Does clothing have a moral effect? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.
Frost tells us that if we were to visit a nudist society, we would find it is actually family-friendly. Well, that might depend on which one you go to. I daresay that across the board there are always exceptions. However, one thing he does say is that the body loses its sexual connotation and becomes unprovocative, the way that it should be.
But is that how it should be?
For instance, you have some valuables that you do keep out in public, such as fine art that you want people to see, but at the same time, you might still keep them behind glass or something similar. Meanwhile, you have other valuables that you keep away for special occasions. You don’t put the fine china in a separate cabinet because you’re ashamed of it. You keep it there because it’s for special events. I have a suit in my closet. I haven’t worn it once since I came to New Orleans. Am I ashamed of it? No. It’s for special occasions.
What if the human body could be the same way?
What if the human body is sexual because we are sexual beings. What if parts of the body were made to arouse the opposite sex, among other things? What if a man or a woman doesn’t display their body not because they’re ashamed of it, but because they think they should save it for someone special that they trust. What if that body becomes a symbol then of the unique trust they only give to one another?
This is part of the problem. Frost says we have a problem with lust, and he is right with that, but then says “Get rid of clothing and there’s no issue” and he’s wrong on that. The problem with lust is not that we see people as sexual beings. The problem is that is the only way that we see them. We see them as objects to fulfill our desire. A man sees a woman as something to conquer instead of a person to woo. The female body for a man in the former becomes an object to conquer and claim dominance over. In the latter, a treasure to adore.
Frost also says that when we bring clothing to these societies that practice nudity, we end up creating problems of lust. Again, the account he gives comes from the 1800’s with no further research on that. A problem here is that Frost regularly says the problem of lust is not based on anything external, but then turns around and says that clothing, something external to us, creates a problem with lust.
As an illustration, see here:
Is a shortage of clothing the root cause of moral stumbling? Does clothing prevent stumbling? In James 1:14 we read, “each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.” From this we learn that lust is caused by our sinful desires, NOT by the sight of anything created.
Frost, Aaron. Christian Body: Modesty and the Bible (pp. 61-62). UNKNOWN. Kindle Edition.
But then he says:
The point I am making is that the natural body does not actually cause involuntary lust. Though it seems counter-intuitive to our backward, legalistic way of thinking, it is actually the clothing that causes the lust, and when those standards are finally removed, the erotic effect quickly disappears as naturists around the world can attest.
Frost, Aaron. Christian Body: Modesty and the Bible (p. 65). UNKNOWN. Kindle Edition.
And again on the other hand:
According to the Bible, nothing I see can cause lust; it can only expose the lust that was already festering in my heart and needed to be brought to the surface and dealt with.
Frost, Aaron. Christian Body: Modesty and the Bible (p. 210). UNKNOWN. Kindle Edition.
So nothing I see can cause lust, but….
The clothing standards we cling to for moral protection have created and empowered the lust and sexual addiction in our culture.
Frost, Aaron. Christian Body: Modesty and the Bible (p. 131). UNKNOWN. Kindle Edition.
So which is it? Frost can’t have it both ways. Now as a man, I don’t care if the woman is completely naked or if she’s wearing completely covering armor over her, if I lust, I am the one to blame for my lust. Yes, she could be doing something that makes it easier for me to lust, but I bear responsibility for my own sin.
So again, I don’t think Frost makes his case. If anyone is trying to evade responsibility here, it is not people who practice what is called purdah, but himself.
We’ll continue next time.
In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)
Support Deeper Waters on Patreon!
