ON LOVE; PART MDXLXIII
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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).
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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.
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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).
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
We ended the last essay with some preliminary thoughts on the New Testament meaning of the phrase “the Son of man“. We come upon this through our discussion of the Master’s words from the Gospel of Matthew that many see as detailing the end times, words that follow immediately upon Jesus’ predictions and comments regarding the sacking of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Through our previous discussions we have determined that the whole idea of the Master’s words, here and in the other synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, ARE speaking specifically of the upcoming events that were to occur and which would essentially end the Jewish religion as it had been KNOWN for 1500 years, or since the times of Moses and his edicts. While many doctrinal scholars still see the end times in the Master’s words, we think that we have established a True case for our better understanding of the Master’s words but this gets more complicated in this second section of His words, words that have led so many to see the end times in His whole presentation. We repeat this second section for clarity; the Master says:
“Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (Matthew 24:25:36).
The Master’s words here begin with the idea that “Behold, I have told you before” and in these words we should see Jesus’ saying that His previous words were predictive of the fall of Jerusalem and the horrors that the Roman siege would put upon the Jews in Jerusalem. We noted that Mark confirms for us the predictive nature of Jesus’ words saying “take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things” (Mark 13:23). The Master’s next words seem to take us on a different path than what we were on in the last section which IS more easily placed as predictive of the sacking of Jerusalem. There the Master’s words concern the appearance of “false Christs, and false prophets” who would proclaim that they ARE speaking for the Lord; here we spent some time on the defining idea of the Greek word christos and both its technical meaning as anointed and its meaning to the Jews as Messiah. This idea IS a major part of the first section that we discussed; the Master IS warning His disciples, He IS speaking to them alone here. This we take from the opening part of the Master’s discourse where we read “as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Matthew 24:3). While our selected section of this ‘Olivet discourse’ DID not include this very beginning, we circle back to it now for additional clarity. Here we read that the whole of the Master’s words ARE offered to disciples who “came unto him privately” and from this we should be able to see that the nature of His warnings ARE offered to men who had some measure of Truth and understanding but who the Master understood could still be deceived. This He tells them twice; first saying “Take heed that no man deceive you” (Matthew 24:4) and then saying that “there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect” (Matthew 24:24).
In the words that we cite above that were NOT a part of our last discussion, we should see that the idea IS framed in terms of the Master’s coming and “the end of the world?“. In hindsight we can say that we did NOT begin with this question from Jesus’ disciples because the very nature of these words leads us to believe that the whole of His comments ARE in this regard: “the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?“. We will take them on now however before we continue with the second part of the Master’s discourse. In regard to the idea of “the sign of thy coming“, we should try to divorce our thoughts from the doctrinal ideas that prevail yet today. This IS the first reference to this idea in the gospels and it IS NOT referenced in either Mark’s nor Luke’s versions of this event. The Event begins with the Master’s saying of the temple that “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (Matthew 24:2); these words ARE similarly presented in the other synoptic gospels. This however IS where the similarity ends concerning the Master’s words regarding “the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?“. In Mark the disciples response to the Master’s words ARE “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?” (Mark 13:4) while in Luke’s Gospel we read the disciples words as “Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?” (Luke 21:7).
Neither Mark nor Luke make any mention of “the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” leaving us to wonder what the reality of this encounter with the Master IS. Based on the Master’s words which we have been discussing as our first section we should be able to see that the question IS regarding the sacking of Jerusalem as noted by Mark and Luke and NOT “the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” as shown us in Matthew. This aside, let us dissect Matthew’s version; first the idea of the sign IS the same in ALL of the gospels; in ALL the disciples ARE asking for a sign regarding a single event, the one that leads to the idea that “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down“. Nothing more IS involved in this part of the question which IS when and how shall we KNOW. The ideas from Matthew however offer us a problem that may not be solvable and we should note that these words ARE used by the doctrines of men to portend the Master’s return and the end times; although they may NOT have been intended for that purpose. We should note here that the Master’s response to the Matthew question IS actually much the same as His response to the question posed in Mark and Luke. In Matthew the Greek word parousia IS rendered as coming in the King James Bible as well as in most ALL others. Strong’s offers us a particularly doctrinal definition of parousia saying that the meaning IS: from the present participle of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; specially, of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physically, aspect:—coming, presence 9a. Thayer’s on the other hand leads with a single word saying that the idea of parousia IS presence 9. From here Thayer’s also goes fully into the doctrinal ideas that prevailed then and which still prevail today saying that the intent IS to portend the second coming of the Christ. We should note here that most ALL DO NOT separate the Christ from Jesus leaving the idea to become: the future, visible, return from heaven of Jesus, the Messiah, to raise the dead, hold the last judgment, and set up formally and gloriously the kingdom of God 9; this is the meaning they specifically assign to our subject verse from Matthew’s Gospel.
Most ALL of the translations and commentaries assign these words from Matthew’s Gospel, to the return of Jesus, despite the absence of this ‘most important doctrinal theme’ in the other gospel narratives. Also, most ALL render parousia as coming or in terms of Jesus’ return except for Young’s Literal Translation where we read “Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?“. While one may say that the difference here IS one without a distinction, we should look further into the use of presence by Young’s. Vincent tells us, without commentary, that parousia IS: Coming [παρουσιας]. Originally, presence, from pareinai, to be present 4. Even with this idea of presence however we ARE left with somewhat of a mystery regarding the recorded words. We should note however that up to this point, including the preceding verses and chapters, neither this idea of the Master’s presence at a future time nor His coming IS mentioned. Moving on, the second idea that the disciples ARE asking about which IS “the end of the world“. The rendering of world here IS from the Greek word aion which IS most often rendered as ever, often world and at times age along with a variety of miscellaneous words. Strong’s tells us that aion IS: from the same as G104; properly, an age; by extension, perpetuity (also past); by implication, the world 9a before they venture off into strictly doctrinal ideas. Thayer’s agrees that the primary definition IS age which leaves us to wonder why it IS so often rendered as world. Age IS a lot less permanent than world in this context and we should try to see how that the idea may be presented in such a way as to promote the doctrinal narrative rather than the reality of the idea. Using age we can discern a meaning that properly coincides with the way that this IS presented in the other gospels. This requires however that the disciples see the end of the Jewish age, the Jewish religion as it had existed for 1500 years in the Master’s description that tells them that “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down“. This makes much more sense that “the end of the world“.
While these ideas of presence and age can help us to understand the destruction of the temple and the sacking of Jerusalem, the ideas of the end and Jesus return come back as the Master’s dialogue goes on. As we begin we should understand that to the Jews the idea of the Christ IS the Messiah and that while He was there with the Jews, few DID recognize Him as the Messiah. Furthermore most ALL Jewish leaders essentially refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah because He DID NOT support their view of their religion; this despite the apparent spiritual Power that He possessed. This was vanity at work and at its fullest. As we stated above, in the previous section the Master IS telling His disciples that they should be concerned with the appearance of “false Christs, and false prophets” who would proclaim that they ARE speaking for the Lord. As we continue in this second section however that idea changes; here the Master says “if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be“. Here Jesus IS specifically speaking of “the Son of man“. He tells us of the nature of the coming of “the Son of man“, equating this to “the lightning” which “cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west“; clearly the idea IS NOT that of a person. So again we must ask what IS the reality of this idea of “the Son of man“?
As we said in the last essay, the doctrinal view IS that “the Son of man” IS just another term by which the Master refers to Himself. Few have ventured any further in trying to understand the True meaning of these words. While it IS True that the idea of “the Son of man” IS used by the Master as a reference to Himself, we should be aware of the context in which this IS used. We should note also that aside from a repeating of a verse from the Old Testament in Hebrews, the idea of “the Son of man” IS totally missing from the epistles where the intent IS ever to amplify and clarify the Master’s own words. We should note as well that except for his ‘trial’ at the hands of the high priest, Jesus never refers to Himself as the Christ, which in this time should be understood ONLY as the Messiah. In one place in John’s Gospel we read that Jesus DOES seem to refer to Himself as Jesus Christ; we read His words in private prayer as “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3). While we can try to see that the Master uses this idea of “the Son of man” so as to NOT call Himself the Christ nor the Messiah nor the anointed of God, there surely IS more to this idea than that; He could have simply referred to Himself as Jesus. Let us begin here with the idea that “the Son of man” IS just what it says, Jesus and ALL men ARE such; ALL ARE sons of men. However, in reference to Himself we should note the uniqueness of Jesus as one that IS fully Repented and Transformed; as one who IS Redeemed according to Paul’s words. Here we should try to see that as Paul waits, the Master has achieved “the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23). We should remember here that the Master is ALSO Transfigured. From a spiritual perspective can we begin to see that “the Son of man” IS reference to one who has achieved ALL of this as a man in this world?
Everything that can be said about “the Son of man” can be said about the Christ, and here in the context of the Master’s words referring to Himself, Jesus the Christ, Jesus the anointed of God, Jesus the Messiah would be suitable replacements. Why Jesus chooses to refer to Himself as “the Son of man” IS perhaps because He DOES NOT want to publish the Truth at the time, the Truth that He IS the Messiah; He wants the people, whomever they may be, to come to the conclusion that He IS the Christ, the Messiah, the anointed of God, on their own. Several times, in the Light of some miracle that the Master performed, He cautioned the people that they should “tell no man” (Luke 5:14). Other times Jesus cautions His disciples in the same way saying in one instance that “they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead” (Mark 9:9); in another we read that “Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ” (Matthew 16:20). Some DO however come to realize the Truth of the Master’s reality. In several places men and sometimes “unclean spirits” call the Master the “the Son of God” (Mark 3:11) while once His disciples, seemingly as a chorus, voiced their saying “Of a truth thou art the Son of God“. This happens as the Master IS walking on the water toward the disciples in a ship in turbulent seas when, after having rescued Peter, we read “when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God” (Matthew 14:32-33). We should be able to see and to understand that the Master DOES NOT want the reality of His being the Christ published, that He wants this reality to be realized by individuals.
This realization DOES come to some as we read of Peter who, after the Transfiguration and the question to His disciples asking “whom say ye that I am?” Peter responds “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God“. To this the Master responds saying “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 16:15-17). Can we see a purpose here for the Master’s referring to Himself as “the Son of man“. Can we see that this IS more than just another term by which the Master refers to Himself as so many believe. Jesus Truly IS a son of man, born of Mary while some scripture alludes to the idea that Joseph IS NOT His paternal father. While many dispute the idea of Jesus’ ‘virgin birth’ with some saying that the story was developed later based on prophecies, this DOES NOT matter as the idea of His ‘virgin birth’ plays NO role in His Life and ‘ministry’; it IS NOT a foundational idea in the ‘divinity’ of the Master. To be sure the Master IS born as we ALL ARE and in this we have one reality for the idea of His use of the “the Son of man” when referencing Himself. Perhaps we should try to see that Jesus, in using this reference to Himself, IS showing us His humanity while His ‘divinity’ IS on display at the same time. The idea of ‘divinity’ here should NOT be understood as it IS presented in the doctrines of men but rather from the perspective that ALL men are ‘divine’ as Souls; ALL Souls ARE part and parcel of the Lord. What sets the Master apart from ordinary men, religious or otherwise, IS that in the Life of Jesus His Soul, the Christ Within, IS actively directing the Life of the man. Perhaps we should try to see the parabolic message that IS contained in His reference to Himself as “the Son of man“; that He IS showing us that He too IS a man who IS so anointed by the Truth and Love that IS the Godhead that He can teach and DO as He DID….and that everyman can be so anointed.
We should remember that the Master DOES tell us that “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do” (John 14:12). This He tells His disciples as He gives them further instruction on the reality of keeping His words as DOING such IS the Way that they can “believeth on me“. To explain this in a clearer way we pause here and cite again our trifecta, some of which comes from this same chapter in John’s Gospel; we read Jesus words saying:
- “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).
The idea of believing IS from the Greek word pisteuo which IS a derivative of the Greek word pistis which IS most always rendered as faith. However, as we have long said, the ideas of faith and believing ARE nebulous ideas at best and ARE NOT the idea that we should take from either word. Both pistis and pisteuo should be understood as KNOWING and, to be sure, KNOWING God which IS to KNOW Truth. The functioning of this KNOWING IS found in the first part of our trifecta where we read that in keeping His words we “shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”. ThIs reality is shown us by the Master in clear language which can be tied to the KNOWING quality of pistis and pisteuo through several New Testament ideas given to us by Jesus. For example; we read in Matthew Jesus’ words regarding the abilities of men that highlight the above idea that “the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do“. The Master tells us that “If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done” (Matthew 21:21). Here the word pistis, rendered as faith, IS combined with the idea that we “doubt not” and in this combination of ideas we should be able to easily discern the reality of KNOWING. If we KNOW that we can DO this, that we can “say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea” without any doubt in our minds, it shall be done“. While faith and believing ARE nebulous ideas that ARE often spoken of in the church using ideas regarding the amount of faith one may have, KNOWING IS much more concrete; we either KNOW or we DO NOT and if we question our ability, we clearly DO NOT. We should try to see that the example that the Master gives us IS a rather impossible task but it surely DOES highlight the reality of KNOWING. Jesus KNOWS that what He says will come to pass as DO several of His apostles as we read in the gospels and in the Book of Acts.
We should note however that this KNOWING can be a fleeting experience; this IS shown us in the way that the apostles ARE ‘sent out‘ rather early in the gospels to teach and heal. While the narrative in Mark and Luke tells us that Jesus “gave them power over unclean spirits” (Mark 6:7), Matthew makes no such reference and we should note that in Luke there ARE and additional seventy that ARE ‘sent out‘ later. Despite the differences, there IS a point to be made through these similar narratives and that IS that the apostles DO have, early in their tenure with the Master, such a measure of KNOWING that they could “preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick” (Luke 9:2). We read of the fleeting nature of their abilities when, later in their time with the Master, Jesus IS confronted by “a certain man, kneeling down to him, and saying, Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water. And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him“. Here the disciples ask “Why could not we cast him out?” While the Master responds with the idea of KNOWING, most ALL of the church dwells on a later saying: “this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting“. Before this however the Master’s first answer IS to the disciples question asking “Why could not we cast him out?” was “Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you” (Matthew 17:14-16, 19, 21, 20). Can we see the point? Can we see the creeping in of doubt in the minds of these disciples?. While the church dwells on the Master’s answer saying that “this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting“, they miss the entire point of this encounter.
In Mark’s Gospel these two ideas ARE separated; Mark tells us the story of the disciples inability to heal this man’s son but his inclusion of the Master’s words on KNOWING come in a later chapter. However, when Mark comes to the idea of casting the mountain into the sea, he DOES so by giving more force to our understanding of KNOWING. Mark tells us the Master’s words as “verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them” (Mark 11:23-24). While this IS framed differently than it IS in Matthew, the idea of the “fig tree” motivates the apostle’s question as it DOES in Matthew; we read that “Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God” (Mark 11:21-22). We can begin here with the idea of “Have faith in God” which IS better understood as KNOW God; this IS the beginning. Jesus goes on to tell them that they CAN DO such things as wither the “fig tree” and saying “unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea” if one “shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass“. This again IS the KNOWING that comes upon us through keeping His words….this IS the KEY to ALL spiritual KNOWING as we read in our trifecta.
Our point IS of course that ALL things ARE possible to the man who can “know the truth” which IS the man who IS freed from his own vanity through keeping His words. We came to this idea of KNOWING from our trifecta as we discussed the Way that the Master IS showing us that in His reference to Himself as “the Son of man” that He too IS a man who we KNOW IS so anointed by the Truth and Love that IS the Godhead that He can teach and DO as He DID. Perhaps most importantly the Master tells us clearly that “He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do” (John 14:12) and when we can understand pisteuo as KNOWING rather than believing we can gain a Truer sense of His words. Can we see the point here? We should next focus our attention on the idea of His anointing, the idea that He IS the Christ, and that He IS able to teach and DO as He DID. Again the word christos actually means anointed and while we see it as the transliterated word Christ throughout the New Testament, and as Messiah and anointed through the Hebrew equivalent, the meaning IS still anointed. When the Apostle Peter tells the Master that “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” he IS affirming that Jesus IS the anointed of God and in calling Jesus “the Son of the living God” he IS showing his understanding of the Master’s reference to the Godhead as the Father. While this idea of “Son of God” (John 1:34) has taken on a Life of its own in the doctrines of men, the idea should NOT have the emphasis that doctrines give it. The Apostle John tells us in this same prologue to his gospel that “as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” (John 1:12). Can we see the point here? Can we see that while the Master can be understood as a “Son of God“, so can ALL who “received him” and those that “believe on his name“.
These ideas of receiving and believing ARE NOT as they ARE portrayed in the church however. The Greek word lambano which IS rendered here as received leans more toward accepted; Strong’s, after a lengthy analysis offers the single word accept to define the idea after telling us that the word means: to take (in very many applications, literally and figuratively (properly objective or active, to get hold of 9a. Thayer’s goes into a lengthy discussion where they show the idea of taking in various forms against lambano’s many uses and in its use here they say: to receive what is offered; not to refuse or reject: τινα, one, in order to obey him 9. Can we see the complexity that IS missed by most? Vincent gives us some help here as well. Vincent combines the idea or receiving from the previous verse where the Greek word IS paralambano; there the text IS “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (John 1:11). He tells us that: the former [paralambano] lays emphasis upon the will that consented (or refused) to receive, while the latter [lambano] brings before us the possession gained: so that the full meaning is, As many as by accepting Him, received Him 4. What we should try to see here IS that in John’s words we have the idea of accepting the Master and receiving Him as the Christ, as the Messiah. In this we have the “power to become the sons of God“. The apostle goes on however to show us another factor in our ability to “become the sons of God” and that IS that we must “believe on his name“. This idea of believing on was one that colored our writing in many previous essays but one that we have NOT used for some time. To “believe on” IS a complex idea of which Vincent tells us: To believe in, or on, is more than mere acceptance of a statement. It is so to accept a statement or a person as to rest upon them, to trust them practically; to draw upon and avail one’s self of all that is offered to him in them. Hence to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ is not merely to believe the facts of His historic life or of His saving energy as facts, but to accept Him as Savior, Teacher, Sympathizer, Judge; to rest the soul upon Him for present and future salvation, and to accept and adopt His precepts and example as binding upon the life 4.
The important part here IS the final idea that to “believe on” the Master IS to accept and adopt His precepts and example as binding upon the life and in this we should see the reality of keeping His words. It IS in DOING so that we can “become the sons of God“. We should note here that the idea that John presents IS NOT framed as believing on the Master but rather believing on His name; this however is a another difference without a distinction. We discussed the idea of His name in recent posts; Vincent, referring to the Master’s words saying “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 28:19) defines the idea and it IS this that we should see in the idea of “believe on his name” in our current discussion. Vincent tells us: The name is not the mere designation, a sense which would give to the baptismal formula merely the force of a charm. The name, as in the Lord ‘s Prayer (“Hallowed be thy name”), is the expression of the sum total of the divine Being : not his designation as God or Lord, but the formula in which all his attributes and characteristics are summed up. It is equivalent to his person 4. Can we see the point here? Can we see that while the Master IS the “Son of God” we have the Power to be such as well as we DO those things that John prescribes for us. This IS an important idea to remember as we break away from doctrines. As we close this essay we highlight yet another verse from this same prologue; John tells us “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,* (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). There IS much to understand in the combination of these sayings from John.
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
| Aspect | Potency | Aspect of Man | In Relation to the Great Invocation | In relation to the Christ |
| GOD, The Father | Will or Power | Spirit or Life | Center where the Will of God IS KNOWN | Life |
| Son, The Christ | Love and Wisdom | Soul or Christ Within | Heart of God | Truth |
| Holy Spirit | Light or Activity | Life Within | Mind of God | Way |
- 2 New Testament Greek lexicon on biblestudytools.com
- 4 Word Studies in the New Testament; Marvin R Vincent D.D. 2nd edition
- 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
