Nude Art and Jesus

[Guest]

though I believe HIS Word does state that we're not to look upon each others nakeness

Where?

 

[lovely]

While normally would agree. I fall back for a reason. I have poor health. A degenerative disease that continues to eat at my body. I'm currently home locked even. I can't get out for even doctor visits without great deal of trouble. I can't get to church if I could I wouldn't be able to sit through it and it would cause me a great deal of problems if I tried. Stress of even a phone call will set me over the edge of this. Stress quickens the diseases pace dramatically. Being only 34 I have no real desire to drive my health down further and be more a burden from my family.

I joined these forums to be able to reach out of myself, maybe help someone while I can still maintain a train of thought, something that gets harder to do as time goes on. While normally I would stay and try, it just pains me to much to see people stuck in that trap. I do spend a lot of time praying and thinking for these people. To a great degree your right I should. But truthfully I feel such a burden on my wife who is the only one there to help me day to day, I don't want to make it worse for her.

I will think and pray on what you stated. Well spoken I'll have to think about it. And I would agree that to some degree that last paragraph was over the line, in at least part of it. For that I apologize.

Timothy, I hope you don't leave permanently. Even though we have disagreed on topics, I have found your posts valuable. Of course, if you think it may cause you too much stress to be here then you should do what's best for you. I have a lung disease, and I wouldn't want to do anything to be more of a burden to my family either. In fact, I try to make great efforts to improve my health for their sake. Anyway, I do not feel stress here too much of the time, but when I do I take a break. The Lord bless you and guide you.

 

[jsnbrown]

Well.. Here it is.. No matter what I say, what verses I present, there will always be a comeback. We both very each side just as strongly.

I believe we both can agree on this from previous posts. And if so, we both must agree that Christian Nude Art is unacceptable in today's society <- key words.

Nudity is good. God can see all, like previously said, if God didn't like our bodies, He would have made us with cover-alls.. Or He could have made them pleasing to Him.

We both understand that to a normal, say around 20 year old, (my age) a nude female body is a definite temptation to lust. I do not appreciate White Water theme park because of all the half dressed females walking around. I do not have a particular issue with lust. I just don't like to be presented with the temptation. The appearance of evil I guess you might say.

Which brings me to my next point.

We both agree that porn stars are generally looked at as a sexual, lustful, sinful career and they usually pose nude. (usually.. ).. So do nude models. What is the difference? nude models lack the sexual additions that porn stars throw in.. But then again, surely some porn stars just model as well right?

The Bible says we are to avoid the appearance of evil. Ahh.. *scampers off to find the ref. Here it is: 1 Thessalonians 5:22 ..

But no matter that, for the most part society (majority of the Christian society) rejects nude models. Some in my church also frown upon models in general because for the most part they seem to interested in the material and less into the spiritual.

But back to the nude models. For a nude model to be completely ok, there would have to be no way they could be a stumbling block to a new Christian or to a potential Christian.. Or to a mature Christian for that matter. Romans 14:13

Now sure, Christians past judgment all the time so in general we break that anywho.. Why should we listen to the other part of it? We should listen to all of it.

BTW, we do not do generalizations at my church, note that my fellow church members usually use the words "From what I have seen.. " or "From what I remember.. " before they state a generalization like what I have posted.

But anywho.. back on topic.

In my feeble young and un-wise mind. I see that nude modeling is inappropriate for a Christian man for woman. Why? It is exposing what God has given you to the public and promoting yourself to the world.

I don't mean or think that nudity in general is wrong.. Nudity in public is wrong. That is what I feel. Nudity between a man and a woman is appropriate only if they are in wedlock.

If not, well, let me and my girlfriend go skinny-dipping and brag about it to God. Hey, as long as I don't lust but only admire her beauty, I'm good right?

Nudity in front of a doctor is a must in our culture. The un-secretive nature of the encounter is left in the doctor's office and is made strictly confidential. The nudity of a woman during child-birth or baby-feeding is thought by many to be beautiful. not sexual. And I cannot see how this would make someone lust or stumble. (though I remember some have had issues with the breast-feeding on facebook recently..They actually made all those images be considered pornographic in nature and removed.. This is a secular site btw.. )

So by all my verse quoting and my thoughts on this, what is my final outcome:
Nudity is good. But nudity in public is walking a very fine line with sin. Maybe not from a verse in the Bible about actual nudity. But about causing others to stumble and for us to avoid the appearance of evil.

If you comment on this, you will be doing so for others education. As far as I'm concerned, my girlfriend and I and my daughters when/if God wills them to be (When the daughters reach around 6-7 years old) will be staying fully clothed (with some exceptions of course) until in wedlock when there is a male in the room.

 

[JoJo]

BTW, we do not do generalizations at my church, note that my fellow church members usually use the words "From what I have seen.. " or "From what I remember.. " before they state a generalization like what I have posted.

That's refreshing!

 

[Timothy]

This is actually a bigger issue for Christian artists to be honest. Those studying formally. Most art course require "Life Drawing" which includes drawing nude models of various forms. Reason being they say you cannot learn to draw without studying human anatomy. In fact many artists can rattle off names of bone and muscle structures and draw them perfectly from memory. To get a formal art degree at schools around here, you cannot bypass this step.

 

[jsnbrown]

I believe as a drawing it is better.. Still not the best.. lol.. but at least it isn't a model there while you draw.. (Maybe when you learn to draw nudes there is.. but if you learn from a book.. maybe not..)

I don't know about that part.. I'm just having an issue with nude photography more than anything.. A live model with students sketching isn't also the most purest setting..

i can just imagine myself coming home from college one day..

"Hey honey! Guess what I got to do today!"
Wife: "What Baby?"
Me: "I got to learn to sketch a nude woman! Isn't that fascinating? "
Wife leaves.. slams door on way out..

Ok.. Maybe a little to dramatic.

But still.. As for me and myself, I'm skipping all of it. I'd rather be sure to be pure in God's eyes both in spirit and in truth then later God asked me why I took pictures of someone else's wife.

 

[Biblereader]

Looking at a naked body, I assume female, for you, is not a prerequisite for loving God.
God never told you to look at nakedness. You really should read the bible.

LOVE the Lord with ALL your heart, soul, mind, and strength.
This is the first and greatest commandment. YES< COMMANDMENT! In the New Testament.

We are to exhort one another.

How is appreciating the beauty of God's creation NOT loving God?

 

[Biblereader]

Until marriage, we are to remain clothed!

What about the shower? What about the doctor?

Are you really that obtuse? That's scary!

 

[ProphetMark]

Looking at a naked body, I assume female, for you, is not a prerequisite for loving God.
God never told you to look at nakedness. You really should read the bible.

Nor is playing chess. God never told me to do that either. That doesn't make it wrong.
The point is, God never told me not to look at nakedness.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Our Lord hung on the cross in HIS nakeness...though I believe HIS Word does state that we're not to look upon each others nakeness...so why would art be the exception?

Interesting how people make statements about what the Bible allegedly says without backing them up with scripture, or they take verses out of context. There is nothing wrong with nudity in and of itself, and no one can find scripture that says otherwise--unless they take it out of context, which is all too common. Even if I were to lust after a nude woman (which I've NEVER done), my lust would be the sin and not her nudity. A woman doesn't have to be nude for men to lust after her. Clothes are not a shield from being lusted after.

 

[Gabe]

...A woman doesn't have to be nude for men to lust after her. Clothes are not a shield from being lusted after...

I have no definitive view one way or the other, but I think Jon-Marc has brought to light a valid point which I think needs to be dealt with. For many men, simply an uncovered face is enough to cause lust. This is why in Islam it is a crime for a women to show anything more than her hands and eyes. If Christian women desire to dress modestly to not cause men to lust after them, why do Christian women not wear Burka's? I think the same thing can be said in the Are bathing suits immodest? thread. It would seem that people are trying to push cultural norms wrongly as Scriptural truths.

 

[JoJo]

[quote:3cp51z5i]Carol Lowery wrote:
Our Lord hung on the cross in HIS nakeness...though I believe HIS Word does state that we're not to look upon each others nakeness...so why would art be the exception?

Jon-Marc wrote:
Interesting how people make statements about what the Bible allegedly says without backing them up with scripture, or they take verses out of context. There is nothing wrong with nudity in and of itself, and no one can find scripture that says otherwise--unless they take it out of context, which is all too common. Even if I were to lust after a nude woman (which I've NEVER done), my lust would be the sin and not her nudity. A woman doesn't have to be nude for men to lust after her. Clothes are not a shield from being lusted after.[/quote:3cp51z5i]

Perhaps she was referring to Isaiah 57:8.

 

[Cornelius]

easy to lust over it, bit too much of a temptation - for us guys anyway!

I was recently looking at a picture of David, the statue. I have to be honest, it really didn't do anything for me in the lust department.

LOL

 

[Lewis]

I have never understood why people who believe that God created the human and after His creation said that His creation was "very good" would think that God would be offended by any part of His creation.It is not the human body that is sinful but what people do with their body. Porn is meant to be sexual and is therefore sinful, but art is not meant to be porn and is therefore just simple non-sexual nudity. Believe it or not, there is such a thing as non-sexual nudity.

When Adam and Eve knew that they were naked, everything went out the window. And God is not offended, by what He created, And there is no such thing as non-sexual nudity, because somebody is always going to lust after you, if you are naked in a museum somewhere on a wall, somebody will find you attractive sexually, and they will start to imagine having sex with you, not only the males but, women too.

 

[Timothy]

And there is no such thing as non-sexual nudity, because somebody is always going to lust after you, if you are naked in a museum somewhere on a wall, somebody will find you attractive sexually, and they will start to imagine having sex with you, not only the males but, women too.

No such thing as non-sexual nudity, that's an all inclusive statement that is pretty off the mark. Is a newborn sexually nude? There is a point where nudity is considered innocence. There may be some freaks who'd say yes, most normal people would say no to that question. Equally on the other side of the fence, to some people naked feet is enough sexually to turn some very strange people on.

Saying that Someone WILL lust after a naked man or woman is an assumption without possibility of proof. You know what they say when you assume. And by and by lust is in the eye of the beholder. If our society developed with woman wearing full length very none revealing cloths, people would still find a way to lust, or consider it Sexual. In some islamic countries not wearing a veil is considered that.

But if you have a scripture that equates nudity with sin then post it. Still haven't seen one that fits. If your not quoting one in your post then your making a statement of opinion. And that's fine, but don't equate it to biblical truth because for that to fit, you've got to have the scripture to back it.

 

[Lewis]

Saying that Someone WILL lust after a naked man or woman is an assumption without possibility of proof. You know what they say when you assume. And by and by lust is in the eye of the beholder. If our society developed with woman wearing full length very none revealing cloths, people would still find a way to lust, or consider it Sexual. In some islamic countries not wearing a veil is considered that.

I hate to be the one that tells you Tim, but people lust after people on a canvas or in a book 24/7. And you live in the number one lustful country. You can't tell me that they don't, for instance Roman picture art, they are and were known and still is known for making some really sexual art. And some people will be turned on by it. Some Roman art shows them engaging in sex, some others just show both male and female naked, in provocative poses. Some old Roman art even has homosexual type art now some people will find this art very appealing, and be turned on by it, and you can't tell me that they won't. I am not talking rough, just trying to get my point across.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Perhaps she was referring to Isaiah 57:8.

There's nothing in that verse about nudity.

 

[Jon-Marc]

When Adam and Eve knew that they were naked, everything went out the window. And God is not offended, by what He created, And there is no such thing as non-sexual nudity, because somebody is always going to lust after you, if you are naked in a museum somewhere on a wall, somebody will find you attractive sexually, and they will start to imagine having sex with you, not only the males but, women too.

It's not the nudity itself that is sexual. It is the perverted mind of the onlooker who sees sex in the nudity and gets turned on by it or believes it to be offensive.

At a local beach in my home city, a girl of about 5-years-old changed her clothes on the beach under a towel. A woman called the police on her, and the police told her when they got there and saw that it was an innocent 5-year-old not to waste their time on something like that. I saw the little girl and just walked on by. By your way of thinking, you believe that since all nudity is sexual that I had to have lusted after her. At least the police in my home city had the good sense to know that not all nudity is sexual, and that not even all public nudity is a crime. If you saw a nude child on a beach, your belief that there is no such thing as non-sexual nudity would cause you to lust after that child? As I said, it's not the nudity that is sexual. It is one's thoughts, fantasies, desires, and perversions that make it sexual IN THEIR MIND.

Some people are so sex crazy and so perverted in their minds that they think of ALL nudity as being sexual. To such people, a man or woman sun bathing nude in their back yard is looking for sex. I assume that means that if one of your children (if you have any) were to see you nude in the bathroom that they would want to have sex with you, or if you saw one of them nude, you would want to have sex with them? You did say there is no such thing as non-sexual nudity. That is the kind of perverted thinking that has turned the human body into a sex object even while dressed.

The sin is in the lusting and NOT in the nudity.

 

[Lewis]

John, you have taken this to far, and you have offended me, I said nothing about children, but there are many people on the planet, who lust after children. What you did is twist what I said. My point was that someone is going to find that nude art picture sexual to them, and you know that. And then some don't, and you know that too. My point was the people who do.

 

[Timothy]

I hate to be the one that tells you Tim, but people lust after people on a canvas or in a book 24/7. And you live in the number one lustful country. You can't tell me that they don't, for instance Roman picture art, they are and were known and still is known for making some really sexual art. And some people will be turned on by it. Some Roman art shows them engaging in sex, some others just show both male and female naked, in provocative poses. Some old Roman art even has homosexual type art now some people will find this art very appealing, and be turned on by it, and you can't tell me that they won't. I am not talking rough, just trying to get my point across.

Thanks that's kinda my point, read my other posts. Like I previously said men will find a way to lust after a woman wearing a burka. Yet not all men. Not everyone lusts after the same things. I have no problem with lust. I understand the gift of my wife. What she does for me on a normal day surpasses that most woman go through with their husbands. Not easy to watch your husband wither away to a degenerative neuromuscular disease like I have and still consider them a husband instead of a burden or patient but she does. There are other reasons but I cannot see another woman without thinking of the blessing my wife is to me. Lust just doesn't come into the picture. And that is regardless of what they are or are not wearing. Not all men deal with lust, some have conquered it. It is true some men will lust after anything. A stick man/woman drawing can drive some men too, but my point is that is not every man.

Now to some men can't separate appreciation for beauty from lust. Lust is very clearly defined as a desire after a woman, that is a desire to partake in some way. Saying that woman is beautiful, or Appreciating beauty is not desiring a woman. You admire a beautiful sunset without calling it lust, and the same God who created that, created woman/man even himself calling it "good".

Those who suffer from lust are they themselves responsible for that sin. James 1 tells us that sin is birthed in the desires of our heart. You cannot go through life blaming sin/lust on everyone but yourself. Our society doesn't make it easy for some people to overcome it but it is possible with God. But you will never conquer it unless you admit the sin to yourself and God as being your fault.