"Nudity (or near nudity) is justified under the name of art"... how to counter?

[Webers_Home]

.

John 13:4-5: Jesus . . riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded." This is a passage from the last supper. After finishing eating, Jesus removed all of his clothes, wrapped himself in a towel and later used the towel to wash the feet of his disciples.

It's a pity that some of the antique translations render the English word "garments" plural. The koiné Greek word is himation (him-at'-ee-on) which simply means: a dress (inner or outer)

According to Mtt 5:40 the Jews of that day wore layers: the principal outer garment resembled a dress, and over this was worn a waistcoat for covering the chest and shoulders. Sometimes under all that was another garment that resembled ladies undies of the early 1900's either with pantaloons or without. When they set to work, the Jews commonly removed the waistcoat and secured the hem of the dress up around their waist with a belt to afford ease of movement; hence the saying "gird up your loins"

Some of the more modern versions translate John 13:4 like this:

"so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist."

Cliff
/

 

[Webers_Home]

.

Why else would Paul so solemnly warn the Corinthians to have their women dress modestly

Well; I don't know about the "solemn" part but anyway, the venue is specific; in other words: it's only in church where Christian ladies ought to be modest (1Tim 2:9) but it's not the kind of modesty you're thinking.

The idea here is to avoid being ostentatious, in other words: to avoid flaunting expensive couture thereby making the less fortunate in the congregation feel like second-class citizens by comparison. Church isn't the place for Cartier, Jimmy Choo, and Valentino. It's far better to blend than stand out.

†. Rom 12:16 . . Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

Cliff
/

 

[Elijah674]

.
Well; I don't know about the "solemn" part but anyway, the venue is specific; in other words: it's only in church where Christian ladies ought to be modest (1Tim 2:9) but it's not the kind of modesty you're thinking.

The idea here is to avoid being ostentatious, in other words: to avoid flaunting expensive couture thereby making the less fortunate in the congregation feel like second-class citizens by comparison. Church isn't the place for Cartier, Jimmy Choo, and Valentino. It's far better to blend than stand out.

†. Rom 12:16 . . Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

Cliff
/

Well folks after reading the posts, is it any wonder that there is a Matt. 7 BROADWAY?

Just one thought for Noah getting drunk. He preached for 120 years while building the Ark, and all the while the Holy Spirit was STRIVING for these [[[ALL LOST ONES]]] to repent. And none did.. it appears? at least if they did they died before the flood came.

OK: There were only 8 of his family that were still living that went into the Ark (compare Matt. 25:10?) SAVED.
And It appears that NO ONE POSTING can relate to that???

Josh, how would you feel??? Surely it could be understood that he must have felt that it was his fault & that his preaching of Rightousness (2 Peter 2:5-OF CHRIST) was the cause of this?? Feeling very DOWN & OUT! At least 'i' can relate to that! And I have not drank alcohol in over 56 years.

Yet Josh, what is being done to have even one saved from those Broadway ones + the Prophesied ones of Rev. 17:1-5's complete 'ex/houses' of their mother as we speak??

--Elijah

PS: And the Matt. 24:21 'time' surely has arrived! (what a Christ/less EARTH we live in!) And NAKED?? (Matt. 22:11-12) 2Surely these ones are not only physically dressing like a Rev. 17:1-5 HARLOT, but are 'SPIRITUALLY' NAKED OF CHRIST'S WEDDING GARMENT as well.

Matt. 22
[8] Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
[9] Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
[10] So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
[11] And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
[12] And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
[13] Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
[14] For many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[cyberjosh]

Well folks after reading the posts, is it any wonder that there is a Matt. 7 BROADWAY?

Just one thought for Noah getting drunk. He preached for 120 years while building the Ark, and all the while the Holy Spirit was STRIVING for these [[[ALL LOST ONES]]] to repent. And none did.. it appears? at least if they did they died before the flood came.

OK: There were only 8 of his family that were still living that went into the Ark (compare Matt. 25:10?) SAVED.
And It appears that NO ONE POSTING can relate to that???

Josh, how would you feel??? Surely it could be understood that he must have felt that it was his fault & that his preaching of Rightousness (2 Peter 2:5-OF CHRIST) was the cause of this?? Feeling very DOWN & OUT! At least 'i' can relate to that! And I have not drank alcohol in over 56 years.

Very interesting. So you are suggesting that Noah might have been depressed that his preaching did not save many people at all, and that the doom he spoke of from God (the flood) had destroyed most of the people in existence. I've never quite thought of it that way. I can barely imagine what that might have been like, especially since it is gloomy enough to think of the millions of deaths during the holocaust alone, and how staggering the death toll was. What if you saw 99.9% of the population wiped off the face of the earth and found yourself as only one of eight survivors left? You might even have "survivor's guilt" as it is sometimes referred to.

Very interesting thought indeed.

P.S. And yes, I agree with you that us finding spiritual clothing and adornment is the most important thing. We should seek those white robes of righteousness from Christ.

 

[Elijah674]

Very interesting. So you are suggesting that Noah might have been depressed that his preaching did not save many people at all, and that the doom he spoke of from God (the flood) had destroyed most of the people in existence. I've never quite thought of it that way. I can barely imagine what that might have been like, especially since it is gloomy enough to think of the millions of deaths during the holocaust alone, and how staggering the death toll was. What if you saw 99.9% of the population wiped off the face of the earth and found yourself as only one of eight survivors left? You might even have "survivor's guilt" as it is sometimes referred to.

Very interesting thought indeed.

P.S. And yes, I agree with you that us finding spiritual clothing and adornment is the most important thing. We should seek those white robes of righteousness from Christ.

'i' find the 1 Cor. 6:2-3 verse being very 'huge'! But perhaps only you will get the meaning of my thinking on that?

--Elijah

 

[cyberjosh]

'i' find the 1 Cor. 6:2-3 verse being very 'huge'! But perhaps only you will get the meaning of my thinking on that?

--Elijah

Hmm, yes from that scripture you gave you are right that we as saints must be able and capable as judges of earthly matters and must be wise to deal with them.

I must say as to the topic of this thread though that the disagreement with the position I have taken is still baffling to me. I have explained to ExtraMedium where I think a balance can be found, but no one so far has addressed the Scriptures I pointed out about the Bible clearly associating nakedness with shame. You can't sweep that under the rug.

And those like Cliff who seem to be saying that there is nothing wrong with it: what exactly are you advocating? That the world turn into a giant nudist colony? I don't understand the intention/what taking it to its logical conclusion indicates.

And I do have to take exception with the "stupid grandparents" idea mentioned by Cliff. Modesty is a matter of the heart, and my grandparents had plenty of the heart of God in them. Why shift the blame? Read what the scriptures say about it!

And I already mentioned that to think we live now in the same state as Adam and Eve as if we were in the Edenic paradise is sheer confusion. In other words, saying it's okay to go naked because Adam and Eve were naked is to ignore most of mankind's history as revealed in the word of God. Please address the shame issue mentioned in scripture if we are to proceed.

 

[Lostear]

.... Please address the shame issue mentioned in scripture if we are to proceed.

Yes, I agree. I've been lurking in this thread as the discussion have been going along greatly. I am figuring out how to present this to my teachers/boss/client in the future in case I need to avoid anything related to this in the future.

I am not intending to really use this to try to convert others to christainity (though I will use it to lead by example and hopefully encourage others to open the door by asking about it so I can witness to the best of my ability).

As I have mentioned in the original post, I really want the scriptures to be used for this discussion rather than just our thought, perspective, and experience on the matter without the support of the scriptures.

Cyberjosh, so far, is one of the person I'm watching the closest here in this thread. Thank you.

(I know that I have not been posting here much but that is only because the discussion is going along well and I don't want to interrupt as long as it is on topic :D )

 

[Webers_Home]

.

Those like Cliff who seem to be saying that there is nothing wrong with it: what exactly are you advocating? That the world turn into a giant nudist colony?

Were it not for the forbidden fruit incident, the whole world would be a clothing-optional planet. That's impractical now, of course.

I do have to take exception with the "stupid grandparents" idea mentioned by Cliff.

The grandparents to whom I referred are the two common to everybody— Adam and his wife Eve.

Cliff
/

 

[Webers_Home]

.

Being a new Christian

One of these days you are going to have to spiritually man-up and accept the rather distasteful fact that you are infected with an acute guilt complex over sex and the human body; and that you did not get it from Christianity's God. No, you got it from a fruit; viz: from an organic substance that somehow altered man's original human nature. This is not unrealistic.

According to an article in the Oct 8, 2011 issue of the Oregonian; new research reveals that some, if not all, the plants we eat actually change the behavior off human genes in ways never before imagined. A new study led by Chen-Yu Zhang, of Nanjing University, found that fragments of plant genetic material survive digestion and wind up swimming in the bloodstreams of humans and cows. Those tiny strands of RNA that somehow make it through the toxic acids and enzymes in the gut come from rice and the plant family that includes broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower and cabbage. Zhang found that they can muffle or amplify human gene expression in various ways. The discovery could lead to ways of designing plants that act as medicine or even change our own genetic structure for the better (or the worse).

So don't even think of taking the high moral ground with your school's art department. They are not required to accommodate your complex as if it were a handicap covered under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Nor are they required to accommodate you propensity for porn as if that too were covered under the Act. In other words; this is on your shoulders— you either adjust or you exit: but it's very unfair of you to expect others to make adjustments to their attitudes to suit yours especially when your complex is the Bible's evidence of Adam's moral decline rather than his moral improvement.

Cliff
/

 

[elijah23]

Being a new Christian (saved oct 15, 2009) and an art student, I sometimes have difficulties with my teachers in the art department showing artworks with nudity in it. I have explained to them that I do not agree with it and based it on the general concept of temptations. FYI, I battled pornography addiction and is pretty much done with that but I still flee temptations of that kind as I know I am weak against it.

Anyway, I would like to ask for some scriptures supporting this reasoning (or any other scriptures condemning nudity in art), so that I may be better equipped to explain this to my teachers and my future potential clients. I have intent to develop my business, lost-ear-studio.com (site is incomplete), with Christian values. In fact, I'm currently volunteering to develops my mother-in-law ministry's site, pastorfriend.org (VERY incomplete), and thus it would not reflect well at all on them if I was doing these inappropriate arts.

Thank you for any input on this matter. god bless.

FYI, my first post here looking forward to learning more about Jesus here and to hash out and improve my understanding of Christ.


---Link removed per 20 post rule---

The world is always looking for ways to justify their sin.

 

[cyberjosh]

.
Were it not for the forbidden fruit incident, the whole world would be a clothing-optional planet. That's impractical now, of course.


The grandparents to whom I referred are the two common to everybody— Adam and his wife Eve.

Cliff
/

Ah, I apologize for misunderstanding you. It wasn't exactly clear what you meant but now it makes sense. I thought you were talking about the values of our grandparents' generation. My bad.

 

[ExtraMedium]

The world is always looking for ways to justify their sin.

Or perhaps it's falsely interpreted as sin because of the generations of Christians who have passed down this (and other) interpretation without really reading the text thoroughly for the true meaning. They're told that nudity is a sin because it's common Christian thought.

 

[farouk]

...us finding spiritual clothing and adornment is the most important thing. We should seek those white robes of righteousness from Christ.

Quite right!

Exactly. I agree.

 

[Ace1234]

Much of it's how you take the bible, totally literal or with an understanding of culture and history. Most tribes totally ruled their women, women were property of the father or husband, really no legal rights. As men do they often fought over property, men wanted more or things that didn't belong to them...like other women.
Because men controlled and had absolute power the easiest thing to do when they failed in controlling their impluses was to blame the woman. Even in the bible you see it always being the woman as the whore, the lurer, the one causing the man to fall. Even the entire legal system of the Hebrews was stacked totally in favor of the man, women were often treated harshly and unfairly for the crimes of the man. The bible list many of these harsh laws against women, I certainly don't think they come from God because the bible says so, but a statement of culture.

Shame over sexuality and nudity only happen because certain cultures teach people to be shameful over being nude. Again, when in Africa men paid no mind at all the all the bare breast, babies feed openly, all are naked. Only in America would men notice, because they're indoctrinated from birth that the breast are sex objects.

In Borneo, not that I would agree myself, not only did they all mostly go naked, people had sex right out in the open. The women there would offer you sex like a gift, all they knew was it was fun and felt good so why not. Our missions had a time trying to resolve how to deal with them as they loved Christ, they were just culturally different.

We are taught to fear guilt and shame over our bodies and sexuality, no doubt that is the cause of most sexual crime and perversion and studies state so.
We would do much better to teach responsible sexuality, that our bodies are beautiful, but I do agree we live in a culture of clothes here, we made the body forbidden fruit and like most things forbidden people just have to take a bite, we are so corrupt sexually from religion and hollywood both at radical extremes we could never live in peace without abuse like nude tribal people do.

 

[farouk]

A:

Actually, compared with the nations around, the Hebrew Bible honored women and treated them with far more respect.

Your comments on the Divine authorship of Scripture isn't something that Christians would agree with you on, either.

 

[Lostear]

.
One of these days you are going to have to spiritually man-up and accept the rather distasteful fact that you are infected with an acute guilt complex over sex and the human body; and that you did not get it from Christianity's God. No, you got it from a fruit; viz: from an organic substance that somehow altered man's original human nature. This is not unrealistic.

According to an article in the Oct 8, 2011 issue of the Oregonian; new research reveals that some, if not all, the plants we eat actually change the behavior off human genes in ways never before imagined. A new study led by Chen-Yu Zhang, of Nanjing University, found that fragments of plant genetic material survive digestion and wind up swimming in the bloodstreams of humans and cows. Those tiny strands of RNA that somehow make it through the toxic acids and enzymes in the gut come from rice and the plant family that includes broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower and cabbage. Zhang found that they can muffle or amplify human gene expression in various ways. The discovery could lead to ways of designing plants that act as medicine or even change our own genetic structure for the better (or the worse).

So don't even think of taking the high moral ground with your school's art department. They are not required to accommodate your complex as if it were a handicap covered under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Nor are they required to accommodate you propensity for porn as if that too were covered under the Act. In other words; this is on your shoulders— you either adjust or you exit: but it's very unfair of you to expect others to make adjustments to their attitudes to suit yours especially when your complex is the Bible's evidence of Adam's moral decline rather than his moral improvement.

Cliff
/

Umm, I'm not trying to force these people to conform with my situation. Where did you get that idea? As I have mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I specifically want to know the scriptures so I can bow out of whatever it is that I can't participate and at least let them understand that it is my belief to do so. I may suffer consequences due to it but I will stand up for what I believe. Who knows? maybe some witness would see and open the door into a talk of God? Maybe nudity is not explicitly a sin in some of your's view but I know that it is pretty much a sin for me personally because of my sin nature being sexual.

It is me and my own fault for having sinned. But I am at least "manning-up" to that sin and to drive such temptations away from me. How could I call myself a christian if I allows such temptations remain nearby when I can leave or abolish the temptations?

Again, I am very well aware that everyone's perspective on the nature of sin may differs. But I want people here to be aware that I am struggling with these temptations (if not sin) and to be able to use the scriptures IF anybody inquires into my reasoning would help me feel more secure in defending my faith.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Umm, I'm not trying to force these people to conform with my situation. Where did you get that idea? As I have mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I specifically want to know the scriptures so I can bow out of whatever it is that I can't participate and at least let them understand that it is my belief to do so. I may suffer consequences due to it but I will stand up for what I believe. Who knows? maybe some witness would see and open the door into a talk of God? Maybe nudity is not explicitly a sin in some of your's view but I know that it is pretty much a sin for me personally because of my sin nature being sexual.

It is me and my own fault for having sinned. But I am at least "manning-up" to that sin and to drive such temptations away from me. How could I call myself a christian if I allows such temptations remain nearby when I can leave or abolish the temptations?

Again, I am very well aware that everyone's perspective on the nature of sin may differs. But I want people here to be aware that I am struggling with these temptations (if not sin) and to be able to use the scriptures IF anybody inquires into my reasoning would help me feel more secure in defending my faith.

You're on the right track. Art is too often an excuse to gaze on the nakedness of someone not your spouse.

Many years ago when discussing this topic with an unmarried young man in our church a wise gentlemen shared the verse about getting people drunk so you could look on their nakeditity (as Radar would say, lol) and used it as the Biblical support for not looking at a naked person you are not married to, outside of a legitimate profession, like medicine, for example (I believe it was Josh that shared the verse already in this thread).

Art is too often just a vehicle or excuse, like drinking alcohol, that people use to create circumstances to indulge sinful appetites for nudity. Not categorically, because some people truly have been jaded by the sin of viewing pornography and are unmoved by seeing naked people in non-sexual activities. But for the rest of us, probably in the majority, it's just plain wrong to choose to gaze on a naked person we are not married to. And may God have mercy on those who just think they aren't moved by the mere image of a naked person not their spouse. God knows the truth.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Habakkuk:

"15 Woe to him who makes his neighbors drink—
you pour out your wrath and make them drunk,
in order to gaze at their nakedness!
16 You will have your fill of shame instead of glory." (Habakkuk 2:15-16)

 

[childeye]

God as my witness, I see nothing wrong with nudity in and of itself. Rather the problem lies within myself and a defiled conscience. There is beauty and ugliness. I must learn to look past that and see a person.

 

[farouk]

Drink is awful. Plain, old fashioned drink causes so many problems, including of the nature mentioned.