Life / Figure Drawing

[achristian2]

Scripture clearly indicates that we should be attired properly and modestly. Going nude for whatever reason, be it for art etc is just plain wrong.

 

[OGM]

Scripture clearly indicates that we should be attired properly and modestly. Going nude for whatever reason, be it for art etc is just plain wrong.

Even in a locker room or in front of ones spouse?

 

[aiki]

It is precisely because humans put many things on the sort of continuum you describe, Peripatetic, that it is so good to have an unchanging, inflexible standard for conduct and thinking revealed to us in God's Word. Believers don't have to fuss over cultural trends and shifting societal attitudes when it comes to determining how they ought to comport themselves morally. It makes no difference to God if a culture has grown accustomed to public nudity, or has become inured to violence, or has embraced sexual promiscuity and perversion.

Malachi 3:6
6 "For I am the Lord, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob.

God does not follow human societal trends, or customs, or shifts in attitude. And His principles and commands to us in His Word are likewise unchanging. Thus, when we find ourselves wondering about things like the rightness of exposing one's naked form publicly, we will find God's attitude, principles and commands concerning this matter are today as they were many centuries ago. And they are just as right and good today as they were when first put down in Scripture.

Does God in His Word offer us a continuum of thought and attitude regarding the matter of public nudity? No, He does not. As I have pointed out in earlier posts in this thread, Scripture is quite clear about God's condemning attitude toward public nudity. He does not indicate to us in His Word that a woman posing nude for the sake of art is more acceptable than a woman walking nude in the mall. All public nakedness is shameful according to Scripture - even when it is mandated by God.

Selah.

 

[achristian2]

Even in a locker room or in front of ones spouse?

You know what I mean, so not necessary to be sarcastic or pretend to be dumb or to nitpick as its not Christlike. If you were just trying for some friendly banter, then accept my apologies. Anyway, to avoid any arguments, of course one can be nude in front of one's spouse or alone in a locker room or with a baby etc.

 

[Peripatetic]

I'm going to admit to you that my knee-jerk reaction though is that there ARE Scriptures that speak against tempting others to lust, that equate lust with the act of adultery, and that we are told to be modest in our clothing (which admittedly has more to do with adorning the heart than the body in the passages that come first to mind - there may be others though).

I'm also a bit wary of being drawn into philosophical thinking that allows one to begin to interpret Scripture not according to its intent.

I agree that we shouldn't define our ethics of one scenario based on philosophical thinking about another. The rightness or wrongness of nudity does not change based on inconsistent thinking or hypocrisy related to violence. The key phrase there is "to interpret Scripture not according to its intent", which we are all prone to do with moral questions (in a more restrictive or less restrictive direction depending on our preconceived notions).

Analogies like the sports example help me to guard against hidden subtexts. A hidden subtext might go something like this: the Bible says do nothing from rivalry or conceit, honor God with our bodies, and love our neighbor. [Hidden subtext: I like Football and it is not taboo in our culture, therefore I can rationalize football's rivalry, conceit, bodily harm, unloving violent hits, and trash talk]

Another might go like this: the Bible says we should dress modestly, and lust is a sin. [Hidden subtext: I am uncomfortable with nudity and it is taboo in our culture, therefore I can infer that modesty refers to nudity even though the next part says, "adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes", and that Looking at an art model is lust, even though the original Greek word and the contextual meaning probably wouldn't apply to such a circumstance].

You could also use hidden subtext in the opposite direction to rationalize nudity and condemn football - which was the exercise I went through in my head and posted above earlier in this thread. Just to see how it played out. I'm not sure what's right, but I'm pretty sure that circumstances matter in both cases.

Hidden subtext is everywhere in Christian life, especially among those of us who see the Bible as the source of truth. We all acknowledge Romans 13:14: But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. Yet we all gratify desires of the flesh. I did when I drank my morning coffee - a totally unnecessary drink with an addictive stimulant, and when I ate a sugar and fat-filled cookie after lunch.

On the other hand, I may be very tempted to fall back on this hidden subtext: "Whew! I don't gratify my body's desires because I don't smoke, take drugs, cheat on my wife, and all the other stuff I see on the news. That verse doesn't really apply to coffee, sugar, craft beer, or any of the stuff I like."

I hope you'll understand that I do NOT accuse you in this

Likewise! This post isn't directed at you, nor is it saying that you demonstrate hidden subtexts. Your openness to dialogue is helpful in hard questions like these. As Christians we need to break out of our own echo chamber and constantly try on other perspectives.

 

[Johnnz]

Hi Peripatetic,

Thanks for bringing up the matter of unexamined first premises. I can relate.

I was raised with the traditional values - any public nudity is sinful because God Himself covered the shame filled couple. Clothing was thereby divinely mandated. But something did not 'gel' with me as a young Christian. If we accept shame as a consequence of wrongdoing, then why were my very sexually moral Christian church members, who had never transgressed Christian sexual values, so ashamed about sex? That did not figure.

Over the years I have discovered how Greek thinking penetrated into Christian teaching quite early in church history. Negative attitudes towards the human body and especially human sexuality soon became normative. Hence, a celibate clergy emerged. That lens influenced how the Genesis creation story was understood and taught, and that became the foundations of what I earlier stated as the traditional view.

The significantly different insights into that story now available provide a fresh way of understanding it, where its inherent imagery tell a far grander story of a loving God reaching out to guilt ridden, fallen humanity and enabling them to continue into a fallen world as His representatives. The story i snot about clothing but of the wonders of our God whose acts on behalf of fallen humanity reached their fulfillment in Jesus.

John
NZ

 

[A Catholic Friend]

God gives us discernment for each situation.