over. What if the naked human form was a normal state (weather permitting)? That would demystify nudity, decouple sex from it, release those in chains of porn from lust, guilt, and shame, porn-proof your children, crystal-clearly showcase two genders, make you more comfortable and less restrained, and even make your marriage stronger by removing a variable no one has control over anyway - perfect body. You can start living closer to Eden by doing the following unclothed (DO NOT associate these activities with sex; relax, think of doing life, not love ;o) Sleep, study Bible, do house chores, work from home, exercise, anything else. Spend time outdoors if privacy is adequate. If you are married, do none of it until your spouse understands and lets you; don’t push it!!! If your children are under 5, it would benefit them to be spectators, and most likely they wouldn’t mind being unclothed as well. If your children are older, things may get awkward, and you may have missed the opportunity unless you are very strategic in your approach. Teens won’t commit to changing their lifestyle at this point, and will not appreciate seeing you nude, but you need to explain to them what you do when they aren’t nearby, and why you do it. Being naked socially is immensely beneficial for you, your marriage, your children, and society, but doing so might be tricky. Start by attending Korean spa; they are usually done in nude, and separated by gender. Nude beaches are often full of perverts, but going there at sunset or especially at sunrise is safe. Naturist resort or a club is what I personally recommend. It must be a family friendly one. AANR provides a map to find the closest to you. Read their rules to know what to expect. Being a Christian Naturist shouldn’t be a life changing event; it only means the things you used to do in bondage you now do as free.

[@breonasmith6587]

Do you believe in head covering?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Hi, Breona! Yes ma'am; however, I believe that the custom spoken of in 1 Corinthians 11 is that of cut versus uncut hair. You may notice I have very long hair in my videos, and I keep it uncut for the purpose of a head covering. ☺ I make it a point to never argue about this issue, however, because Paul clearly states it's a custom. There's also not commandment for the issue. What about you? I'd love to hear your perspective!

[@breonasmith6587]

Raquel H I personally believe there’s two types of covering spoken in this passage -one a woman long “uncut” hair as her glory and to tell a different between a women and a men -Two a head covering when she pray and prophecy’s ....by the way I know it’s hard for some women to grow hair

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Oh interesting. ☺ And, yes, I agree that God made our hair to grow different lengths. My understanding is that the hair spoken of isn't just long, but uncut. That can look different on any person. And that the issue wasn't so much distinction between male and female but between the prostitutes who shaved their heads (remember in Torah it says an adulteress was to have her head uncovered, which meant and was practiced that her hair was let down and shaved.) and those who were faithful followers of God and in their relationship with their husbands (which is the greater principle spoken of in the passage). ☺ I appreciate you taking the time to share your understanding! Blessings and shalom!!

[@breonasmith6587]

Raquel H your welcome and thank you for you response also shalom❤️

[@jessicarhodes5123]

What do you think about jeans?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I wear blue jean skirts... 😬 I personally only wear skirts/dresses for two reasons: 1) I find them to be the *most* distinctive of female versus male. And 2) I find modest skirts/dresses to be 'more modest' than modest pants. I also think that, from a historical perspective, there's more evidence for skirts being more distinctive of female. While this is my preference and opinion, I also understand that Scripture does not specifically delineate the answer to 'pants vs skirts,' and I would never say skirts are a commandment for women. Maybe one day I will go a little more in depth into this topic and Deuteronomy 22:5 because I know there's a lot to be said. ☺ ☺ I'm curious what you think about jeans, Jessica?! I'd love to hear your perspective.

[@everythingsgonnabealright7924]

@@WomenLivingTorah Its a sin for women to wear pants. Deuteronomy 22:5. You've made the right choice.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thank you for commenting and sharing your thoughts!! 😊 I am very careful not to cite Deuteronomy 22:5 as evidence that it’s a *sin* for women to wear pants.... The reason is because men and women’s dress in Biblical times was very similar. There wasn’t an obvious ‘these are pants, so these are for men; these are skirts/dresses, so these are for women.’ The difference might be the colors, type of material, neckline.... or even, as one Jewish tailor who has done extensive research into Biblical dress explained to me, ‘If it was commonly sold to men, it was men’s dress. If it was commonly sold to women, it was woman’s dress.’ Because the Scriptures do not specially say, ‘woman should not wear pants,’ I try to allow liberty and diversity in the Body of Believers and leave a person’s conclusions between them and God. That being said, I do believe there is a strong historical argument that skirts/dresses are woman’s attire and that pants are man’s attire. 😊

[@everythingsgonnabealright7924]

@@WomenLivingTorah I really think we have been deceived on what people wore in ancient times. For example, just think about Jesus riding a donkey with a skirt/tunic... Or think about the army of Israel having their soldiers ride horses in tunics!(The Bible tells us their Army had horses) Its completely absurd. I firmly believe that Pants existed and were worn quite frequently during bible times. You can't ride a horse/donkey in a skirt, but you can in a pair of slacks. The bible tells us that the technology needed to create pants existed and it also gives one instance of men wearing pants so my theory isn't off.

[@everythingsgonnabealright7924]

@@WomenLivingTorah However I agree with you for the most part. I also think (As a teenager) That skirts are the most modest and feminine thing a woman can wear.

[@D.L.W.]

God sent the prophet Isaiah out to preach NAKED for three years.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

Thank you for watching and commenting! Yes, I discussed this point. The point was to tangibly represent shame. Also, my third video discusses how modesty is a principle- not a commandment. Blessings! 😊

[@everythingsgonnabealright7924]

yes but it was not to tell us that its okay to be naked

[@GlorytoGodYaweh]

@@WomenLivingTorahwe can’t inherit the kingdom if we live in disobedience.

[@anniemayflower9187]

body shaming is unacceptable and inapporiate must never force others to wear crap clothes dont want on

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I didn’t write the Scriptures, but I do live by it and encourage others who do. I’m not sure who is ‘forcing’ particular clothing on you, but you certainly have the free will to determine whether you live by God’s Words or not- and free will to decide what KZbin content to seek out & watch. 😉

[@jamesb.hallmd9899]

Annie May, we all have a free will to do whatever we wish. But as people of God, we choose to honor God in the way we dress. This means we choose to dress in a way that will please God; as a resule, we dress DIFFERENTLY from the culture & different from the modern world. We want to be modest in our mind, body, & soul. Modesty is actually a sign of refinement, maturity, and confidence. Women who dress to show skin & "the goods" are insecure and basically advertising something. Why advertise if there is nothing for sale? In the professional world, low cut blouses on women are dissuaded, mini-skirts are frowned, painted hair is frowned upon, flashy makeup/nails, clothes/accessories are frowned upon because they draw attention to her body. If something is lustful, draws attention to themselves, and immodest, it should NOT be worn in public. Talk to some CEOs as well as Women of God, Men of God and ask about modesty. It is not about you; it is about modesty.

[@GlorytoGodYaweh]

Hey I’m new to your channel, but I think you are confusing people by saying that breasts are not private parts but then say that God covered Adam and Eve with tunics in Genesis 3. If Jesus says lust is adultery, then surely we should cover parts that men are titillated by.

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I tried to be very clear in this series regarding what the Scriptures say and what they do not say and distinguishing that from my opinion. 😊

[@Ashley-iy3nv]

Hi what denomination are you ?

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I was raised in the United Pentecostal Church, but I now consider myself generally speaking a ‘Torah observant Christian.’ No denomination, just a Believer and Follower of Messiah Yeshua and His entire Word. 😊 Blessings!

[@Ashley-iy3nv]

@@WomenLivingTorah Are you now trinitarian ? :)

[@WomenLivingTorah]

I am not. In fact, since becoming Torah observant, I am more firm in my understanding of the Oneness of YHVH. 😃

[@REALTORInessaLamb]

I was wondering if you don’t believe in Trinity, to whom was Jesus praying when He said Father hear me? To Himself? I am sorry again, I am not trying to be rude, just don’t know how to form question nicer.

[@anniemayflower9187]

lying to us trying say everyone would say boobs is not acceptable im not everyone stop throwing words down my throat and stop body shaming

[@WomenLivingTorah]

It’s a generalization that American society regards a woman’s cheat/torso as something that should be covered and uncovered chest/torso as ‘indecent exposure.’ 😊