Life / Figure Drawing

[MrsKoshka]

I am a Christian and have been for almost 13 years now. I recently started on a new career path as a life model, posing nude for art students between the ages of 16 to 75!

I see my work as a privilege, I get to show people that although I do not have the perfect body I am happy with it. I get to see students change from drawing stick men to drawing fabulous pieces of art. I also find that people are more open to talk in the class about their own bodies and inhibitions.
I believe that God made us naked and that it was the fall that made us, embarrassed and shameful.
I get to pose and during this time, I pray for the students, meditate and also sing worship songs in my head. Not only does this help me build up my relationship with God but it also helps the poses fly over!
One of my friends at church (also a christian) is an Art tutor so we decided to join forces and run a life drawing class for the community.
The place where our church meets is a community hall so we booked that up. We have been told by the church that perhaps we should have thought of somewhere else to hold the course as “this is where church meets.”

I know my own views on life drawing and modelling and know that in my heart its what God wants me to be doing. However it appears that my church doesn’t agree that I should be doing it or even running the class.

Just wondering what you all think?
Of life drawing classes?
Or even if a Christian Church should be supporting such a class?
Or holding a class in the same building that a church meets in? The church won’t be there at the same day or time the class would have the building all to themselves. The building gets used for all sorts of community uses from Fayres, Pantomimes, Free Mason Meetings, Bowling, Parties etc

 

[citizenthom]

Honestly, I can understand the objection. In theory you could be posing nude for these students without lust entering the picture, but the likelihood that no one in the class is being tempted by your nudity is extremely low. And it doesn't send the best message about modesty to the unmarried women in your church--something which, as a married woman, is one of your duties within the church.

I also wonder how your husband feels about this. Although I gather he has approved of it, I have a tough time imagining that he has no reservations about it.

Basically, I personally don't have a particularly visceral reaction to your posing nude for this purpose, but I do have some serious Biblical concerns about it.

 

[Macx]

Shame over our bodies is a function of sin. When Adam and Eve had no sin, in the garden, they had no shame. When sin came into their lives, shame came into their lives and they began to clothe themsleves. You have been restored through Christ, as a Christian you are washed free of sin, therefore I'd posit that body-shame is a function of those parts of holding on to "the old human" that we all do. It is not neccessary.

I think it is just fine. "you go girl!"

 

[Autumnleaf]

Its fine. Good job being able to be still for so long.

 

[ezeric]

Love is always the bench mark.

I tell my boys, that if you don't know what to do, pursue LOVE.

Ok, you may say - "I love what I do".
That is not the kind of LOVE that GOD is talking about!

LOVE is always, ALWAYS, what is best for everyone (others) not you/ never self (that is lust).

So, does this (what you are doing) help others, help your marriage, help the students?

You may say; 'sure, its helping them succeed in art'.
Yes, but you don't know how it might be effecting some students.
Or family or parents or those around you that know your a Christian and now
perhaps wonder?

Let us behave decently Romans 13:13

Let all things be done decently and in order. 1 Corinthians 14:40

Is this decent?
Remember, when Adam and Eve were naked - GOD clothed them. Gen 3:21

That would have been the opportune time for the LORD to say
- 'stay naked, its ok' but
HE clothes them as HE also wants us covered.

Lastly there is scripture, where Noah, after the big flood and now safely
got out of the ark, gets drunk and lies naked on his bed.

Two of Noah's son's walked backward into (Dad) Noah's tent with a blanket
to cover up their naked Dad, and so as not to see or expose his nakedness.
The other son, went to look and laughed and was then cursed. See Genesis 9:20-25

Remember Paul, also had a huge problem because some of the new brothers wouldn't eat meat that they bought in the market, if it was first dedicated or offered to an idol. Yet other brothers couldn't be bothered, simply 'gave thanks' for the food and ate it!

What is the right path?
Does Paul say - no its ok, just eat the meat - GOD blessed it, don't be so hung up on it?

Or does Paul say - "don't eat the meat, you can't eat meat that was offered to idols/demons and still be a christian - dont' do it".

No, what Paul teaches, is that out of love, he wouldn't do anything that would hurt or cause someone else to have a problem with conscience, or any opportunity for the laughing world to make light or fun of the LORD.
See the entire discussion in 1 Corinthians 8

But you must be careful so that your freedom does not cause others with a weaker conscience to stumble. 1 Corinthians 8:9

Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall. 1 Corinthians 8:13

You are responsible.

What has the LORD been telling you? (deep down in your spirit)?

-eric

 

[fm107]

MrsKoshka, what you’re doing is very sinful.

Now I'm not going to say that then leave, I'm going to tell you why...


First of all, your argument in favour of displaying yourself naked because God made Adam and Eve that way is flawed.

Here's why:

Adam and Eve were innocent!

We are not!

Here is something else, what did Adam and Eve do? They covered themselves in fig leaves.

Genesis 3:7
Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

God obviously, thought this clothing was inadequate so he killed two animals and clothed them...

Genesis 3:21
The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.

Clothing is meant for covering!

When they sinned, they didn’t get cold all of a sudden, that wasn’t why they wore fig leaves, it was because they knew about their nakedness.

..............................................................

Take heed of this scripture:

Matthew 18:6
But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

Are you causing people to lust after you? Are you the cause for there sin? If you are, then woe unto you!

Matthew 18:7
"Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!

Your sin is much worse than theirs if you the cause of it. I certainly hope you take heed to this warning.

..............................................................

Lastly, I find you wanting to sin like this in a Church - God's house of prayer absolutely repulsive.

Please, for your own sake, take a long hard think about what you’re doing!

 

[Peripatetic]

The subject of nudity is a polarizing one for sure! Here's my take: nudity itself (with no outside circumstances) is not sinful. I think it falls into the category described in Romans 14 where Paul says that food itself is clean, but... there's more to the story:

Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

Obviously, being naked is not wrong, or we'd sin with every shower. So the context is the real test. In the right situation, I think artistic nudity is a good thing if it doesn't "cause your brother to fall". Unfortunately, society has sexualized nudity so much that people have a hard time separating the wonderful aesthetic of art from the degrading nature of inappropriate content with which nudity is so often connected.

So my feelings on your specific question are mixed. On one hand, I admire the fact that you and others are doing your part to break the stereotype that all nudity is perverse or degrading... to show the positive side of it. However, some of the people for whom you are posing might be negatively affected by it. Someone in your church who goes in with the best intentions could develop lustful feelings for you. Also, nudity can be progressive situation for some men (not all, but some)... an interest in the artistic could lead to soft inappropriate content, which could lead to hard inappropriate content, which could lead to extreme/degrading inappropriate content, etc.

I personally can't even begin to understand how objectifying and degrading women in hard inappropriate content could be enjoyable to watch. It really saddens me to think of how broken our appreciation for the body has become... especially here in the USA.

 

[Johnnz]

Go for it. Many of the great artists were Christians and they painted nudes. We live in a time where the human body is being disfigured and dishonoured by excessive prudery on one hand and by excessive exploitation on the other. The misunderstanding of some scriptures results in a failure to present a robust account of our humanity, including our bodies, to a society that needs better foundations for living.

John
NZ

 

[A_maize]

In my humble opinion, there is nothing wrong with nudity, as long as it is not tied to lust. And the building you use does not belong to the Church.

To the other Bible verses written here, I hope folks take the scripture in context. You are not purposely leading anyone to sin, and you have made it clear that the class if for art only, not lust. If anyone lusts after you, it is their problem that they have to work on, not yours.

Of course, that being said, you may be asked questions from other folks, and some of those may hurt. The church will probably worry that some new Christians may mistake your art in that any kind of nudity is OK. And of course, if it is in the same location, some men may start daydreaming about nudity during the worship service! Thus causing them to miss Gods words. I know it would be tough for me!

But in the end, I think we are all, including you, called on to be leaders of faith, the salt and light of the world. And as leaders sometimes we have to compromise between what we want to do, and what the worlds, and other folks, perception of us, and our work is. Yes it may seem like a burden or restriction at first, but hey who's to say God isn't molding us into sharper tools? When we work for God, God works for us!

God Bless!

 

[Johnnz]

Here is what one well know Christian wrote (Franky Schaeffer)

The Bible is not only the Word of God, divinely inspired to give people understanding of the way of salvation, but is also a literary work, a work of art. Descriptions of nudity as well as extreme violence are found in profusion in the Bible. From the story of the Garden of Eden to such instances as Noah's youngest son looking on his nakedness, to the Levite's concubine who was cut in twelve pieces and distributed to the twelve tribes of Israel at God's command, to the account of David cutting off two hundred Philistine foreskins, to the graphic sexuality of the Song of Songs, to Christ's often violent imagery in His parables, we find realistic, factual, literary descriptions of sex, nudity, and violence in the Bible. We also learn that God has used violence and people's sexual behaviour, even immoral behaviour, to shape history, to punish the wicked, to chastise, and to build up His people.

God, evidently, is not worried by any ratings board, not to mention the maintaining of polite niceties. When it comes to His own literary work, even His action in history, God's attitude seems to be, let the chips fall where they may. The Bible is many things, but it is certainly not suitable family entertainment. The Bible would probably not be sold in any “Christian bookstores” if it was perceived as merely a book to be thoroughly read rather than as a religious devotional work.

It is the exercise of a peculiarly Protestant arrogance that ignores church history and tradition and assumes that as we look for answers to moral problems, we are alone before God, armed only with our own reading of Scripture and our puny consciences. The fact that in their wisdom, countless faithful churchmen through generations before and after the Reformation found nothing intrinsically offensive about nudity and violence in art is instructive, at least to those who regard themselves as part of the historic church.

John
NZ

 

[wayfaring man]

More than the need to feed , or be fed .

More than the need to breed , or be bred .

Is the need to respect , and be respected !

Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: <-----> 1st Corinthians 10:32

 

[heron]

Art students use live models to add accuracy to their understanding of the skeletal structure, movement, skin textures, unexpected flaws and differences. If artists never stared for hours at what the body looked like, then their paintings would either look like blobs, or like themselves.

One might think then, do we really need paintings of the body? In one sense no, but if the body is not painted, then the head sits by itself. Do we need accurate paintings of humans? Do we need paintings? Does art serve a purpose?

Nude figure drawing is not an easy issue, and the debate has gone on for centuries.

Some artists are medical illustrators, who sketch a segment from surgery and clarify the parts, in order to train others on that surgical process or physical aberration. If the artist had never sketched a nude, they would have a giant leap to make in sketching a corpse or a gaping, pumping chest cavity.

One of the concerns I have personally -- will the student then show the sketch at a job interview, in a gallery, on the web, to their grandmother? Probably so. Will the pictures eventually end up in the hands of someone who uses them wrongly? Maybe.

Will you ever consider taking a job where someone will say, "Oh yeah, I recognize you, you're the one with the left mole...".

That's something you (OP) have already settled in your mind, and seem to feel comfortable with.

I agree with others that there will always be hidden lust, criticism, and other bad motives that the art students will stay quiet and professional about while they are in class. But that does not mean it doesn't happen.

I have been in figure drawing classes where the model wore a leotard. The artists joked about how that was too tame, it wasn't real figure drawing. People have expectations in their heads about what should be done, because it has always been done.

It is good to question, to continually scrutinize whether our expectations are in line with cultural norms, or with what is really needed.

As for the church complaining about the same building, and that list of all the other things going on... who knows, maybe there were robbings and shootings in the building too. Will they block their own progress with fears of the unknown? It is their decision.

 

[Philothei]

If you are a christian why then scandalize your brother?

1 Corinthians 10:23-33 (New International Version)

The Believer's Freedom

23"Everything is permissible"&#8212;but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"&#8212;but not everything is constructive. 24Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others. 25Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26for, "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it."[a]
27If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake[b]&#8212; 29the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? 30If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?
31So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God&#8212; 33even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.




1 Corinthians 10:23-33 - Passage Lookup - New International Version - BibleGateway.com

ARe there parishioners that the would be scandalized? Remember a Christian is not to make his brother stumble...Would there be people who would be scandalized? Also is this for the "glory of God"???

I mean we can afford to have no "art lessons" if that is not "profitable" I think the evangelist puts it in the right perspective here for us.
First you have "just because something is 'permisable" it does not mean it is profitable.
Second :is it for the glory of God? In what way that "lesson" as art is for the glory of God? I do not see it being in a Church setting... I can see it in a secular setting though..

And thridly is is scandalizing anyone? and I think it does. Now the evangelist is not talking about "social norms here" but putting someone into temptation. How would the fellow parishioners would feel seeing their fellow parishioner nude? This is an extremely difficult situation if someone comes into to the class. I truly do not think the "free mason" meetings would stand up to this kind of class.

So this is permissable but not edifying IMHO. The result is that we do not seek the glory of God but our own glory bottom line. So we "serve" Christ by encouraging each other not tempting each other...and that sure is an extra temptation.

BTW I have great respect for nude art models and I personally draw and do art. Many Renaissance nude paintings have been painted indeed in Churches esp. in Italy. The western art has dedicated a great deal on such paintings I see nothing wrong for them to continue to use them. It is all about sensitivity IMHO and respect to our fellow brothers and sisters who would be scandalized by this. God indeed created us nude and the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. But regardless if our passions are such and instead of admiration one feels lust then I think it is worth to try not to scandalize our fellow brothers and sisters.

That is my opinion on the matter as I grew up in Athens among plenty nude statues and I do not consider that to be a stumbling stone to my spiritual development. Again the human figure is as beautiful as a flower it just is. Human lust and passion for that body is what can be dangerous if one has a weakness on this and we have an obligation not to bring our fellow man to stumble along.

 

[Johnnz]

Lets at least interpret Scripture with some accuracy.

! Cor 10. If you look closely and also in a similar passage in Romans you will see that both parties were being addressed as not unneccesarily inhibiting someone else's freedom. Paul mentions special foods. Elsewhere he makes his view about eating any food well known. Paul could adapt to a particular circumstance without that preventing his from doing the opposite elsewhere. And of course the weak wen't expected to stay weak either.

Nor is Paul advocating that a Christian's life should be forever contained by the weakest member. That would reduce our faith to some tepid, irrelevant set of beliefs. What ius within our capacity to do as image bearers of God, utilising our creativity, intelligence, gifts and talents is inherently edifying as these are expressions of God' s life within us.

John
NZ

 

[Philothei]

Lets at least interpret Scripture with some accuracy.

! Cor 10. If you look closely and also in a similar passage in Romans you will see that both parties were being addressed as not unneccesarily inhibiting someone else's freedom. Paul mentions special foods. Elsewhere he makes his view about eating any food well known. Paul could adapt to a particular circumstance without that preventing his from doing the opposite elsewhere. And of course the weak wen't expected to stay weak either.

Nor is Paul advocating that a Christian's life should be forever contained by the weakest member. That would reduce our faith to some tepid, irrelevant set of beliefs. What ius within our capacity to do as image bearers of God, utilising our creativity, intelligence, gifts and talents is inherently edifying as these are expressions of God' s life within us.

John
NZ

If that was true then we should be practically walk naked to church you think?? Why not do it then? No need to take care fo weaker members such as children then either... The weak in faith are not expected to stay week? Hmmm...find me where Paul says that and I will agree... That we should not take care of the weaker in faith...

How is taking care of the weak reducing our faith? If I know my fellow Christian has a weakness of a "poor health habit" and I tempt him by offering in a meal bacon (that he is not supposed to have...) am I helping him over come his temptation? It seems like I trigger it more. Like offering Alchohol to an ex-alchoholic ... There are many people out there who have similar spiritual ills that they struggle with no need to find triggers in a Church setting.

Like I said there is another place for our self expression and that is not the Church setting. We cannot expect all members of our congregation "not to be weak" in their faith neither we should "push" unwillingly to accept what they might not be able to handle.

You are mentioning Romans ...can you pin point the verse please Thanks

 

[Johnnz]

An ad extremis argument won't work, as I have neither advocated nor accepted that would be appropriate.

The issues Paul was dealing with, food offered to idols, holy days, kosher foods were deeply rooted cultural beliefs. Paul recognised that it woul dbe a maturing process for people to think through such issues. Hence his admonition.

It would be culturally in appropriate to attend church naked in a society that is a dressed one. That is one issue. But an equally important issue is whether simple human nakedness is in fact wrong in itself, not merely culturally inappropriate. I don't accept that nakedness is inherently 'sinful', rather the contrary is more consistent with Scripture. Thus, Christians who believe this can engage in some form of nudity in appropriate circumstances, where any who would be offended are not present, and those who would be won't restrict unjustifiably their freedom to do so. That fulfils Paul's advice.

John
NZ

 

[ezeric]

Brother John NZ

Paul said that he wouldn't even eat meat (ever again) it if offended his brother.
I Corinthians 8:13

I don't think JESUS walked around naked but the demon possessed sure were.
Luke 8:27

Of course on the cross, our LORD was most likely stripped naked as they gambled for his clothes taking the total shame for us.

And as you mentioned the Bible is full of graphic and some terrible things.
We are not pretending it doesn't exist, the world bombards us with all kinds of its filth
and vulgarity - but its not us, thats not how HE lives through us.

In the world, but thankfully not of it. John 17:14

-eric

 

[Johnnz]

But Paul said he was not bound by the old regulations. he might act in one way for specific reasons without changing his underlying values which he continued to practice oin other situations.

Jesus probably worked naked as a carpenter, was naked at his baptism as was John and bathed in rivers naked like many did at that time.

John
NZ

 

[ezeric]

To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 1 Corinthians 9:22

My question is:
Is posing nude winning them to Christ?

-eric

 

[Johnnz]

Christian nudists also evangelise.

John
NZ