I especially enjoyed your version of what Adam said when he first saw Eve: "WOW!" I have said that for years.
Have you read D. Brian Shafer's series -- Chronicles of the Host: Exile of Lucifer, Unholy Empire: From the fall of man to the birth of Christ, Rising Darkness: The showdown between Christ and Satan, and Final Confrontation? His vision is much like yours.
Thanks and keep up the good work.
You're right. Sorry I missed that. Thanks for pointing it out. I have made the corrections in "Our Father's Children."
First, I want you to know that I've enjoyed reading Theophilus as well as OFC and I'm glad that the Lord has enabled you to continue in His work.
I do have a question regarding the Nimrod/Semiramis storyline. Where have you gotten your source information for this? Nimrod is mentioned only briefly in the Bible, and I've found no mention at all of Semiramis.
While I'm not knocking the crdibility of your sources (as the theory plausibly explains the beginning of the mother goddess cult of the ancient tribes), it might be good for you to make a note of these sources so that the readers won't think this is directly from the Bible itself and lead to potential confusion.
During Sylvia's illness and one of her near-death experiences she was exposed to the evil spirits and dangers of a certain alternative health therapy. To help in my efforts to rescue her, the Lord brought me in contact with "Treated or Tricked?", a book by Dr. Badu Bediako and Dr. Selwyn Stevens. This in turn brought me in contact with another book by Dr. Stevens titled "The New Age: The Old Lie in a New Package." During my reading of this book, the Lord let me know that He wanted me to include the story of Nimrod and Semiramis and the beginning of the New Age religion in the next segment of OFC, which would include the Tower of Babel.
My comic strip was on hold at this time while I took care of Sylvia. When I returned to this work, I researched the subject of Nimrod and Semiramis more thoroughly and asked the Holy Spirit's direction in writing the script and doing the illustrations. The result is the 30 episodes that follow the flood and rainbow part of the story.
Here are a few excerpts from Dr. Stevens' book, followed by references to additional sources:
"Archeological evidence indicates (Nimrod) was so physically strong that he killed both a bull and a lion with his bare hands. He then wore the bull's horns and the lion's skin as proof of his prowess as a hunter and a leader. Nimrod had his people build several cities, and also a number of ziggarats (temple-towers) for religious purposes. These were claimed to be staircases from earth to heaven, and were used for satanic worship and occultic initiation. The best known was at Babylon, and was called 'The House of the Foundation or Platform of Heaven and Earth.' This is the famous 'Tower of Babel' -- (babel means 'Gateway to God' as well as 'Confusion').
"Josephus, the Jewish/Roman historian, records 'it was Nimrod who excited them (the people) to such an affront and contempt to God... He also gradually changed the government into tyranny -- seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a dependence upon his power. He also said that he would be revenged on God, if He should have a mind to drown the world again: for he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers.'
"The evidence from all sources is very consistent -- Nimrod rebelled against God, and determined to lead the people away with him. Together with his wife Semiramis, Nimrod created most of what we know today as Occultism, including witchcraft, astrology, blood sacrifices and much more. Nimrod was also called 'Molech,' and it was not uncommon that he required human sacrifices by fire, particularly of children.
"Semiramis was famous for her beauty including her blond hair and blue eyes. Among her many titles were 'Queen of Heaven,' 'Mother of God,' and 'The Mother of Knowledge.'...
"... Shem killed Nimrod in an attempt to put an end to the evil. Fearing the loss of her power over the people, Semiramis had an illegitimate child named Tammuz. She claimed the child was a reincarnation of Nimrod and that he was now a deity, explaining that the soul of Nimrod had ascended to the sun-heaven. Semiramis taught that Nimrod was the Sun-God 'Baal' or 'Bel.' Soon statues began appearing of Semiramis holding her baby son/husband. This is the origin of the 'Mother and Child' religion, which is common in quite a number of cultures.
"Semiramis also taught that the stars were actually the spirits of the dead which continue to watch over mankind. Over a period of time her teachings were gradually structured into a religion which involved worshipping dead ancestors and looking to the stars for guidance in the affairs of life for both individuals and nations.
"... The overwhelming evidence is that Nimrod, Semiramis and many of the other priestly leaders were involved in direct Satanic contact and activity."
-- Selwyn Stevens Ph.D., The New Age: The Old Lie in a New Package, p. 12-14. Copyright Selwyn Stevens 1992. Available from Jubilee Resources.
Nimrod, Mars and the Marduk Connection, by Bryce Self.
Semiramis, Queen of Babylon, by Bryce Self.
Nimrod: Who was he? Was he godly or evil?, by Bible archaeologist Dr. David P. Livingston.
The Two Babylons: The Mother of the Child, by Alexander Hislop.
The Spirit of Nimrod (Mystery Babylon).
The Tower of Babel and the Confusion of Languages, by Dolphin, Stedman, Montgomery, and Morris.
Mystery Babylon the Great.
I know that God will continue to bless you as you continue to bless others with the work He has called you to.
My prayers are added to all the others for your health and welfare. May God send his holy angels to sustain and strengthen you, to give you courage, and peace and hope in your heart. May you and Sylvia have twenty more years of health and love.
The scriptures I want to compare are Genesis 2:16,17 and Genesis 3:2,3. The first scripture says that eating the forbidden fruit will cause death. In the second scripture Eve says to the serprent that eating or even touching the the fruit will cause death. Note the addition of touching in the second scripture. In my opinion Satan got Adam to worry or be afraid that Eve might accidentally eat of the tree that would cause death. So when Adam gave instruction to Eve, Adam added touching the fruit would cause death. In other words the second sin in the Garden of Eden was that Adam lied and said that God said something that He did not say.
When the serpent talked to Eve, he told the truth (sort of). Just touching the fruit would not cause death. Adam was with Eve at the time and in my opinion he was caught up in the sin of pride. "Pride goeth before destruction." With Eve and the serpent ganged up against him, he was too proud to admit the problem was caused by his own addition to what God said and that caused him to be too embarrassed to open his mouth and correct his error.
I can imagine Eve saying to Adam something like, "Look, I touched the fruit and I did not die and you said that I would die if I even touched the fruit." With further arguments Eve, supported by the serpent, embarrassed Adam and hurt his pride so that he would not speak up and correct his error, but was compelled to eat the forbidden fruit. This is my opinion, which is backed up by the main way that Satan has gotten me in a hole.
I am a Sunday School teacher and will definately recommend your site to others in the church. It's unlikely that my Pastor will have a link to the cartoons, so for future reference will the previous weeks' cartoons always remain on your site?
As far as I know, the previous weeks' comic strips will always remain on the web site. Of course that is subject to change according to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Thanks for helping to spread the word!
I've been doing a free Christian comic strip publication, dsitributed in several counties surrounding where I live, for a few years now. I can appreciate the hard work which goes into creating a strip like yours.
May the Lord bless you in all you do. Keep up the good work.
Three common views of the meaning of "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-4 among most scholars and commentators are: One, the sons of God are rulers, an early royal aristocracy; two, the sons of God are angels; and three, they are the godly line of Seth. The daughters of mankind are then seen as women from the ungodly line of Cain.
Much has been written concerning each view, but I will address them briefly.
The "human rulers" view affirms that the sons of God were princes and kings among men. Ed Murphy writes , "...like boastful Lamech before them (4:19,23-24) and sexually addicted King Solomon after them (1 Kings 11:1-13), these kings sexually abused women. While this is the position of Orthodox Judaism, Keil and Delitzsch say it can 'be dismissed at once as not warranted by the usages of the language and as altogether unscriptural.'" (The Handbook of Spiritual Warfare (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992), 222).
Gordon J. Wenham ("Genesis 1-15", The Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word, 1987), 139), says that "the 'angel' interpretation is at once the oldest view and that of most modern commentators." He says that modern scholars who accept this view advance various reasons for supporting it.
"First, elsewhere in the Old Testament (Psalm 29:1; Job 1:6) 'sons of God' refers to heavenly, godlike angelic creatures. Second, in 6:1-4 the contrast is between 'the sons of God' on the one hand and 'the daughters of men' on the other, not between one group of the sons of men versus another group of the daughters of men.
"The alternative interpretations presuppose that what Genesis 6 really meant was that 'the sons of some men' married 'the daughters of other men.' The phrase 'sons of God,' is, to say the least, an obscure way of expressing such an idea."
It is made the more improbable by 6:1 where "man" refers to all humanity. Also, "it is natural to assume that in verse 2 'daughters of man' has an equally broad reference, not a specific section of the human race."
Derek Kidner writes, "The main point of this cryptic passage is that a new age has been reached in the progress of evil, with God's bounds overstepped in yet another realm.
"... If the [angelic] view defies the normalities of experience, the [Sethite] view defies those of language, for while the Old Testament can declare God's people to be His sons, the normal meaning of the actual term 'sons of God' is 'angels,' and nothing has prepared the reader to assume that 'men' now means Cainites only." (Genesis (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1967), 83-84).
Ed Murphy adds, "While we have great difficulty understanding this passage, evidently the original recipients of Genesis did not. What they understood by verses 1-2 unfortunately has not been passed on to us. Our understanding of Genesis as a book, which is written to a people who knew fallen spiritual beings could take on human bodies to engage in illicit sexual relationships with human beings, would incline me towards the view of the sons of God as fallen angelic beings. My objections to this view, however, are all but insurmountable to me because of my research, my counseling with demonized people, and my experience with them in dealing with sexual demons.
"Demons which specialize in having sex with human beings, both male and female, are very common. They have been known and written about for centuries... While [evil] spirits do engage in full sexual relationships with humans, they do not produce sperm, and are thus incapable of procreating children and producing a race of beings half demon and half human...
"While I am strongly inclined towards the Sethite position and away from the fallen angel view, like Wenham, I have difficulty with its way of interpreting both 'the sons of God' and the 'daughters of men.' I also have difficulty believing the original recipients of the book would get that position from the text alone. Thus, we are probably left with an unresolvable question." (The Handbook of Spiritual Warfare, page 225).
As for me, I am strongly inclined towards the fallen angel view. Of course, there is that question concerning whether angels could produce sperm. However, even though angels cannot produce sperm as spirit beings, it seems to me that the physical bodies they take the form of may be able to. Afterall, we have Bible examples of angels appearing in human form with their physical bodies performing functions that we take for granted, such as eating food and drinking water like angels did when they appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18. Perhaps fallen angels appearing in physical bodies that can engage in sex with humans can produce sperm with those bodies as well.
Regardless, there is no doubt in my mind that fallen angels were having sex with humans in the days before the flood, just as they are today. And that's what is suggested in The Daughters of Men.
Yes, I'm aware that in the laws God gave the children of Israel through Moses more than 2,500 years after creation that incest was forbidden (Leviticus 18, for example). But does that mean that it was forbidden during the first generations after Adam and Eve were created, or even after Noah and the flood?
God told Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it" (Genesis 1:28). How would they do that? What are the alternatives?
Did God create another man and woman so that their children and grandchildren could marry Adam and Eve's children and grandchildren? No. Genesis 3:20 says that Eve "would become the mother of all living." God created only two people: Adam and Eve. Who does that leave for their children to marry?
You suggest that maybe God took one of Cain's ribs and used it to create a wife for him. If so, did God take one of Seth's ribs and make him a wife also? And did He do the same for all of Adam and Eve's other sons, grandsons, etc.? Then what about their daughters and granddaughters? Where would their husbands come from?
The same questions might be asked concerning the children of Noah's sons and their wives after the flood that destroyed the rest of mankind. Who did they marry if not a sibling or a cousin?
Apparently during that period of time God did not have a problem with marriage between near of kin (i.e., Rebekah, whom God chose for Isaac to marry; Genesis 24:15, 67).
God bless you and your ministry. I have always loved Theophilus.
I decided to revisit Genesis 3 and refresh my memory because it has been almost a year since I drew that particular comic strip and my focus lately has been outside the Garden, so to speak.
No problem. If the passage is indeed a verbal metaphor, then my comic strip becomes a visual metaphor. But I don't know why you would assume that Eve's encounter with the serpent is a metaphor. Don't you believe that a serpent could have talked? Or that he could have been charismatic enough to engage Eve in conversation? Isn't it possible that the serpent in Genesis 3:1 was an entirely different creature than the serpents we're acqainted with today? This serpent even had legs, apparently, since he lost them as a result of God's curse:
"Cursed are you above all the livestock
and all the wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life." (verse 14)
Is Satan crawling on his belly and eating dirt? No, but serpents are. The next part of the curse (verse 15) is for Satan. At least that's the way I see it.
One tiny little insignificant item of feedback... You use the term "Lucifer" in some of the cartoons. Have you studied the history behind this? It was a mistake in the original King James and it is still the only version that used the word. It was never intended as a name for Satan. A more accurate translation of the term used in the original KJV is "Bright and Morning Star" and it was a reference to Nebuchadnezzar (Isaiah 14:4).
Isaiah 14:12 KJV: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"
Isaiah 14:12 NNAS: "How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, you who have weakened the nations!"
Yes, I'm aware that the word "Lucifer" is only used in the KJV and only in the verse you mentioned. I did a lot of prayerful research and study on angels, etc., in preparation for what the Lord has been leading me to do with this comic strip. And as I asked the Lord what words He wanted me to use for the angels' dialogue in the strip under consideration, the name Lucifer came strongly to mind. And I have had peace about using that even after putting it on the internet.
I'm not a Hebrew scholar, but according to Young's Analytical Concordance "Lucifer" means "shining one" and in Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (as referenced by Strong's Concordance) the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 14:12 means "bright star, i.e. Lucifer. Nor is this a bad rendering, for there is added (another Hebrew word) and in the Chaldee also Lucifer (the morning star), ...and in Arab ... splendid star..."
Angels are sometimes referred to in Scripture as "stars." Apparently Lucifer is just another way of saying "shining one," "bright angel," "morning angel," "splendid angel," which describes the way Satan was while he was in God's presence and reflecting God's light and glory. Of course when he was cast out, his countenance darkened and he was no longer the "bright star" ; no longer Lucifer. Now he is the "adversary" -- Satan.
Anyway, I still have peace about leaving the word Lucifer in the strip, but I remain open to changing it if that's what the Lord wants. I have asked Him to show me very clearly if He wants it changed.
The reader's response to Bob:
The thing I really appreciate about this is your taking the time to expose the Scripture for yourself. You are right my brother, you and the Lord have a personal relationship and you have made that the focus instead of a trivial battle over what the original Hebrew meant. Much of Moses' Hebrew is lost to us, even though Hebrew scholars today may not want to admit that. My mother is Lebanese and I've studied Hebrew my entire life, 40 years so far.
It can easily be "exposed" that while the reference in Isaiah may have been referring to the king of Babylon at that time, it is made clear to us that there were only two powers. So he was either for God or for the Evil one. It is of course interesting that God calls Nebuchadnezzar His servant even while he was still doing evil, because he was being used to punish Israel and then Judah, "as a man wipes a plate with a towel." Much later after eating grass for 7 years, hehe, Nebuchadnezzar humbles himself and then truly serves God. There are lessons within all of that for anyone who has a personal relationship with God.
I love science. In the late 80s and early 90s the human genome project was underway. It involved an international study whose goal was to accurately map the entire human genetic code. One of the discoveries was the mitochondria's DNA in individual human cells (which act as "lungs" allowing individual cells to "breathe" so to speak) are passed with absolutely no change from mother to offspring. The chromosomes in the nucleus of a cell are a mix of both parents, but the mitochondria's DNA is not so. It is cloned exactly from the mother's side and the father has no input whatsoever.
Humans of diverse races, white, oriental, Negro, and aboriginal all were found to have identical mitochondria DNA sequences right down to the last helix. The DNA evidence supports that all humans had one mother. We all came from the exact same matriarch! This shocked the scientific community! And that mother was a Negro woman! The DNA don't lie.
Several years after God told me that Adam and Eve were black, science confirmed it. And it provided scienfic evidence for the story of creation.
Every church wants Adam, Eve, and even Christ to be of their race. I have seen crucifixes with Negro men, Aryan men, etc. We all need to realize race really does not matter. It is irrelevant.
Yes, it is true that we normally see Adam portrayed as a white blond by white American artists, as a black by African artists, as a hispanic by Haitian artists, and so on. But in Our Father's Children Adam is not white. With my limited palette of internet-friendly colors, I show him as brown. That and the plain facial features makes him sort of generic, which is the way I believe God wants him in this strip -- so more people can relate to him and will have more personal involvement in the story.
I don't doubt that Adam and Eve were black. Undoubtedly they were some color, and I have no problem with black. But the Lord did not reveal that to me, and I believe that was deliberate in my case. For like I suggested, He wants my comics to appeal to as many as possible -- to all races worldwide, and even to those who are prejudiced against other races -- so that they might become more intimately involved with the message He is giving me to share through the comic strip format. That's why I chose the color for Adam that does not pin down a particular race. It could even be a white man with a dark tan.
For the same reason I am drawing the characters in a simple style, even though at the same time I try to suggest realism. More people can see themselves in a character when the features are simply drawn with little or no detail. For example, everyone can relate to the popular happy face symbol (a plain yellow circle with two dots for the eyes and a curved line to represent the mouth smiling). That could be your face. It could be mine. It could be anyone. It could be everyone. Add more detail to that "face," and fewer people would be able to put themselves in the picture. And a photographic likeness would eliminate all but the one person who looks like the photo.
Maybe the Lord revealed to you that Adam and Eve were black, and then exposed you to scientific studies that confirmed that in order to help you deal with an attitudinal problem, or to help you help others overcome that kind of sin in their hearts.
Like you say, race doesn't really matter. Not even when we're drawing Adam and Eve.
No doubt the Holy Spirit was there as well.