Are Glamour Models Immoral?

[Rusha]

Except for the double standard part, which you did not explain, I agree with the above as accurate enough to agree with, as far as it goes.

The double standards would have to do with expecting more from women insofar as acceptable behavior as compared to men ... which includes turning a blind eye to criminal offenses.

What you, as a nonbeliever, leave out is the accountability factor. Accountability, on ALL sides, ultimately to God. Not just for one's actions but for the impact one's actions will have on others, who in turn are responsible for THEIR actions. NO ONE involved in these scenarios is morally off the hook, but that's what's been ignored or misrepresented in every one of these threads. THAT'S been the double standard here.

The double standard has been defending the use of criminal offenses and violence towards those who have committed neither. By focusing on victims, the offender is being defended.

Immorality may be in the eye of the beholder to us, but ultimately it's in the eye of God. Some of us believe that; others don't. Some who say they believe it don't seem to believe it very strongly. But without FIRST agreeing on what exactly morality/ethics/modesty is, this kind of thread will always go nowhere fast.

Do you want to try herding the cats on that one -- see what people believe "morality" even is, and where we get it? Artie used the term first in this thread and I don't even know what he considers moral and immoral, but I'll bet it doesn't sync with my definitions.

It probably doesn't sync, in every aspect, to mine either. However, I will go with intentionally harming others as a good starting point.

Of course, we would most likely disagree on what *always* harms others.

 

[glorydaz]

Your judgment is from the pit of Hell. We are strictly prohibited from this behavior by our Lord God.

His judgment is not from the pits of hell, but bad behavior is strictly prohibited by our Lord God. Even those of us who are saved and not of this world, are chastened for our bad behavior while we're here on this earth.

 

[glorydaz]

:chuckle: No worries, at least you now know enough to make up your own mind.

As opposed to his having the mind of Christ, of course. :chuckle:

 

[glorydaz]

Simple ... he believes he can claim himself innocent of provoking a response by talking ABOUT us rather than to us.

Rusha, that's what YOU do all the time. :rotfl:

 

[glorydaz]

BINGO.

So let's call their job what it is. They're paid, very well, to sell some degree of sexual enticement...lust.

Christ warned that for a man to look upon a woman with lust is the same as actually fornicating with her. God counts it as the same thing so saying "I didn't touch her" when you lusted to touch her is no excuse.

Question(s) for you, PJ:

They're selling lust by selling images of themselves which they know men will lust after. That's the point.

Could that conceivably make what they do an indirect form of prostitution?

Or does it, at least, make them adulteresses and fornicators (indirectly, admittedly) because of the reaction of men they know they're going to entice?

Or, at the very least, are they deliberately setting out wicked snares that (though they'd never think of it this way) will cause many to fall?

Whichever of the above options you choose, are they answerable to God for accepting money to inspire lust?

Or...

Are they purely innocent because "it's just a job"? Are they innocent of whatever happens to the men who lust after them while allowing themselves to be displayed 80% naked on a magazine cover in the checkout aisle, or 9 foot tall Victoria's Secret posters in the mall? Is God 100% fine with what they do?

:first:

 

[glorydaz]

A stripper or a model can be a Christian. A rapist can be a Christian.
So to say that they are not living the "Christian" life is creating a legality for Christians that God did not create. A Christian is based on grace, not legality.

So if a Christian rapes a woman, he won't have to suffer any consequences in this life? He won't be chastened by God?

Of course he will, and if he wasn't then those people would be right who claim grace gives believers a license to sin. We have no license to sin because even though our sins are forgiven we are chastened as sons for all our faults.....right here in this life.

 

[glorydaz]

Right. So even our thoughts are counted. Can you imagine how offensive we appear when even our thoughts are exposed and count against us? And yet we still try to maintain a superiority that we can blame more wrongs on others than ourselves.

Believers aren't trying to maintain a superiority or blame more wrongs on others, but we most certainly can and must call all immoral behavior wrong. Strippers can't blame others for their own wrongs any more than believers blame their own faults on others. There is enough fault and wrong doing to go around.

 

[Granite]

Believers aren't trying to maintain a superiority or blame more wrongs on others, but we most certainly can and must call all immoral behavior wrong. Strippers can't blame others for their own wrongs any more than believers blame their own faults on others. There is enough fault and wrong doing to go around.

That's rich coming from you. Spare us the shtick.

 

[glorydaz]

Not sure who on this thread you think is blaming who for what. I'm just pointing out there's a whole lot of approval of sin, and of causing others to sin, that's going on in threads like this one, while personal responsibility before God is being disregarded. That's a dangerous mix.

For example: God cannot approve of stripping in light of Luke 17:1. He considers lust offensive. Stripping serves one purpose: to inspire lust in men (or male strippers, in women). It is a means of offense.

Exactly, and believers certainly shouldn't join with unbelievers in saying any immoral behavior is acceptable. It's not acceptable for anyone to blame their own bad behavior on someone else. It's a matter of personal responsibility and has been, or should have been, from the first "rape thread" that was posted.

 

[glorydaz]

That's rich coming from you. Spare us the shtick.

It's the truth, nonetheless. I'm simply putting forth God's point of view on this matter, and as much as I'd like to claim it was my idea, I won't.

 

[Granite]

It's the truth, nonetheless. I'm simply putting forth God's point of view on this matter, and as much as I'd like to claim it was my idea, I won't.

Which is arrogance in a nutshell. Well done.

 

[glorydaz]

Yep. By the law everyone is condemned. Not only by their actions, but by their very thoughts as well.

What measure you use to judge will be the measure you are judged by.

Which means if a believer says stripping is immoral and then goes out and strips, that person would be committing an immoral act. It doesn't change the fact that stripping is immoral. No doubt that person will be chastened in this life even though he, himself, may already have eternal life.

 

[glorydaz]

Which is arrogance in a nutshell. Well done.

What? You don't like it that believers have the mind of Christ? I'm not surprised about that in the least. You should turn to God, Granite, before it's too late.

 

[serpentdove]

So if a Christian rapes a woman...

f a believer says stripping is immoral and then goes out and strips...

What do you think a Christian is? :AMR: 1 Co 6:11, Eph 2:2-3, 1 Jn 2:13

 

[Granite]

What? You don't like it that believers have the mind of Christ? I'm not surprised about that in the least. You should turn to God, Granite, before it's too late.

No, I just don't care for self-righteous arrogant stuffed shirts like you. Happy new year. You haven't changed a bit.:cheers:

 

[serpentdove]

No, I just don't care for self-righteous arrogant stuffed shirts like you. Happy new year. You haven't changed a bit. :cheers:

The Christian is supposed to be more like you, Satanist? 1 Pet. 1:2, 2 Cor. 3:18, Jn 8:44

 

[ClimateSanity]

:first:

I agree too. Some will see a contradiction in what I did with the pic of my then fiancee and the things I was looking for in a mate with my latest statements in this forum.

I have been deliberately seeking a "stunning" mate since 2012. I don't ever want to lust after any woman not my wife. If I have a stunning wife at home , I won't be tempted when I see stunning out in the streets.

I wasn't intending to make any man sin with that pic on my profile; I was happy as can be and wanted people to notice and ask me about it. They noticed alright. They flew into indignation that has recently been revealed to be hypocrisy.

 

[glorydaz]

Some don't like that. They think you need to deserve what you get. They cling to the old reap what you sow and eye for an eye bit. Mercy is beyond their scope.

There's nothing "old" about reaping what we sow. And mercy is not beyond my scope. When we sow to the flesh in this life, we will reap the consequences of that right here in this life.

If you become a drunk or a womanizer, you will most certainly reap the rewards of that behavior....right here on earth. It's a law just like gravity. It applies to everyone...believers and unbelievers alike.

 

[Rusha]

The pic in question was noticed ... WHY?

MANY members show pics of their wives and girlfriends ... fully and modestly clothed.

Also, the pic in question was on a site from the internet.

 

[glorydaz]

No, I just don't care for self-righteous arrogant stuffed shirts like you. Happy new year. You haven't changed a bit.:cheers:

Well, I don't really care for ungodly folks like you, either, Granite, but I won't ever give up hoping you'll turn to God for His mercy and grace. As far as fellowship goes, there is no fellowship between darkness and light, but I will continue to reprove those things you seem to condone.

Ephesians 5:11
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.​