ON LOVE; PART MDLXXXV
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
In the last essay we continued our discussion of the Sermon on the Mount. We have concluded our thoughts on the Beatitudes, and the Master’s words leading up to His redefining of those laws that the Master sees as the crux of the Ten Commandments, “the weightier matters of the law” as He later describes them (Matthew 23:23). As we have often said, these “weightier matters of the law” ARE far far more important than the ancillary laws of Moses that were intended as civil rules and regulations. However, to this day many of these still seem equal in Judaism. We began our current discussion of the Master’s thoughts on the commandment that “thou shalt not kill” with a determination that the point here IS murder and NOT accidental killing.We should clarify our point to say that killing through what IS considered today as ‘collateral damage’ the indiscriminate killing of others, should be included in our understanding of murder. The Master’s words that we ARE currently considering ARE:
“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing” (Matthew 5:21-26).
As we ended the last essay we went off script to try to understand the idea of judgment as it IS used in the Master’s words above as a result in the Life of those who murder as well as those that ARE “angry with his brother“. Understanding that the church’s ideas on judgment come from several New Testament sayings, we went to the predominant one: 2 Timothy 4:1. The verse of note IS “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom“. When this verse IS better understood in terms of manifestation and when the manifestation of “his kingdom” IS seen in the same way, we can better understand that the idea here IS the reality of the Christ Within, “the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations” (Colossians 1:26). The point here IS simply that ALL allusions to the reappearance of the Christ and an end times judgment, as well as any idea that “his kingdom” IS that heaven where the ‘saved‘ Christian, regardless of judgment, will go both after death and at the end ARE but doctrinal fantasies that have NO basis in a True reading of scripture.
As we discussed, Paul’s words to Timothy ARE a caution and an instruction to Timothy to “Preach the word” and that the doctrine that Paul cites in his instruction IS the gospel of Truth, the words of the Master. The caution IS Paul’s prediction of the state of the church from the days of the church fathers until today and it IS unfortunate that none have seen and acted upon this Truth. Paul’s warning to Timothy was simply that the vanity of Life in this world will overcome the church which may believe that they have “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 16:19) through their own man-made doctrines. It IS such doctrines that ARE the crux of the Master’s own predictive words saying “This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:6-7). These things ARE important to understand; it IS important for us to KNOW that the church takes Paul’s words out of context and then uses them to misrepresent his intent. There IS a reality to the apostle’s words that we can easily see if we but open our eyes. Repeating Paul’s words to Timothy:
“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:1).
One last point before we continue with our discussion of our verses from the Sermon on the Mount. We often discuss Peter’s most profound words that show us the Truth of discipleship, words which have a relationship to Paul’s words to Timothy. Paul IS showing us that it IS in the idea of lusts, desires for supposed comfort apart from the seemingly strict words of the gospels, that propels some men to seek the easier message and others to provide that message which Paul calls fables from the Greek word muthos. The meaning of this Greek word in Paul’s contexts IS much debated; the word itself simply means a tale 9a according to Strong’s while Thayer’s tells us that the idea IS: a narrative, story 9 while adding that it can be Truth or fiction. By Paul’s use, here and in (1 Timothy 1:4) we can easily see the idea of fiction so that the idea of fables need NOT be attached to any past ideas from Judaism as many believe. Others render the idea as myths and legends or to “stories that aren’t completely true“, ideas which give texture to the idea of Jewish fables. There IS however a clearer picture given to us by the context and the definitions of the word as a narrative and that is that such fables can be anything made up by men and, again based on the context, we see this as the man-made doctrines of the churches. This IS the way of the average man in the churches yet today where the Truth of the Master’s words IS absent in the doctrinal teachings. We should see the men of the church “after their own lusts” believing the fables rather than the True disciples who ARE “partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (2 Peter 1:4)
These words from Paul to Timothy have turned on what seems to be an anti-church rant and indeed it IS. Our words ARE intended to show that so many of the doctrinal ideas of the church ARE founded in what the Master refers to as their “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men“. For centuries the church at large has been teaching such doctrines in place of what they likely saw in the gospels as an inconvenient Truth. Paul cautioned Timothy as we cite above and while he may have properly handled that warning, those who followed him DID NOT. The result was centuries of religious conflicts and wars, rampant prejudices that still afflict mankind, and the creation of thousands of denominations and sects that each believe that they alone have the KEY to the Truth. The Master however tells us how that we can KNOW the Truth as we read in our trifecta; He also tells us how that we can “enter into the kingdom of heaven” and how that we can Truly have the Presence of the Lord in our lives. ALL of these ‘rewards‘ are based in keeping His words and ALL ARE ignored. Repeating our trifecta:
- “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).
Most ALL doctrinal beliefs ARE based in the deception that James warns us about as he gives us a glimpse of the Truth of the gospels. James tells us to “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves” (James 1:22). Paul shows us the result of our deception saying “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting” (Galatians 6:7-8). And this IS perhaps the biggest deception in the church: that those in the church DO NOT understand that despite their doctrines they ARE sowing to the flesh. The ONLY saving grace IS that the church DOES keep the attention of some on God which IS a good thing even if their motivations ARE misplaced.
Returning to our main topic we come back to our greater point which IS to define judgment apart from the ideas that ARE the doctrinal teachings ‘gleaned’ from Paul’s words to Timothy as a main source. Judgment, from the Greek word krisis, IS defined by Strong’s as: decision (subjectively or objectively, for or against)9a and in this we should be able to see that the doctrinal views applied to judgment ARE a stretch of this idea. Perhaps the main idea of judgment from krisis IS based on the rendering of krites as judge from the Greek krites but the defining ideas of both ARE related to a decision. Krites IS from the Greek krino of which we read that: Originally, it meant to separate, sift, part, or divide (like separating wheat from chaff). From the physical act of separating, it evolved to mean the mental act of discerning, deciding, preferring, evaluating, or making a determination**. This IS a clear description of the idea that should apply to its two variants krisis and krites. This description ends with the idea that: In legal or institutional contexts, it is translated as “to judge,” but its primary psychological and functional sense is the process of examining and drawing a distinct line between two things (such as truth and falsehood)**. From ALL this it IS easy to see the idea of judge and judgment in these Greek words. However to take it to the applied doctrinal ideas IS again a stretch that IS NOT founded in scripture save for such doctrinal ideas from Paul’s words to Timothy which ARE both misinterpreted and taken out of context. There ARE however other bible verses that led the church to interpret the ideas affiliated with krino as doctrinal judgment.
We should first eliminate the ideas taken from the Book of Revelations as the entirety of this book should stand apart from the gospels and, in reality, the entire New Testament. Revelations IS the dreams and visions of a man that is ‘reported to be the Apostle John’ by some in the early church in the second century. The church has relied upon this and other rather illusive ideas to claim with certainty that the Apostle John IS the author. However, regardless of authorship we should rely upon the very nature of the writing; it IS a fantastical story replete with fantastical figures of human and divine origin that depicts the end of civilization through the reign of a tyrannical entity. This then results in a thousand year reign of the Lord. None of this is fathomable but it IS believed by millions who tie it to equally fantastical ideas of rapture and being “caught up in the clouds” (1 Thessalonians 4:17) from Paul’s Epistle to the Thessalonians. In the politics of human Life much of this has transpired when viewed from a metaphorical perspective. There IS a reality here; first that the Book of Revelations was never meant to be part of the canon but was adopted by a church looking for doctrines in a yet barbaric and superstitious time. Second, and more importantly, is the reality that the Godhead simply IS; God DOES NOT take part in the issues of men in this world; if civilization ends it will be at the hands of men and men alone who ARE somehow given or have seized the power to dictate the end.
Having eliminated the Book of Revelation as a primary source of the doctrinal ideas of judgment, makes the rest an easy mark for any who can tear themselves away from the fantastical voyage of the end times. Throughout our blog posts we have maintained the perspective of the Christ Within. We often note that this was and IS a mystery based on Paul’s writing regarding the Christ Within; Paul tells us of “the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:26-27). To be sure there have been few if any True saints in the world and therefore few who Truly understand this mystery of “Christ in you“. This idea of the Christ Within has been a great part of our motivation to write. We equate the Christ Within with the Souls of men that remain undiscovered to the consciousness because the whole idea is yet a mystery. It IS this mystery that covers, obnubilates is the better idea, the reality that our own part of the Godhead exists as the Soul and, if we trace ALL of the other ideas on judgment from the New Testament to this mystery, we can discover that we, as Souls, ARE our own judges, judging the lives that we live in this world through the lens of True righteousness. On this depends our future existence after we leave this Earth.
Bringing this ALL back to our discussion of the idea of judgment from the Master’s words on killing and anger, we can now view this from a different perspective that has naught to do with our deaths nor the end times. The idea that “whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment” as well as the expansion of this in the Master’s words saying “whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment” can now be viewed through the idea of self-judgment rather that the judgment of our lives by an outside force, even God. If we kill we ARE Truly in “danger of the judgment” as in this act of killing we ARE setting aside any and ALL spiritual impetus in our current lives. This DOES NOT mean that we ARE doomed to failure, but it DOES mean that we have likely severely imperiled our spiritual future in this Life. We should remember here the idea of danger, the Master DOES NOT say that we will be severely imperiled but that we can be and perhaps we should view this according to the nature of our killing. We can view the idea of anger in a similar way. Anger can bring out the worst in men, anger can lead to killing or to so bittering our lives that we become prisoners of the anger. The spiritual harm here IS that in anger we can put ourselves into a position where our anger so preoccupies our minds that we ARE moved ever further away from discovering our True spiritual potential in this Life. Again there IS the modifying idea of danger; NOT ALL anger is equal.
The main point of the Master’s words here IS NOT judgment however, it IS His caution that we NOT kill and that we NOT be angry. There IS a qualifier in His statement on anger which IS reported in the King James Bible as “angry with his brother without a cause“. This idea of cause IS NOT found in many translations which have been used by some whose denomination or sect excludes this phrase but then allows for it. The reasoning here IS the same as it IS for many bible verses that have come into question over the centuries: source documents. The oldest manuscripts DO NOT contain this phrase which tends to soften the Master’s interpretation of the commandment while subsequent manuscripts DO. this leads some to the conclusion that it was added by scribes. Rightfully stated the idea should be that anger IS bad, it IS an often uncontrollable emotion and one that leads to undesirable results among which IS killing. We should also try to see that from our perspective on judgment, one may, as a Soul, judge one’s Life too harshly which can inhibit one’s recovery from anger. This idea of judgement should be understood as a constant evaluation of one’s Life by the Soul, the Christ Within; it IS NOT restricted to an after death experience. The interaction between the Soul and the carnal mind IS one of conscience. Most DO NOT recognize the source of one’s own pangs of regret and, when one’s Soul IS, through what we understand as conscience, causing such regret, it can be a great hindrance to any spiritual progress. We must remember here that spiritual progress IS the goal of the Soul and, as such, it IS the direction of ALL teachings from the Master.
While the ideas of killing and anger can be understood according to these ideas, the idea of Raca IS more elusive. The Master says “whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council“. This word Raca IS used ONLY one time in the New Testament and has been affiliated with the Hebrew word rêq which IS defined by Strong’s as: empty; figuratively, worthless. Some translations render this idea as fool while using a different idea for the next phrase which IS rendered as “thou fool” in the King James Bible. Others render the idea in terms of insult while still others render into the idea of saying such things as “You good-for-nothing“. For us this idea of Raca and the next idea that states “but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” point us to the results of being “angry with his brother“. The reality here IS that ALL that results from anger, from killing to insulting, should be avoided by the disciple who IS the main audience of Jesus’ words. The results of such ‘offenses’ lack clarity in the church. Being “in danger of the council” evokes ideas of the courtroom which IS perhaps equivalent to today’s being sued for defamation; not a welcome result for such interactions regarding Raca. Similarly calling one “thou fool” can be understood as just another type of insult but here the Master IS referring to “danger of hell fire” as the result. This result IS misunderstood and misapplied in the church and perhaps used to invoke fear as it IS referred to most often as the hell of Christian doctrine. The Greek words here ARE geena and pur and while pur IS easily seen as fire the idea of geena NOT specifically hell but rather a reference to: the common refuse – place of the city, into which the bodies of criminals, carcasses of animals, and all sorts of filth were cast. From its depth and narrowness, and its fire and ascending smoke, it became the symbol of the place of the future punishment of the wicked 4 as Vincent tells us. Using such a simple idea of fool with this result can be confusing but perhaps the reality IS the message that such a confrontation with another can result in the type of struggle that can result in murder and then simply casting the body into the pit. There can be danger in every negative interaction with another and this IS likely the simple carnal message which should be understood by the disciple as a caution that such simple thoughts as anger can and will upset one’s spiritual journey.
The next series of verses are connected to these ideas of anger, killing and insulting others by the word therefore and while the connection may NOT seem to be the Master’s point, it surely IS. The Master tells us:
“Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing” (Matthew 5:23-26).
These words ARE NOT so much about the gift or the altar as they ARE about contentions between men and we should note here the use of brother to define others. The point here can be understood as the way that we can lose our spiritual connection when we ARE angry with others, in contention if you will, and that in such a state the disciple or aspirant to discipleship CAN NOT function spiritually which idea IS shown to us through the gift and the altar. We CAN NOT participate spiritually when we have such contentions. This IS NOT a follow up to killing as that IS an extreme act that takes away our spiritual acuity but it can be understood as a follow up to anger which IS ofttimes the result or the cause of such contentions. We should also try to see that the previous ideas on insulting, using the ideas of Raca or calling another a fool, can easily produce such contentions. Can we see that we CAN NOT remain in a spiritual mode of action whensoever we have such contentions in our hearts. Here the resolution IS simply that we “first be reconciled to thy brother“; from this we can return to our spiritual foundation. The next verse seems intended to prevent such contentions in our hearts as we, in a spirit of meekness and agape, “Agree with thine adversary quickly“. In such agreement the ensuing contention IS prevented and here we should see the carnal consequences of our failure to DO so. While the text seems to allude to the idea that it IS the disciple that IS at fault through the idea that “the adversary deliver thee to the judge“, we should try to understand that this, like many New Testament ideas, works out in both directions.Whoever IS at fault in such situations where there IS NO agreement IS subject to the modern versions of being delivered “to the judge“, “the officer” and perhaps “cast into prison“. The final message here IS that there IS a definite result from our anger which produces contentions and forms a block against our continued spiritual participation. The Apostle Paul offers some commentary on these ideas saying “Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: Neither give place to the devil” (Ephesians 4:25-27). This IS NOT a command to “be ye angry” but it IS rather a supposition. We should understand here that if we ARE angry that we should “sin not“, we should NOT let the anger overcome our spiritual sense, and that we should minimize its duration. In the idea that we should “let not the sun go down upon your wrath” there IS NO specific time frame but rather a metaphor that tells us to minimize the duration of our anger and therefore any contentions that it may produce. The last verse should be self-explanatory: there is always a price to pay for ALL of the above ‘sins’, be they killing, being angry or in the ideas of Raca and calling another “thou fool“.
ALL of the previous words from the Master ARE in regard to the commandment “Thou shalt not kill“. This IS the first of the commandments of Moses that Jesus chose to comment on and expand into the spiritual realm, a realm that should have been understood through the words of the prophets over the centuries. The original commandment was spoken to the people while a large segment of the people were designated by family to be the servants of God. The Levites were the family designated to this Life while a subset of it, men who were descendants of Aaron, were alloted the role of the priest. Within the Levites there were many who became teachers of the law, judges and religious officials and aside from their position in greater Judaism as depicted in the Pentateuch, we DO NOT KNOW much detail. We can however assume that as priests and as teachers, judges and religious officials, they had at least a modicum of spiritual knowledge through which to perform their duties. We must remember as well that the whole nation of the Jews, like most ALL nations in the day, were barbarous and superstitious. Alexander Mclaren shows us a picture of the times as he discusses the objective of the Book of Genesis. He says: We are not to look to Genesis for a scientific cosmogony, and are not to be disturbed by physicists’ criticisms on it as such. Its purpose is quite another, and far more important; namely, to imprint deep and ineffaceable the conviction that the one God created all things. Nor must it be forgotten that this vision of creation was given to people ignorant of natural science, and prone to fall back into surrounding idolatry 12. The Old Testament history of the Jewish nation shows us the reality of Mclaren’s ideas.
Our point here IS that the simplicity of the Ten Commandments was intended for the understanding of such people and that we should hold that there IS at least the possibility that the Levites and Aaronoids were more astute and cognizant of spiritual matters. They did however seem to miss the point behind the words “Thou shalt not kill” as they DID convert the idea into a strictly moral code and a part of their doctrines and traditions. These commandments waned and waxed through the reign of the many kings that ARE noted in the Old Testament books as “he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD” (1 Kings 15:3) and “he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD” (2 Kings 17:2). We must also consider the split of Judaism into two kingdoms, Judah and Israel as well as their eventual captivities by the Assyrians and the Babylonians as we try to understand the form of Judaism into which the Master was born. In the end we should try to see that whatever the motivation that originated the Ten Commandments was long gone through the reigns of the kings and the captivities and that what was left was the Pharisees, scribes and lawyers to whom the Master tries to show the True Way through His reinterpretation of the law. They seem to have missed the spiritual contexts completely and DID NOT accept the correction of the prophets nor that of Jesus. The next law that the Master chose to expand upon was “Thou shalt not commit adultery” and we should note as we proceed that this idea IS greatly expanded and that the True intent of the idea IS yet lost in the church. The Master tells us:
“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:27-32).
We begin with the simple reality that this idea of adultery was never intended to address ONLY the relationships between man and wife; adultery affects a broad range of ideas both spiritual and worldly. This simple reality is shown us in the Master’s words saying “An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign“; here He IS NOT speaking of adultery in marriage but rather of adultery through the idea of seeking after the things of the self and the self in this world. The “adulterous generation” here IS the reality of the Jewish nation that seeks only carnal fulfillment through the appearance of righteousness which they themselves have defined. James also shows us the universality of the idea saying “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 4:4). James melds together both of our points; first we should understand that he IS NOT calling out ALL as adulterers in the ‘biblical’ sense of the marriage vow, he IS calling out ALL that ARE NOT focused upon the Truth and the Godhead. We should remember that while the church believes that James’ words, as well as the words of the other epistles, ARE intended as worldly instructions, the reality IS that they ARE addressed to True disciples and aspirants to discipleship….those that ARE focused on the things of God. James also includes the reality of friendship which idea IS closely tied to the carnal ideas of Love sans the sexual tones. Friend IS from the Greek word philos, the root word from which the idea of friendship, philo, comes as well as phileo which IS broadly understood in terms of Love.
The idea here can perhaps be best understood as fondness and that which one IS fond of and, by extension, those things that take our attention, our focus if you will. James IS showing us that our ‘fondness’ for and our focus on the things of the world, being “a friend of the world“, IS contrary to the Truth that the True follower of the Lord must follow. This IS the reality of adultery both here and in the Master’s words which have come to be defined solely through the marriage relationship. Defining adultery this way IS as the idea existed even in the Old Testament where the prophets continually called out the Jewish nation for their adulterous ways. This can be seen through the ideas of the nations’ whoredom and idolatry which word itself covers a broad range of carnal endeavor. Jeremiah tells the Jews “I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks” (Jeremiah 3:8-9); He IS NOT calling ALL of Israel as adulterers in the marriage sense but in the sense of whoredom and idolatry as a nation. The prophet also says “How shall I pardon thee for this? thy children have forsaken me, and sworn by them that are no gods: when I had fed them to the full, they then committed adultery, and assembled themselves by troops in the harlots’ houses” (Jeremiah 5:7). In this is a clear indictment of the Jews as a nation and here the idea that “thy children have forsaken me, and sworn by them that are no gods” IS their adultery. Ezekiel offers a similar condemnation saying “That they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols have they committed adultery” (Ezekiel 23:37). Through these New Testament and Old Testament verses we should be able to see clearly that adultery IS NOT what the church has made it to be and that spiritually the idea refers to the focus of ALL men, whether it be on the things of God or the things of the self. That the church DOES NOT teach this IS Truly unfortunate but we should try to understand that within the psyche of the church leaders there is likely an inkling of the Truth which they choose to ignore.
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 |
- 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
- ** Google AI on: the relationship of krisis, krino and krites
- 12 Expositions of Holy Scripture–Project Gutenberg’s and Baker Book House’ Expositions of Holy Scripture, by Alexander Maclaren–(1826-1910)
those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher
