ON LOVE; PART MCCCXIV
FIRST IS THE GREAT COMMANDMENTS: “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:29-31).
WHAT THEN IS LOVE? In a general sense love is benevolence, good will; that disposition of heart which inclines men to think favorably of their fellow men, and to do them good. In a theological sense, it includes supreme love to God, and universal good will to men. While this IS from an older definition of Charity, which IS rendered in the King James Bible from the same Greek word agape which IS generally rendered as Love, we should amend our own definition here to include the idea that in the reality of Love a man will accord to ALL men ALL things that he would accord to himself and to say that Love IS our thoughts and attitude of the equality of ALL men regardless of their outward nature or appearance…that ALL ARE equally children of Our One God.
PLUS THE EVER IMPORTANT AND HIGH IDEAL TAUGHT TO US BY THE CHRIST: “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matthew 7:12).
We ended the last essay with some thoughts regarding the Apostle James’ words from the fourth chapter of his epistle. While we generally cite ONLY the fourth verse to highlight our view of the incompatibility of the world with God, between worlds spiritual and carnal, we have selected the entire beginning of this chapter and the lead in provided by the last verse of the preceding chapter. There James speaks about “the fruit of righteousness” as he tells us that such ARE “sown in peace” by those who “make peace“. While Vincent DOES NOT address these words, John Gill DOES so in a strictly doctrinal fashion. Mr. Gill tells us that this fruit IS: either eternal life, which is the fruit of Christ’s righteousness….or else what is enjoyed in this life, as the fruit and effect of a righteous and holy conversation 2. He takes this latter idea from the words of the Prophet Isaiah who says “the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever” (Isaiah 32:17). While this IS a good reference point for the idea of righteousness that James IS portraying, the greater reality should be seen in what Mr. Gill calls a righteous and holy conversation. Such would be both the cause and the result of one’s expression of “the wisdom that is from above” which ideas immediately precede James final point of the third chapter. If however we can see that James’ “fruit of righteousness” IS his reference to those ‘virtues’ that ARE the product of “the wisdom that is from above“, we can then see an unbroken stream of spiritual thought that has been arbitrarily separated. The more complete segment from James would read:
“Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 3:13-18, 4:1:4).
James begins this section with by telling us of the ‘conversation‘, the manner of conduct, of a man who has that “the wisdom that is from above“; that such a man would “shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom“. He goes on to show us the man who IS NOT so endued as those that have “bitter envying and strife in your hearts” and here again we should pause to show the Truer meaning of the apostle’s words “pikros zelos kai eritheia“. When we can see this idea presented, as the result of that wisdom that “descendeth not from above” and understand it in the context that James completes further on we can then see the lack of True meaning when these words ARE rendered as envy or as they ARE rendered by other versions….in terms of jealousy and zeal. James’ continuing context shows us the incompatibility of the spiritual and the carnal or as he presents it as the world and God; in this we should be able to see ‘worldly’ wisdom versus True Wisdom from above. The one IS the product of one’s vanity as this IS compounded by one’s proclivities, nurturing, indoctrination and experience while the other True Wisdom IS what one hears over the din of these factors. This True Wisdom comes from one’s own Soul and here again we should see the Soul as the unction or the anointing by which “ye know all things” (1 John 2:20). It IS the revelation and the realization of thoughts and ideas based in this idea of “all things” that IS “the wisdom that is from above“. The itemized list that the apostle provides ARE the qualities of this Wisdom, qualities that ARE lacking in that wisdom that “descendeth not from above“. This latter wisdom IS self-centered and cares for itself as a carnal force in this world and it IS this that James calls bitter, an idea that IS used in most every bible translation. The defining ideas for this word that IS used but twice and ONLY by James tell us only that pikros IS: perhaps from G4078 (through the idea of piercing)9a according to Strong’s. Thayer’s tells us that pikros IS: from the root meaning ‘to cut,’ ‘prick’ as they cite scholarly sources and show us that this IS used by the Septuagint for the Hebrew word that IS rendered as bitter 9. The Hebrew use however shows us the idea of bitter herbs, waters and events while the adverb form of the Greek word IS used in the gospels to show the level of Peter’s ‘grief‘ as he realizes that he has betrayed Christ. Through ALL of this we should perhaps try to see the idea of harsh or virulent which Thayer’s shows us as metaphorical equivalents. In relation to envy there IS a degrading connotation that implies that such envy IS in a form of attack and in this many DO NOT see themselves or their own sense of envy thereby freeing themselves from this sense of wisdom. However, when we can see zelos as emulation as Vincent shows us saying that: Emulation is the better general rendering, which does not necessarily include envy, but may be full of the spirit of self-devotion 4, we can have a better understanding of James intent using the defining ideas for emulation that prevailed when Vincent wrote his commentary. The 1828 and 1844 versions of Webster’s Dictionary tell us that emulation means: The act of attempting to equal or excel in qualities or actions; rivalry; desire of superiority, attended with effort to attain to it; generally in a good sense, or an attempt to equal or excel others in that which is praise-worthy, without the desire of depressing others. Rom.11. In a bad sense, a striving to equal or do more than others to obtain carnal favors or honors. Val.51.
The idea then of bitter or harsh emulation can be understood as a determined sense of attempting to equal or excel in qualities or actions; rivalry; desire of superiority, attended with effort to attain to it which in a carnal sense IS neither good nor bad. It IS however according to the ways of the world and therefore IS NOT Wisdom but rather wisdom and, in James’ words, this IS wisdom that “descendeth not from above“‘ it IS “earthly, sensual, devilish“. We should try to see here that such wisdom DOES NOT have to be ALL three but that it can be any or ALL of these and, from our perspective, the KEY idea here IS earthly in the context of James’ words. We should also remember here that included in such things that ARE “earthly, sensual, devilish” IS James’ other determining factor for what IS wisdom that “descendeth not from above“, eritheia, which IS rendered as strife in our King James Bible and in terms of “selfish ambition” by most others. A few have rendered this as faction and rivalry which ideas ARE closer to the idea that James is showing us. Vincent tells us that strife IS: A wrong rendering, founded on the mistaken derivation from ἔρις 4 and he concludes that eritheia IS lit., of faction as he shows us the original Revised Version rendering of factious which IS shown as faction in our internet copy. As with the rendered ideas of envy and jealousy, strife has little to DO with James presented ideas. In the idea of factions however we have a sense of the division which ideas that ARE “earthly, sensual, devilish” will cause. Webster’s 1828 version defines factious as: Given to faction; addicted to form parties and raise dissensions, in opposition to government; turbulent; prone to clamor against public measures of men 1, and if we add ideas of religion to this definition we can rather clearly see what happened to the church from Paul’s time onward. Emulation and faction ARE NOT intended to be seen as a single idea but rather as two independent carnal ideas that ARE the product of vanity, again compounded by men’s proclivities, nurturing, indoctrination and experience. Most importantly these ideas of emulation and faction show us the carnal intent of men who ever seek better for themselves and who will divide themselves into whatsoever groups will best serve their own sense of self. Most importantly such ideas ARE NOT the product of True Wisdom whose qualities ARE listed as being “first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy” ALL of which ARE contrary to the opposing ideas of “pikros zelos kai eritheia“.
These qualities of “the wisdom that is from above” should be seen as “the fruit of righteousness” and in this we should also be able to see that this fruit IS Wisdom as the flow of revelations and realizations of the eternal Truths that ARE the True mysteries of Life. Taking the apostle’s words further we should be able to understand that the wisdom that “descendeth not from above” and its qualities ARE the source of “wars and fightings among you” and, in this context ARE the product “of your lusts that war in your members“. Again, we should be careful NOT to see ONLY wars in a military sense but as the externalization of those “lusts that war in your members“, those desires for the self, emulation, and those desires to separate oneself into a like minded group, factious behavior. Can we see James’ continuing point here as he asks us that question while already KNOWING the answer. These things, these emulations and factious divisions, ARE “earthly, sensual, devilish” and ARE contrary to the spiritual view of those ideals that ARE “the fruit of righteousness“. From here the apostle IS showing us the very nature of most ALL men who have NOT Truly embraced “the fruit of righteousness” as he critically advises men of their carnal behavior before his ideas on how that one can remove such from their lives. In James’ next words ARE again the reality of emulation and factious division which he words quite strongly saying “Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not“. In the idea of lust we have the desires of men for the things of the world which most DO desire yet DO NOT have and here we should try to see the carnal reality of the man who DOES have somewhat what he had desired….he then desires ever more continually until he desires those things that he CAN NOT obtain. Here we should understand that NO one Truly KNOWS the heart of another where there IS likely lurking unfulfilled desires. In the idea that “ ye kill, and desire to have” we should try to understand more than the act of murder and at the same time see that this word rendered desire IS from the same root word which IS rendered as envy, jealousy and selfish ambition in the previous chapter. We should remember here that James IS speaking to a general audience where it IS unlikely that there would be murderers and killing as we understand this idea yet this IS the way that many render his point. We read such as “You long for something you don’t have, so you commit murder” which idea IS alien to the apostles context. If however we can see in killing more than carnal murder, if we can see this idea of killing according to its other uses, we can than see Webster’s 1828 secondary definition of: To quell; to appease; to calm; to still; as, in seamen’s language, a shower of rain kills the wind 1. There IS a connection here between phoneuō which IS rendered as kill and zeloo which IS rendered as “desire to have” and here the ideas above on emulation can give us a view of both. If we can see that these ideas of killing and emulation result in that same emptiness as the beginning idea of lust, perhaps we can understand that in rivalry; desire of superiority, attended with effort to attain to it; generally in a good sense plus a striving to equal or do more than others to obtain carnal favors or honors as the bad sense we have a sense of killing the desires of others with our own drive of emulation. We need to look at the whole idea of “wars and fightings among you” in relation to the desires of men that ARE rooted in “pikros zelos kai eritheia“, in emulation and factious division properly understood. James’ ends these ideas with the statement saying “ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not” and here we must tie this back to the essential failure of carnal desires to bring satisfaction and James previous words from the beginning of his epistle.
The apostle tells us that “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him” and here we must understand that the subject IS the Wisdom that comes from God and NOT that wisdom that IS the providence of men in this world. We KNOW that the apostle’s intent here IS spiritual as he continues to say “But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:5, 6-8). This is the reality of pistis which IS rendered here as faith, a reality that shows us the same ideas as DOES Jesus as He speaks of moving the mountain and casting the sycamine tree into the sea. Both ARE showing us a single mindedness that IS based in KNOWING and NOT the nebulous ideas of faith and believing from the doctrines of men. While James IS speaking to a general audience, we should try to see that it IS one that leans toward the Lord and here James gives a pretext of this single mindedness in his later words so that we can better understand the duality in the ideas of wisdom and Wisdom. We should try to see that the apostle IS offering us two sides and that men have NOT yet understood the differences nor how that the carnal reality of vanity, as this IS compounded by one’s proclivities, nurturing, indoctrination and experience, IS the natural moving force, the natural motivation, against which the apostle speaks in our selection from the fourth chapter. How one DOES ask for Wisdom and how to distinguish Wisdom from wisdom ARE important parts of the apostles writing. James DOES NOT shy away from such ideas as that it IS ONLY in pistis, rightly understood, that one can have such Wisdom and perhaps it IS toward ALL who will think that by their doctrines they have such Wisdom based in their doctrinal faith, that he continues to show us the difference between Wisdom and wisdom. To be unwavering IS to be certain and sure but the idea here IS ONLY fully possible by the man whose full focus IS upon the things of God. We should understand here that the Way to this place of KNOWING, this unwavering place, IS through the words of the Master who tells us the way to Truth. This way IS simply put in the first part of our trifecta but goes unseen by the doctrinal church which believes that they have the Truth and this despite the many different interpretations offered by the thousands of denomination and sects of the One Christian Truth. So too DO the points offered by the Master in the rest of His trifecta go unseen and this despite the clearly written idea; reading our trifecta again:
- “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32).
- “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21).
- “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me” (John 14:21-24).
These ARE simple sayings that show men the way to those spiritual components of Wisdom. To KNOW the Truth, to have that “wisdom that is from above“, one needs ONLY to “continue in my word” as Jesus instructs us. It IS by DOING so, by keeping His words, that the focus of a man changes from the carnal to the spiritual allowing for the flow of revelation and realization which produce, for everyman, both that Wisdom according to its qualities, and his freedom from his “bondage of corruption“, from his vanity (Romans 8:21, 20), through which he could never see clearly….he could never “see afar off” (2 Peter 1-9). We should note here how that these ideas from Paul and from Peter amplify and clarify Jesus own words on True ‘salvation‘. We should remember here who it IS that CAN NOT “see afar off“; it IS the man that “that lacketh these things” which Peter itemizes for us as virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity; these rendered ideas ARE but the carnal components of the True spiritual inflow of Truth. We should remember that these rendered ideas DO NOT show us the deeper ideas embedded in the Greek words but, at the same time they DO reveal the carnal effect of one’s faith, one’s pistis which IS for us that KNOWING that comes according to Jesus’ words above. A simple example of the way that the deeper meanings reflect upon the carnal IS found in the idea of charity which IS from the Greek agape. Agape IS always in reference to that Love that streams from one’s own Soul with, as James shows us must be the way, NO “respect to persons” (James 2:9). We discussed these words from Peter is some detail recently; our comments can be found in In the Words of Jesus parts 1654-1659). The problem with the ideas offered to us by the renderings of many Greek words into English and other languages IS that the translators use ONLY the carnal ideas that they KNOW rather than the deeper spiritual points that they DO NOT readily see. Our point here IS that men DO NOT see through their vanity, their own illusion and glamour, because they have NOT been shown the more spiritual and Truer Way. Most men DO NOT even posses the ideas from Peter’s list carnally as their manner of Life in this world; their doctrines DO NOT show the Way through their fixation on the doctrinal themes of atonement by which ALL believers ARE made righteous and their ideas of being “born again” through doctrinal rites and rituals. These ideas ARE contrary to Jesus’ own words from our trifecta which doctrines believe ARE justifiably ignored based in their ‘view’ of a ‘new covenant’ which IS revealed NOT by the Master in His words but by the Apostle Paul. Here we should see that while the church sees outsiders as being caught in the vanity, in that “bondage of corruption“, it IS these same things in which the church itself IS yet trapped; it IS in this illusion and glamour that the church DOES NOT see the reality of the Master’s words nor the import of His rhetorical question that asks “why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?“. Most ALL parts of the greater Christian religion rely upon the words of the writer of the Book of Hebrews to endorse the individual views of their doctrines which ARE based in the Epistles of Paul and while many still attribute this book to the Apostle Paul, it IS generally accepted by scholars that he IS NOT the writer and that the True writer remains unknown. Vincent tells us: Many a supposition has been made as to who the author might have been: Paul, Luke, Barnabas (so says Tertullian), Apollos (so says Martin Luther), Silas or even Aquila and Priscilla have been suggested 4. In their reliance however the church fails to see the writer’s words saying that Jesus IS: “the author and finisher of our faith” which idea should show us that it IS the Master’s words that should prevail as the beginning point for ALL doctrinal approaches to the Lord. For us this acceptance of such ideas as there ARE in the Book of Hebrews by the early church IS a profound mystery that must lie at the feet of the church fathers who began the process of identifying what writings were or were NOT ‘canon’, which writings they believed were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Perhaps they DID have such insight into the mind of God but we should remember here that they ARE but men in this world whose efforts devolved into the beginnings of the partisan divisions that we have today as they arrived at their theological pronouncements largely by committee. We ARE neither for nor against the inclusion of this epistle in their ‘canon’, we ARE however strongly for giving preference to the words of the Master as our spiritual guide and an understanding of how that the words of the apostles ONLY clarify and amplify Jesus’ words.
The church however has placed the words of the Apostle Paul above the words of the Master and this IS based more in their convenience than as a practical religious matter. It IS evermore easier to believe that one’s ‘salvation‘ IS based in the rites and the rituals or the affirmations and the confessions of the denominations and sects than it IS to actually become “doers of the word, and not hearers only” which idea explicitly refers to the words of the Master and the Truth of the law. These words echo the Master’s own words which ARE put into the form a that rhetorical question by the Apostle Luke or the fuller idea offered by the Apostle Matthew, part of which IS a part of our trifecta. In Matthew’s Gospel we read Jesus’ words as “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matthew 7:21-23). Here we should see that merely calling Him Lord and NOT respecting Him as such IS of no profit. We should note here how that elements of the Christian era ARE a part of Jesus words which ARE, through this idea, addressed to much more than the Jews in His audience. Jesus’ words here ARE predictive of the nature of men who will take hold of what Paul refers to as “spiritual gifts” (1 Corinthans 12:1) while NOT respecting the words of the Master as “doers of the word“. Yet today the churches ARE filled with those whom Jesus calls out, those who “prophesied in thy name“, those who claim to have “cast out devils“, and those who believe that they “done many wonderful works“; the message to these IS simply that if they ARE NOT among the few that “doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” that they ARE as James tells us….”deceiving your own selves” (James 1:22). The church however will NOT accept this logic; they refuse to see themselves at odds with the Master’s words as they have adopted their theological positions through which they ARE absolved from having to be “doers of the word“. It IS through this deceptive idea of absolution based in the atonement provided by Christ’s death on the cross that most ALL have lost sight of the Truths upon which the True Gospel of Christ IS erected; they forget or ignore the idea that He IS the True Cornerstone of the religion that IS founded in His Name. Picking and choosing from Jesus’ words what ideas that they could live with, men have devised their doctrines and, by the assumed authority of the church leaders and early fathers, have dictated to the masses the precepts by which the ‘believer‘ shall live; precepts that DO NOT include the Truth of the Master’s words. Jesus speaks of Himself as that Cornerstone saying “Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?” (Matthew 21:42). Jesus takes this idea from the Psalms where we read “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the LORD’S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes” (Psalm 118:22) and here we should NOT forget the ‘predictive’ words of the Prophet Isaiah who says “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste” (Isaiah 28:16).
The doctrines of men believe that these ideas explicitly refer to Jesus yet at the same time they have failed to see what should have been constructed upon Him as the Cornerstone if favor of their theological and doctrinal ideas that have been built up over the centuries and taught by what Jesus has called “blind leaders of the blind“; He shows us a sense of their demise saying “if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch“. While this seems a harsh assessment of the Christian leadership through the centuries, we should try to see that this IS but human nature at work in this world of vanity, this world of illusion and glamour in which most ALL men live. This IS as Paul tells us their “bondage of corruption” from which Peter tells us that we must escape as he shows us that to be “partakers of the divine nature” one must have “escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (2 Peter 1:4). It IS through this escape that we can both experience and express “the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:20, 21). This brings us back to our starting point which IS the incompatibility of the world with God; the incompatibility between worlds spiritual and carnal.
James continues in his words to get yet deeper into the idea of asking, an idea that much of the doctrinal church attributes to their ideas of prayer. The apostle ended his last thought discussed above saying “ye ask not“, and he clarifies this in the next sentence saying “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts“. In the idea that “ye ask not” we should see beginning of the idea that “ye ask amiss“, that asking wrongly IS the same as NOT asking at ALL. Through this we should try to understand the nature of asking amiss which IS as the sentence concludes: to ask “that ye may consume it upon your lusts“. Here again IS the separation of the world and God and if we can see here a separation between the things of the world after which men lust, the things that they desire for the self, and the things of God which James shows us earlier as “the wisdom that is from above“, we can then perhaps glimpse the greater Truth that in this “wisdom that is from above” rests that same Truth that Jesus tells us “will set you free“. In the context of the apostle’s words we have the reality that the common idea of prayer IS most often for the things of this world, things or other more subtle ideas which either physically or psychically benefit the one asking or the one being ‘prayed’ for. Can we see the apostle’s greater point on asking, that in asking for those things of the world one IS asking amiss which IS ever to NO avail. The apostle Luke frames this for us in more spiritual terms from Jesus’ words as he records the Master’s saying as “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” (Luke 11:13). We should note here that Matthew’s version of this speaks of “good things” rather than the “Holy Spirit” and it IS Matthew’s version that IS most often used by the church as it better supports their ideas of prayer. What IS the meaning then of “good things“? The idea of “good gifts” IS used in both versions and from Luke’s we should understand that the “good gifts” of the Earthly father IS the equivalent to the “Holy Spirit” given by our Heavenly Father. Matthew shows us the Master’s words as “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?” Matthew 7:11). Both the idea of “good gifts” and “good things” ARE rendered from the same Greek word agathos; in the idea of gifts in both Luke and Matthew the word doma, rendered as gifts, IS added while in the rendering of “good things” agathos stands alone; the additions of things IS based in the presumed intent of the saying. Standing alone agathos simply means good according to both Strong’s and Thayer’s. To best align the idea of “Holy Spirit” with those “good things” we need only look at Jesus’ words saying “Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God” (Luke 18:19). While this will NOT satisfy those who ARE convinced that asking or praying for things of the world IS a valid view of prayer, the reality still remains that “the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God“.
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
- 1 Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1828 and 1913 from https://1828.mshaffer.com/
- 4 Word Studies in the New Testament; Marvin R Vincent D.D. 2nd edition
- 8 Bible commentaries on BibleStudyTools.com
- 9 Thayer’s Greek Lexicon on blueletterbible.org
- 9a The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible on blueletterbible.org
Those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher