\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 our comments on the sixth Beatitude as we continue to discuss the Master’s words that have been so named. The word Beatitude DOES NOT exist in any of the translations in our library but it IS the appellation given to Jesus’ list of ‘virtues’ and men’s rewards <\/em>for living by them. While most ALL view Jesus’ words in carnal terms, the specific purpose of His list IS spiritual in nature and the ideas should always be seen as such. In today’s dictionary Beatitude means: supreme blessedness; exalted happiness; (often initial capital letter) any of the declarations of blessedness pronounced by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount<\/em>*. The first defining idea here IS a reflection on the defining ideas assigned to blessed <\/em>by the lexicon which we discussed as we started our look at the Beatitudes. While it IS difficult to define the idea of blessings <\/em>according to its scriptural usage, the meaning DOES NOT simply apply happiness<\/em>, especially when we look to see a spiritual definition. To be blessed <\/em>IS to receive something and from our spiritual perspective what we receive IS the reward <\/em>that IS shown us with each Beatitude. We may like to think that such things flow from God and while this IS True such flowing IS NOT to from the One God to whosoever IS blessed<\/em>. We should try to understand that whatsoever comes from the Godhead comes from and through our own Souls, our own Christ Within, as our realization<\/em><\/strong> of the rewards<\/em>. For example “the kingdom of heaven<\/em>“, our realization <\/strong><\/em>of it, IS the reward <\/em>for those that ARE “the poor spirit<\/em>” which IS our truncation of the original wording that contains words that ARE NOT in the Greek. For this we applied the idea of forsaking <\/em>from the Master’s words on discipleship and from His discussion with the ‘rich young ruler’. Similarly, “they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness<\/em>” will get their reward <\/em>which IS to be filled with such righteousness <\/em>as the objective of our striving <\/em>toward this high ideal. It IS by these examples from the Beatitudes that we define the idea of being blessed<\/em> as receiving our rewards <\/em>for our Life according to the Master’s words. To be sure, there IS much more to discover from these first six Beatitudes and perhaps an expanded view will come to us as we proceed with the rest of the Master’s list which we repeat here for clarity:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you<\/em>” (Matthew 5:3-12).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The next Beatitude IS perhaps one of the more clearly phrased ideas in the list that the Master provides for us; He tells us “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God<\/em>“. This verse IS the ONLY place where the Greek word eirenopoios <\/em>appears in the New Testament and the defining ideas here ARE lacking. Strong’s tells us that eirenopoios <\/em>means: pacificatory, i.e. (subjectively) peaceable<\/em>9a<\/sup> while Thayer’s offers us the idea of: pacific, loving peace<\/em>9<\/sup>. While both frame the idea in terms of pacification<\/em>, which IS defined as appeasement<\/em>, this IS NOT the idea that the Master IS bringing us. The idea of pacification <\/em>or appeasement<\/em> has taken on a negative tone in regard to carnal matters and IS seen as placating <\/em>by many. Today’s working definitions of pacification <\/em>take the form of such ideas as: Pacification is an attempt to create or maintain peace. That can mean appeasing a hostile country through diplomacy or even just by settling an argument. A pacifist is someone who is against fighting and wars<\/em>** and we should note that many see the idea of being a pacifist <\/em>as a negative. The lead in of an essay on pacifism <\/em>tells us that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pacifism has always been a marginal position, but only in the 20th century did it become stigmatized \u2013 i.e. dismissed and ridiculed as outside the boundaries of serious discussion. This reflected the rise of \u201ctotal war\u201d, as exemplified by the century\u2019s two world wars, where the war making claims of the state on the individual became absolute, hence any questioning of war itself became heretical. After this century of war, our greatest challenge is not to repeat the endless aimless conflicts of the past. Pacifism\u2019s contribution to this is partly theoretical. Through its analysis of the \u201cwar system\u201d it debunks any thought that war can be ended by war, as the past has imagined; it can only be ended by unraveling the system itself. Pacifism\u2019s contribution to this is practical, by placing the politics of nonviolence at the center of this task…. Pacifism has always been a minority position, if not a marginal one. But prior to the 20th century it was a respected position and one that \u2013 depending on how broadly you construe \u201cpacifism\u201d \u2013 was often espoused by persons of influence<\/em>***.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While a lengthy summary, it IS important to note that the status of a pacifist <\/em>IS a minority position, if not a marginal one<\/em> which in the 20th century<\/em> became stigmatized<\/em>. While pacifism <\/em>IS NOT exactly what the Master means in this Beatitude, it IS the ONLY working idea that we have to use in regard to today’s societal norms. For us the whole idea of being the peacemaker <\/em>comports with the Master’s words that tell us to “resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also<\/em>” (Matthew 5:39). We can also see the idea of the peacemaker <\/em>in the Beatitude that tells us “Blessed are the meek<\/em>“. Vincent tells us that the idea of the peacemaker<\/em>: should be held to its literal meaning, peace – makers; not as Wyc., peaceable men. The founders and promoters or <\/em>[sic] peace are meant; who not only keep the peace, but seek to bring men into harmony with each other<\/em>. This of course IS a lofty goal and one that CAN NOT be achieved without some position of influence which IS NOT necessarily the station of those who Truly seek the Lord. ALL of this however DOES give us a basis from which we can proceed to define the peacemaker <\/em>against the words of the Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should try to see the spiritual import of being among “the peacemakers<\/em>” as we redefine the idea away from the carnal and mundane and toward the example and words of the Master. Jesus tells His disciples “I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world<\/em>” (John 16:33); here He tells us that there IS tribulation <\/em>in this world and that it becomes worse for those who may carry the torch of peace<\/em>. He tells us as well that such tribulation <\/em>ends when we can understand that “as he is, so are we in this world<\/em>” (1 John 4:17), a saying that should show us that as He had overcome<\/em>, we too can “overcome the world<\/em>“. We should note here that the Master IS called “the Lord of peace<\/em>” (2 Thessalonians 3:16), and there ARE many references to the idea of “the God of peace<\/em>” in Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Hebrews among others. From this we should be able to see that peace <\/em>IS a Godly attribute and one that IS a part of the very Life of the Christ who tells us “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid<\/em>” (John 14:27). Perhaps we should see the dividing line between the peace <\/em>that the world sees, carnal and mundane, and the “peace of God<\/em>” (Philippians 4:7) in such sayings as “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?<\/em>” (Matthew 16:26). While the concept of being “the peacemaker<\/em>” may be difficult to understand, we should try to see the relevance of this idea to the whole of keeping His words<\/em> and to DO this we start again with our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>where we read:<\/p>\n\n\n\n ALL of the Master’s words that ARE our trifecta<\/strong><\/em> involve the question of keeping His words<\/em> as He shows us some of the rewards <\/em>for DOING so. The rewards <\/em>ARE easily understood as discipleship and the Truth that “shall make you free<\/em>” according to the first; “the kingdom of heaven<\/em>” or the Kingdom of God according to the second and, according to the third, the Presence of God in our individual lives. Each of these rewards <\/em>IS activated by keeping His words<\/em> and come to us in the form of realization<\/em><\/strong>. While many may believe that such rewards <\/em>ARE bestowed upon a man by a higher authority, this IS but the talk of doctrines that fail to understand, or refuse to understand, the very nature of the Godhead. This problem IS a universal one that afflicts most every religion where men seek to define God in human terms, a defining that IS ONLY suitable to assuage the concept of God in the minds of men. Most ALL have NO True concept of God as a Being save for the way that He IS depicted in art and literature and we should understand that such depictions ARE the product of the minds of men. While most ALL of the church understands the concept that “God is The point here IS that the promises <\/em>of rewards <\/em>that ARE found in our trifecta<\/em><\/strong> ARE offered to us through our own spiritual link to the Godhead which IS our individual Spirit and Soul. The link between Spirit and Soul IS undefinable in human terms but we can say that they ARE One with the Soul being the manifestation of Spirt, the middle point if you will between highest plane of existence, Spirit, and its incursion into a Life in this world. It IS the Soul that IS our spiritual presence as a man in form in this world. In understanding this we must also understand that the human body, the complex combination of a physical form with a mind and emotions, IS an individual entity apart from the Soul. It IS an entity that, much like its lower animal relatives, lives a Life of instinctual behavior loosely controlled by the mind and emotions which motivate the life according to the times and places in which the entity exists; this IS compounded by the nurturing, indoctrination and experience that, through the mind and emotions, forms a personality. It IS this personality that becomes the entity over time and it IS the personality that the entity seeks to protect according to the nurturing, indoctrination and experience that has formed each personality. To be sure, this view of being a man in this world IS NOT intended to be a scientific theory but rather a working idea from which we can introduce the Soul. While it IS the Soul that gives Life to the entity, the Soul has little or NO control over the activities of the personality but, at the same time, the Soul provides the wherewithal to be Truly human with a marked separation between the human animal and other lower forms of Life. There IS little difference between the simian and the human save for the influence of the Soul on the individual Life in this world. For the simian, primates if you will, there IS NO individual Soul at work; hence their lives ARE based solely on instincts which ARE controlled in some way for which we have NO understandable explanation. We should note that animals simply KNOW what to DO; there IS NO teacher. From birth they KNOW to grasp onto an udder or a breast to feed as they slowly develop other instincts necessary to survival.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It IS the Soul then that makes a human an human and separates him from his animal relatives. And it IS the Soul that contributes the sense of logic that the lower animals DO NOT possess and here we should try to see that there IS ever an interaction between the Soul and the personality albeit an interaction that IS NOT realized by the personality. We ofttimes say that the Soul IS continually prompting the personality to the Good, the Beautiful and the True and that this prompting goes unheeded because of the din of daily living. In this we should try to see the reality of our awakening <\/em><\/strong>which occurs as we begin to hear and heed the prompting of our Souls over the clamor of our daily lives. This awakening <\/em><\/strong>IS often the product of our dissatisfaction with our lives or it can be a purposeful endeavor to break away from our carnal and mundane lives spurred on by scripture. In either event this awakening <\/strong><\/em>prepares us for our Repentance<\/strong><\/em> and our Transformation <\/em><\/strong>which in turn allow us to see the need to keep His words<\/em> as we strive <\/em>to DO so. Then, it IS in keeping His words<\/em> that we begin to understand, to have realization <\/strong><\/em>if you will, of the Truth, of the Kingdom and of the Presence <\/em>that our trifecta<\/strong><\/em> promises<\/em>. It IS with this realization <\/strong><\/em>that we come to understand the ideas of the Beatitudes and come to KNOW the reality of being a peacemaker<\/em>. In this rather long winded explanation of Life we should try to see that it IS in keeping His words<\/em> that we will perforce become the peacemaker <\/em>as being such IS the product of keeping His words<\/em>. In fact, ALL of the Beatitudes ARE the result of keeping His words<\/em>; in keeping His words<\/em> we can see ourselves as the “poor Spirit<\/em>“, as the mourner <\/em>or lamenter<\/em>, as the meek<\/em> and as those that strive <\/em>after righteousness<\/em>. It IS in keeping His words<\/em> that we ARE merciful <\/em>and “pure in heart<\/em>” and it IS here that we come to understand our role as peacemakers<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n There ARE many ways to look at this role of the peacemaker <\/em>and we should try to see that it IS NOT to be understood in a strictly carnal sense. There IS a sense of peace <\/em>that comes from the Soul, from the Christ Within; a sense of peace<\/em> that IS to become our possession. It IS this sense of peace <\/em>that Jesus refers to in saying “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you<\/em>” and we should try to understand that we too can give this peace <\/em>as we learn to live by it through keeping His words<\/em>. The Master DID NOT give this sense of peace<\/em> as a gift, He exuded it; this peace <\/em>was His every expression <\/strong><\/em>which flowed from Him and which was happily received by those that had tuned themselves to His to Love and Truth. It IS our expression <\/em><\/strong>of this same peace <\/em>that makes us “the peacemakers<\/em>” and we should try to see how that this expression <\/strong><\/em>of peace<\/em> IS a part of our expression<\/em><\/strong> of agape<\/em>; these CAN NOT be separated. In the end we should try to understand that “the peacemakers<\/em>” ARE first those that keep His words<\/em>; they ARE those that ARE aspirants to discipleship, those that have the Truth that “shall make you free<\/em>” and those that have the realization<\/em><\/strong> of the Presence of God. It IS this realization <\/em><\/strong>of His Presence that allows us to be “the peacemakers<\/em>“. We have discussed the rewards <\/em>of the trifecta <\/em><\/strong>to the understanding that these ARE the rewards <\/em>for keeping His words<\/em> and here we should try to see how that the reward <\/em>for being a peacemaker <\/em>IS much the same….the peacemaker <\/em>IS such by keeping His words<\/em> and Jesus’ calling this as being among “the children of God<\/em>” IS but another way to look at the reward <\/em>that IS essentially our realization <\/strong><\/em>of the Truth and the agape <\/em>that IS our God. While working toward peace <\/em>in the world, peace <\/em>among people and nations, IS a virtuous endeavor, the reality that the Master refers to IS quite different; it IS our expression <\/strong><\/em>of Truth and agape<\/em> that makes us “the peacemakers<\/em>“. The whole of this journey from being an unawakened man in this world to being among His disciples as aspirants revolves around our keeping His words<\/em>; it IS from here that the promises flow and we should try to see these Beatitudes, our ability to live by them and be blessed<\/em>, ARE themselves the spiritual rewards <\/em>that garner yet additional rewards<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should not be taken aback by the idea of our realizations <\/strong><\/em>being our rewards <\/em>as much of the church would be. The Master uses the word misthos <\/em>which IS generally rendered as reward <\/em>several times and here for us the rendering as reward <\/em>IS the most explanatory of Jesus’ intent. The technical meaning however IS a bit different; Strong’s tells us that misthos <\/em>means: pay for service (literally or figuratively), good or bad<\/em> as they show the idea as both reward <\/em>and wages<\/em>9a<\/sup>. Thayer’s shows similar ideas while adding that misthos <\/em>IS: dues paid for work; wages, hire<\/em> and the idea that it IS a: reward: used \u2014 of the fruit naturally resulting from toils and endeavors<\/em>9<\/sup>. It IS this last idea that we intend to show in our use of the word reward<\/em>. For us such toils and endeavors<\/em> ARE merely striving <\/em>to keep His words<\/em>. Perhaps the best example of the Master’s use of misthos<\/em> IS in His saying that “if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?<\/em>” (Matthew 5:46); here the reward <\/em>should be understood as grace <\/em>as we have previously discussed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The next Beatitude tells us “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven<\/em>“. This IS another Beatitude that IS misunderstood as it became aligned with the idea of persecution <\/em>and NOT the righteousness <\/em>that causes it. The Greek word dioko <\/em>which IS rendered as “are persecute<\/em>d” and that IS the way that it should be viewed here in this Beatitude and the next verses from the Master. The word dioko<\/em> however IS also rendered as “follow after<\/em>” (Romans 14:19) and could be a reflection upon a previous Beatitude saying “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled<\/em>” through the sense that we ARE blessed <\/em>to “follow after<\/em>” righteousness<\/em>. It IS based upon the following verses that we see the idea as being persecuted <\/em>but we should NOT forget this alternate ideas. We should note that there ARE several meanings for dioko listed in the lexicon and to understand the fullness of this word we should look at them here; the lexicon, seemingly summarizing Thayer’s definitions, tells us that dioko <\/em>IS: to make to run or flee, put to flight, drive away; to run swiftly in order to catch a person or thing, to run after; to press on: figuratively of one who in a race runs swiftly to reach the goal; to pursue (in a hostile manner); in any way whatever to harass, trouble, molest one; to persecute; to be mistreated, suffer persecution on account of something; without the idea of hostility, to run after, follow after someone; metaph., to pursue; to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire<\/em>2<\/sup>. These uses for dioko <\/em>range from hostility <\/em>to following after<\/em> eagerly and earnestly but because of the usage of the word in the next verses we again see the idea here in this Beatitude as \n
a<\/s> Spirit<\/em>” (John 4:24), this understanding IS on a most basic level with NO explanatory ideas as to the True nature of the Godhead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n