Christian Nudists
We gather together for fellowship. To share about our relationship with God To tell of how we work out being a Christian and a nudist in daily living. We see nudism as a positive expression of our God given sexual nature.
- created by Bluespoet
im confused
Return to DiscussionsI love jehovah and i believe in him whole heartedly. The Jehovah's witnesses are right when they say we are not supposed to be nude with others. Its said it in tge bible. Jehovah's witnesses only speak directly out of the bible. You should conduct some bible studies. God bless
I love jehovah and i believe in him whole heartedly. The Jehovah's witnesses are right when they say we are not supposed to be nude with others. Its said it in tge bible. Jehovah's witnesses only speak directly out of the bible. You should conduct some bible studies. God bless
Sorry, but there were many changes to the Bible made by the JWs. I would not accept anything of significance from their Bible. They are entitled to their beliefs, but their beliefs are not mine.
An example of a change is ... Jesus did not die on a cross, but on a stake. So, I guess you won't be singing "Old Rugged Cross" at any of their services.
I won't even take the time to go into their beliefs regarding Jesus. This is something that has come directly from speaking with a member of the JW faith. However, I feel confident that they are not Christians in the Christian sense of the word, i.e., Jesus is not God and is not to be worshipped.
My biggest problem with the Jehovah Witness account of scripture is that they say that Jesus is not God incarnate.
The key to sorting out this mess is to understand the Tetragrammaton (Four Hebrew characters, YHWH, which the Jehovah witnesses have mistranslated into JHVH, hence Jehovah instead of Yahweh).
YHWH is how God self identified to Moses at the burning bush, translated as "I AM", or "I will be what I will be". From that moment on, those four characters became holy among the Jews, and to speak them was to claim deity, blasphemy punishable by death.
In English translations of the bible, we normally see YHWH translated as LORD, in full caps. However, some of this gets lost in translation. In the five thousand odd times that YHWH appears in the bible, it's only spoken a grand total of three times.
The first is, as I mentioned, at the episode of the burning bush. The other two? Jesus.
The first is in the synagogue, when Jesus says "Before Moses was, I am". How do the Jews react to this statement? By picking up rocks to stone him for blasphemy. Unless you get the "I AM" reference, this seems like a massive overreatcion.
The second is at the sanhedrin, when they say "Are you the Messiah?" And Jesus says "I AM, and you will see the son... etc etc." How do they respond? They tear their robes, howl in anguish, beat Jesus, and haul him off to the Romans for crucifixion.
Basically, if Jesus is holy, and the saviour, and he claimed to be God incarnate, then you have to take the lot or leave the lot.
Now regarding the bibles stance on nudity. The only passage that gives any serious talk to "Don't be seen naked or see naked" is in Leviticus where it says "Do not uncover your mothers nakedness, for it is your fathers nakedness" etc etc. The thing is, they're not talking about nudism or casual nudity here. "Uncover the nakedness" is a Hebrew term for sex. Think about Noah and Ham, Noah is drunk, Ham goes in and 'uncovers his fathers nakedness', Noah finds out, and curses Ham's son Canaan? What the?!
If you understand 'uncover the nakedness' in the context of the Hebrew culture (this is called Hermeneutics, and is very important for studying the bible), Hams sin wasn't that he saw his father sans clothing. His sin was that he had sex with his mother to usurp power from his father (Like Ruben did with Jacob's concubine, like Absalom tried to do with Abishag etc).
So basically, Jesus is Lord and God, you can be naked around people if you're not having sex outside of marriage.
Hope that helps. :)
I once had a discussion with a friend of mine who is a JW. Their New Word Translation of the Bible translates John 1:1 as "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was a god". Leon Morris in his excellent Commentary on John has a long explanation why the Godhead of Jesus could be gleaned not just from the last limb but also from "and the word was with God". It's very complex and it's easier if all of us knew Koine Greek. But to cut a long story short, John 1:1 does state quite categorically that our Lord Jesus Christ is God.
Anyway, I flipped through his Bible to see if they might have left out some parts that they haven't changed or distorted the verses. It was so amusing and I considered it a triumph when I turned to Isaiah 9:6, their Bible had the same words as ours - that our Lord would be called, among other things, "the mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace". There you have it - I returned his Bible to him and told him that it says clearly that Jesus is the mighty God. Imagine my disappointment when he replied, "Oh yes, Jesus is the mighty God but not the Almighty God". I gave up. Even if there was a verse that says Jesus was "Almighty God" he probably would have replied, "Oh yes, Almighty God but not the one and only Almighty God."
I don't like to appear as if I have the authority to say which group is or is not Christian. These things can be very personal. But I would be very suspicious of any group that does not accept the Nicene Creed or the spirit behind the Nicene Creed. For the record, most churches including the most fundamentalist churches accept the Nicene Creed even if they don't recite it. The JWs don't because an integral part of the Nicene Creed is the belief in the Holy Trinity. JWs reject that.
Well, the title of this string says it all... the dude is confused all right. It is unfortunate that this gentleman does not understand the infallacy of the bible. I normally do not do this, but in this case, I will offer up information that will help this gentleman (if he was not a troll who committed a hit and run):
Of many books of antiquity, experts in that field have certain standards in which they judge authenticity. For example, there is only one edition of Homer's Illiad in existence, but no one questions its authenticity. There is only three known editions of Plato's Republic in existence, and again, the experts on these books of antiquity do not question its authenticity. There are many other books that have very limited known copies, and their authenticity is not questioned. However, the New Testament writings have over 17,000 known first century copies in existence, yet people want to question the authenticity of the Bible! Let's not even discuss the Old Testament, because copying the writings of scripture for the scribes was almost a religion unto itself, and if they even had one pen stroke that was wrong, the whole parchment was thrown away.
When one compares the accepted versions of translations to those first century copies of the New Testament, they are 100% accurate. It does not matter if it is the KJV, The NKJV, NIV, NASB, or others... the simple fact is that yes, the JW's and other cults have severely altered the Bible.
Remember, Jesus Himself said, "though heaven and earth may pass away, my Words will NEVER pass away."
Amen?
Don