\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<\/em><\/p>\n\n\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).<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\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, 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9\u2022\u0391\u03a9<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\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).<\/p>\n\n\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<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n We ended the last essay with some words on sin from the Apostle James whose blunt and direct style greatly differs from Paul’s. We noted that while Paul’s epistles leave much opportunity for interpretation as his words ARE taken out of context, the same IS NOT True of James’ writing. There ARE several areas where Paul’s words and those of James seem to be contradictory but this IS mostly because of the way that Paul’s ARE taken out of context and interpreted by men whose apparent goal IS to lessen the presumed severity of Jesus’ words. We should note here that while both James and Paul DO write in agreement with the words of the Master, the doctrinal interpretations of Paul’s words render that agreement moot. Add to this that a very select few ideas from James ARE used in most ALL Christian doctrine which results in the present state of the church that relies so heavily on the words of Paul. Our overall point in the latter part of the last essay was in regard to the twin ideas of striving <\/em>and measure; that it IS through striving <\/em>that we gain our ever increasing measure of Truth and in this our ability to express <\/em><\/strong>agape<\/em>. While the Greek word agonizomai<\/em> which IS rendered as strive <\/em>is scarcely used in New Testament and IS used but once in the words of the Master, the idea behind it IS the overwhelming theme of ALL His teaching and that of His apostles IS that men DO just that: strive<\/em>. Jesus tells us to “Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able<\/em>” (Luke 13:24) and here we should see what Luke IS telling us of the Master’s intent. Strong’s tells us that agonizomai<\/em> IS: to struggle, literally (to compete for a prize), figuratively (to contend with an adversary), or genitive case (to endeavor to accomplish something)<\/em>9a<\/sup>. While Thayer’s defining ideas are concentrated on the Strong’s figurative idea, they DO add at the end that agonizomai<\/em> IS to: to endeavor with strenuous zeal, strife, to obtain something<\/em>9<\/sup>. Vincent tells us that agonizomai<\/em> IS: used only by Luke and Paul, except John 18:36. Originally to contend for a prize in the public games; and thus conveying a sense of struggle. The kindred noun, ajgwnia, agony, is used of Christ ‘s struggle in Gethsemane<\/em>4<\/sup>. <\/span> Perhaps the idea that IS most meaningful IS the reference to Christ’s struggle where the flesh <\/em>and the Spirit collide in thoughts and emotions. In regard to the use of agonizomai<\/em> in Luke’s Gospel Vine’s tells us that the idea IS to put forth every effort, involving toil<\/em>9b<\/sup>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n It IS this struggle between the flesh and the Soul’s spiritual prompting that should be seen in this modern definition of the English word strive <\/em>which reads: to exert oneself vigorously; try hard; to make strenuous efforts toward any goal; to contend in opposition, battle, or any conflict; compete; to struggle vigorously, as in opposition or resistance; to rival; vie.<\/em> ALL of these ideas can be used in regard to this struggle that engulfs mankind and which IS shown us from a spiritual perspective in Paul’s words saying “For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would<\/em>” as we read in our selection. Paul then adds for us the resolution to our struggle saying “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<\/em>” (Galatians 6:8). We should see that this latter saying IS NO different than Jesus’ words that tell us to “Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able<\/em>“, the difference being that Paul clarifies and amplifies the reward <\/em>that comes to those that DO “enter in at the strait gate<\/em>“. The force of this word agonizomai<\/em> permeates the entire New Testament as the singular idea that leads us to True salvation<\/em> but, unfortunately, the idea IS washed away by the doctrinal stance that says that a man IS a sinner and that he CAN NOT save <\/em>himself. The whole Truth of our salvation <\/em>IS found in our striving<\/em>, our ability to exert oneself vigorously<\/em>, and to: To make efforts; to use exertions; to endeavor with earnestness; to labor hard; applicable to exertions of body or mind<\/em>1 <\/sup>as we read in Webster’s 1828 Dictionary. It IS this idea of striving<\/em> that leads us to the Truth that “he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting<\/em>“.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This striving <\/em>IS the work <\/em>of a True follower of the Master. We should understand as well that this striving <\/em>IS a complex idea that IS centered in agape<\/em>. This striving <\/em>IS NOT to reach the Kingdom despite the way that the idea IS framed but it IS rather a striving <\/em>toward the Kingdom through the singular idea of keeping His words<\/em>, the most important of which IS agape<\/em>. The church however has relied upon their interpretations of Paul’s words that decry works <\/em>while NOT understanding just what it IS that he means in saying “by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God<\/em>: Not of works, lest any man should boast<\/em>” (Ephesians 2:8-9). Again, we should try to see that charis<\/em>, grace<\/em>, IS ALL that comes from the Lord….charis<\/em> IS in effect that “wisdom that is from above<\/em>” which brings with it the reality that such Wisdom IS “first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy<\/em>” (James 3:17). This grace <\/em>IS also “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>” that flows into the heart <\/em><\/strong>of the man who will keep His words<\/em>. Here we should remember that the first fruit <\/em>in Paul’s list IS agape <\/em>and we should remember also that: Love, in this passage, is that fruit of the Spirit which dominates all the others<\/em>4<\/sup> <\/span>as Vincent tell us. It IS the “works of the law<\/em>” (Galatians 2:16) that Paul decries and the crux of his opposition to the idea IS limited to the way that the Jews’ interpretations of the law, their traditions if you will, were but a show of compliance made without regard to the “weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith<\/em>” (Matthew 23:23), all of which ARE component parts of agape<\/em>. This should be clear as Paul completes his saying from Ephesians saying “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them<\/em>” (Ephesians 2:10)). Can we see the point here? Can we understand the difference between such “good works<\/em>” and those works <\/em>that ONLY serve the self? <\/p>\n\n\n\n While our discussion IS NOT about works <\/em>as that idea IS generally understood by the doctrinal Christian who has been told that one CAN NOT save himself, we must understand that the idea of works <\/em>IS NOT found in that doctrinal idea alone. Paul tells us that we ARE created “unto good works<\/em>” and that “we should walk in them<\/em>” and here we should try to see that this admonishment IS NO different that we find in Jesus admonitions that we strive <\/em>toward that goal and that we “seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness<\/em>” (Matthew 6:33). Both of these require the personal attention of the man in this world and the reality of our being able to DO these things IS well beyond the nebulous doctrinal ideas of faith<\/em>. We should understand as well that doctrinal faith<\/em>, rightly applied, will perforce make a man pay personal attention to His Truths and since this DOES NOT happen with any regularity, we should be able to see that it IS one’s doctrinal leanings that prevent such attention to His Truths. The Master’s teachings on keeping His words<\/em>, striving <\/em>and seeking <\/em>after the Truth among other things, have become moot in the church today as men have rendered His Truths to be of little or no practical value, meaning, or relevance<\/em>*, as moot IS defined. This IS the natural effect of the churches’ fixation on their interpretations of the teachings of Paul over the centuries. That Jesus’ words have become words of encouragement rather than commandment IS the fault of the church from the beginning and we should lay a good deal of the blame regarding our current religious dilemmas on the teachers of the Reformation. But this DOES NOT relieve any from that blame; from the church fathers onward the Master’s words have been diluted into pomp and ceremony while the crux of His teachings have been interpreted into such things as sacraments which ARE for many a man’s way to his salvation<\/em>. While the interpretations of Paul’s ideas on faith <\/em>and works <\/em>may leave us in a state of uncertainty, such uncertainty should be eliminated by such ideas as we have above from Ephesians as well as what seems to be a rebuttal from the Apostle James who tells us that “faith without works is dead<\/em>” (James 2:26). Without interpreting Jesus’ words, we should refer to His saying that “the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works<\/em>” (Matthew 16:27) to see the Master’s perspective. And, if we can see the idea of sowing <\/em>in Paul’s teaching on works<\/em>, we can likely better understand his words 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<\/em>” (Galatians 6:7-8). The doctrinal conversation should NOT be one that disparages the idea of works <\/em>in relation to faith<\/em>; it should be one that distinguishes between “the works of the flesh<\/em>” and those “good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them<\/em>“. Returning now to our selection from Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians we read:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “<\/span>for, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit<\/span><\/em><\/strong>“.<\/span><\/p>Galatians 5:13-25<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Combining our discussion of Paul’s lists with the idea of works <\/em>shows us rather clearly the divide between works <\/em>and works <\/strong><\/em>where using the same word for two different phenomenon has created much confusion. There ARE the “the works of the flesh<\/em>” in our selection from Paul but these should NOT be used to define the totality of such types of works<\/em>. Viewed spiritually, as we have attempted to DO, these “works of the flesh<\/em>” represent the pitfalls to be avoided by the man who has found some measure of Truth; such pitfalls ARE the thoughts, attitudes and actions of the emerging spiritual man that ARE reoriented toward the self and the things of the self in this world. It IS this reorientation that IS the cause and the product of “another gospel<\/em>” which allows for men to deviate from the Truth for personal gain. Viewed carnally “the works of the flesh<\/em>” ARE the carnal endeavors of men which, while NOT strictly sensual as much of doctrine purports to be the essence of men’s desires, ARE nonetheless his self-centered motivations for living. It is such “works of the flesh<\/em>” that represent that idea of works <\/em>that Paul rails against and here we should pay more attention to the spiritual ideas than the strictly carnal; it IS these that encumbered the Jews as they replaced the Truth with their version of “another gospel<\/em>” which IS their traditions and their self-centered interpretations of the law. In these spiritual ideas ARE those works<\/em> that Paul decries as men, from the Jews onward, have convinced themselves that their spiritual undertakings ARE according to the Will of God. That Jesus shattered this view was NOT recognized by the Jews; His words fell upon deaf ears. The religious Jews supported such doctrinal ideas, their versions of “another gospel<\/em>“, over the Master’s spoken words and this despite His most profound examples and miracles. These ideas cover the first works <\/em>in that divide between works <\/em>and works<\/strong><\/em>; the second works <\/strong><\/em>should be understood as such spiritual ideas as “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>“. It is “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>” that should be see as those “good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them<\/em>“. These ARE surely works <\/strong><\/em>that Paul IS NOT against and these ARE surely James’ reference in saying that “faith without works is dead<\/em>” (James 2:26). It IS through the Apostle James’ words that we can also see the reality of pistis <\/em>which, while rendered as faith<\/em>, IS that KNOWING that comes to those that will keep His words<\/em>, that KNOWING by which men DO express <\/em><\/strong>their measure of “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>” according to James’ saying that “I will shew thee my faith by my works<\/em>” (James 3:18). Works <\/em><\/strong>ARE the natural and necessary result of KNOWING and here we should understand that this spiritual KNOWING which IS unlocked according to Jesus’ words from our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>IS the reality of KNOWING God. The simple key to unlocking our ability to KNOW IS so simply put by the Master and while His words ARE relatively ignored, the reality stands as we read in the first part of our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>saying:<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should try to see here that men’s momentary agreement with Jesus’ words, His commandments if you will, DOES NOT suffice to bring a man the Truth which IS the free <\/em>flowing of our KNOWLEDGE of God into a mind that perhaps could not before comprehend that Truth. Jesus tells us that it IS in our continual striving <\/em>to keep His words<\/em> that this Truth comes. James 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. 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<\/em>” (James 1:5-8) and here we should try to see this Wisdom as KNOWING the Truth, KNOWING God. There IS a compound message here however that says that one must “ask in faith<\/em>” which should be understood as asking while KNOWING that this Wisdom “shall be given him<\/em>“. Here in these words we should try to see the idea again of measure as it requires some measure of KNOWING to advance to where one can become single minded and leave behind that time when one was “unstable in all his ways<\/em>“. In ALL of this the simple Truth IS that we keep His words<\/em> which IS the essence of Truly “believing on<\/em>” Jesus and here we should remember that “all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself<\/em>” where the idea of the law <\/em>IS defined as: anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command<\/em>2a<\/sup>; this IS NOT ONLY the law of Moses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Our expression<\/em><\/strong> of “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>” IS the spiritual goal of ALL mankind but this IS an expression <\/em><\/strong>that seems afar off in this world today. Perhaps if the ideas of this goal were disseminated among the masses in similar simple terms as those of the Master, the journey could have a nearer end. This however requires that somehow the ideas and the ideals of agape <\/em>become KNOWN by those masses and this regardless of country, class, religion, race, customs or any other prejudicial canal realities that may exist. Of course NOT ALL will agree to participate in this idea of Love where one gives up his focus<\/em> upon himself and those close and gives up any prejudices that separate him from others. While this IS a sea change in the hearts <\/strong><\/em>of men some will undoubtedly follow and while this may cause yet another round of focus <\/em>upon a variety of different opinions, a new surge of Paul’s “another gospel<\/em>“, it could be “another gospel<\/em>” that IS closer to the Truth than those that exist in the churches today. This brings us to the next word from Paul’s list of “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>“, a word that has great importance as a component of both agape <\/em>and the changes that agape <\/em>must bring: meekness<\/em>. Rendered from the Greek word praotes <\/em>the idea of this word IS greatly misunderstood based in common usage; the carnal ideas DO NOT satisfy the spiritual notes that praotes <\/em>should carry. While praotes <\/em>IS rendered as meekness <\/em>in many translations, other ideas such as “Gentle behaviour<\/em>“, gentleness <\/em>and humility <\/em>have become the chosen rendering of others. In those translations where gentleness <\/em>IS the rendering for praotes<\/em>, other words, specifically chr\u0113stot\u0113s<\/em> and agath\u014dsyn\u0113<\/em> from earlier in Paul’s list, ARE rendered into different ideas than the gentleness <\/em>and goodness <\/em>of the King James Bible. Perhaps the drift away from rendering praotes <\/em>as meekness <\/em>IS found in the negative connotation that the idea of meekness <\/em>engenders though its common usage. For us this serves to amplify our idea that many of the words in these lists and others ARE rendered to the convenience of men rather than the meaning intended by the writers. While gentleness <\/em>and humility <\/em>may be component parts of meekness<\/em>, these DO NOT show us the depth of the idea as a “the fruit of the Spirit<\/em>“.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The bible definitions for the Greek word praotes<\/em> ARE essentially Christian ideas of the use of the word; Vincent tells us this saying that praotes <\/em>IS: Another word which, though never used in a bad sense, Christianity has lifted to a higher plane, and made the symbol of a higher good. Its primary meaning is mild, gentle. It was applied to inanimate things, as light, wind, sound, sickness. It was used of a horse; gentle<\/em>4<\/sup>. This idea that the word IS become a symbol of a higher good<\/em> IS likely based in two sayings from the Master; Jesus tells us “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth<\/em>” (Matthew 5:5) which perhaps shows a higher good<\/em> in that those who express <\/strong><\/em>this meekness <\/em>ARE blessed<\/em>. This saying IS also translated substituting the ideas of gentleness <\/em>and humility <\/em>(\u201cHappy are people who are humble<\/em>“) and ofttimes the idea of blessed <\/em>IS rendered in terms of happiness<\/em>. Both happy <\/em>and gentle <\/em>ARE purely carnal ideas while humility <\/em>may have some degree of spiritual Truth regarding the whole of the idea; we can ask here a question which IS why would the gentle <\/em>or the humble <\/em>“inherit the earth<\/em>“. It IS far easier to see the meek <\/em>in such a position spiritually and we should remember here that we ARE discussing praotes <\/em>as a “fruit of the Spirit<\/em>“, ALL of which ARE components of agape <\/em>that flows into the hearts of men. Jesus also tells us to “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls<\/em>” (Matthew 11:29). While the same ideas of gentle <\/em>and humble <\/em>ARE translated into this saying, the force of the Master’s words seems lost in such translations and perhaps here we can try to see that gentleness <\/em>and humility <\/em>ARE but carnal effects of the flow of that fruit<\/em> which IS