Christian Naturism vs. Pornography Poll

Pornography destroys lots of marriages, and harms lof people in terrible ways. How can nudists pretend it doesn't matter?<P>Only Native Residents may post here.

Moderators: jochanaan, MatthewNeal, jimmy, natman, Senior Moderator, Moderators

How has your practice of viewing pornography for sexual gratification changed since you were exposed to Christian naturism?

I regularly viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism and I still do. (No change)
0
No votes
I regularly viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I rarely do. (Decreased)
6
24%
I regularly viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I never do. (Decreased)
4
16%
I rarely viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I regularly do. (Increased)
0
No votes
I rarely viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism and I still do. (No change)
2
8%
I rarely viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I never do. (Decreased)
12
48%
I never viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I regularly do. (Increased)
0
No votes
I never viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism but now I rarely do. (Increased)
0
No votes
I never viewed porn prior to my exposure to Christian naturism and I still don't. (No change)
1
4%
 
Total votes : 25

Postby LivingFree » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:34 pm

Well, I like your comments. I'd like to wrap up my comments here by drawing a comparison between Victorian clothing ethics and contemporary conservative Christian "porn" attitudes and comments. In the Victorian Era prudish legislators became so afraid of "lust" that they required piano legs to be covered by skirts, so men would not be tempted by naked legs. That's certainly a far flung Pharisaical application of Jesus' warning about lust in Matt. 5. But in the same way, in our generation we have confused "appreciation of simple nude beauty" with lust, and called it porn. The definition of porn is clearly, depictions of sexualized activity. There is no sexualized activity in naturist photos, yet many people call all nude photos "porn." Also, most of DOMAI and some Playboy photos do not have great amounts of sexualized posing in them; they simply present the female form in all its glory. (Hugh Hefner originally conceived of the idea of a magazine with female nudes to satisfy the male desire to be entertained, not necessarily to cause erotic arousal, although many use it that way, and Hefner had no problems with it.) But we have put "skirts" on the nude form and called it "porn." John Ashcroft exemplifies the worst of this mentality in a public, official capacity. When we read Song of Songs just the way it is presented in Scripture, one has to wonder exactly what God was thinking when he inspired Solomon to write it, and allowed the ancient Jewish community to include it in their Scriptures, and allowed the Church to follow suit. (Notice that every part of the nude form, male and female, is mentioned there, except the groin area.)
LivingFree
 

Postby natman » Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:03 pm

LivingFree wrote:When we read Song of Songs just the way it is presented in Scripture, one has to wonder exactly what God was thinking when he inspired Solomon to write it, and allowed the ancient Jewish community to include it in their Scriptures, and allowed the Church to follow suit. (Notice that every part of the nude form, male and female, is mentioned there, except the groin area.)


That may be a matter of interpretation. I have read many commentaries that point to the mention of the "navel", stating that the original Hebrew word that was translated "navel" actually referred to a part of the female body a bit further south.

SOS 7:2
"Thy navel is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy belly is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies."

Many mention the order, workin from feet to head; feet, thighs, navel, belly, breasts, neck, eyes, nose and head, and point out that the "belly" is the entire section above the groin and below the breasts.
SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

Get exposed to the sun, and get exposed to the Son.
User avatar
natman
Mayor (Site Admin)
 
Posts: 7264
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:48 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Postby LivingFree » Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:27 pm

natman wrote:That may be a matter of interpretation. I have read many commentaries that point to the mention of the "navel", stating that the original Hebrew word that was translated "navel" actually referred to a part of the female body a bit further south.

Many mention the order, workin from feet to head; feet, thighs, navel, belly, breasts, neck, eyes, nose and head, and point out that the "belly" is the entire section above the groin and below the breasts.


Both BDB and The Blue Letter Bible don't support the part "further south." The root word, shorer, refers to a twisting, like a rope, which would indicate the region of the umbilical cord. "Belly" would be an appropriate translation. I agree that "thighs (waist) and belly would then be a bit out of order, but there are other Hebrew words for vulva which could have been used here but aren't.
LivingFree
 

Postby jochanaan » Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:52 pm

Hmmm...Did they have a rating system back then? :lol:
User avatar
jochanaan
Councillor
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:58 pm
Location: Denver

Re:

Postby Bare_Truth » Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:47 pm

natman wrote:So then would you say that naturism has had very little affect on pornography's lure in your life?
Well, I could not say that. I would have to say something like,:
I virtually did not view porn before I got internet access, and then out of curiosity I saw some and realized that it was ridiculous fantasy when it was not just outright depraved and I rejected it. I then discovered Christian naturist sites and saw beauty and honesty and openness except when I stumbled across porn sites masquerading as naturist/nudist sites.

But hey! I lived a sheltered life shaped by prudery before I found liberty. Porn is disgusting because it objectifies others as things and not as persons. That does not mean I was somehow inherently morally more pure than others, merely that I was luckier than some others :D , but not lucky enough to be raised naturist :cry:.
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Previous

Return to Isn't nudity just as bad as pornography?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron