Bedrock & Paradox

I dream of a hard and brutal mysticism in which the naked self merges with a non-human world and yet somehow survives still intact, individual, separate. Paradox and bedrock.

If the influence of nudity is declining, that may be a sign of the times. After expelling the pair from the Garden of Eden, God’s immediate priority was to clothe Adam and Eve in animal skins. The resurgence of nudity is not a sign of a return to a less sinful age but rather the tail end of the crumbling of restrictive social mores since the 1960s. But as public nudity has become more acceptable, its power to surprise and so its usefulness as a catalyst for change has diminished. The connection between nudity and purity, while remaining a potent part of the symbolism of religious art, is long broken beyond the canvas. Now the last vestiges of baring all as a symbol of dissatisfaction with the system have slipped away too.

The Economist knows no bounds, as it were.

DaveC

3 responses to “”

  1. Enel Avatar
    Enel

    “After expelling the pair from the Garden of Eden, God’s immediate priority was to clothe Adam and Eve in animal skins.”The writer is ignorant of the story of the fall of man. See Gen 2:25-3:24 for the complete story.2:25 says “the man and his wife were both naked and not ashamed”Clothing came after sin when “the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings?” The clothing was a desire of Man and not God to hide his shame.God reclothed man in animal skins prior to ejecting him from the garden. The skins required the death of the animal and are thought to be the first blood sacrifice for atonement of sin. This sets the stage for the overall story of the scripture of sin requiring atonement.

    Reply
  2. Cellarrat Avatar
    Cellarrat

    Man when well a magazine get there bibles stories right?

    Reply
  3. Enel Avatar
    Enel

    I agree, Dave N. that the issue is minor in what is a relatively tongue in cheek article.I do think the issue of accuracy in journalism is an important one, however. It would have taken very little time or effort for the author to properly research the story he is quoting. Instead, he assumes he knows the story, and from his incorrect assumption, assumes God has something against human nudity, then propagates this false assumption in an article in a nationally read magazine. When in fact, in the quoted bible story the humans are the ones ashamed of nudity, not God.One of my favorite philosophers Dallas Willard puts it this way: “Presumed familiarity of Jesus and his message has led to unfamiliarity, unfamiliarity has led to contempt, and contempt has led to profound ignorance”.Insert for the word “Jesus” just about anything you like: The Bible, Plato, the Constitution. You can see the underlying issue here: Assuming you know it all can actually lead to total ignorance because you don’t bother to check the facts.It is a minor issue and unfortunately such minor issues are very prevalent in our society leading to great societal ignorance.

    Reply

Leave a comment