Outlaw Photography wrote:
How about, God let Satan test Job so you and I would have an example to follow in our lives, knowing that if we keep our faith, God will step in and fix it at the last possible moment.

This is one convoluted, narcissistic self-empowerment issue this god has. Particularly considering that this deity supposedly could have just instilled the magical knowledge garnered from the 'example' in the first place.

I really don't feel like getting into how inane the modern judeo-christian deity concept is...

Pat Thielen wrote:

I have no IQ left... It drained out of my brain last night when I slept.

They have ear plugs for that, pretty cheap too.

I just find it odd how people with fight on the internet about religion, if one person believes  and someone doesn't then leave it at that lol.  You won't change anyones opinion with a post on the internet outlining why you believe this or that, and wow how some religous folks get offended by someones opinion is just ridiculous.  It may not apply to this thread but in general, and it goes both ways

It's like fighting with a soap dish lol, but that may be the sleep deprivation talking.  Brain leeking r bad!

Kasmia wrote:

They have ear plugs for that, pretty cheap too.

I just find it odd how people with fight on the internet about religion, if one person believes  and someone doesn't then leave it at that lol.  You won't change anyones opinion with a post on the internet outlining why you believe this or that, and wow how some religous folks get offended by someones opinion is just ridiculous.  It may not apply to this thread but in general, and it goes both ways

It's like fighting with a soap dish lol, but that may be the sleep deprivation talking.  Brain leeking r bad!

Hey -- whenever I fight with the soap dish I always win. Stupid thing just sucks at debate. You're right about these religious threads, and I've manged to avoid them for a while now. But I certainly got sucked into this one... Do'h!

  It should die out soon -- most of the people I'm fighting with are gone. Aha! That can only mean that I win! Woohoo! I totally rock! I'm awesome!

  Er... sorry about that. No IQ will do that to you.

Clarence aka  Big C wrote:
Consider this, cuz I saw some of the other posts concerning why God lets the devil tempt people....if God didn't make evil, how would you know what good really is?

Well, I'd say it would fall in line with heaven etc... I mean, God is this great all-knowing, all-powerful being right? Surely he could just make people with that knowledge ingrained in them.

Also, going back to the OPs question a bit and pulling from other arguments up to page 4 (I have to work people) My suggestion to you would be to do what truly feels right, in your heart of hearts, deep down... don't let fear be a crippling device to your work, obviously God is fine with the nude image, look at the ancient works he had "his people" commission in the name of the church. If you are worried about the 'sin' of lust, simply shoot things that you truly deep down feel are merely a celebration of beauty. If what others say are true and you are fully open to your God, he will let you know if something is not right.

The fact that nudity is the most debated part of the question here actually astonishes me... from what I know of your euro-centrically based religions the true sin you are worried about is lust... I highly doubt there is a successful model out there in America who never plays on the lust of men. Nudity or no you know if a shot is made for the carnal pleasures section of the mind (uh oh, am I using crazy SCIENCE TALK? and maybe even implying we're ANIMALISTIC?). If you people are truly concerned to the levels you say you are, look deep into your own ports, do none of your images speak to lust or vanity? 'Cause hot shit if I recall that's two sins right there!

OP, if you do what your heart says and ask for forgiveness in the case that you go a step too far in a moment of weakness, I can see no reason to have a fear of photographing what you want. Your God is a kind and forgiving God remember? If you do what you feel is right on all fronts, what could be the problem?

StMarc wrote:
If you believe that taking glamour nudes is going to incite lustful thoughts in the viewer and is therefore against Biblical teachings, that's it. Game over.

Actually, unless you plan on taking pictures of daisies, you might as well sell your camera. After all, an individual doesn't have to take off their clothes to incite lust. A beautiful pair of lips can set a guy off. I have even heard of guys that become aroused seeing a Nun in a habit.

jeffgreen wrote:

My proof is in the accuracy of the Book.  The New Testament was written by MANY witnesses of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.  They either knew him personally or were close to one who did.  The New Testament has been proven accurate based on ALL that we hold historical documents to.  What we have with you and others is that you want to change the qualifications between the Bible and other historical documents.  You will allow less reliable and credible evidence for them but when the Bible has more evidence you refuse it.

Many of the Gnostic writers were among those witnesses.  It comes down to politics.  Gnostic texts differ enough from the ones that were selected for inclusion in the bible and make many more points of contradiction with the desired outcome thus they got shit canned to the desert.  Come to think of it most of archeology is spent rummaging in piles of discarded shit.

JAY-DUB2 wrote:
Hello my fellow MMers... I need your valued expertise and opinion.

I am about to re-emerge into the photography/modeling scene and I need some ideas about how to "begin again", to wit:  During the late 70s & early 80s I was the proverbial "GWC"... attempting to become known.  I spent time, money and many hours of "practice" learning and applying my craft.  Later in the mid-80s, I married my "fairytale" sweetheart, whom I had to promise "not to photograph" women in the erotic/nude (which is my passion and forte.)  I maintained my promise for nearly 13 years; later (after the divorce), while attempting to revive my chosen endeavor, I became physically ill, for many years, with a chronic condition, which I am now pleased to say has been greatly alleviated.

However, during my time away from the "lens, lights and lust" (LOL), I was "exposed" to a spiritual rebirth which has created a sort of quandary for me, in that I'm trying to balance "that which is right-??" (biblical teachings) with "that which is my pride and passion" (art form).

I've already considered: 1) a different specialization in photography, 2) giving up my religious beliefs, 3) seeking counsel from "higher authorities"
and even photographing "church folk on Sunday after-meetings".  I may sound somewhat facetious, but seriously though, I will welcome and respect any, and all viewpoints on this subject, and will hold no one to blame for speaking the truth... ALL "B.S." to the side -- Please Help!!

Anyone (male or female) who has had similar thoughts or convictions, especially anyone with an understanding "mate" (married or not), please send me a shout out; my life is being taken "one frame at a time", and my "exposure" in life needs to be shown ... in the final "proof"!!  Thanx!

To thine own self be true . . .

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

elisabeth eagle wrote:
i'll show them a slit throat if they touch my son
that was kind of a weird thing for me to say... but its true

Unless you bring a mirror, "showing" them one is the wrong approach.

M

Kaitlin Lara wrote:
Lol...I don't mean I couldn't understand it as in I didn't understand the language...I mean I don't understand how God could be as great as everyone says he is when basically, he let's the devil tease him into totally dicking over his most loyal follower just so he could say "I told you so" like some 5 year old. It just seems illogical to me...not to mention the inconsistencies with science. I just don't get it.

You need only consider that to the vast majority of religious people, God is basically a human being with super powers. He acts pretty much the way they'd act if they were omnipotent.

When you advance the idea that a Being who was eternal, omnipotent, fearless, omniscient and omnipresent would, in all likelihood, have motivations and plans that a human being's tiny little mind couldn't even comprehend, let alone anticipate or rationalize, they get very touchy. (This is different from them discussing His "mysterious ways" when you point out that a human being who acted the way He acts would be viewed as either evil or mentally ill by any rational person.)

M

Pat Thielen wrote:
I get so tired of people thinking nudity is the same thing as sex. I also get tired of people that can't deal with their own emotions. Feeling lust is guess what? NATURAL! We're supposed to! What do you expect? We're physical beings with physical needs. We feel all sorts of things: love, happiness, sadness, anger, hate, and yeah... we even feel lust. It's how we are made and it's how we are. To think it's a "sin" because you feel a certain way emotionally is ridiculous because you have no bloody choice in how you feel; we're hardwired that way.

"Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, fuckin' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER! "

--- John Milton, aka Lucifer, "The Devil's Advocate"

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Hey, I already told the OP he should go into fetish...

That was, by the way, a brilliant response. I wish I had thought of it.

M

Pat Thielen wrote:
So you're ok with god just hanging by and letting satan do all this?

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke-

To do nothing to stop an evil act, when you have the power to do so, is in itself an evil act. God doesn't get off the hook that easily.

jeffgreen wrote:
You are trying to equate God with man and they two aren't equal.  For God to eliminate all pain and suffering would be for God to create robots.

Stop telling God what He can and can't do. If He wanted to create a world where we had free will but people weren't allowed to hurt other people, He could do it. For instance, if you want a perfectly rational mechanism - not that God is limited to such - he could have put a nerve cluster in our brains that caused us to pass out for a few seconds if we tried to harm another human being.

He's *God,* remember?

Logical constraint *does not apply to Him.*

If He wanted to make it so that if you dropped something heavy it would automatically miss your toe, He could do that, too. "God allows evil so we can have free will" is a copout and it diminishes the power of God.

M

StMarc wrote:

That was, by the way, a brilliant response. I wish I had thought of it.

M

I only said it because every fetishist I know has some form of religion [usually fundamentalist] in their background -- Catholicism seems to dominate, but I know Mormons, Christians, Orthodox Jews -- even one Domme who was raised with Islam.  I think I may be the only confirmed atheist I personally know who does fetish.  Inner religious conflict seems to be a requirement for my genre.

JAY-DUB2 wrote:
Anyone (male or female) who has had similar thoughts or convictions, especially anyone with an understanding "mate" (married or not), please send me a shout out; my life is being taken "one frame at a time", and my "exposure" in life needs to be shown ... in the final "proof"!!  Thanx!

My spouse does not like me doing glamour related content but understands it is part of the business in these days.  As for spiritual beliefs, I am a born again christian and have struggled with it at times, but came to the conclusion that it is possible to shoot and display images containing nudity without going against my fundimental beliefs.  I simply do not include sexual themes in with the nude content.  These would be simular to the nude carvings and painting from over the centuries.  Nudity can enhance expression (as in my "into the light" image on my profile). 
   In the end, let the Lord tell you what is right...as I listen as well.  If the relm of content involving artistic nudity is not what He wants you to do then He will open the doors for the areas you are to step into.

Sian Louise wrote:
Job as i said can be taken as a source of strength for christians. the reason god tested job was for jobs own purpose not for his as yes he already knew the outcome.

In my opinion - and I admit it is not widely shared - the book of Job is a metaphor for the uselessness of opposing God's will, and the intended target is the Adversary, not Job. God is trying to show the Adversary that no matter what He does, He will not be able to effectively oppose God, because a true believer cannot be swayed no matter how the Adversary tries.

However, using Job (and all the poor unfortunates who DIED, don't forget them) as pawns in this little theological lesson was immoral. A God who would do that, as opposed to demonstrating His power directly to the Adversary, is evil. Worship that? Never.

M

Outlaw Photography wrote:
How about, God let Satan test Job so you and I would have an example to follow in our lives, knowing that if we keep our faith, God will step in and fix it at the last possible moment.  Inother words, never give up when you know you are right.

I'm sure that knowing God fixed Job up with new shorties and a crib twice as bling was a great condolence to the dozens of people who were killed during this little drama. "Never mind what happens to everybody else, *I* will be okay if I just believe," that's a fine, fine lesson for a Father to teach His children.

M

StMarc wrote:
I'm sure that knowing God fixed Job up with new shorties and a crib twice as bling was a great condolence to the dozens of people who were killed during this little drama. "Never mind what happens to everybody else, *I* will be okay if I just believe," that's a fine, fine lesson for a Father to teach His children.

M

Dude, that's the lesson in all organized religion:  "Me, so f*ck you."  Pick up any holy book you like and you'll find the same two groups -- the righteous/chosen/blessed who get the spoils and the damned/infidel/heathens who get the lake of fire.  This is one of the [many] reasons I'm a non-believer:  It's impossible for me to accept that any deity would stand around and have his name dragged into such petty, childish one-upmanship.

jeffgreen wrote:

Wrong.  They are uncovering sites of where cities used to be.  Archeologists have long claimed that certain locations in the New Testament were not correct, therefore it made it hard to see it as an accurate book.  These digs have uncovered proof that these cities were where they said they were and were named correctly.  Dipping pools found in the Bible have been uncovered.

BTW, read ancient writings like the book of Antiquities.  Pardon me if it is misspelled... I should have been asleep hours ago.  Numerous ancient writings refer to Christ.

So the fact that people wrote about places that actually existed makes the Bible right about everything? That's stretching if you ask me. Greek mythology talks about places that existed and things that existed, and I don't know about you, but I personally don't think that Gaea (the Earth) and Uranus (the Sky) got together and gave birth to the Titans and Cyclopes, and all that.

And what do you do about all the apocryphal texts that were excluded from the Bible, basically because they contradicted what the rest of the book said? There were 12 disciples...they don't all have books in the Bible...why? Because they contradict what the others say. So who's right? Who decided? You can say it was God, but you really can't prove it. I'm not going to say you're wrong, because I can't prove you are either, but there are certainly inconsistencies.

elisabeth eagle wrote:
wasn't talking to u.

It might be easier to determine that if you'd actually quote people all the time so we actually knew who you were talking to. It takes like 2 seconds.

elisabeth eagle wrote:
nope- porn to me is something different- and like i said b4- i don't care what u think so why don't u just drop it then? you want to think its erotic fine- i really don't give a crap- you think its crap fine doesn't bother me either. i could be wearing coats, gloves, a scarf, hat, boots , and 3 shirts with 2 pair of pants on and someone would say its erotic- just because they want me to feel like i lied by saying i didn't shoot erotic.... whatever-

For someone who doesn't give a crap you're certainly arguing a lot. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks". (Macbeth...Shakespeare...much better writer than whoever wrote the Bible if you ask me)

Pellegrino wrote:

Oooooh, I thinnk boots are Sooooo erotic.

Me too

Pat Thielen wrote:

Show me the evidence and proof. Specifically, what historical documents?

Personally, I take all history with a grain of salt...but I'm pretty sure people are more critical of the Bible because I've never seen anyone kill another person in the name of a history book. When people start committing atrocities in the name of Lincoln or Churchill, then I think people will be a little more critical of history books too.

Sian Louise wrote:
do you not think the universe is infinite? do you think we're collapsing oh my i'm scared of a black hole now.... help me god argggggghhhh.

I routinely hear about scientists believing the universe is expanding...if it's infinite how could that be possible?

jeffgreen wrote:

And yet... something came out of nothing... funny how that works!
And why does it fall on the believer?  The believer in what?  That life just happened?  That life was created?  Both believe, just in different things.  Both require some burden of proof to be provided, no?  Science provides proof that you can not get a life form from absolutely nothing.

No one created God...right? God just is. Why can't the same apply for the rest of the world? I'm not claiming to understand the origin of the world...but the argument that life had to come from somewhere is silly, because if you're going to believe that about God, logic would follow that you should be willing to consider the same about life in general.

Outlaw Photography wrote:
Satan wanted Job to denounce God. God knew Job would not do it, that he would retain his faith and not blame God.  ... I wonder how people got the idea that God was punishing Job or testing him?

Okay...so are you saying God got into a pissing match with Satan? Is that really better?

Sian Louise wrote:
do you not think the universe is infinite? do you think we're collapsing oh my i'm scared of a black hole now.... help me god argggggghhhh.

Kaitlin Lara wrote:
I routinely hear about scientists believing the universe is expanding...if it's infinite how could that be possible?

"Infinite" does not mean the same thing to a scientist, a mathematician, or a geometer that it does to a philosopher or an interested layperson. Mathematicians have different classes of infinity, which scientists uses as the mood strikes them.

The Universe, as we understand it, is not infinite in the philosophical sense. It is infinite in some geometrical senses, and not in others. And when we say it is "expanding," again, an astrophysicist does not mean the same thing by that that the word typically means in ordinary context.

M

Kaitlin Lara wrote:
I routinely hear about scientists believing the universe is expanding...if it's infinite how could that be possible?

Just because something is infinite doesn't mean that it can't be bigger, or that something else can't be bigger still.  For instance, consider the set of "all integers".  Then consider the set of "all even integers".  One is twice the size of the other, but both are infinite.

And people misunderstand what is meant by the expansion of the universe.  It doesn't mean that the boundaries of the universe are expanding (infinite things don't have boundaries) but rather that the structure of the universe is expanding.  Very different.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:

I only said it because every fetishist I know has some form of religion [usually fundamentalist] in their background -- Catholicism seems to dominate, but I know Mormons, Christians, Orthodox Jews -- even one Domme who was raised with Islam.  I think I may be the only confirmed atheist I personally know who does fetish.  Inner religious conflict seems to be a requirement for my genre.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:

Dude, that's the lesson in all organized religion:  "Me, so f*ck you."  Pick up any holy book you like and you'll find the same two groups -- the righteous/chosen/blessed who get the spoils and the damned/infidel/heathens who get the lake of fire.  This is one of the [many] reasons I'm a non-believer:  It's impossible for me to accept that any deity would stand around and have his name dragged into such petty, childish one-upmanship.

"She is prowling through all the religions of men
Seeing that time and time and time again
Their gods have made them special, and above
Nature's law, and the respect thereof."

Oh Ani...you're my hero.

Vance wrote:
I dont beleive in "God"...I find it amusing when people question there actions or future actions based on an entity that doesnt exist. That aside.

I say use a "moral" judgement. If it is a passion driven by art, then go for it. If it is a passion driven by lust, stay away.

Vance, if there is no God, where does your "moral judgment" come from? There has to be a source for our understanding of right and wrong.