A question of a christian and nude models

[Jungleman]

I thought this would be a no brainer, but apparently some pretty Liberal christians I know have actually justified the use of viewing nude models for artistic purposes. I feel that this is basically soft core pornography, and another attempt by art to destroy something sacred. They stand in their views....Any thoughts?

[HisLeast]

I thought this would be a no brainer, but apparently some pretty Liberal christians I know have actually justified the use of viewing nude models for artistic purposes. I feel that this is basically soft core pornography, and another attempt by art to destroy something sacred. They stand in their views....Any thoughts?

Is all nudity pornography?

[Jungleman]

I think that viewing someone nude to draw them is. There is a reason Adam and Eve covered themselves after they brought sin into the world.

[HisLeast]

I think that viewing someone nude to draw them is. There is a reason Adam and Eve covered themselves after they brought sin into the world.

And yet in their state of innocence, nudity wasn't wrong.

[Jungleman]

But that has nothing to do with the world today, you can't take something from pre-sin and try to put it into a sinful world.

[Vhayes]

There is nothing sinful about the human form. The question is, can you look at a nude model and see only the beauty and not lust? If not, it's your problem and not the models.

Should doctors be permitted to study nude people? If so, how is that any different than an artist?
V

[Jungleman]

I wouldn't say it isn't the models fault. Are we not charged in the bible not to cause others to stumble? This makes it impossible to really have models pose at all because there will always be someone struggling. We can't really compare medical to art. In Medicine they have to observe cadavers and pictures of a human being to understand how it functions so they can preform their duties of keeping someone alive and well. Art isn't related at all.

[moonglow]

I thought this would be a no brainer, but apparently some pretty Liberal christians I know have actually justified the use of viewing nude models for artistic purposes. I feel that this is basically soft core pornography, and another attempt by art to destroy something sacred. They stand in their views....Any thoughts?

Ok I am majored in art in college (not that I ever got a degree...) but I did major in it. Being a small college we never had a nude model come in though.

Have you ever seen Michelangelo's work? I would hate to think what you thought of his statue of David (king David from the bible)..or the Sistine chapel..he painted the ceiling of a church and many of the people are nude or partial nude including Adam in the Creation of Adam with God reaching towards him to bring life into him. Or other major artist through the centuries? Many of the painted nudes (usually partial nudes). The human body does not have to be viewed in a sexual way. When you go to the doctor and have to be partial nude do you think the doctor is viewing you sexually just because you are nude? Of course not. Most naked people are far from attractive anyway. God created our bodies and orginally Adam and Eve were naked in the garden so apparently God saw nothing wrong with it..that is until sin entered in.

Those that view the nudes are the ones that may have the problem...not the nude person in the painting or statue. The human body is an amazing thing and can seen as beautiful without the sexual stuff attached to it. Sadly though everything seems to be corrupted with sex in some way or fashion.

I am far from being a liberal Christian and if I hadn't major in art, I might feel like you do...but seeing it from an artist point of view...you just don't view a nude in this way.

and another attempt by art to destroy something sacred.

I don't know how to come to this conclusion that art is somehow to blame for this. As I said, nudes were a very common thing to be painted and sculpted hundreds of years ago...probably going back longer then that actually. Its nothing 'new' and not an attempt by the art community to destroy something...maybe its their attempt to bring back the simply nature of appreciating the human body without the sexual stuff attached to it.

edited I see several others already posted pretty much what I said here...lol. And yes a doctor viewing OUR naked bodies is no different...not all doctors look at dead naked people either...that is usually done by those doing autopsies or in funeral homes.

God bless

[Jungleman]

I attack art in general because it seems that artists are always trying to push the envelope morally be it theatre or normal paintings.

Though with the logic you're using you could say a person looks at playboy magazine to admire the human form because it's a beautiful creation of God. I don't know if we can ever agree on this topic.

[Vhayes]

Then I advise you to stay out of art classes with nude models so you aren't being forced to stumble.

I brought up doctors for a reason. Most if not all doctors have the ability to view a human form and not lust after it - they view it as a complex machine. Most artists that I know (and I know quite a few) view the human form as the ultimate work of art - not a thing to lust after but a thing to marvel over.

Do as your heart dictates to you - but please do not assign your heart attitude to others when they may be completely innocent. God knows what they are thinking, not you, not me.

Peace to you -
V

[Vhayes]

I attack art in general because it seems that artists are always trying to push the envelope morally be it theatre or normal paintings.

Though with the logic you're using you could say a person looks at playboy magazine to admire the human form because it's a beautiful creation of God. I don't know if we can ever agree on this topic.

The Sistine Chapel didn't have the provocative poses that Playboy does - one is inteneded to honor the Almighty, the other is intended to sell magazines. Apples and oranges.

It isn't the "body" that is at fault - it's the attitude BEHIND the portrayal of the body.

[moonglow]

I attack art in general because it seems that artists are always trying to push the envelope morally be it theatre or normal paintings.

Though with the logic you're using you could say a person looks at playboy magazine to admire the human form because it's a beautiful creation of God. I don't know if we can ever agree on this topic.

No comparison though between the two. Those picking up a Playboy magazine know its about lust and the women are posed in such a way. In most nude paintings they aren't posed to be seductive or in outfits to promote lust either. In art, especially the older art I was talking about the women are chubby and in position that many times look pretty awkward actually. The women are not done over by a plastic surgeon to make them 'perfect' by any means. Plus no fancy makeup or hair do's. All their flaws and imperfections are shown...this goes for the nude men too. They aren't 'attractive' in the sense you are thinking of. They are much more 'real' in that the artist does capture their imperfections...thighs too heavy, hips too wide, many times with tiny feet that don't fit their portions, sags and bags here and there..and they aren't posing lustfully...

Now there is some art that was done before they had things like Playboy magazine that are clearly sexual in nature...its pretty obvious though.

Like they say though, Beauty is in the eye of the beholder..

God bless

[IamBill]

I think that viewing someone nude to draw them is. There is a reason Adam and Eve covered themselves after they brought sin into the world.

You mean -sinned, and brought Death into the world right ?

they covered themselves because they were "afraid" ..doesn't mention ashamed or suddenly lustful, no longer innocent, etc. etc. They "knew they where naked [3:7]" and hid from God because they were "afraid because they were naked" [3:10]

[moonglow]

Oh I forgot one thing ... There ARE people that do obscene things in art. I remember years ago some 'artist' (I use the term loosely here) did a picture of Christ on the cross then put it in a bottle of urine. It was considered outrageous and all over the news..very offensive to the Christians. (though we didn't go out and burn things down or riot or kill people over it...unlike some other religions when they get offended....) So you are right one one thing jungleman..some 'artist' do push things to the extreme and some do paint or draw things that are of a lustful nature..people having sex or made to be viewed in a sexual lustful way. There is now even homosexual art...

These people abuse art though as far as I am concerned.

That kind of stuff, yea you want to stay away from.

The thing though is you will see any media abused...people considering writing to be a noble thing to do...now we have people writing about sex and violence and other terrible things. Poetry is considered a wonderful form of 'art' yet there are people that make up poems to trash our God.

In every field of creativity you will find those that take it and twist it and abuse it. That is where you see sin really coming into play.

God bless

[miepie]

I don't have a problem with being naked in front of a doctor or in front of the girls who wash/shower me every day twice. I can understand the art of a nude model.
But what I can't understand is the fashion of these days..... we have a lot of youth hanging around in the shoppingcentre we live above, and they are as we say it "half-dressed"..... Charles always feels sorry for them because they can only afford "half" clothes like mini skirts and shirts that reveal a little too much, but I am very sensitive to it and dislike it a lot...... I dislike the magazines that promote it as well...... Probably because in the past with my exhusband I was forced to watch movies with only naked people in it doing horrible things together...... and I still have a complex from that........ and I don't even dare going outside in a short anymore, I always wear long trousers or long skirts.... I feel very uncomfortable in shorts.... I do wear a t-shirt though but only shirts that don't reveal anything.......

Love you,
Mieke