IN "LIGHT" OF THE NAKED TRUTH! (PART: TWO)

A dear brother in Christ who disagrees with the study I have been doing on the possibility of Adam and Eve being clothed in light, posted a link to Herescope's article on "Nephilim Theology." The article was quite lengthy numbered at around 35 pages. Anyway, I reviewed the article. Here in this blog are some of my thoughts on Herescope's "Nephilim Theology" article. Also, I elaborate a bit more on this concerning Adam and Eve's bodies of light. 

On page 8, the author, Gaylene Goodroad of Herescope, makes this revealing comment in this paragraph: 

"The Scripture mentions four things that will be taking place on the earth prior to His return: mankind will be “eating,” “drinking,” “marrying,” and “being given in marriage.” There is NO mention of an outside demonic horde planning to corrupt the human gene pool by sexual and reproductive means! The clear implication of these sobering passages is that people—sinners—will be doing normal things up until the time judgment comes. They won’t be prepared for what happens very quickly—like the flood waters that overtook the men and women of Noah’s day. The details for this judgment are found in the Book of Revelation—and the Nephilim are conspicuously absent from all twenty-two chapters."

 It is interesting to note the author gives no Scripture reference for the "four things that will be taking place on the earth prior to His return: mankind will be “eating,” “drinking,” “marrying,” and “being given in marriage.” Are we to believe these are the only things that will be happening at Christ's return? The author even goes so far as to say, "The clear implication of these sobering passages is that people—sinners—will be doing normal things up until the time judgment comes." So according to the author, we are to believe these four "normal things" are going to warrant the judgment of God? Why would God judge man for such normal things? These things hardly sound like something that would warrant the wrath of God on a world taken in wickedness and rebellion against their Creator and God. 

Then the writer states: "They won’t be prepared for what happens very quickly—like the flood waters that overtook the men and women of Noah’s day." Great to see the author acknowledges and alludes to Matthew 24:37. Yet, it is disappointing to note this is as far as the writer of Herescope goes in referring to what occured in Noah's day. Instead, the author concludes the paragraph with this comment: "The details for this judgment are found in the Book of Revelation—and the Nephilim are conspicuously absent from all twenty-two chapters." Again, the writer does not provide the reader with the reference he is referring to in the Book of Revelation. Nevertheless, the author makes a good point by saying the "Nephilim" are not mentioned at all throughout Revelations. However, the writer should know better to make such a statement, when there are other books in the New Testament that mentions end times prophecy as well. For example, Paul's Epistle to the Thessalonians.  (TO BE CONTINUED...)

IN "LIGHT" OF THE NAKED TRUTH! (PART: ONE)

"Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves lioncloths." 
(Genesis 3:7, ESV).

Had this question posed to me: "What is the significance of Adam and Eve's suddenly becoming aware that they were naked according to Genesis 3:7?" 

I believe the answer is twofold. First, after eating the forbidden fruit, they realized they had sinned against God, which resulted in guilt and shame. Hence, they sought human means to cover their sin with fig leaves and to hide from God. Second, why would they seek physical means to cover their nakedness with fig leaves for a problem that was primarily spiritual in nature, and had to do with their heart? (1) The act of the transgression against God's command was first conceived in the heart by the temptation, (2) and then carried out in the flesh by eating the fruit, which God had commanded them not to eat (2:16-17; 3:1-6). (3) the consequences was the loss of their innocence and the sentence of death (2:17; Rom. 5:12). All this answers the questions above, but only in part. The nagging question still remains. Why did they suddenly become aware of their feeling physically exposed and naked? It never bothered them before, why now? This raises the question: What else did they lose when they fell into sin? I believe the answer is found in the fact that man bears "the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Yes, man's image is presently marred by sin. However, before the fall man was in a sense without sin, perfect in innocence, knowing not sin, nor its consequences. This means Adam's body then differed from ours in that it was not subject to disease, genetic defects, or death. Man was spiritually alive to God and enjoyed fellowship with God in the Garden of Eden until sin interrupted that fellowship. Sin brought not only death, but separation from God as well. So when man died spiritually, the light went out from him. Our original parents, before the image of God in them was marred, shared in common with God, light. They were clothed in light.

Here, consider these Scriptures on God as Light: To begin with, God is light, "This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5, ESV). Second, He is the Father of lights, "Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow." (Jam. 1:17, NASB). Third, He dwells in unapproachable light, "who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen." (1 Tim. 6:16, ESV).

Consider these Bible verses on man as light: First, man gets light from God's Word, "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path." (Psalm 119:105, ESV). Second, man is light in that he is a Testimony for Christ by good works towards man, "In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven." (Matt. 5:16, ESV). Third, We are to follow the Light of the World, "Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, "I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life." Fourth, He will transform our lowly body, "And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light." (Matt. 17:2, ESV). "Who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself." (Phil. 3:21, ESV).

In Conclusion: The Scriptures establish that God is Light, like the Psalmist says, "covering yourself with light as with a garment,..." (Psalm 104:2, ESV). The Bible also states that man will one day be clothed in light in his resurrected body, much like Adam was in the beginning (see 1 Cor. 15:42-54; Phil. 3:21). At present, Christian are still in their perishable bodies that are subject to death. They will not receive their new bodies until the day of the resurrection. It is then our new body will once again be clothed in light. There is still so much I don't understand about the different natures between the physical and spiritual bodies and what they reveal. I am presently still studying the issue. For a more detailed study on the topic of man's body of light, see this link:http://www.douglashamp.com/bodies-of-light-and-adams-bioph…/

It is sad that we primarily hear only about the first answer and rarely, if at all, hear about the second one.

THE VIRTUE OF SUBMISSION

But Honey the Bible says Submit?"..... "I'LL GIVE YOU SUBMIT 

"Submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord."
(Eph. 5:21-22, ESV).

It is interesting to note where our focus is to be placed in regards to our submission. Generally speaking we are to submit to "one another." Yet our focus for submitting is to the Lord. We are to do it "out of reverence for Christ" (5:21) and "as to the Lord." (5:22). The title "Lord" speaks of authority. Christ's authority is supreme, therefore we are to submit to it (see Matt. 28:18; Phil. 2:9-11). Those we submit our service to benefit from it, whereas our focus or reason for doing so is to the Lord. "Truly I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me." (Matt. 25:40, ESV). Did you catch that phrase? "You did it to me." When we submit in service to one another, it is just like we are doing it to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. How humbling to consider that Christ identifies Himself with us. So each person we submit our service to is actually to the Lord Himself. Equally true is the fact how we treat others, whether good or bad, is as if we were doing it to the Lord Himself. This should cause us to pause and seriously reflect on how we treat one another.

Submission is a double edged sword. It cuts both ways. The blade must cut deeply in the heart of both husband and wife, so all traces of pride, manipulation, control, and selfish ambitions may be slain. Though the husband's responsible for the leadership in the home, yet he should never consider it beneath him to humbly serve his wife in submission and love. Without the virtue of submission on the part of both spouses, there will be a lack of balance in the relationship. One will serve, while the other does not. A truly healthy and lasting relationship can only exist if the husband and wife live according to a symbiotic relationship, not a parasitic one. If the relationship be a parasitic one, it will eat away at the unity and harmony that rules that relationship until it collapses. Submission is the true path to the virtues of unity, harmony, and peace. Submission does not conquer by force, but by humble resolve and compliance. Submission is the brother to sacrifice. Now rebellion against the principle of submission may seize a kingdom for a fleeting moment, by pride, arrogance, and force, but its own lust for power and control will prove its own undoing. The flower of Submission is seen in the favor of its calming fragrant influence that wins a place in the King's court; whereas the hemlock of Pride's foul poison spreads its deadly influence which seals its own fate. Pride's kingdom is only for the moment, whereas Submission's kingdom is eternal.

Racism or Ethnic Discrimination?

"And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth,..." 

(Acts 17:26, NKJV). 

It never ceases to amaze me how people misunderstand racism. Here, let me explain this in brief. By one blood, God made all the peoples of the world.  "And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth,..." (See Acts 17:26). Yet people still refer to different ethnic groups such as Caucasian, Indian, Chinese, native, and black people as different races. Then we wonder why certain ETHNIC groups are discriminated against. One ethnic group thinking themselves better than another ethnic group. There is a reason why the proper context is "the human race," not "human races." People who discriminate against native people are discriminating against a specific ethnic group within the human race. In order to properly use the plural form of "races" in a correct context, there would need to be more than one race of beings.

For example, there are various alien races in such movies as Star Trek or Star Wars. On Star Trek we have the Human race, Klingon race, the Romulan race, Vulcan race, and the Ferengi race. If such races existed, then yes, racism would exist. Since there is only one RACE, the human race, then those who persecute a specific ethnic group within the human race are guilty of ethnic discrimination. So to discriminate against one ethnic group is really to discriminate against the human race period. Ethnic discrimination is what needs to stop.

May God help us to love ALL ethnic groups, and not just our own ethnic group we are associated with. There should be no room in our hearts for such hatred and discrimination against specific ethnic groups. No specific group of people is better then another group. God does not favour one ethnic group above another. If He did, He would not have made so many various ethnic groups of people with different skin colours and diverse languages. The Lord desires all nations, tribes, and peoples to be with Him. Unfortunately, not all will be saved and in heaven, but the Lord will still have believers representing all peoples, nations, and tongues gathered around His throne. “I looked, and behold, a great multitude ... of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!’” (Rev. 5:9; 7:9-10). 

And Their Eyes Were Opened

" And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons."

(Genesis 3:7, KJV)

By John Gill

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/genesis-3-7.html

Genesis 3:7

And the eyes of them both were opened
Not of their bodies, but of their minds; not so as to have an advanced knowledge of things pleasant, profitable, and useful, as was promised and expected, but of things very disagreeable and distressing. Their eyes were opened to see that they had been deceived by the serpent, that they had broke the commandment of God, and incurred the displeasure of their Creator and kind benefactor, and had brought ruin and destruction upon themselves; they saw what blessings and privileges they had lost, communion with God, the dominion of the creatures, the purity and holiness of their nature, and what miseries they had involved themselves and their posterity in; how exposed they were to the wrath of God, the curse of the law, and to eternal death: and they knew that they were naked; they must know before that they were naked in their bodies, but they did not perceive that their nakedness was at all uncomely, or any disadvantage to them; but now they were sensible of both, that whereas they could look upon it before, and not blush or feel any sinful emotions in them, now they could not behold it without shame, and without finding evil concupiscence arising in them; and it being now the cool of the day, and their spirits also seized with fear of the divine displeasure, they might feel a shivering all over them, and wanted something to cover them: but more especially this may respect the nakedness of their souls they were now conscious of, being stripped of that honour and glory, privileges and power, they were vested with; and having lost the image of God that was upon them, and that robe of purity, innocence, and righteousness, the rectitude of their nature, with which they were arrayed, and finding themselves naked and defenceless, and unable to screen themselves from the curses of a righteous law, and the fury of vindictive justice: and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons; not to cover their whole bodies, but only those parts which, ever since, mankind have been ashamed to expose to public view, and which they studiously conceal from sight: the reason of which perhaps is, because by those members the original corruption of human nature has been from the beginning, and still is propagated from parents to children. The leaves of the fig tree were pitched upon because of the largeness of them; the leaves of the common fig tree are very large, as everyone knows; and perhaps those in the eastern countries, and especially in paradise, were much larger than ours. Pliny F13 says of the fig tree, that its leaf is the largest, and the most shady. Some think the Indian fig tree is meant; so John Temporarius, as Drusius relates; and so our Milton F14; and according to Pliny F15, the breadth of the leaves of this tree has the shape of an Amazonian shield. And when they are said to sew these together, it is not to be supposed that they sewed them as tailors sew their garments together, since they cannot be thought to be furnished with proper instruments, or that they tacked them together with some sort of thorns, or made use of them instead of needles; but they took the tender branches of the fig tree with leaves on them, as the word signifies, see ( Nehemiah 8:15 ) and twisted them round their waists; which served for "girdles", as some render the word F16, and the broad leaves hanging down served for aprons; but these, whatever covering they may be thought to have been to their bodies, which yet seem to be but a slender one, they could be none to their souls, or be of any service to hide their sin and shame from the all seeing eye of God; and of as little use are the poor and mean services of men, or their best works of righteousness, to shelter them from the wrath of God, and the vengeance of divine justice.

---

FOOTNOTES:

F13 Nat. Hist. l. 16. c. 26.
F14 ----There soon they chose The fig tree; not that kind for fruit renowned, But such as at this day in India known. Paradise Lost, B. 9. l. 1100
F15 Nat. Hist. l. 12. c. 5.
F16 (trgx) , (perizwmata) , Sept. "perizomata", V. L. "cinctoria", Tigurine version, Fagius; "cingulos", Pagninus, Montanus; so the Targums; "subligacula", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Vatablus, Drusius.

Selfish or Selfless Love?

 “Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God [agape’ love] has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.” 

(Romans 5:5, NKJV). 

It has often been said among Christian circles that “love” is an action verb, and so it should be. Love is not something we just glibly say to someone we claim to love; we show our love to that person by our actions. Love without action is nothing more than a dead term. It is useless. There are many in our society today who are dying in want of love. Christians who claim to know the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour are in the best position to show “the love of God” to their neighbors. 

However, the question arises then in what our underlying reason is for showing love towards others? Is it for personal gain, or is it genuinely for God’s glory and the benefit of the person we show our love to? Is our love “selfish” or “selfless?” 

1. Selfish love may well benefit others, but its real motive is to draw attention to the giver. Its depth is a shallow kind of love where the giver expects something in return. In other words “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.” This kind of love is not the love of God.

2. Selfless love is the kind of love that seeks to bless others without expecting anything in return. It also does not place any conditions on the one it bestows its blessing on; for this kind of love is unconditional. It does not choose any favorites, nor does it erect any fences as barriers in loving others. It even seeks to show love towards enemies, “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.” (Matt. 5:44, NKJV) 

Goliath's Brothers or Sons?

“Then he [David] took his staff in his hand; and he chose for himself five smooth stones from the brook, and put them in a shepherd’s bag, in a pouch which he had, and his sling was in his hand. And he drew near to the Philistine [Goliath].”

(1 Samuel 17:40, NKJV).

 

 

Over the years, I have heard preachers and have read that these “five smooth stones” were for Goliath and his four brothers. However, after examining the Scriptures 2 Samuel 21:15-22; 1 Chronicles 20:4-8 that speak about Goliath’s relatives, I ran into a couple problems.

First, only three giants are mentioned by name, but one is not, which is fine. The problem was that three of these giants are mentioned to be “born to the giant,” whereas only Lamni is actually mentioned to be “the brother of Goliath the Gittite” (see 2 Sam. 21:19; 1 Chron. 20:5). So the question of these four giants being Goliath’s brothers is simply not true. Only one, Lamni is mentioned as the actual brother of Goliath. So that still leaves us with the question to who is the father of the giants Ishbi-Benob, Saph [Sippai], and the unnamed giant with the six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot? Some argue that the phrases “one of the sons of the giant” (see 2 Sam. 21:16, 18; 1 Chron. 20:4) and “born to the giant” (see 2 Sam. 21:20; 1 Chron. 20:6) refers to Goliath. If that is true, then we can conclude that Goliath had three sons. However, the Scripture texts that refer to the three giants being born to the giant does not confirm their father was Goliath. A better explanation could be that the Bible texts that refer to giants born to the giant speaks about these giants are the descendants of their father Anak who was a giant (see Num. 13:28, 32-33).

Second, we have what appears to be a contradiction. 2 Samuel 21:19 says that Elhanan killed Goliath the Gittite; but 1 Samuel 17:40-58 says that David slew the giant Goliath. So who is it? Did David or did Elhanan kill Goliath? Well this problem is easily rectified by comparing 2 Samuel 21:19 with 1 Chronicles 20:5 which clearly identifies the giant that Elhanan killed was “Lamni, the brother of Goliath the Gittite.” The NKJV version of 2 Samuel 21:19 actually states “the brother of Goliath.” Dr. Norman L. Geisler and Thomas Howe agree, when they wrote:

“The 2 Samuel text is probably a scribal error in coping the manuscript and should read “Elhanan…slew Lamni the brother of Goliath the Gittite.” This conclusion is supported by a parallel report of the story in 1 Chronicles 20:5 which has the missing highlighted phrase “Lamni the brother of,” thus showing it was the brother of Goliath that Elhanan killed and not Goliath, whom David slew just as 1 Samuel 17 reports.” (see The Big Book of Bible Difficulties, by Norman L. Geisler and Thomas Howe, pgs. 176-177).