\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 the Master’s words that epitomize the reality of our expression <\/em><\/strong>of agape <\/em>in this world. The Master tells us “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me<\/em>” (Matthew 25:40). We came to this saying through the last part of our trifecta <\/em><\/strong>against which we were showing the equality of keeping His words<\/em> and expressing <\/strong>agape<\/em>. This saying captures two points from Jesus’ saying that “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<\/em>” (John 14:21). The first point IS simply that if we believe that we Love the Lord and DO NOT keep His words<\/em> we ARE at best showing an emotional idea that, while promoted by much of the church, DOES NOT satisfy the criteria of Love for the Lord which IS clearly stated. The clarity of the Master’s words IS NOT interpretable; nor IS the reality that keeping His words<\/em> requires that we answer in the positive Jesus’ rhetorical question “why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?<\/em>” (Luke 6:46). While there ARE two approaches to satisfying this criteria, actually DOING “the things which I say<\/em>” and expressing <\/strong>agape <\/em>Love to ALL as state of mind. The former idea IS largely responsible for the state of the church today as most ALL see the improbability of their being able to follow the ‘letter’ of the law let alone following the spirit of the law. The latter idea, expressing <\/strong>agape<\/em> then as the Way par excellence to keep His words<\/em>, seems to be a hidden factor in the spiritual uplifting of the masses and we should note that much of the problem here IS the misunderstanding of the doctrinal ideas of faith <\/em>versus works<\/em>. This we discussed briefly in the last essay as we use Paul’s own words to establish the idea that “all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself<\/em>” (Galatians 5:14). While the idea that our expression <\/em><\/strong>of agape <\/em>Love IS the Way to keeping His words<\/em> remains a hidden factor, the Master’s words from His Parable of the Sheep and the Goats should have been able to reach out to men and allow them to see the idea that our Love for the Master and for the Godhead IS intimately tied to our expression <\/em>of agape <\/em>Love to ALL. Perhaps, as we alluded to in the last post, the reason here IS that this parable IS viewed ONLY for its eschatological value which, from our perspective, IS a totally wrong approach to understanding His words.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The very idea of the parable IS agape <\/em>Love and we should apply the same comparison to this parable as we DO to the Master’s words to His disciples that ARE the third part of our trifecta<\/strong><\/em>. While the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats IS told from the perspective of the king, we should try to understand this king as the lord of his domain much like the Master’s IS the Lord of His domain. As to the sheep and the goats, these ideas have NOT been completely explained by the church which sees the separation as between the good and the evil or, in more doctrinal terms, those that ‘believe<\/em>‘ and those that DO NOT. There IS a reality to His words which we should try to uncover as to better comprehend the overall message but the specific message remains as you express <\/em><\/strong>agape <\/em>to your neighbor, your fellow man with NO “respect to persons<\/em>” (James 2:9), you ARE showing forth your Love for the Master. To be clearer, let us look again at the full Parable of the Sheep and the Goats; the Master tells us:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal<\/em>” (Matthew 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n There IS much going on here in Jesus’ words and we should begin at the beginning where the stage IS set. While most believe that the reference of “When the Son of man shall come in his glory<\/em>” IS to the ‘second coming’ this need NOT be the way that the idea IS understood….we must remember that this IS a parable. One of the definitions of a parable in the lexicon IS that a parable IS: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning<\/em> 2<\/sup> and this IS the way that we will begin as we remember the Master’s words saying “Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand<\/em>” (Luke 8:10). Two things here; first the you in the Master’s statement ARE His disciples and, for us, the idea applies by extension to ALL who Truly strive <\/em>to keep His words<\/em> and live in accord with His dictates. Remember here also Jesus’ words saying “Go ye therefore, and That many Christians believe that they ARE disciples IS based in the doctrinal instructions that they receive and the diluted ideas of discipleship that such doctrines teach. And, this idea of discipleship, like other spiritual ideas, IS defined by the lexicons and the commentaries in carnal terms that ignore the Master’s words and the intent of them. Regarding the Greek word mathetes <\/em>which IS rendered as disciple<\/em>, the lexicon offers ONLY that a mathetes <\/em>IS: a learner, pupil, disciple<\/em> 2<\/sup> equating the three terms. Strong’s 9a<\/sup> and Thayer’s offer us the same ideas while Thayer’s goes on to discuss the twelve disciples, singling them out as beyond the scope of their defining statement adding that: in a wide sense, in the Gospels, those among the Jews who favored him, joined his party, became his adherents<\/em> 9<\/sup>. Our point here IS simply that while so many believe that they understand the gist of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, they Truly ONLY understand what their doctrines have shown them regarding it. Understanding that the subject parable IS NOT as it IS perceived by many, as an eschatological statement, IS our starting point for understanding the final idea that the Master brings forth to us which IS that “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me<\/em>“. We must try to understand here that the church as a whole has taken the ideas of this parable into their doctrines but in a largely superficial way and, for most, without seeing the spiritual import. Nor DO they see its effect on the Great Commandment saying “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself<\/em>” plus the defining idea offered by the Master in our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>that shows us how it IS that we can Truly Love Him through our expressions <\/strong><\/em>of agape<\/em>. Let us begin here with the idea of the separation of the sheep and the goats, a subject that we have broached in at least one past essay. First we must remember that this IS a parable and that the totality of the ideas presented DO NOT have to be as an earthly story<\/em> but can be a mixture of earthly and spiritual ideas. We begin with the “Son of man<\/em>” which IS a largely undefined term used by the Master. Vincent tells us that the idea did have some Messianic value in the Old Testament citing the Book of Daniel and to show us: a circumlocution for man, with special reference to his frailty as contrasted with God<\/em> 4<\/sup>. Vincent goes on to tell us that the Master’s use of the term IS at times used when: acquiescing in the title “Son of God,” addressed to himself, he sometimes immediately after substitutes “Son of Man”<\/em>4<\/sup>. Cited examples of this ARE in the Master’s introduction to Nathanael in the first chapter of John’s Gospel and in His questioning by the high priest as He IS asked to “tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God<\/em>” (Matthew 26:63). Vincent goes on to tell us that: The title asserts Christ’s humanity – his absolute identification with our race<\/em> and that it also exalts him as the representative ideal man<\/em> 4<\/sup>. Finally Vincent adds that: Christ’s humanity can be explained only by his divinity. A humanity so unique demands a solution. Divested of all that is popularly called miraculous, viewed simply as a man, under the historical conditions of his life, he is a greater miracle than all his miracles combined<\/em> 4<\/sup>. These selections from Vincent’s commentary on the “Son of man<\/em>” appellation that IS self applied by Jesus ARE part of his larger commentary which also contains purely doctrinal ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With ALL this the idea of “Son of man<\/em>” IS yet largely undefined and searches for additional ideas lead us ONLY to doctrinal theories of which there ARE many. For us the commentary from Vincent can form a basis for our understanding that the idea IS to assert the Master’s humanity <\/em>and his absolute identification with our race<\/em>, the human race as a whole. Our own position IS that this self identification of Himself as a man should have served to impress upon us that Jesus IS just that, a man; born of a woman, nurtured and indoctrinated, and set loose on the world. The difference IS that the Master IS born as an advanced Soul and here we should NOT try to see that there IS a difference in Souls as ALL are alike in nature. The Master’s advanced state IS based in His own progress as a Soul in this world of men where He had excelled in being able to express <\/em><\/strong>the qualities of the Godhead through His form and here we should try to accept the idea that He DID so in previous lives. Jesus, the “Son of man<\/em>” IS our example of our own Divine Nature and what can be accomplished by the fully awakened <\/em>Soul in this world. We should remember here that some of His apostles, specifically Peter and Paul, ARE also examples of this same destiny and while there may be others who approached the Power of the Master in this world, we DO NOT have enough historical writings on their behalf. So it IS the “Son of man<\/em>“, the human with divine qualities that shall <\/em>“sit upon the throne of his glory<\/em>” which IS but an idea that IS applicable to the times and one that embraces His divine Power. It DOES NOT mean that he IS sitting on an actual throne <\/em>and the Greek word thronos <\/em>has a wide meaning aside from its being such a seat. As we continue here we should remember that this IS a parable and that we ARE attempting to both dissect it and analyze it so that we can better understand the mysteries <\/em>that ARE at its core.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With this in mind we should note that the next parts ARE extremely difficult to interpret and understand but we will nonetheless continue. The Master goes on to say that “before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats<\/em>“. This implies the idea of the king which becomes the subject as the parable proceeds and we should remember here that the Greek word ethnos <\/em>which IS rendered here as nations <\/em>IS more concerned with persons<\/em>. This rendering as nations <\/em>prevails throughout most ALL translations in our library save for the Wycliffe translation which renders the idea as “all folks<\/em>“. Essentially the idea behind ethnos <\/em>IS the human race<\/em>4<\/sup> as Vincent shows us and we should note here that as nations<\/em>, few existed at the time, and fewer still ARE mentioned in the Bible. We could say at this point that the Divine Human, the “Son of man<\/em>” in His glory, DOES NOT gather<\/em> the people; they ARE however gathered <\/em>and we should try to understand here that this IS NOT necessarily a convergence of millions of persons but rather a allegorical event, a figurative treatment of one subject under the guise of another<\/em>*. Can we see that from a Divine perspective that this would be the Way to view humanity? The next verses tell us about the separation <\/em>saying “he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats<\/em>“. This IS perhaps a parabolic idea within the parable as the Master likens this separation <\/em>to how “a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats<\/em>” and we should understand here that it IS the human race that IS being divided<\/em>. We could go into the differences between sheep <\/em>and goats <\/em>as we have in the past but this seems an unnecessary exercise other than to say that whensoever the followers of the Lord are mentioned in terms of livestock, it IS sheep <\/em>that ARE used show them; for example, the Master says “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me<\/em>” (John 10:27).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The differences between the sheep <\/em>and the goats <\/em>ARE defined for us through the remainder of the parable with “on his right hand<\/em>“, and “the goats on the left<\/em>” which then follows into ideas of good and evil to use doctrinal terminology. The separation IS NOT a physical reality however which follows in the ways that each group DOES or DOES NOT express <\/em><\/strong>the qualities of agape <\/em>as men in this world. The sheep <\/em>ARE rewarded <\/em>for their expression <\/strong><\/em>of such qualities while the goats <\/em>ARE denied such rewards <\/em>and seemingly condemned. While we can see the whole idea here as either expressing <\/strong><\/em>the qualities of agape <\/em>or NOT DOING so, much of the church has taken the individual ideas and has tried to use them as a way to accomplish the letter rather than the spirit of the Master’s words. Entire ministries have been constructed to feed<\/em> the hungry<\/em>, clothe <\/em>the poor<\/em>, visit <\/em>the sick <\/em>and attend to the prisoner<\/em> but these ARE but superficial attempts that ARE often used as a shield against men’s failure to express <\/strong>agape <\/em>to ALL. Granted that the church’s efforts ARE virtuous and ARE welcomed in this world but these ministerial efforts ARE NO replacement for the expression <\/strong><\/em>of agape <\/em>to ALL with NO “respect to persons<\/em>“. We should here be able to understand that the Master was NOT implying that the church should start such ministries but rather that the whole of humanity should be an expression <\/strong><\/em>of agape <\/em>with the understanding that whensoever we express <\/strong>agape <\/em>to any, we ARE expressing <\/strong><\/em>it to the Lord. This IS the concept of the entire parable yet it IS is ill-understood by most of the doctrinal church. While most ALL of the doctrinal analysis of this parable call out doctrinal theologies, they ALL ARE seen as error when we can see that the whole of the message of this parable, and of the entire New Testament, IS that we must become expressions <\/strong><\/em>of agape <\/em>and Truth. We must DO so if we ARE to receive the promised rewards<\/em> which the Apostle Peter shows us as “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust<\/em>” (2 Peter 1:4).<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have often discussed these words from Peter as we try to understand just what the promises <\/em>ARE. We ARE told that they ARE “great and precious promises<\/em>” and while commentary on these promises <\/em>seems to be generally nebulous, some DO point to an end. The Mormons however break out of the general Christian doctrinal mold by saying that: God promises His children that if they follow the precepts of His plan and the example of His Beloved Son, keep the commandments, and endure in faith to the end, then by virtue of the Savior\u2019s Redemption, they \u201cshall have eternal life, which gift is the greatest of all the gifts of God.\u201d Eternal life is the ultimate exceeding great and precious promise<\/em>**. Here the idea that we should be responsible for our own destiny IS made rather clear as they tell us that it IS if they follow the precepts of His plan and the example of His Beloved Son, keep the commandments, and endure in faith to the end<\/em> that they will be ‘saved<\/em>‘. While this IS an important idea that IS missing from other commentary on this subject, they DO yet cite that the reward <\/em>IS Eternal life<\/em> which IS something that men already possess with the ONLY question being how will we spend that ‘time’ in eternity. The idea of ‘works’, keeping His words<\/em> and following His Plan, IS discounted by most mainstream Christian commentators; John Gill for example tell us that these nebulous promises <\/em>ARE: better promises than those of the covenant of works; they are not merely temporal ones, nor are they conditional and legal; but as they relate to things spiritual and eternal, to grace here and glory hereafter<\/em> 8<\/sup>. In the general tone of doctrinal Christianity there IS NO requirement for attaining these promises <\/em>as Mr Gill tells us: so they are absolute, free, and unconditional, and are irreversible and unchangeable; and they answer great ends and purposes, the glory of God<\/em> 8<\/sup>. But Peter, without defining the promises <\/em>specifically in this verse, tells us that we can have these “exceeding great and precious promises<\/em>” ONLY after “having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust<\/em>“. And, while Peter DOES NOT tell us the specifics of the promises<\/em>, he DOES tell us that they allow for us to become “partakers of the divine nature<\/em>” which IS yet another idea that IS tormented by the doctrinal church. Here John Gill tells us to be such a partaker <\/em>IS: not essentially, or of the essence of God, so as to be deified, this is impossible, for the nature, perfections, and glory of God, are incommunicable to creatures<\/em> 8<\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of course we should look at this from the idea of the Christ which we ARE pursuing regarding the Master’s self-appellation that He IS the “Son of man<\/em>“. We should remember here what Vincent tells us above regarding this appellation which the Master takes upon Himself; Vincent tells us that the idea IS that: The title asserts Christ’s humanity – his absolute identification with our race<\/em> and that it also exalts him as the representative ideal man<\/em> 4<\/sup>. In Vincent’s terms the idea of the “Son of man<\/em>” as a self-appellation shows us the Master’s humanity along with His divinity in the picture as the representative ideal man<\/em>. While the church at large has decided through their doctrines that the Master IS alone in this picture, that man should NOT be deified<\/em>, the Apostle John tells us something different saying that “as he is, so are we in this world<\/em>” (1 John 4:17). That this simple statement IS made out to be selective by the doctrinal church, that it may apply ONLY to the saints….and such who are born again, as those who love the brethren<\/em> 8<\/sup> IS ONLY partly a True representation of the apostle’s words. ALL ARE “as he is<\/em>” but few there ARE that realize that Truth. In the gospels and the Book of Acts we ARE rather clearly shown the possibilities that lie before humanity but as such ideas ARE discounted and considered heretical, most ALL men will never see what lies before us as men. It can be understood as True that few will ever have realization <\/strong><\/em>of this Truth that “as he is, so are we in this world<\/em>” and this should NOT be a surprise as we ARE also clearly told that “wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it<\/em>” (Matthew 7:13-14). We should try to see that those that DO keep His words<\/em> ARE those that DO find that “strait gate<\/em>” and this idea should be apparent to ALL as the criteria for such ‘glory<\/em>‘ IS shown us throughout the New Testament and especially in such sayings as our trifecta<\/strong><\/em>. The simple point here IS that we can ALL become “partakers of the divine nature<\/em>“, we can ALL receive those “exceeding great and precious promises<\/em>“, and that we can ALL become, in Truth NOT theory, “as he is<\/em>“. ALL can accomplish this as we Repent <\/strong><\/em>and Transform <\/strong><\/em>our lives out of our conformity <\/em>“to this world<\/em>” as Paul shows us saying “be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God<\/em>” (Romans 12:1-2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should try to understand that most ALL men ARE “conformed to this world<\/em>“; we ARE ALL born into vanity <\/em>and then nourished and indoctrinated into the ways of the world by most ALL that we come into contact with; parents, teachers, pastors and priests ALL show us the ways of the world and religion has little or no effect on this dynamic. The Master tells us of that “wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction<\/em>” and we should try to understand just what this means. While the church believes that they have found the “\n
teach<\/s> make disciples of all nations<\/s> persons<\/em>” (Matthew 28:19) which we interpret into acceptable changes from the King James text through the definitions of the Greek words and the use of them in other translations. The idea here IS to “make disciples of all nations<\/s> persons<\/em>” and while this has ever been a lofty goal, it IS the goal of True religion. The second thought regarding Jesus’ words regarding His use of parables IS simply that so many Christians believe that they have this KEY to the mysteries <\/em>while the fail to understand the perplexities of and the criteria for being His disciple. Here again we have deception<\/strong><\/em>, the same self-deception <\/strong><\/em>that James shows us saying “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves<\/em>” (James 1:22). We have often discussed the Master’s criteria for discipleship and here we will rely ONLY upon the first part of our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>where the reality IS that we must keep His words<\/em> in order to be His “disciples indeed<\/em>“. For clarity we repeat our trifecta <\/em><\/strong>of the Master’s words saying:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n