{"id":13453,"date":"2017-02-18T18:11:34","date_gmt":"2017-02-19T01:11:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newagedevelopments.org\/blog\/?p=13453"},"modified":"2017-02-18T18:11:34","modified_gmt":"2017-02-19T01:11:34","slug":"in-the-words-of-jesus-part-1481","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newagedevelopments.org\/blog\/2017\/02\/18\/in-the-words-of-jesus-part-1481\/","title":{"rendered":"IN THE WORDS OF JESUS\u2013Part 1481"},"content":{"rendered":"

ON LOVE; PART MCXX<\/span><\/h2>\n
\n
\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391<\/span><\/h6>\n

GoodWill\u00a0IS Love in Action<\/span><\/h2>\n
\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391<\/span><\/h6>\n
\n

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<\/em>” (Mark 12:29-31).<\/span><\/p>\n

\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9<\/span><\/p>\n

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<\/em> which IS generally rendered as Love,\u00a0we 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\u00a0of the equality of ALL men regardless of their outward nature or appearance…that ALL ARE equally children of Our\u00a0One God<\/span><\/p>\n

\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

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<\/em>” (Matthew 7:12).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

We ended the last essay with another view of the Apostle Peter’s intended influence upon ALL who seek to follow the Lord. As we often DO, we discussed how that the story of Peter IS one of the primary features of the gospels and the Book of Acts and how that his journey on the Path to Truth IS laid out for us to clearly see. We ARE shown Peter’s walk upon the Path and his growth by measure from the fisherman sinner to the fullness of discipleship and how that he overcomes ALL that the Master shows us as his faults along the Way.<\/span><\/p>\n

We should remember here that those things that Jesus rebukes Peter for ARE NOT sin and evil as we see them through our doctrines but they ARE his failure to be in full accord with the Truth that the Master IS teaching….his failure to keep his thoughts and his attitudes off of the self. It IS most difficult to find anything sinful or evil in Peter’s Life according to men’s interpretations of\u00a0hamartia<\/em> and poneros\u00a0<\/em>but if we look to the Truth of Jesus’ words and of the Great Commandments we can likely see where the apostle fails.<\/span><\/p>\n

Perhaps the greater lesson from Peter’s Life IS NOT however the end result of his achievements but the measure by which he grows and by which the Kingdom of God grows in his Life. Peter shows us that through his trials and tribulations with the Master that he IS still a disciple of the Lord according to Jesus own words on discipleship, words which the doctrines of men choose to ignore. And Peter shows us that one can be His disciple whilst still developing evermore focus<\/em> upon the things of God. We should try to see here how that by increasing one’s\u00a0measure of focus<\/em>,\u00a0one proportionately increases the measure of revelation<\/em><\/strong> and realization<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0to Truths which we CAN NOT even imagine; Truths that ARE found ONLY in the Cosmic scope of the Life that IS God.<\/span><\/p>\n

From this we should try to see that the journey NEVER ends; as the spiritual man the journey continues in ways that ARE ONLY seen through the eyes of the spiritual man who IS that “unction from the Holy One<\/em>” and who DOES “know all things<\/em>” (1 John 2:20). If we can see and understand that this KNOWING IS the reality of the Spirit that IS man and that the realization<\/em><\/strong> of this KNOWING comes ONLY by measure to one’s manifestation as the Soul in form, perhaps we can get a glimpse of this idea of the Cosmic journey as well as the relationship between the Spirit and the Soul that ARE the True man.<\/span><\/p>\n

Most ALL men however DO NOT yet see how that they ARE expressions<\/em><\/strong> of this Life in form….that they ARE NOT this form but the Life that quickens<\/em> it. This IS the first mystery that must be revealed to each man individually and this IS one that IS fully KNOWN by the Soul. If we can see this, we can then perhaps understand Jesus words to Nicodemus, a religious man in the model of religious men still today, saying: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.\u00a0If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?\u00a0And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven<\/em>” (John 3:11-13).<\/span><\/p>\n

We should understand here that the idea behind Jesus words to Nicodemus IS being “born again<\/em>” and that this idea has been hijacked by doctrines and attached to the Apostle Paul’s words to the Romans regarding salvation<\/em>;\u00a0words that ARE taken out of context and then misapplied. In their doctrinal view millions upon millions believe that they KNOW better and more than Nicodemus and NOT this ONLY as these also believe that they ARE “born again<\/em>“. However, when we equate this idea of being\u00a0“born again<\/em>”\u00a0as the Way to\u00a0“see the kingdom of God<\/em>” (John 3:3) with His words from the trifecta<\/em><\/strong>, we can then see how that to be “born again<\/em>” one must “doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven<\/em>“.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Greek word eido<\/em> that IS rendered here as see<\/em> should be seen in terms of perception; NOT only visual perception but also in the power of discernment; this word IS also frequently rendered as KNOWING. If we can understand Jesus’ words here as saying that one CAN NOT KNOW the Kingdom nor discern the Kingdom, then these words take on additional meaning. But we ARE NOT left to wonder here as the Master continues to show us the reality of being “born again<\/em>” in the idea of being “born of water and of the Spirit<\/em>” and then rephrases the idea of seeing, KNOWING or discerning the Kingdom with the clearer idea of entering<\/em> as He says “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot* enter into the kingdom of God.\u00a0That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit<\/em>” (John 3:5-6).<\/span><\/p>\n

It IS unfortunate that most doctrinal authorities see this idea of being “born of water<\/em>” as baptism.<\/em>\u00a0And one of the problems with understanding Jesus’ words here IS the doctrinal view of baptism<\/em> as that rite and ritual rather than the reality of one’s immersion<\/em> into the Way of the Christ, a Way which IS NOT accomplished unless one DOES strive<\/em> to keep his words<\/em>; this striving<\/em> IS one’s immersion<\/em>. We DO NOT KNOW with what words the apostle baptized<\/em> men but, to be sure, they ARE NOT the words that ARE used in the churches. John’s was “the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins<\/em>” (Mark 1:4) but this IS NOT understood by doctrines as it IS intended because the very word rendered as Repentance<\/em><\/strong>, metanoeo<\/em>, IS NOT seen as the vehicle of change that it IS.<\/span><\/p>\n

So much of this idea of baptism<\/em> IS so doctrinized that it IS nearly impossible for one to see the True intent. From the lexicon we can see that Repentance<\/em> <\/strong>IS change, it IS:\u00a0a change of mind, as it appears to one who repents, of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done<\/em> 2<\/sup>; it IS NOT merely sorrow but the change that the such sorrow\u00a0may produce. And it IS NOT merely a change from DOING this or that for which there was sorrow; this IS a spiritual event and has serious spiritual overtones of change. Vincent tells us that:\u00a0Repentance, then, has been rightly defined as \u201cSuch a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice.\u201d Sorrow is not, as is popularly conceived, the primary nor the prominent notion of the word<\/em> 4<\/sup>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Taking this reality of Repentance<\/em> <\/strong>into the idea of baptism<\/em> as the immersion<\/em> that it IS, we should be able to see how that these work together and how that the very idea of baptism<\/em> IS rather worthless without Repentance<\/em><\/strong>; hence the the way that this IS framed for us as “the baptism of repentance<\/em>“. And the logic continues into the idea of the purpose of this “baptism of repentance<\/em>“, that this IS\u00a0“for the remission of sins<\/em>“. Here again doctrines have hijacked a word that has a meaning of a “release from bondage or imprisonment<\/em>“, and have attributed it to the doctrinal idea of forgiveness<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n

This Greek word\u00a0aphesis<\/em>\u00a0that IS rendered here as remission<\/em> IS rendered as forgiveness<\/em> in several places where the other defining ideas from the lexicon, deliverance<\/em> and freedom<\/em> from bondage<\/em>\u00a02<\/sup>,<\/em> would work as well but be against the doctrinal concepts of the atoning quality of Jesus’ death. Vincent takes us to this same idea in Luke’s Gospel where he speaks of the Baptist saying “And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins<\/em>” (Luke 3:3); there we read this regarding remission<\/em>:\u00a0The word occurs in Luke more frequently than in all the other New Testament writers combined. Used in medical language of the relaxation of disease. Both Luke and John use the kindred verb \u03b1\u0313\u03c6\u03b9\u0301\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9 , in the same sense. Luke 4:39; John 4:52 <\/em>4<\/sup>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The King James translators render this word as forgiveness<\/em>, deliverance<\/em>, liberty<\/em> and remission\u00a0<\/em>in Luke’s Gospel where the medical idea seems to denote freedom<\/em> as this IS word IS defined by Strong’s 9<\/sup>. In Vincent’s references to Luke and John, the kindred word IS\u00a0aphi\u0113mi <\/em>which\u00a0IS rendered in terms of leaving in a medical context; Luke says that Jesus “rebuked the fever; and it left\u00a0her<\/em>” (Luke 4:39) and John tells us of the centurion’s servant that “Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him<\/em>” (John 4:52). Aside from these medical references this Greek word\u00a0aphi\u0113mi\u00a0<\/em>IS rendered in a wide variety of ideas according to the doctrinal interpretation of each verse.<\/span><\/p>\n

Other bible translations restrict aphesis<\/em>\u00a0to forgiveness<\/em> and this in accord with the doctrinal precept that God forgives<\/em> sins. If however we apply the reality of remission<\/em> as\u00a0the relaxation of disease\u00a0<\/em>and the freedom<\/em> that this releases from that disease we can better understand the Strong’s definitions of\u00a0aphesis<\/em>. To understand this in regard to the words of the Baptist however we must look within and NOT without. Doctrines and their interpretations ARE fixed on the Transcendent God of the Old Testament and NOT in the Immanent God of the New Testament; they prefer that God forgive<\/em> men over the idea that men free<\/em> themselves from the wiles of sin, the wiles of Life here in this Earth.<\/span><\/p>\n

But the Baptist’s words ARE rather clear when taken out of the doctrinal context and this clarity IS seen by those who DO come to him for baptism<\/em>; they were NOT confounded by the doctrines of men and were breaking away from the doctrines of the Jews.\u00a0In the words shared by Luke and Mark there IS the singular idea of\u00a0“the baptism of repentance\u00a0for the remission of sins<\/em>” and Luke shows us that this idea IS used also in\u00a0Paul’s teaching at Antioch where he says “When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel<\/em>” (Acts 13:24).<\/span><\/p>\n

Paul continues in his words to include\u00a0“the remission of sins<\/em>” which IS here rendered as forgiveness<\/em>; we read “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins<\/em>” (Acts 13:38) and here if we render as remission<\/em> and the freedom<\/em> from sin that this reflects we can make much sense of the context of ALL the\u00a0words from the apostle. Can we see the doctrinal dilemma here that IS caused by the translation and the interpretation of the New Testament according to the doctrinal bent of those who translate and interpret?<\/span><\/p>\n

In the Immanent Nature of God we have the Christ Within and if we can see that baptism immerses<\/em> one into the Truth that IS ever the prompting of the Soul, we can then see the reality of Repentance <\/em><\/strong>as the\u00a0changing of the expression<\/em><\/strong> of the man in this world to conform with that prompting. We can also then see how that this change, this Repentance<\/em><\/strong>, accomplishes the remission<\/em> of sin; NOT in terms of forgiveness<\/em> but in terms of making the man who IS “transformed by the renewing of your mind<\/em>” free<\/em> from his heretofore singular focus<\/em> upon the things of the world….upon sin. And so this immersion,<\/em> this True baptism, IS found in one’s striving<\/em> toward the Truth which IS NO different than his striving<\/em> to keep His words<\/em> and finding the Truth, the freedom<\/em>, and the realization<\/em><\/strong> of His Presence with the discernment, the KNOWING, \u00a0of His Kingdom….this IS the reality of being “born again<\/em>“.<\/span><\/p>\n

This IS the simplicity of the Baptist’s\u00a0baptism: that if one will immerse himself into the Way of the Lord that he will perforce change and be free<\/em> from the ways of the world and of the affliction of vanity<\/em> which keeps men in “the bondage of corruption<\/em>”\u00a0(Romans 8:21).\u00a0And the Apostle Peter sets this idea for us in his saying to the “men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem<\/em>” that they should “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost<\/em>” (Acts 2:14, 38). Can we see here that same “baptism of repentance for the remission of sins<\/em>“? And can we see how that it IS in this immersion<\/em> and change and in the freedom<\/em> that this brings that “ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost<\/em>“.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here Peter uses a different word that IS rendered as gift<\/em>. Charisma<\/em> which IS used by Paul in our selection below IS from the same root as IS charis<\/em> which IS most always rendered in that nebulous idea of grace<\/em>\u00a0and which we see as ALL things that ARE the spiritual\u00a0revelations<\/em> <\/strong>and realizations<\/em><\/strong> of men. Peter uses dorea<\/em> which IS rendered always as gift<\/em> and which Strong’s defines for us as: a gratuity\u00a0<\/em>9<\/sup>. Vincent tells us of dorea that it IS:\u00a0Only here in the Gospels, though Luke uses it in Acts four times, and the kindred adverb, \u03b4\u03c9\u0342\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 , freely, is found once in Matthew. The word carries the sense of a bountiful, free, honorable gift<\/em>\u00a04<\/sup>. The context here IS Jesus’ words to the Samaritan woman at the well to whom He says: “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water<\/em>” (John 4:10).<\/span><\/p>\n

If we can see Vincent’s idea here as his doctrinal view against Strong’s idea of dorea<\/em> as a gratuity<\/em> we can perhaps grasp the idea that Peter IS offering us and that Jesus IS showing to the woman. In the context of Peter’s words the idea of gratuity<\/em> as:\u00a0Something given in return for a favor; an acknowledgment<\/em> 1<\/sup>\u00a0as Webster’s 1828 dictionary shows us, we can see the idea of a quid pro quo and NOT the simplicity of a free gift<\/em>. Peter IS telling us that in return for Repentance<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0and baptism<\/em> “for the remission of sins<\/em>” that\u00a0“ye shall receive\u00a0the gift of<\/del>\u00a0in return<\/strong> the Holy Ghost<\/em>“. Can we see this in the apostle’s words? Similarly in Jesus words to the woman\u00a0where we can read that\u00a0“If thou knewest the gift of<\/del>\u00a0 what<\/strong> God would give in return<\/strong><\/em>” then you would “have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water<\/em>“.<\/span><\/p>\n

We came here in this essay by way of the example that we should take from the Life of the Apostle Peter and the reality of being “born again<\/em>” as the reality of the trifecta<\/em><\/strong> and NOT the result of affirming and confessing Christ according to the precepts of various doctrines. Peter IS\u00a0“born again<\/em>” but Nicodemus, as the model or the religious man, IS NOT at this time and this simply because his sense of religion IS founded in his doctrine and NOT in the Truth which comes according to the Master’s words in our trifecta<\/em><\/strong> which we repeat here again:<\/span><\/p>\n