Quick Compelling Bible Study Vol. 49: The Meaning of Light in the New Testament

Today we conclude our two-part study exploring the Meaning of Light in the Bible. Last week in the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, we discussed how God created light to give life to all living things. Light symbolizes God’s Glory. He is light. His holiness, presence, goodness, and above all, His love shines upon us when we show our love for Him by showing love for each other.

Jesus said, “In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

In the New Testament, the Meaning of Light is God's love for humankind revealed through the light of Jesus Christ in a dark, sinful world.

Question: What did God create on the fourth day “to separate light from darkness?” Answer: He “made stars.” And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth (Genesis 1:17).

Subsequently, when the Messiah’s birth was foretold in the fourth book of the Hebrew Bible by the oracle Balaam — the prophecy mentioned a star coming out of “Jacob” (the name often used to reference the Jewish people) that read:

“I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel…” (Numbers 24:17).

Approximately 1,412 years later, a bright star heralded the birth of Jesus — famously seen by the local shepherds and the “Magi from the east,” also known as the “Wise Men.” They traveled to Jerusalem bearing gifts asking, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him” (Matthew 2:2). And why should YOU “worship him”? Jesus has the answer:

“The people” knew from their ancient Hebrew Scripture that “God was light.” Thus, when Jesus proclaimed, “I am light” and granted followers “the light of life” (eternal life), he revealed his Divinity knowing the deadly consequences.

Jesus was also clear about the presence of His physical light being short-lived, saying:

And: “Believe in the light while you have the light, so that you may become children of light” (John 12:36).

Near the beginning of John’s Gospel, the Apostle wrote about the light of Jesus:

Later, in the New Testament chapter “1 John,” the Apostle wrote a significant verse proclaiming the meaning of Christ’s light and why we must believe in Him — juxtaposed with His death on the cross:

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin" (1 John 1:7).

John witnessed Jesus “in the light” (along with Peter and James) during the New Testament event known as the Transfiguration when Christ was “transfigured” into light. (See Vol. 26.) Scripture describes what occurred:

"As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning" (Luke 9:29).

Therefore, John’s writings reflect his authority about the meaning and implications of Jesus as the “light of all mankind.”

Not long after Jesus was briefly transfigured into light, He was put to death on the cross – crucified like a common criminal – and again, John was a witness.

Although no human saw Christ’s resurrection, the next morning, John “went to the tomb” and “saw the linen cloths lying there.” Upon seeing the empty tomb “he saw and believed” (John 20:1-18).

After years of studying “the linen cloths lying there,” I firmly believe one of those cloths is Christ’s burial shroud — known as the Shroud of Turin. Secured today in Turin, Italy, the 14-foot linen Shroud is the world’s most studied artifact. The cloth, with numerous mysterious properties, is famously imprinted with an anatomically correct image of a crucified man whose body markings reflect the torturous wounds endured by Christ as recorded in the Gospels. Moreover, myself and millions of others, conclude that a God-induced force of light energy propelled Christ’s dead body out of the stone tomb leaving his imprint on the cloth.

The other cloth, smaller and recorded as a “napkin” or “handkerchief,” only covered Christ’s face when He was removed from the cross. Called the Sudarium of Oviedo, the cloth is preserved today in Oviedo, Spain. Forensic studies show that blood type, blood, and other bodily fluid stains present on the cloth, perfectly match the face wounds as seen on the man of the Shroud. The Sudarium only shows stains but no facial image.

How do the cloths found in Christ’s empty tomb link with our discussion of light?

First, if you call yourself a Christian, then you believe Christ was resurrected — for that is the foundational basis of Christianity, the world’s largest religion.

Second, for Christ to be resurrected a supernatural force had to occur. Therefore since God is light, Christ’s transformation from death back to the “light of life” presumably involved light energy.

Third, if light energy resurrected Christ, then it is plausible that same energy could have left an imprint of his body image on the burial shroud.

Here is another thought to consider related to the light of Christ: Countless people have reported near-death experiences and mentioned seeing a bright light they said was Jesus. That is also plausible since believers know His light is eternally "the light of the world" and "He was with God at the beginning" (John 1-18).

The Lenten season that leads to Easter began this past week. There is no better time to study and pray about the source of all light, life, and love — the Lord Jesus Christ!

Well to start with, as for the article, I got as far as the part about the Shroud of Turin. Then I struggled to read the rest, but that always happens when I read the writer thinks something fake is real.

I disagree it is the blanket that covered Christ. As for the response that Barrie Schwortz got from Mom,

“Barrie, of course, the Shroud is authentic — they wouldn’t have kept it for 2,000 years if it had belonged to anyone else — it wouldn’t have mattered.”

Well we know that's a lie, because there are many objects from skulls, legs, swords, cups, and the like that the Catholic Church and a few governments in Europe swear on a stack of Bibles are genuine. Yeah right.

While I like many of the Pastors and Christians who flocked to Republicans who get elected President, many of them I look with at questionable eye. I don't blame our Presidents for those Religious leaders who flock to them, because neither Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2, nor Trump are, or were, studied in the Scriptures. So they would be clueless as to how close to God they truly are.

Just look how far Falwell's son fell. Turned out he was a cuckolded husband. I may have the wrong mega pastor, but I vaguely remember his father admitting to an affair also. I remember him crying when he confessed. So her being a close religious friend of Trump does not persuade me about the Turin.

Many years ago I read about a sculpture that existed of Jesus, which someone made out of memory. One day in the 2nd century, the person it was handed down to, had placed it on a platform for display. Then one day, there was an earthquake. The bust fell to the marble floor and was smashed into a gazillion pieces.

I believe that story, because God knew that if it lasted, we would worship it. Look what the Israelites did with the snake Moses made in the desert. It was originally stored in the ark of the covenant, and kept in the Temple.

We read in 2 Kings 18:14 that King Hezekiah destroyed the bronze snake while in the process of ridding Judah of all the idols and temples to the false gods. It seems that for hundreds and hundreds of years the people had been worshipping the bronze snake. So God told the King, via Isaiah, to destroy it.

This is why I believe that God would not want some blanket hanging around for us to keep in a glass cage to worship. If there ever was a shroud that was real, God would have moved a true faithful Christian to destroy it many, many, many years before the Catholic church got their filthy evil hands on it. So it's a fake.

Now to your question

She states that;

What did God create on the fourth day “to separate light from darkness?” Answer: He “made stars”

I agree, she's just wrong. Gen 1:4 is where He divided the light from darkness. Then in verse 5 He called them day and night. Thus the separation of day and night. When He exposed His light, darkness did not just go away, it was still there, because we learn God divided the light from the darkness after He exposed His light to His new Creation. So there is proof that He did not separate the day and night on day 4 when He made the heavenly planets.

Now we know He created darkness when He created the heavens and the earth, because in vs 2 we are told that the earth was without form and darkness existed. Then in vs 3, He spoke light into existence, and since He did not create it, GOD just exposed His new creation to His light, thus creating darkness. In fact in Isaiah 45:7 we read that God did indeed create darkness. So, while Moses did not record it, Isaiah set the record straight. Isaiah writes;

vs 5 ) I am the LORD, and there is no other; There is no God besides Me.
I will gird you, though you have not known Me,
vs 6 ) That they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting
That there is none besides Me. I am the LORD, and there is no other;
vs 7 ) I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the LORD, do all these things.’ Isaiah 45:4-7

So we know that, because God is light, He did not have to create it. Interestingly, the sun and moon and the stars did not exist yet, so we know it had to be His light that was used. Since the heavenly planets did not exist until the 4th day.

Now as for your thought that things made were from things already created, I agree. In vs 2, we learn that "the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. Consider what Henry Morris wrote in his book, "The Genesis Record".

The deep ( Hebrew word is tehom), in later Scriptures it refers to the waters of the Ocean. Initially, however, the earth had no form; and similarity, this state must apply to the waters also. The picture presented is one of all the basics material elements sustained in a pervasive watery matrix throughout the darkness of space.The same image is suggested in 2 Peter 3:5,
"the earth standing out of the water and in the water"

So all the elements existed for the things He would make later. We would not see the word creation used again till He created life, as in water, air, and land creatures. Now animal and human life needed to be created since they all have a spirit, where as plant life does not. We learn in Ecclesiastes 3:21;

Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?

So like humans, animals also have a spirit, and thus needed to be created. This is why, as you stated, "Genesis 1 uses “Create” three times; in the beginning, on day five and on days six.". I also agree that there are no insignificant details in scripture. I could go on and on about creation week, but I gave you enough to see my take, which pretty much aligns with yours.

God bless brother. It's late, I'll check by sometime tomorrow for a response from you.

I decided to expound upon this a bit for a commentary on my blog. It won't be much different. I'll basically remove any reference that shows it's a comment, instead of a commentary.

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

If God is light and God is omnipresent, where is outer darkness? Just wondering.

As we seek to establish rules for interpretation of God’s word, we find the best place to look is in the Bible. One rule I am using here is

1 Cor 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

How often do you see this? Lets look at creation with a different perspective. There are two creations and the number two gives a different dynamic than the number three. Romans 5:14 says that Adam is a figure of him that was to come and then the rest of the chapter points out the difference between Adam and Christ. Here the bible helps us to compare and contrast the natural man and the spiritual man and so we learn how to do it elsewhere. This may be why some parables are explained and others are not explained. The first creation is a figure of the second and our task is to discern which attributes are like and which are not. We are created in Adam and we are created in Christ. (Ephesians 2:10) One difference that jumps out is the natural man is Created male and female in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2 the spiritual man is Formed out of the dust and Eve (church) was taken out of him. Even though Christ was not actually created, he was created in Adam just as Adam is created in Christ.

The structure of scripture is one of God’s fingerprints that we find on every page. The rest of Genesis parallels the creation of chapter 1. The first day was light and the eyes of them both were opened. The second day waters divided and you have the two natures in Cain and Able. The third day you have land appearing, Noah and so on. The six days of work divide into a 3+3. Light on the first and fourth day. Days two and five; waters dividing and waters producing. Days three and six: land appearing with plants and land producing with animals.

Also the Old Testament gives the history of the natural man and the New Testament covers the spiritual man. Note that Joseph, the seventh day, rises to rule, but ends in a coffin in Egypt.

Before I answer your full question, contemplate this thought
God Created man. Yet he made Eve from man. Again he took what Adam had so he did not have to create her. God took her from Adam.

Up until that moment, Adam was the closest man could ever be to complete in Christ.

Once He took Eve out of man, he separated the Lion and the the Lamb from being One, in Christ with God.

Christ is the Lion, and the Lamb, in One powerful package similar as was Adam originally. Yet He was not shod as Christ is. Thus the first Adam sinned and fell, because the lamb side, Eve, led him to sin.

One day we will be as we were intended to be, but in a spiritual new body

I’ll go into more depth later, but contemplate that for awhile.

Again I am playing with my shepherds

The only excercise they get is when play with them after I feed them. Since I moved up
Here to Idaho I do not live in the country anymore. Thus they don’t have the room they had in Ca

Shepherds need much excercise, so I will be busy fir a bit and respond to your question in full later tonight

Interesting the way you paralelled the 7 day's of creation with the whole book of Genesis. I'll have to ponder that awhile, but it is intriguing.

Anyway,

If God is light and God is omnipresent, where is outer darkness? Just wondering.

Outer darkness refers to living in the World of Satan. Darkness of the heart/spirit as apposed to living in the Light of God. We are all in spiritual darkness until we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior, and thus His light begins to shine in us, as we reflect His light in us to a dark World, which still belongs to Satan.

1 Cor 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

The first being natural continues the analogy Paul used in Galatians 4:21-29 about Ishmael being the son of the flesh, while the Spiritual son, Isaac, who came after harkens to the One born of the promise of God, and thus of the spirit.

Adam was born first, but he was representative of the flesh, while Christ was born afterwards representing the Spirit. Born under the law born of a woman. Thus He had to fulfill all the prophecies, all the works of the Law, and complete all the ceremonies mandated by the Law.

Ishmael is like Adam in a way by representing the old covenant of the flesh that needed the Law. While Isaac is the New Covenant, representative of Christ and the new covenant. Thus the natural (the works of the flesh) was first, followed by the spiritual one.

When God separated Eve from Adam, He gave her a seed that could only be fertilized by Him through the Holy Spirit. The One conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the woman, was born without sin. It must be stated, that Mary was not the first to have a child by the spirit. She was just the only virgin.

While Issac, Samson, Samuel, John The Baptist, and others were all conceived through the help of the Holy Spirit by allowing their husbands to supernaturally impregnate them, the women all had sexually known their husbands beforehand. So the children were all born of sin. Whereas Mary was the only virgin, thus Christ was born without sin.

I hope that makes sense. I'm tired, been a long day, and I am working on like three different ideas for commentaries. While also contemplating a political article about Biden enabling pedophiles by canceling Operation Talon.

Note that Joseph, the seventh day, rises to rule, but ends in a coffin in Egypt.

Is that an analogy of Christ being born at the end of the Old Testament, and then is buried in the tomb after the Crucifixion? Which I guess would relate to the building of God's nation through trials and suffering in Egypt. So the new nation, Christ's Church, is born with His entombment, and now we struggle and suffer till He returns.

If that is what you are alluding to. I would say that the New Testament began the moment Christ died and God tore the veil that had kept all but the High priest from entering the Holy of Holies. With Christ death, the Law had ended, all ceremonies had ended, and the need for a human to intervene had ended, because the perfect lamb had been sacrificed which became the propitiation for our sins.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.