The key to understanding Leviticus 18:6-18, where one was constantly commanded not to “uncover the nakedness” of one of their family members, is understanding that this has to do with “having SEXUAL RELATIONS with them”; in other words, acts of INCEST. The New International Version makes this clear, for verse 6 reads, “No one is to approach any close relative to HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS. I am the LORD.”

Most translations, such as the NASB, say, “None of you shall approach any blood relative of his to UNCOVER NAKEDNESS; I am the LORD.” The words “uncover nakedness” in this passage has the same meaning as “have sexual relations,” so in all translations God is forbidding family members to engage in sexual intercourse with each other, which, as I said before, would be an act of incest.

I know of no scripture which would forbid a mother from undressing in front of her daughters (or a father in front of his sons). My wife and I used to take our daughters on camping trips when they were still living at home and she would frequently take showers with some of them at the public showers or they would undress together while changing into swimsuits. My wife and my daughters had no conscience whatsoever against doing this.

I will close by mentioning one passage where it was inappropriate for sons to see their father naked. In Genesis 9:20-24 we read, “And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Then he drank wine and was drunk, and became UNCOVERED in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, SAW THE NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER, and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and COVERED THE NAKEDNESS OF THEIR FATHER. Their faces were turned away, and they did NOT SEE THEIR FATHER’S NAKEDNESS.” (NKJV). In this case, Noah’s nakedness was a shameful thing, for it was his DRUNKEN STATE that resulted in him LYING NAKED in his tent. When Ham saw his father in that drunken state he should have “covered the nakedness of his father” (as his brothers eventually did). It was wrong and disgraceful for Ham not only to look on his father, but to then expose his father’s nakedness (and thus his “drunken state”) by telling his brothers. If Ham had really loved his father, he would have “covered his father’s sin” by literally “covering his father’s nakedness.” 1st Peter 4:8 declares, “And above all things have fervent love for one another, for ‘love will cover a multitude of sins’.” (294.7) (DO)