Here is an extract from a book byFanky Schaeffer, the son of well know Christian scholar Francis.
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 behavior, even immoral behavior, 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.
As Christians we look to the Scriptures for moral teaching. From their study we can conclude that the Bible seems unafraid of flesh and deals openly with nudity and violence. Historically, the church has not always been as unfriendly toward flesh as some fundamentalists are in our own times. Historian and scholar Etienne Gilson shows there was not a lack of awareness of the physical aspects of the individual in the church of the Middle Ages.
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.
Unfortunately, in addition to ignoring church history, few Christians seem to understand the importance of the *context* in which something appears. Thus they are left with a few, inadequate, simplistic rules, which are not necessarily Biblical or aesthetic, by which to judge art.
Although his topic was Christianity and the arts his comments are useful in helping us see that our very modern views are not necessarily those shared by Christians in other times. We need to look at the bikini issue in a wider context.
Bless those who have pointed out the responsibility that guys have too. We all need to understand what Paul meant when he said "to the pure all things are pure." A bikini clad woman is not an object of lust for a pure minded guy, a modestly dressed one can be if that is the guy's mindset.
John
NZ
