The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 12 -- The Rest of the New Testament

This statue is from Corinth where Paul ministered

Now once we leave the Gospels and Acts it only takes till Romans 8:35 to get to a reference on nakedness -- it is a reference that nothing can separate us from the love of God -- not even nakedness. Now I am going to tell you this is one of the most significant verses I have seen on the subject of nakedness but I am going to tell you why in a later post -- just know this that if you are standing in the shower naked, the love of God is still there.

The next reference to nakedness is 2 Corinthians 5:3 which is in the context of taking off this mortal body so that we may put on the eternal one -- so we will not be found naked anymore. Does that mean part of new body will be clothed -- I doubt it -- but with the same of sin gone so will the shame of nakedness be gone. While we wear our white robes in 'heaven' we will doubtless not be ashamed; but also, if we were to take them off we would not be ashamed either -- sin is gone.

You have to get to James 2:15 where it makes reference to a brother or sister being without clothing and that faith would be demonstrated in giving them clothes to cover them.

In Revelation there are actually several stops -- 3:17-18 both mention nakedness -- in verse 17 it is about the reality of the state of the church of Laodicia -- they were naked -- exposed, vulnerable and shameful. Verse 18 tells them the cure -- buy clothing from God.

Revelation 16:15 has a parenthetical blessing to those who keep their clothes so that god will not see their shame -- now in this case I think the clothing is symbolic of righteousness which has been mentioned before in the book of revelation.

Finally in Revelation 17:16 there is a promise by God to the Whore of Babylon -- that He will strip her naked and leave her desolate. Another symbolic use of naked that she will have nothing left.

Well that is all i could find in reference to the Bible but I want to continue this series to by making a few observations and drawing a painful conclusion.

Next: Biblically -- What is Nakedness?

The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 11 -- The Gospels and Acts

On to the New Testament, the first real reference to nakedness in the New Testament is in Matthew 25 where Jesus is blessing the sheep and cursing the goats. In all cases, though the thought is on naked as vulnerable and destitute. A naked person in he ancient world meant either very poor or a slave. Jesus reminds us to cloth the naked and protect them from this vulnerability.

There is one case of nakedness in all three of the first gospels but it is indirect -- the Man possessed with legion is said Mark to be 'clothed' although no reference is made (at least in the NASB) to him being naked it is assumed because of the reference to him being clothed. In this case nakedness is indicative of how nothing was shameful to the demon possessed man. Once healed he gets clothes on to show he is back to being normal.

The second reference is in Mark 14:51-52 -- where John-Mark (it is believed) covers himself with a sheet to go to the garden with Jesus and as they arrest Mark he lets go of the sheet they grab and flees into the night naked. I am going to tell you this sound like someone who was used to sleeping naked who is roused from sleep and asked if he wants to come the Garden of Gethsemane -- he agrees but does not even dress -- he simply wraps the blanket around himself. There is nor moral statement of whether this was right or wrong -- simply a statement of the facts.

Luke makes two references to women's breasts -- Luke 11:27-28 in which a woman speaks of the blessedness of Jesus' mother's breasts and womb and Luke 23:28-30 where Jesus blesses the breasts that never nursed. In both cases the issue is the nurturing power of women's breasts through nursing. No sexual reference is indicated at all. Jesus also does not seem embarrassed in either case to make references to this part of a woman's body or to hear it referenced.

John makes no reference to either

Acts has only one reference to nakedness and it is Acts 19:16 where the seven sons of Sceva flee stripped naked -- They are totally humiliated and dishonored.

What all this shows us is that nakedness is about being shamed, humiliated, being vulnerable or destitute.

Next: Nakedness and the Rest of the New Testament

Is Hell Justified? -- Part 6 -- The Purpose of Hell

OK. What is the purpose of Hell? Now to recap the working theory is that Hades/Sheol is the place of waiting for the final judgment with the Lake of Fire as that place of final judgment where God brings aobut final justice. Now the question is that needs to be answered is twofold. What is the purpose of Hades and what is the purpose of the lake of fire?

Hades -- I think Luke 16:19-31 actually provides us the best explanation of the purpose of Hades/Sheol -- Abraham's words indicate that Lazarus is now receiving good things because in life he did not receive good things. The rich man the opposite is true.

I think deep within the heart of man has always existed the desire for justice and the raw fact is that many time justice does not take place. The 18 year old prostitute is beat to death by an unknown assailant but the police do not give any effort to finding the murder because she is a prostitute-- the killer is never found. Crimes without number like this go unsolved and justice is never done on this earth. Hades is the place where these wrongs are righted -- justice is served. In Hades the prostitute is avenged.

It is a place of the dead where those who received good things in life without care for others find themselves in want. It is also a place where those who receive evil all their lives final receive some good.

Infants who never leave the womb who die by the fault of life or the deliberate hand of men find themselves in a place to choose and grow.

All of these things may be possible in Hades/Sheol. It is simple a place where the shortcomings of this world are righted.

It also may be a place where the dead hear the gospel again -- 1 Peter 4:6 -- "For the gospel has for this purpose been preached even to those who are dead, that though they are judged in the flesh as men, they may live in the spirit according to the will of God." Now this is an odd verse if everything is settled at physical death. It might also answer part of the criticism people have of God -- "What about the heathen who never hear the gospel?" What if they do hear it? Even more telling is the question about babies -- do they really get to choose their faith in God? Does God simply force them to love him? Or does he give them an opportunity to choose?

In Hades these questions may be answered.

The Lake of Fire -- Unlike Hades the Lake of Fire has an ultimate finality to it. It is the place prepared for the devil and his angels. It is ultimately the place where everything that has gone against the will of God is removed forever.

The question at this point is whether that is served by eternal torture or annihilation. To be sure it is a question that relates to God's purpose for hell but it is also a question of God and his justice as well as desires for the human race.

Next: Tough Questions Considered.

The Keys to Revival

Revival assumes a couple things. It assumes first of all that you understand that you need to be revived --the assumption is you are dead or dried up and that needs to change. Secondly it assumes you understand what is required for revival:

1. Return to being humble -- understand who your authority is and walk in the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
2. Prayer -- Revival cannot begin without the power of prayer and people who are praying for it.
3. Seeking God's Face -- trying to be more like Christ requires that you seek him more to know him better.
4. Turn from Sin -- stop disobeying God when he tells you what to do -- no matter how small it may seem. Follow the Word and His Spirit.

Lord send revival and let it start with me!

The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 10 -- Nakedness and the Rest of the Prophets

The next of the prophets to talk of nakedness is Hosea. Poor Hosea, God uses his life and marriage to illustrate the nature of God's relationship to Israel -- God tells him to marry a harlot who herself is the product of harlotry. Telling isn't it.

The early part of chapter 2 also speaks of both nakedness and breasts in a sexual connotation -- Israel need to stop playing the harlot after other gods. God uses the image of breast to convey sex -- remove her adulteries from between her breasts. Sorry i get the image of a foreign god laying on top of her. Because of this god says he will strip Israel naked and expose her to shame. Hosea 9:14 is a threat by God to dry up women's breasts -- in short remove their power to nurture their infants in response to Israel's sin.

Amos 2 -- God promises doom to Moab and as a part of that pronouncement he promises ultimate shame by saying that their warriors will be turned away naked -- exposed to both ultimate disgrace and vulnerability.

Micah 1 -- Micah talks about lamenting over Jerusalem and Samaria by walking naked and barefoot in chapter 1, symbolic of how both countries have been made naked and vulnerable.

Nahum 3 -- God promises to disgrace to Nineveh and uses nakedness as a way of illustrating how much He is going to expose them.

Habakkuk 2:15-16 -- Avery telling story of lust for other peoples nakedness by God pronouncing judgement to those who willfully expose others to nakedness through debauchery. god promises that those that do such thing will themselves be exposed to nakedness.

Next: The Gospels and Acts

Is Hell Justified? -- Part 5 -- The Nature of Hell

OK. Given all the biblical considerations Boyd presents, I would have to say that his case is good that most of the teaching on final judgment indicates a finality -- death, destruction and perish. The only problem I see is you have to get rid of the 'parable' Jesus teaches in Luke 16:19-31 which I don't actually believe is a parable. That said is there a way to reconcile the two pictures? Does the picture of the Bible leads us to torture or annihilation?

Why not both?

The Luke account is very much a description of what the Jews view of Sheol or the grave that the Jewish people had for centuries, including before Christ. The concept is place of waiting where the justice of God is brought about on a person. The shocking thing to the Jew who heard Jesus' story is that the rich man (supposedly blessed by God) and the Lazarus are flipped. They would have taught and believed it would be the other way around. Contrary to the beliefs of one commenter on this blog the concept of Sheol appears very early in the Bible -- the first writer to use it was in the book of Job which is the oldest written tradition period. This way before the Greeks even existed as a nation.

At the same time, I cannot ignore Boyd and others like him, including many from the early church that say to end something is to end something. They have a point and their reasoning is sound.

Then I see this verse in Revelation 20:14 -- "Then death and Hades were thrown in the lake of fire..."

This indicates two things:

1) These are two separate places: Hades/Sheol is some place separate from the lake of fire.

2) That even Hades (if the lake of fire represents the final destruction, death and perishing Boyd hits on) will to have its end.

So what if Hades/Sheol is the place where the good are blessed and the bad suffer for the lives they lived as represented by Luke 16 but the lake of fire is the final end off all things evil after judgment?

Now I am going to be blunt here -- this satisfies my sense of justice. Is it right for someone like say a Hitler or Attila the Hun to just be disintegrated without suffering something for their crimes? To me it would be fitting for them to suffer every death they ever caused over and over again until the final judgment. Shouldn't the man who burned so many Jews as well as other be burned himself? At the same time, Uncle Larry who was a great guy, never hurt a fly or told a lie, but never accepted Jesus and died in his sins -- what should he suffer?

My working theory is that Sheol is not so much a place of torture but a place of justice being served and inequalities being balanced. Look at Abraham's words to the rich man: "Child, remember that during your life you received your good things; and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here' and you are in agony." I want you to notice the reasoning for why each man is in the place he is in -- one received good in his lifetime but the other bad. Now in Hades/Sheol the situation is reversed by God to make things right. It is not about the book of life or the lamb of God, like the lake of fire in Revelation, but what each person did and received in this life. It is these things that determine what happens in Sheol.

I think I can live with a temporary place of God dispensing justice. The thing I have a hard time with is listening to our loved ones for all eternity cry out in pain for something they did in a short amount of time. It also seems inconsistent with the love of God if someone truly repents -- which they may do in Hades/Sheol -- but God does not honor it. Is Hades also a refiners fire of sorts as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 3 as well as a place of an another chance for salvation before judgment? One of my professors, Jerry Walls in his Book Hell the Logic of Damnation explores this possibility and at the time I took his class on the problem of evil, I had to admit he made some good points. He theorized that some people would rather go to Hell -- "Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven" i.e. Paradise Lost by Milton. Is this getting too close to the doctrine of Purgatory? Maybe, but then again, what exactly is Sheol/Hades? Perhaps some would prefer to be annihilated as opposed to serving God?

Maybe Dante had a few things right?

Next: The Purpose of Hell

The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 9 -- Jeremiah and Ezekiel say a few words.

Jeremiah does not really get into the whole nakedness thing in his big book by his name but in Lamentations he mentions nakedness a couple of times in which the reference is to shame and desolation. In one place the breasts of jackals is mentioned where it is said that even jackals offer their breasts to their young but the daughters of Zion were more cruel and wouldn't. Mostly another reference to women's breasts as something that has the power to nurture life.

Ezekiel by contrast uses nakedness as a constant metaphor in his prophecies particularly concerning Israel, Judah and Jerusalem.

Chapter 16 is particularly graphic in its description of how God found Israel like a a baby left to die on the side of a road and God saved her and blessed her as she grew up. Chapter 16:7 mentions how that when she had no breasts and was naked God took care of her (by the way this is the only verse I could find where the word breasts and naked both appear and it is not about sexuality but vulnerability and youth). God states than no one but Him cared for them when they were naked and swimming in their own blood. I said it was graphic. The rest of the chapter is about how Israel has been treacherous because even though God has loved her so, she has decided to play the harlot and expose herself to other gods. Ezekiel will play on the image of the unfaithful wife for the rest of the book.

Chapter 18 remarks about how the people have left the poor naked and vulnerable and thus they will be judge for it. The same is true for 22:10.

Chapter 23 is another graphic description of God's relationship with Israel (Samaria) and Judah who he calls harlots and uses the images of nakedness and breasts in a sexual way. The idea of foreplay comes to mind as you read verse 3. In all cases the issue is how God has always loved his wives Israel and Judah but they have been unfaithful to Him but playing the harlot with other gods. Because of this God promises he will give them both into the hands of their lovers and they will be striped naked and be made ashamed. Particularly telling is how Ezekiel uses the image of nakedness to convey shame and lewdness. The problem is the metaphorical usage which does not really help us with our issue other than to say that sometimes to be naked is to be ashamed or to be exposed and vulnerable but it never really defines nakedness. Nakedness is understood in these passages by the readers and hearers, so Ezekiel never defines it.

Nakedness = shame, vulnerability, exposure

Next: Nakedness and the Rest of the Prophets

The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 8 -- Job and Isaiah Naked

Job says several things about being naked but one is the most classic line about coming fro the womb naked and in nakedness we return to the dust. (Job 1:21). In using nakedness this way Job shows symbolically that we come into the world with nothing and we will leave it with nothing. Solomon does the same thing in Ecclesiastes 5:15 -- it is almost a quote of Job. In any case nakedness is sue to make a point and a good one.

The Bible does use nakedness to symbolize things that sometimes involves shame, sometimes vulnerability.

Isaiah 20 is an example of this: Isaiah is TOLD by god to strip naked and walk around naked for three YEARS. It is symbolic of how God is going to shame Egypt and Cush through the Assyrians and in this way God uses the prophet's actions to pronounce judgment on Egypt and Cush. Much the same thing happens in Isaiah 47 about Babylon as far as judgment although there is no record of Isaiah walked around naked. In short God is saying -- I am going to expose you for what you really are -- powerless against me. Other verses about nakedness in Isaiah demonstrate need and the neediness of people that are oppressed. There is also one verse about the comfort of a mother's breasts in 66:11 (see previous post)

I wonder what the modern proponents that all nakedness is sinful do with this passage: Here is someone who walks around naked for three years AT GOD"S DIRECTION! I don't know I am beginning to wonder if the same of nakedness is so much about physical nakedness or a state of spirit. Isaiah is naked but I doubt he himself has any shame about it -- He is being obedient to God so why would he be ashamed of his nakedness? Creates a problem doesn't it when God asks you to be naked before him?

Next: Jeremiah and Ezekiel say a few words.

Is Hell Justified? -- Part 4 Greg Boyd and Eternal Punishment -- Video 3

Seeing this is the hot topic on my blog right now let's continue.

Video 3 -- Greg Boyd and Eternal Punishment

Greg is wrapping up and drawing his conclusions to their final end:

1. His final conclusion is one of 'annihilation' that is anything that does not line up with God's will has its ultimate and complete end. The punishment still is eternal -- that is once a person gone they are gone for eternity.

2. Regardless of what way you interpret these things there are three things that are true:
a) We were created for eternal life, b) The consequence of rejecting god is hell -- regardless of what you mean -- and it is not a good thing. c) The sure way to avoid hell is to completely submit to the Lordship of Christ and thus join the church which is predestined for salvation.

Now, I am going to admit that Greg Boyd's view has a lot of merit. It considers the more common uses of eternal punishment and uses a lot of Scripture. It's one weakness overall is its treatment of Luke 16:19-31 as a parable. It certainly has given my cause for pause to rethink the merits of the annihilist position. As I have done osme historicla research -- the fact si that the early church supported both views. The nature of hell was a big debate.

Next: The Nature of Hell -- Biblical Considerations

The Real Story of Friday the 13th

Superstition and paranoia surround this day every time it happens but the real story is far less than dramatic. In the 1300s some of the Knights Templar were burned at the stake on Friday the 13th and since then 'bad luck' has been associated with this date. More of a superstisious time flowing over into our own.

For the Christian, superstition is a little more problematic as we are really not supposed to have it. God being control and all. Plus Paul's words about old wives tales as well.

Me, I have always found, like Thomas Jefferson, that I always have plenty of good luck the harder I work.

Is Hell Justified? -- Part 3 Greg Boyd and Eternal Punishment -- Video 2

Video part 2 -- Greg Boyd and Eternal Punishment -- Part 2

I can first of all applaud Greg for asking the simple question -- Can we look at this a different way? It is the question I am asking so I am glad he is asking it too.

Considerations he is asking us to look at with my responses:

1. Luke 16:19-31 is a parable: Really? Greg makes this point because he does not want the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus to teach us on the nature of hell. However, Jesus never identifies this as a parable nor does the gospel writer. It could be factual story. It is purely speculation that this is a parable. Even so, parables are not completely one point deals. In the case of the first parable Jesus tells -the parable of the sower -- it could be argued that Jesus is making a single point by using four sub points. The interpretive model that parables only make one simple point all the time is overly simplistic and does not consider the individual nature of each parable may be different. In any case, even if this is a parable, it does not indicate that Jesus is being inaccurate about the nature of hell.

The fact is that this view of the afterlife was and still is the notion of the Jews based on interpretation of Old Testament scriptures of Sheol -- the grave. So, Jesus then would be reinforcing this belief by default. At the least -- if this story is not accurately representative of what the afterlife is like, then we have Jesus perpetuating a false notion -- I certainly don't see Christ perpetuating a false notion of anything, but even if this is just a parable by using the common belief of Sheol he is doing so. Jesus was certainly not shy about blasting false beliefs but here we would have Jesus actually using one to illustrate a point? I don't think so.

2. Many metaphors to describe eternal punishment: Greg rightly makes the point that metaphors are the basis of what we understand about hell -- I think most of his observation are accurate on this one.

3. Three most common ways God refers to punishment in the bible: a) death b) destruction and c) perish. "Be as though they have never been" Obadiah 16 is particularly telling. The point he is making is that all of these things have a finality to them and do not indicate a torture type punishment. I agree.

4. The Bible sometimes speaks of things being eternal in consequence not in duration. He makes good points here. This is part of my problem with the doctrine of hell is that is what is indicated most of the time -- the consequence of eternal death is what is indicated -- once your dead a second time your dead it is not a continual dying.

Now, I agree with most of this except the notion of Luke 16:19-31 is a parable. I really do not think it is a parable but an accurate representation of Sheol or the grave. If so, that indicates some sort of punishment for the wicked and reward for the righteous. One thing that can be said though is the parable does not indicate that Sheol is eternal -- the belief is that it is a place of waiting for final judgment. Maybe this is where the idea of purgatory first comes from but I don't think the 'hell' side is redemptive although it could be.

Next: Greg Boyd Video 3

The Book of Revelation -- Part 11 -- The Great Multitude

Revelation 7:9-17. Now if you are looking at the future of things I suppose you could see it as a future scene in heaven around the throne -- but why can't it be a current scene?

If I was writing to seven churches --- some good, some bad, some ugly I think this picture of the saints around the throne in worship would inspire them all regardless of what time this is. Now I know some make a big deal of the phrase -- "these are they that have come out of great tribulation", but I want to note that, it does not say THE great tribulation -- it says great tribulation which can and has happened at many times and places in the history of the world, not just here in the book of Revelation.

Otherwise the passage speaks for itself. it is who is worshiping around the throne and we could be one of them someday.

Next: The Seventh Seal.

The Bible and Nakedness -- Part 7 -- Women's Breasts

I suppose that one might argue that I seem to have a fascination with this topic and maybe an obsession. I could argue -- "Yeah, I am a guy. Get over it, guys are fascinated with the subject." What I don't think most Christian men and women understand about this issue is that it is a current issue. One State of the United States, New York already has a law about this subject -- anywhere a man can appear without a top so can a woman. Similar laws exist in in about 7 other states in certain situations (beaches and other areas). In Europe, there are many places where a woman can appear topless -- the fact is Europeans don't have as many hang ups about nudity in general as we do in the US. Many local cities, towns, etc. have their own laws because most states leave the issue to local government to deal with on their own. For instance Columbus, OH has a very similar law to the one in New York state. The point is in certain places a Christian can be walking down the street and see a woman topless (or topfree if you prefer) and they really can't call the cops -- in fact calling the cops in New York can get you and the cops sued. So what do you do? You can't avoid everything.

I all states and places though the problem is that a woman is only considered indecent if she shows her nipples. That still leaves a lot of room on a woman's breast.

At this point in going through Bible I am looking for how the Bible refers to nakedness. In the issue of women's breasts at this point I would have to say the Bible is silent other than a few references to nursing. Now as we get past David and begin to look at the rest of the Bible -- nothing till the book of Job. The fact is the poetic literature of the Bible has a lot to say about the subject of women's breasts. Job makes mention of them, Song of Solomon as well (9 separate verses). Job makes mention of the motherly aspects of women's breasts. No sexual connotation at all. Song of Solomon is a different story.

In the context of Song of Solomon, the subject is the desire the couple has for each other. In chapters 1-7 the mention of breasts is one of admiration. That is the man is admiring his future bride's breasts and commenting on them. In short, he is saying his bride has a nice pair. 8:1 mentions the motherly aspects of women's breasts again much like Job. In Chapter 8 verses 8 and 10 the woman in the story mentions her own breasts as a symbol of her virtue -- she has kept her virginity to her wedding night referring to her breast as acting like towers. In this case they are symbolic of her virtue but it is not mentioned how that is so other than to say she was not a women who just put out for anyone. Probably no one has touched them. Seen them? Well it does not say.

What can be said at this point when dealing with the subject of the Bible and women's breasts:

1. When women's breasts are mentioned, the most common reference is to nursing or the motherly aspect of the breasts or women. It is about nurturing.

2. In Song of Solomon we have an unmarried couple and the man makes continued reference to how much he admires -- not only his future wife's body but her breasts in particular. Wonder how he knew what all this looked like in a middle eastern culture? So is admiration a sin? Not with these verses -- they got into the Bible and no sin is mentioned.

3. In all cases, it is never stated that a woman showing her breasts is sinful or shameful. if anything the virtues of women's breasts are set forward and they are not presented in a negative light.

Next: Job and Isaiah Naked.

Is Hell Justified? -- Part 2 -- Greg Boyd and Eternal Punishment -- Video 1

The context for this part of the discussion watch Greg Boyd in this video

Luke 16:19-31 provided the backdrop of the discussion. Now I think this story does not actually recount what heaven and hell are like but it is a reinforcement of the Jewish idea of Sheol or the grave. The waiting place for final judgment. It has some marked differences from the idea of eternal fire in Revelation. Here the people are placed in waiting placed and punished or rewarded based on what their life was like on earth. In Revelation, this idea does not appear at all but their the eternal fire has a finality to it based on whoever is in the Lamb's book of life. So Boyd gets off a little wrong in my opinion because I don't believe this story is dealing with the final state after final judgment but a holding place in waiting for final judgment. However he does an excellent job of presenting the problem with traditional thinking on eternal punishment.

Boyd brings up the standard questions in objection to eternal punishment:
1. How can we enjoy heaven when right down the road are people being tortured in flame that I may love and am called to love?
2. How is eternal punishment consistent with the theme that God's anger lasts only for a moment but his love and mercy lasts forever?
3. How is eternal punishment consistent with the teaching God is love?
4. How is eternal punishment consistent with the Bible's teaching regarding God's final victory?

As I watched these points being brought up I can see myself asking the same questions. The issues here are well presented and will serve as the basis for his and our further discussion.

Next: Greg Boyd Video 2