The basis for his conclusions seemed to derive from the fact that Adam and Eve were created nude and were declared at same time, to be ‘very good’!

I agree! I have seen beautiful works of art which depict nudity (eg. Goya’s ‘The Nude Maja’) and have not felt the need to lust.

Being a normal male person with a pulse however, I have indeed felt sexually aroused by images of nudity that I have seen in the media.

To deal with this problem, I consulted with a number of my male Christian acquaintances as to what to do.

They all told me that I needed to avoid looking at such images so as not become tempted to lust.

However, most of them have since fallen over by by getting involved in pornography and the like.

In response, I have adopted a different strategy.

Instead of just trying to avoid being tempted, I have made it my practice to go out of my way to meet sexy looking females for example, so that I can practice a number of mental routines aimed at disciplining my natural tendencies to become aroused and lust after them.

I do the same thing with images depciting female nudity.

While the process was difficult at first and I did fall over a few times in the beginning, it is all second nature to me now.

I no longer feel ill at ease and sexually tempted by exotic looking girls, or images of them, regardless as to how undressed they might appear.

I am now regarded with considerable suspician and disdain by many in my congergation however, who see me as being engaged in a sinful process.

I am not convinced however. The strategy that I have used, works a lot better than the ‘hear no evil, see no evil’ type of approach that was first recommended to me.

As far as I can see, all I have been doing is practising how not to lust in the face of temptation, so as to build up an immunity against my natural tendencies to be tempted by female beauty and sexuality.

I can not find anything in Scripture that says that it is wrong to talk to good looking women (especially if I am doing so for the purpose of being accomplished at not lusting after them), or as per the Pope’s view, that there is nothing wrong with nudity in itself (once again - especially if I am using images of it to practice not being tempted or improperly influenced by it).

What do you think?

ANSWER: It is fair to point out that when humankind was created they were nude. But, when they disobeyed God’s one and only commandment, they discovered their nudity and their response was to cover it up and God later confirmed their solution by providing clothes for them. The inference here may be that in their fallen state that nudity would lead to more problems in their lives than they were presently facing. This seems to play itself out in that in the business of religious systems in the ancient world where nudity played a significant part in their worship life and these rituals were condemned by Judaism.

God seems to suggest, in his action of providing clothes, that it is important to have a social relationship where body parts are not the object of being social. One story of interest in the New Testament was the demonized person in the cemetery who was nude when he approached Jesus and after he was released from his demons, he set clothed and in his right mind. One must ask why Jesus didn’t leave the man nude.

It appears that nudity is not a biblically socially acceptable practice.

I don’t think that if you could ask the Pope about your interpretation of what he said about nudity that he would have come to your present strategy. He would not acquiesce that what he meant or what you have interpreted that he meant in the article you read as the same thing. You might want to ask yourself WPDI (Would the Pope Do It)?

Living in God’s Story means living in a story that has a different character about it. So, I would suggest that you should keep your clothes on, keep the clothes on those “good looking” women you are meeting, keep your pants zipped, and ask for the presence and power of the Holy Spirit to help you overcome your present practices.

Well, there’s what I think!

ANSWER: There is no indication to the time frame between the story of Lazarus in John 11 and John 12.1. John 12.1 begins on Friday evening before the crucifixion of Jesus on the next Friday.

ANSWER: I have written about this on by blog drwinn.com at this link.

ANSWER: The text of Acts 2.38 reads: “Peter replied, Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” The call for repentance was a common call for the Jews to heed. The word “repent” meant to turn around form what you were doing and move back toward God. It meant to give up the way you though you could get to God and follow a different way. It was not a specific “sin” that Peter or Luke, the writer of Acts had in mind.

ANSWER: I began a online Bible study entitled “Decoding the Apocalypse. Here is a like to the section that deals with Apocalyptic Literature which is called “Apocalyptic What?. I would encourage you to signup for the whole study at: Decoding the Apocalypse.

Any Dangers? No, I think the genre of the text needs to be understood and interpreted within the boundaries of the kind of literature it is. Like all literature, if you don’t know what kind it is, poetry, narrative, etc., you might discover that when reading it you might come to a different conclusion that the author’s intent because you do not know what kind of literature he/she is using to convey the message to the reader/listener.

ANSWER: I know that Modern Jews still worship in their synagogues on the Day of Atonement which is Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur starts at sunset on Sunday, October 1, and ends at nightfall on Monday, October 2. But, beyond that I am not sure. You might want to ask a Jew that question and you can at Ask A Rabbi.

You can find a chronology of the story of the Old Testament (still under revision) on my SBL site here and the New Testament here.

ANSWER: No, Jesus was not in a human form in the Old Testament. Some interpret the story of in Genesis 18 that one of the three visitors to Abraham was Jesus. Others see the phrase “son of man” in the story of Daniel in the lion’s den as a reference to Jesus. A rule of thumb when interpreting Scripture is that a story cannot mean what it could not have meant to the first hearers/readers. The Old Testament folks did not have a concept of Jesus. They would not have recognized him as a character in a story presented to them to tell them of the journey of God with Israel.

John recounts the birth of Jesus and “he became flesh and tabernacled among us” as the point in time of the incarnation or the “human form” of Jesus.

ANSWER: I have a thirteen week Bible study at the following link that may help you identify an answer to your question.

See Kingdom of God

Revelation is as much a challenge to the comfortable within their society as it is comfort for those whose commitment has brought them into tension with the host society of this present evil age. It is a challenge and protest as well as comfort and encouragement.

Prophecy “experts” like Jack van Impe, Hal Lindsey, and the recent Left Behind series by Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye with their mode of interpretation which looks at the meaning of Revelation as it applies to international politics and dosmestic policies have, in my opinion, misguided readers of this book for decades.

I will attempt to “decode the visions” of Revelation with a bit more sanity. I hope you will join us for this journey.