Skip to main content

Sexuality, Nakedness, and the Original Sin: Discussion Points & Questions

Illuminated parchment, Spain, circa AD 950–955, depicting the Fall of Man, cause of original sin
Illuminated parchment, Spain, ca AD 950–955,
depicting the Fall of Man (Wiki)
Why was it that when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, the first thing they became aware of was their own nakedness?

Of all the sins, hasn't only the sexual one to do with or against the body? (1Cor. 6:18).

Why is it that following the Original Sin, nakedness is considered shameful? Even the heavenly hosts appear clothed in all visions.

[There is no mention that Adam and Eve were covered with a glorious light. If they were, it would have been mentioned so - that they were naked but were not ashamed because they were covered with a glorious light; however, it only says that their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked.]

From the above, do we infer that the first consequence of sin was ALIENATION?

Alienation from God resulted in Fear (because of nakedness, Gen.3:10)
- They hid.
Alienation from Fellow humans resulted in Shame (because of nakedness, Gen.2:25; 3:7)
- They sew aprons of fig leaves. They were the only two humans; the rest was the animal world. So, why did they sew fig leaves to make aprons?
"Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons" (Gn 3:7). This is the first sentence of the Yahwist narrative, which refers to man's situation after sin and shows the new state of human nature. Does not this sentence also suggest the beginning of lust in man's heart?...
....Genesis 2:25 emphasizes that they "were both naked, and were not ashamed." But Genesis 3:6 speaks explicitly of shame in connection with sin. That shame is almost the first source of the manifestation in both man and woman of what "is not of the Father, but of the world." - Pope John Paul II, Theology of the Body, April 30, 1980.
Why does sexual sin feature first in most places? (Gen.6:1,2; Rom.1:24,26,27; 1Thess.4:4,5,7) (Augustine couldn't ignore it; neither could Freud; but, Frankl noticed that in adverse conditions, when things are not Edenic (like in the Concentration Camp), the desire was forgotten-- but, what if all things were well; and, for instance, when power was absolute, like in war-time...Gen.6:1,2).
Suppose now that there were two such magic rings [that on turning made the wearer invisible], and the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice. No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men. - Plato, The Republic
The original sense of nakedness, however, is beyond the sexual sense. For why would they need to cover themselves from each other, if the sexual sense was all that was to it; since they were husband and wife? But, they weren't afraid of each other, for both were guilty; they were afraid of God. (To note: Modern man neither fears God nor is ashamed of nakedness)
  • Clothing is not just a symbol; it is a remedy… it is a basic need.
  • Physically it covers against the antagonistic physical forces.
  • Psychologically it remedies shame by hiding nakedness.
  • Nakedness needs to be hid because man has become a private being.
  • Nakedness relates to the organs primarily associated with sexuality.
  • “Culture” (concepts and customs) play important rule in defining “nakedness” and “shame”
  • “Cover” indicates the need for privatization of sexuality in a world that has grown adverse. It symbolizes the first instance of alienation and threat of privacy and dehumanization by bestial humans. “Uncovering” is only permitted where mutual self-giving has occurred through a nuptial covenant. To “uncover” would mean to bare the private areas; to “know” would mean to experience the privacy of the other through union. These are terms conditioned by the culture of shame. (Theology of Clothing: Discussion Points and Questions)

Further Reading
Theology of Clothing: Discussion Points and Questions
The Culture of Shame and the Shame of the Cross
Nakedness, Shame, and Shamelessness
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is Theology? Its Divisions with Short Descriptions

Published in REVIVE, May 2012 (Malayalam Edition) A simple and literal definition of “theology” would be “the science of divine things”. It comes from two Greek words theos meaning “God” and logia meaning “discourse or speech”. In modern times, it is the stream of knowledge that differentiates the secular pursuit of knowledge from the sacred one because of its starting point: all secular studies begin with reason and experience while theology begins with faith. The starting point for all extra-theological studies is the world (Latin: saeculum); the starting point for theology is the Word of God. So, while one may say that theology is the study of God, the factual definition would be that theology is the science that rationally pursues the understanding of the self-revelation of God in the Scriptures. It would be interesting to note that many of the universities had originally begun as seminaries and theology was once known as the Queen of Sciences. However, with the dawn of theAge of E...
5 comments
Read more

Placebo and the Philosophy of Mind and Matter in Drug Research

A placebo is a non-therapeutic substance administered under the camouflage of medication to deceive patients into believing that they are receiving medications; this done solely for psychological and not for physiological effects. Placebo may usually be used to compare its effects with the effects of other drugs in drug research. Let's take the case of an experiment that tries to establish whether a particular drug, say to treat weariness, is genuine or merely has the effects of a placebo. Suppose 20 candidates are chosen for this experiment. 10 are given the drug and the rest are put on a placebo while they are told that the placebo is a genuine medication. They need to make sure that the deception is well carried on for the success of the experiment. If both the groups make similar improvements after taking the treatments, the new drug seems to only function as a placebo in effect. The basic hypothesis of the placebo raises the question of mind over matter. Of course, this pushes...
Post a Comment
Read more

Reliability, Predictability, and Paul the Octopus

Paul the Octopus has recently become very famous after his predictions for Germany and Spain during the World Cup 2010 came right. The 100% accuracy tag distinguishes him from any other diviner who had attempted a prediction during the World Cup. There were responses and reactions from various people including sportsmen, statesmen, and mathematicians. Whatever, the use of Paul has demonstrated once again that mankind's search for an extra-temporal, psychic foresight has not quelled through the historical calendar returning a decade over this millennium. The question before us is can such predictions as those of Paul be counted on as reliable (in other words, can they be seriously taken as true)? The mathematicians have plumped for chance. It's all a matter of probability, they say ( BBC News ). However, the argument of chance in itself is weak. The mathematics of chance will calculate that the probability of Paul being right seven times out of seven is 1/128. But, the conclusi...
3 comments
Read more