NUDITY EXPOSES CHRISTIAN HYPOCRISY

 
The Christian Church forbids wilful sexual thoughts under pain of everlasting torment for to have sex with somebody in your imagination is to think that you are doing it so as far as the will is concerned it is as bad as doing it. She warns that the price will be the loss of God’s friendship which results in eternal torment.
 
Paintings of naked people abound on Michelangelo’s painting, The Last Judgment, in the Sistine Chapel in Rome where the pope, is elected. This is in direct opposition to Exodus 20:26 where God was so strict about nudity that he even forbade steps up to his altar in case somebody would see up the priest’s robes a bit. The people who would have got a glimpse would have been men for women were not allowed near the altar indicating that homosexual lust is such a gross evil that nothing can be done - even slightly - to risk it happening. God commanded that we had to be extremely strict and avoid accidental exposure even of a bit of leg at all costs.
 
The Virgin Mary must have forgotten that when she appeared at Fatima in a shortened skirt giving bad example to fashion and when she had the little girls of Garabandal skipping up and down mountains while having visions in their little skirts. This is another example of why if the Bible is true these visions are demonic or hoaxes.

The Church has had many seminaries fitted with swimming pools where much exposure is seen.

Jesus said that arousing lust was a very serious sin. So risking it unnecessarily is also a serious sin.

So, you have to look ugly and dress in hideous loose-fitting clothes and talk like you have a permanent cold in order to avoid leading anybody into sexy thoughts.

Even a beautiful face can do that so beauty is sinful. Some of the women saints disfigured themselves to ruin their appearance.

Christians read that Peter under the authority of his Christ told married women that beauty was not for them and that rather their adornment should be holiness (1 Peter 3). He does not say he means they should be more worried about inner beauty than outer beauty and that he permits enhancing outer beauty. Read it and see that it does not sound like he meant that.  He bans outer beauty outright.
 
Any poor woman could have an elaborate hairstyle and look pretty so it is not the spending of money on glamour while the poor languished that the epistles are bothered about.

1 Timothy 2 says that women should not look for beautiful clothes and elaborate hairstyles. It does not say just married women so it is women in general. The epistle says it takes inspiration from Genesis. What does it find so inspiring? Here is what. Genesis says that Adam and Eve were ashamed because they noticed they were naked after the fall. Before the fall it didn’t matter because they had no bias towards sin but after the fall they had a bias toward sin and they were ashamed of their nudity for it was bad even though they were married. This suggests that sex should be only for babies and not for pleasure. It suggests that it is sinful for a man to enjoy looking at his wife’s naked flesh. God approved of their shame for he gave them clothes though there was nobody else around for them to lust after.
 
The Old Testament never approves of looking good but just reports. Isaiah 61:10 says that God and his bride his people are done up like bridegrooms and brides but that is only a metaphor. The ring being put on the prodigal son means nothing for the prodigal son story was just a parable and it might have been a plain ring. Rings don’t necessarily make one look better or sexier. The Song of Solomon may be inspired by God but that does not mean that God considered it infallible. God could inspire a man to express his hatred of God in the words he chooses. Aaron dressed up in priestly finery but that does not mean that it make Aaron look more desirable or that women saw him. The robes give no impression that Aaron would have looked sexy.

The Church does not ban women going into Church with mini-skirts so it is sloppy about Christian modesty.
 
Many humanists believe that there is nothing wrong with erotica. That is when, say, a man and woman, do sexual things to titillate others but when they consent to it fully and the impression that it is right to abuse others sexually is not given. The Church accuses all who like erotica of being perverts. Telling them that makes some progress to perversion for they believe they are already perverts anyway. It would be wrong to look at a film in which a person has been performing just to get the money for a drug habit. That is perversion for the person does not really want to be seen doing these things. One must be very careful. The Church will protest that we should ban all erotica for it leads to victims like that being sexually objectified and thereby degraded. But you can’t condemn anything because it is abused and each individual should learn how to avoid exploiting people.
 
The questions and issues surrounding nudity show us the hypocrisy of Christianity.

WORKS CONSULTED

A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, Catholic Truth Society, Westminster, 1985
A Teenager’s Answer to “Shall I Go to the Prom?” Sherry Burgess, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
A Work of the Flesh: Sexualism, Weldon E Warnock, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
Believing in God, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
Biblical Dictionary and Concordance of the New American Bible, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1971
Contraception and Chastity, Elizabeth Anscombe, Catholic Truth Society, London
Contraception, John T Noonan, Jr., A Mentor-Omega Book, New American Library, New York, 1965
Courtship and the Dangers of Petting, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1943
Divorce, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1946
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Uta Ranke Heinmann, Penguin, London, 1991
Moral Questions, Bishops Conference, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1971
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Pornography – A Psychiatrist’s Verdict, Melvin Anchell MD, Liguori Publications, Missouri
Preparing for a Mixed Marriage, Irish Episcopal Conference, Veritas, Dublin, 1984
Rediscovering Gay History, John Boswell, Gay Christian Movement, UK, 1982
Rome has Spoken, A Guide to Forgotten Papal Statements and How They Have Changed Through the Centuries, Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben (Editors), Crossroad Publishing, New York, 1998
Scattered Vows, Exodus From the Priesthood, David Rice, Blackstaff Press, Belfast, 1990
Sex & Marriage A Catholic Perspective, John M Hamrogue C SS R, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
Shall We Dance? Dick Blackford, Guardian of Truth Publications, Kentucky
Son of Joseph, The Parentage of Jesus, Geoffrey Parrinder, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1992
The Emancipation of a Freethinker, Herbert Ellsworth Cory, The Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, 1947
“The Lord Hateth Putting Away!” and Reflections on Marriage and Divorce The Committee of the Christadelphian, Birmingham, 1985
The Pope and Contraception, Brenda Maddox, Counterblasts 18, Chatto & Windus, London 1991
Vicars of Christ, Peter de Rosa, Corgi, London, 1993

The WWW
 
How to Fight the Religious Right, Brian Elroy McKinley
http://elroy.net/ehr/fighttheright.html
 
BIBLE VERSION USED

The Amplified Bible