|
Here goes trouble...
Just for the record, I'm not so much anti-"nose-art" as I'm against nose art that violates principles that I think are universally applicable to life. For instance, I think that the picture on Dick Bong's aircraft was completely appropriate, respectful, and did not violate any sense of propriety. The nose art I was objecting to, DOES violate Christian principles. Public nakedness has been a sin ever since Genesis 3, and the fall of man from the state of perfection in the garden, and it is clearly considered shameful throughout the whole Bible. Yes, there are mentions of it in the historical record, witness Bathsheba in particular, and other places that I could mention, but those places, the thing is always mentioned with a carefulness not to engage in lusting upon the thing, but to put it in a negative, non-descriptive (as much is neccesary only) light. As you can see from the small sampling of verses below, the idea of someone's public nakedness being shameful is quite apparent, and is throughout the whole Bible.
Isa 47:3 Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen:
Lam 1:8 Jerusalem hath grievously sinned; therefore she is removed: all that honoured her despise her, because they have seen her nakedness
Eze 23:18 So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness
Nah 3:5 Behold, I am against thee, saith the LORD of hosts; and I will discover thy skirts upon thy face, and I will shew the nations thy nakedness, and the kingdoms thy shame.
Hab 2:15 Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!
Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Am I perfect? NO! I've seen stuff that I don't need to see, and am tempted by such things just like any other guy, but the reason I brought the subject up is that I want to be able to enjoy the good aspects of aviation, and the sacrifices of our servicemen who fought for our freedoms, without having my conscience violated, my mind seared to evil, or to have to glorify those aspects of our wars, that I do not think should be glorified.
I also find it somewhat hilarious that some of my friends here are so concerned about dropping bombs, and equating that with the sin of adultery, or lust... Objection to that, and mentioning that as if it's an issue, and making ridiculous comments such as that you'd rather your kid wear a pin-up girl than a bomber dropping bombs, I find quite ironic. You are presupposing a standard of morality, that it's wrong to kill people. Funny thing is, you basically only have three ways to defend that kind of arguement. 1) It's wrong to kill people because God said so, because He made all human beings in His image, 2) because of a general consensus that it's wrong, or 3) because you just feel it's wrong. Either way, you are making a judgement that there is some standard of morality.
It's funny because if you believe that it's wrong to kill because of God's moral standard, then you should also believe that what He says about morality is also valid. If you just believe that it's because of consensus, well, I guess that become's up the majority, and that's dangerous, because if the majority say that it's ok to do something, like kill Jews, then you've got a problem, much like we do now with abortion. And if you believe that you're the standard, or something else, well you're going to have a hard time defending it ultimately, because it's my word vs. yours.
I just think that it's safer to believe that there is Absolute truth given by the ultimate absolute, the God of the Bible, who says that there is a time and place for warfare, for the defense of the nation and for righteous purposes, which should be strictly defined and limited.
Some have essentially accused me of wanting to start a religious war, which is something I have no intention of doing, neither do I think it should be done. I belive that Scripturally, the only kind of war a nation should engage in is a defensive war for just purposes (We could get into what defines that, but I don't think it's really neccesary). Now sometimes that might involve religious rhetoric, such as the idea that it's wrong for Muslims to call for the subjection of all infidels.
The reason I can appreciate WW2 as much as I do is that despite some US foreign policy that may have precipitated other nations' actions, we were essentially fighting a fairly just war. We were attacked first by Japan, and both Japan and Germany were clearly fighting for evil, racist purposes. That said, we were not completely blameless, especially in the way we demonized the Japanese as in or sub-human, but I believe that essentially, the war was worth fighting. Just look at the name that was given the aircraft that started this whole discussion. The Liberator! The American people at least for the most part in World War Two had a sense of the justice of their cause, the noble intentions, and the evil of the enemy's actions.
Anyway, rant over for now.
Ryan
_________________ Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI. Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com. The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
