If Bikinis Were Sexual

Somehow, the fact that bikinis are nonsexual is actually brought up far less in refutations of evangelical modesty teachings than other things that are in some ways far less central, like the sense of shame that modesty teachings aimed at women only can instill in its targets.  While the potential consequences modesty teachings aimed at one gender can have psychologically need to be addressed, they are not the reason why modesty teachings are irrational and Biblically invalid (in being legalistic, they are themselves sinful).  This shifts discussions away from the actual nature of bikinis and other clothing.

It is very important to point out the stupidity of treating something nonsexual as sexual because of perceptions that are often conditioned by culture in the first place.  However, even if everyone's perceptions of bikinis were sexual (and they are not) or if bikinis truly were sexual (again, they are not), bikinis would still not be sinful on the Christian worldview because sexual feelings and expression are not immoral by default and because it still would not follow from any Biblical command that the exposure of either the female or male body is vile.

Even if bikinis were sexual, and it is objectively true that they are not, this alone could not make wearing or looking at someone wearing them morally wrong within a Christian framework, as if the potential beauty of the female body--and the male body by logical extension--are somehow offensive to the deity who made it!  Whether something is sexual or nonsexual by nature or if someone perceives it sexually are separate topics from whether the thing in question is sinful.

The very first two chapters of the Bible are all that is necessary to show that Yahweh is no enemy of the human body, even in its original state of full nudity.  If nudity is not morally wrong because there is nothing Biblically problematic about exposing or viewing any part of the human body, it cannot be immoral to expose even less of the body!  Of course, Deuteronomy 4:2 also confirms this with its command to add to its instructions, as there is no demand to cover either the male or female body to a random extent.

Bikinis are not sexual.  If they were, though, no other logical or theological facts about them would change.  This is why evangelical modesty teachings would not be validated even if bikinis or other forms of sensual clothing were somehow themselves sexual in nature.  Women would still be Biblically free to wear revealing swimwear in public, just as men would still be free to bare their torsos in the sight of others.  There is nothing shameful, sinful, or otherwise inappropriate about the body irrespective of its relationship to sexuality.