A recent answer on this site made a very broad statement, that "those who live in nudist colonies are not Christians". However, a quick Google search for "Christian naturists" (other search engines are available) shows that there appear to be quite a few people who would disagree with that stance.

Do any denominations specifically stipulate that naturism/nudism is a sin? If so, which?

  • I'm voting to close because I think that it merely sets up a strawman to be knocked down. As the accepted answer points out, it's hard to identify which people find naturism wrong for societal reasons and which think it's a sin. Mar 4, 2013 at 18:21

3 Answers 3


Bibilically speaking, being "exposed" has always been linked with a shaming - from the time that Adam and Eve realized they were naked and after the fall thus ashamed (Gen 3), to Hosea in which a disgraced and conquered foe was stripped naked, etc... the general tenor of Scripture is that being naked is an undesirable state.

Since naturism / nudism as a movement is a very new phenomenon (springing in the early 20th century), very few denominations would have felt much need to deal with the issue. There are nudist "churches" (I think of the one at White Tail Resort in VA, for example) but by and large the membership isn't sufficient to warrant the attention of most denominations

All in all, my take on it (and its just my take) is this - being a nudist - i.e. advocating that clothing is unnecessary and socially inhibiting in public - is contrary to scripture mostly because it is an attempt to deny the Fall. In a way, it attempts to deal with the "sin" by stating that it is simply man's invention - a stance that would be at odds with an understanding that God defines what is and is not sin.

  • 2
    This doesn't really seem to answer the question. It's primarily an opinion piece (not that I disagree with the opinion posted). There are many indigenous tribal peoples where standard clothing is at a minimum, to the point that the majority of people are completely "naked" by western standards. Would you say that these people would have to learn to wear clothes before they could become Christians?
    – Flimzy
    Dec 9, 2011 at 7:29
  • I was focusing on the agenda of the nudist here intentionally, because the accident of clothing is neither their focus nor what I imagine the sin to be. As stated, the sin is the willful disregard of the consequences of sin, not the clothing. Agreed also this has a bit more opinion than I'd like, but as stated, the movement itself is kind of past the time when formal doctrinal statements are to be expected. Dec 9, 2011 at 13:16
  • Wow... My first foray into answering here... Nov 8, 2013 at 15:38

First dealing with the error in the first answer. It the 3rd paragraph the author specifically calls naturism sin when he/she writes "... it attempts to deal with the "sin" by stating that it is simply man's invention ... "

nakedness cannot be sin because last verse of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 tell us that the man and woman were naked and that God saw that "... it was very good."

Also in Isa 20:2 God commanded his prophet Isa to go naked for 3 years, and yes that really was NAKED! as it symbolized the naked/barefoot/"buttocks uncovered" condition the Egyptians and Ethiopians would experience when they were taken away as prisoners of war and slaves.

Likewise contending that the "concept of naked" is some invention of mankind appears to miss the mark. as is reveled by God's question in Genesis 3:11 when God asks "Who told thee that thous wast naked". It hardly makes sense that God would have asked that if the idea had not come from the serpent. As for God clothing Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:21, one should apply the principle of examining the context and one will see that 3 verses previous in Genesis 3:18 God had just said he was sending them into a world with thorns and thistles, and then note that in verse 21, those clothes were made of LEATHER! a material appropriate for repelling thorns. The context suggests that the clothing was needed for protection and not covering up God's "capstone of earthly creation". Clothing is protection when needed, which is why it is a shame when people do not have it because of poverty or being denied it because of their state of captivity.

Now to answer the original question: The question is stated in the negative asking in which denominations is it unacceptable. The societal aversion to nudity is so broadly spread that to avoid condemnation from lay members, or disrupting congregations, or sowing discord among the brethern; it is perhaps better to seek an answer to the converse, "In which denominations is naturism well tolerated?" Quakers have a great tolerance for nudity, having practiced it as a religious statement in times past. Lutherans are said to have tolerance for it (may vary by synod). and the previous pope has said that the naked body is not sinful. However the problem is that what is the viewpoint of the denomination may not be reflected in the practice of the local congregations. So it is best to check it out with the pastor and/or deacons or others in the local hierarchy. An accurate picture of the official position of the denomination might be more likely obtained by searching for the denomination's web site and asking the question there.

  • 1
    I just approved an anonymous edit suggest that came in for this answer because it really looked like it was from you. If that's not the case we can roll it back, just be sure to be logged in when you make edits and you won't have to have them approved.
    – Caleb
    Jan 7, 2012 at 0:05

I do not know of any denomination that specifically prohibits naturism/nudism. I have heard that the Anglican/Episcopal denomination has specifically pronounced that nudism is okay.

I will only add that in my study and experience, I have found nothing that conflicts with the Bible, and much to recommend the practice.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .