Serious thought. I don't think clothes are necessary in Celestial Kingdom

[Guest]

When Adam and Eve were created they were placed in the Garden of Eden naked and lived that way peacefully for a long time. It wasn't until they ate the fruit and Satan was the one that pointed out their nakedness. They weren't ashamed until that point and God wasn't ashamed of their nakedness. In heaven we will all have resurrected perfected bodies and perfected minds if we are in the CK and there will be no lust nor inappropriate thoughts about another person. You might ask what about all the white robes that mortals see angels wearing? Well that could be just how the angels appear to us mortals because we suffer from lusts, fallen minds and self consciousness about nakedness because of our society. What would be the need for clothes in the Celestial Kingdom if everyone is perfect and we are pure like Adam and Eve were in the Garden. If you think I'm crazy for coming to this conclusion, then why did God put Adam and Eve in the Garden naked instead of immediately giving them clothes? Wearing a white robe for eternity sounds boring anyway. But robes could be put on if Celestial beings visit lower kingdoms and people on earth.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Zarahemla

[zil]

IMO, nakedness in (this sort of) scripture does not mean lack of clothing, it means sin, lack of purity.  Study all the scriptures which use "naked" in this way and I think you'll agree.  E.g.:

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/9.5?lang=eng#4

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9.14?lang=eng#13

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/ex/32.25?lang=eng#24

See footnotes as needed.

Adam and Eve's nakedness in the Garden is symbolic.  I don't believe for a minute it was literal.  Nor do I believe they or Satan were concerned with their lack of attire - rather, they were concerned with hiding their sins (which is why we should avoid doing so like the plague).

As for boring, you're thinking telestial at best.

Edited December 15, 2016 by zil

[james12]

The Adam and Eve story is an allegory and should not be taken literally. For example nakedness and clothes are very symbolic and I would be very cautious about drawing any literal conclusions in this regard. 

[zil]

21 minutes ago, Zarahemla said:

Wearing a white robe for eternity sounds boring anyway.

Quote

Does sameness depress you? The heavenly hosts, so we are told, all wear the same simple white garment--how monotonous! We all dress alike in the temple. Are you depressed to be there? No, the difference is in the person himself. It shines through as the individual spirit. The Father and the Son glowed exactly alike. Why doesn't one wear black and the other wear green or something like that? No. It is the outward sameness that allows inward sameness, the spirit, to shine through. Such monotony is put to shame by the multi-billion-dollar fashion industry of our times. The difference is that in heaven it is the individual spirit that shines through. What do we see in the temple, when we are all dressed alike? We must go out to the parking lot to assert our individuality in Mercedes, Cadillacs, and so forth. And which is the more depressing picture? The gaudy display of vanity fair is an attempt to cover up the spiritual and intellectual barrenness of the present world we live in.

Hugh Nibley, Approaching Zion, Chapter 15

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, zil said:

IMO, nakedness in (this sort of) scripture does not mean lack of clothing, it means sin, lack of purity.  Study all the scriptures which use "naked" in this way and I think you'll agree.  E.g.:

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/9.5?lang=eng#4

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9.14?lang=eng#13

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/ex/32.25?lang=eng#24

See footnotes as needed.

Adam and Eve's nakedness in the Garden is symbolic.  I don't believe for a minute it was literal.  Nor do I believe they or Satan were concerned with their lack of attire - rather, they were concerned with hiding their sins (which is why we should avoid doing so like the plague).

As for boring, you're thinking telestial at best.

I can't help thinking Telestial since we are in a telestial state. And I always took the Garden story literally. Are you sure the nakedness is just symbolic?

[Anddenex]

We will have clothes as Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial beings. The concept of having a clean mind, a mind like Christ, doesn't negate the need for clothes. I am of the opposite mind as some here, and do believe Adam and Eve were literally naked (no clothes) and symbolically naked (innocent). 

If you are going to use Adam and Eve as an example, remember their is a difference between who Adam and Eve were while in the garden, and who they were after they had partaken of the fruit. Their knowledge was increased to be able to experience joy, and many other emotions. Before the fall they were, "Adam and Eve were at first both as innocent and unself-conscious as children." Children have a different tendency toward nakedness than adults. This won't be much different in heaven. 

I am not of the mind that accepts that Adam and Eve's, as described in the temple and scriptures, story were allegoric. I believe them to be both, literal and allegoric; however, I am open to whatever is revealed when God sees fit to reveal it.

[NightSG]

"With clothes, there's right away pockets, and with pockets you gotta put something in them."

[Just_A_Guy]

24 minutes ago, zil said:

IMO, nakedness in (this sort of) scripture does not mean lack of clothing, it means sin, lack of purity.  Study all the scriptures which use "naked" in this way and I think you'll agree.  E.g.:

The trouble I see with this argument is that Genesis 2:25/Moses 3:25 describes Adam and Eve as "naked" (whether literal or metaphorical) prior to the fall.  So, equating "naked' with "sinful" suggests that Adam and Eve were somehow sinful before the fall. 

If we're taking an allegorical approach, it would make more sense to me to equate "naked" with "helpless" or "guileless" or "childlike".

Edited December 15, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest MormonGator]

35 minutes ago, Zarahemla said:

When Adam and Eve were created they were placed in the Garden of Eden naked and lived that way peacefully for a long time. It wasn't until they ate the fruit and Satan was the one that pointed out their nakedness. They weren't ashamed until that point and God wasn't ashamed of their nakedness. In heaven we will all have resurrected perfected bodies and perfected minds if we are in the CK and there will be no lust nor inappropriate thoughts about another person. You might ask what about all the white robes that mortals see angels wearing? Well that could be just how the angels appear to us mortals because we suffer from lusts, fallen minds and self consciousness about nakedness because of our society. What would be the need for clothes in the Celestial Kingdom if everyone is perfect and we are pure like Adam and Eve were in the Garden. If you think I'm crazy for coming to this conclusion, then why did God put Adam and Eve in the Garden naked instead of immediately giving them clothes? Wearing a white robe for eternity sounds boring anyway. But robes could be put on if Celestial beings visit lower kingdoms and people on earth.

 Dude, if you are so obsessed with nakedness, I know of a couple beaches down here ....

(just playing everyone) 

[Anddenex]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

 Dude, if you are so obsessed with nakedness, I know of a couple beaches down here ....

(just playing everyone) 

[Guest]

This can bring up a better discussion. Was Adam and Eve literal and were they literally naked?

Edited December 15, 2016 by Zarahemla

[Guest]

1 hour ago, james12 said:

The Adam and Eve story is an allegory and should not be taken literally. For example nakedness and clothes are very symbolic and I would be very cautious about drawing any literal conclusions in this regard. 

What makes you think it's an allegory?

[zil]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The trouble I see with this argument is that Genesis 2:25/Moses 3:25 describes Adam and Eve as "naked" (whether literal or metaphorical) prior to the fall.  So, equating "naked' with "sinful" suggests that Adam and Eve were somehow sinful before the fall. 

If we're taking an allegorical approach, it would make more sense to me to equate "naked" with "helpless" or "guileless" or "childlike".

In light of the use in the other verses, I can go with "helpless" or "exposed" or "unable to hide from God" (as fitting each of those applications).  I can also go for multiple meanings to the word (literal and multiple figurative meanings).  But if they were literally naked, I don't think that's nearly so important as the figurative or symbolic nakedness.  Nor nearly so important as what the other verses are teaching us.

NOTE (replying to multiple comments now): I believe there really was a Garden and Adam and Eve were in it and fell into mortality, but I'm not sure 100% of the story is literal as opposed to a teaching tool...  I'm OK if it's all literal, all figurative, or all both, or some of each - it's all good.

[zil]

1 hour ago, Zarahemla said:

I can't help thinking Telestial since we are in a telestial state.

I disagree (to a degree).  Go back to the temple and pay very, very close attention.  Even if it takes years - that's OK.

[james12]

9 hours ago, Zarahemla said:

What makes you think it's an allegory?

Was Adam fashioned from dust and breath added to him?

Was Eve created when God plucked a rib from Adam's side and formed flesh around it? 

Did an actual serpent come to Eve and talk to her about eating the fruit?

Is the earth only 6,000 years old?

Did God really create a tree that would turn Adam and Eve into mortals?

Ponder these, consider on them. Read the words of prophets on the matter. You will come to know that the story in many instances should not be understood literally. This does not mean that Adam and Eve did not exist, simply that some parts of the story are a bit fanciful. 

[CV75]

13 hours ago, Zarahemla said:

When Adam and Eve were created they were placed in the Garden of Eden naked and lived that way peacefully for a long time. It wasn't until they ate the fruit and Satan was the one that pointed out their nakedness. They weren't ashamed until that point and God wasn't ashamed of their nakedness. In heaven we will all have resurrected perfected bodies and perfected minds if we are in the CK and there will be no lust nor inappropriate thoughts about another person. You might ask what about all the white robes that mortals see angels wearing? Well that could be just how the angels appear to us mortals because we suffer from lusts, fallen minds and self consciousness about nakedness because of our society. What would be the need for clothes in the Celestial Kingdom if everyone is perfect and we are pure like Adam and Eve were in the Garden. If you think I'm crazy for coming to this conclusion, then why did God put Adam and Eve in the Garden naked instead of immediately giving them clothes? Wearing a white robe for eternity sounds boring anyway. But robes could be put on if Celestial beings visit lower kingdoms and people on earth.

“And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.” (D&C 130:2) Clothes are part of that "sociality" as a key means of interpersonal communication and expression of intent, especially where the Celestial Kingdom is a material world (in a good way!).

[Guest]

[estradling75]

Once again you need to understand the context..

Adam and Eve were innocent (aka they had not knowledge),,,  God allowing them to run around naked was no more indicative of their/our eternal state... then modern day parents who allow their toddlers to run around naked intend that to be their state when they grow up.

Note that God's question was prompted by a change in behavior on the part of Adam and Eve... a change brought about by a loss of innocence brought on by gaining knowledge. That change is what brought about clothes.

While our Eternal state is many things, lacking knowledge (aka Innocence) is not one of them.  We are not going to be running around like toddlers in paradise.

 

[Vort]

Worth noting that God himself made Adam and Eve clothes to wear. We can safely presume God's reason for clothing them did not have to do with Satan telling them a lie that God then propagated.

[MarginOfError]

1. I outright reject the notion of Adam and Eve being the literal first human beings on earth. The whole Creation story strikes me as an allegory that was used to teach eternal principles and was never intended to explain the origin of the planet nor of our species. Evolution, all the way, baby.

This doesn't preclude "Adam and Eve" as "first prophets", so to speak...the first humans to which God revealed himself. But clothing would have been around a very long time before that. 

2. A heaven without lust sounds even more boring to me than a heaven of white robes.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

1. I outright reject the notion of Adam and Eve being the literal first human beings on earth. The whole Creation story strikes me as an allegory that was used to teach eternal principles and was never intended to explain the origin of the planet nor of our species. Evolution, all the way, baby.

This doesn't preclude "Adam and Eve" as "first prophets", so to speak...the first humans to which God revealed himself. But clothing would have been around a very long time before that. 

2. A heaven without lust sounds even more boring to me than a heaven of white robes.

I think Adam and Eve were the first humans to have souls and be capable of agency.  Neanderthal man may have been physically similar to modern man, but fundamentally different and more like animals because sin had not entered the world yet (perhaps "death" relating before the fall means "sin" more than actual death?)  It also coud be that Adam and Eve were first and were in the garden for millions of years while outside generations of Neanderthal lived and died... who knows?  I do not know why Neanderthal man was here on Earth but I do suspect that Neanderthal souls are fundamentally different from modern human souls (maybe on a different plan or maybe more like animals) owing to the fact that they existed before sin came ino the world.

I do think it is interesting that humans began to act more like humans around the time of the fall... that is about the time when civilization was born, writing and monetary systems began, technology began to appear, and man ceased to live like animals (which was apparently how man lived for thousands of years before).  In other words, perhaps at the fall, humanity moved away from being smart animals and towards being more like God?  Perhaps clothing is a marker that comes with moving towards being more like Heavenly Father, along with civilizatiin, writing, economic systems, complex culture, etc.?  Perhaps clothes come with the territory of being exalted and eternal marriage and being capable of sacred blessings between husband and wife?

Just my speculation... i can't help to think that it is funny that human-like creatures have existed for 200,000 years but suddenly within the last 8000 years or so (around the traditional time of the fall) there has been an explosion of developments leading humans to behave in ways very different from other animals.

Edited December 16, 2016 by DoctorLemon

[Larry Cotrell]

Revelation 3:5 "He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels."
 

Revelation 4:4 "And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold."

 

[askandanswer]

just a little detour here - would the wearing of clothes in the celestial kingdom necessitate clothing manufacturers in the same way it is said that the existence of a watch proves the existence of a watch maker, and the existence of a world suggests the existence of a world maker?

Edited December 17, 2016 by askandanswer