\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 In the last essay we completed our discussion of the Apostle Paul’s words to the Romans from the first part of chapter eight. For us, this IS one of the more important and revealing parts of Paul’s writings as it outlines the reality of being “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” and thereby becoming “sons of God<\/em>“. As we discussed in the last essay and many times before, that the church believes that they ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” DOES NOT make it so and while they teach this to their congregants, they ARE withholding the most important part of being “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” (Romans 8:14) which IS that we keep His words<\/em>. This IS NOT a criteria put on by the church but it IS a criteria as shown by the Master and His apostles throughout the New Testament. Paul frames the idea as a bit cryptically but when we combine his words with those of Jesus, we get the full picture that shows us that we ARE “in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you<\/em>” (Romans 8:9). Most of the church takes this idea as affirmation that one IS “not in the flesh, but in the Spirit<\/em>” but they fail to consider the Master’s words saying “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him<\/em>” (John 14:23). In these words from Jesus we have the Way that “the Spirit of God dwell in you<\/em>“; there IS NO other Way. In the teachings of much of the church it IS the affirmations of faith <\/em>that brings the Christ into one’s heart <\/strong><\/em>but this IS NOT the Way according to these words from John’s Gospel. The Master addresses this in another way also as He asks a rhetorical question saying “why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?<\/em>” (Luke 6:46). The point here IS that far too many people ARE deceived <\/strong><\/em>by believing that they DO have “the Spirit of God dwell in you<\/em>” when they DO NOT meet the stated criteria. The Apostle James offers us yet more evidence regarding the spiritual value of keeping His words<\/em> saying “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves<\/em>” (James 1:22). Can we see the point here and can we see how that this criteria of keeping His words<\/em> IS the KEY to so many biblical promises; our trifecta <\/strong><\/em>lays this out clearly saying:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Having finished our work on the first 14 verses of chapter 8, we will continue though the rest of this most important chapter from Paul’s writings. The apostle goes on to say:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body<\/em>” (Romans 8:15:23).<\/p>\n\n\n\n We DO cover parts of this selection frequently but today we cover it in context. Speaking to those that remain or, better, abide <\/em>in His word, according to the last statement from Paul that “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God<\/em>“, he begins our new selection. First IS an affirmation to those that “are led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“; the apostle tells these that “ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear<\/em>“. We should try to see here that this “spirit of bondage<\/em>“, an idea that IS repeated a bit differently later, IS tied to the idea that one “live after the flesh<\/em>“, the bondage <\/em>IS to this world and to the self at its center. For those that Truly “are led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” as we defined this idea in the last essay, this “spirit of bondage<\/em>” has been eliminated. Yes, it can come back to the man who rebels against his Repentance <\/em><\/strong>and Transformation <\/em><\/strong>allowing the carnal mind to reassert itself, but this IS NOT typical of the Way. The idea of fear <\/em>is from the Greek word phobos <\/em>from which we get the English idea of phobia. The idea here should be understood that it IS “spirit of bondage<\/em>” that produces fear <\/em>and here we should see the opposite of peace <\/em>and NOT the idea of terror <\/em>which IS one of the defining words applied to phobos<\/em> 2<\/sup>. Two scriptural points here. First the Master tells us about this peace <\/em>saying “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid<\/em>” (John 14:27). This IS the peace <\/em>of mind that overcomes the man who IS Truly “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“; it IS the peace that we find in our Repentance <\/em><\/strong>and Transformation<\/em><\/strong>. The second idea comes from the Apostle John who tells us “There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love<\/em>” (1 John 4:18). In these words we should try to see that the elimination of fear <\/em>IS found in “perfect Again Paul IS writing to those that “are led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” and NOT the average doctrinal Christian when he says that “ye have received the Spirit of adoption<\/em>“. We should understand here that Paul IS NOT telling us directly that those that “are led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” ARE adopted<\/em>; there IS much more to this idea than this simplicity. Later in our selection the apostle tells us that we ARE, along with him, “waiting for the adoption<\/em>” so that here we should understand that there IS much more to be understood here. Perhaps we should begin with the idea that we have the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” which idea can be understood as a reference to our own Spirit, that our own Spirit IS NOT the “spirit of bondage<\/em>“, a part of the corruption <\/em>that IS Life in this world, but IS rather the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” which IS ever aloof from the carnal Life of the man in this world. Further we should understand the Greek word huiothesia<\/em> which IS rendered as adoption<\/em>. This word IS defined by Strong’s as: the placing as a son<\/em>9a<\/sup> and by Thayer’s as: adoption as sons<\/em> but the word has much deeper meanings. Vincent shows us the idea of adoption saying that: Mr. Merivale, illustrating Paul ‘s acquaintance with Roman law, says : <\/em>“The process of legal adoption by which the chosen heir became entitled not only to the reversion of the property but to the civil status, to the burdens as well as the rights of the adopter – became, as it were, his other self, one with him<\/strong>\u2026 this too is a Roman principle, peculiar at this time to the Romans, unknown, I believe, to the Greeks, unknown, to all appearance, to the Jews, as it certainly is not found in the legislation of Moses, nor mentioned anywhere as a usage among the children of the covenant. We have but a faint conception of the force with which such an illustration would speak to one familiar with the Roman practice; how it would serve to impress upon him the assurance that the adopted son of God becomes, in a peculiar and intimate sense, one with the heavenly Father<\/strong>” (Conversion of the Roman Empire)<\/em>. Vincent has adopted <\/em>this understanding of the adoption<\/em> and while we DO NOT see the application of this to the “Spirit of adoption”<\/em> per se, it IS a valuable way to understand the concept. So then, in this verse we have, or better ARE, the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” but we ARE NOT yet “one with the heavenly Father<\/strong>“<\/em>, an idea that comes up again at the end of our selection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paul then adds that as a result of this elimination of the “spirit of bondage<\/em>” in our Life in this world and the establishment of the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” as one that strives <\/em>to be “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“, “we cry, Abba, Father<\/em>“. We should note here that we ARE exchanging the idea of being “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” with the idea that we ARE striving <\/em>to be “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. We should try to see that the former idea requires that we ARE Truly “sons of God<\/em>” while the reality IS that we ARE working toward that end which IS our adoption<\/em>. These ideas ARE difficult to put together in a cogent manner because there IS much duality at play. Paul IS addressing men whom he presumes, if only for the sake of his writing here, ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” and ARE then “the sons of God<\/em>“. Paul wavers from this presumption however when he speaks about the “spirit of bondage<\/em>” and the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” from the perspective of telling men who ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” what they should already KNOW, that they “have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear<\/em>“. Can we see the point here? Can we discern that Paul IS speaking to both those that ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” and those that ARE striving <\/em>to be so. Perhaps we can also see that it would be those that ARE striving <\/em>against the difficulties of shedding the “spirit of bondage<\/em>” that would be those that DO “cry, Abba, Father<\/em>“. This point of duality aside, we should see that the message IS that when one IS Truly and fully “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” that he no longer is captive by the “spirit of bondage<\/em>” as this IS overcome by the “Spirit of adoption<\/em>” which will make us “sons of God<\/em>” because we ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. We should try to see that the idea that “we cry, Abba, Father<\/em>” is essentially a ‘Paulism’.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The next verse begins with the words “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God<\/em>” and this is a statement of fact that IS ill understood and unprovable. Here we should try to see that the Spirit that “beareth witness<\/em>” IS the “Spirit of God<\/em>” or the Godhead itself. That the Godhead could “beareth witness<\/em>” would be a very personal idea that plays in the hearts <\/strong><\/em>of men and IS a rather invisible reality. Our individual Spirit, represented in Life by the Soul, will KNOW when we have joined the ranks of “the children of God<\/em>” which IS the end result of being “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. What the apostle IS essentially saying here IS that when we ARE Truly among “the children of God<\/em>“, that the realization <\/em><\/strong>of this comes to us through the Spirit. Here again we must try to understand that ALL individual Spirits ARE part and parcel of the Godhead; this IS their natural condition. The realization <\/em><\/strong>of this Truth IS ONLY possible when the Soul can convey this Truth to the renewed <\/em>mind and this, as Paul shows us, IS the result of our Repentance <\/strong><\/em>and Transformation <\/em><\/strong>although he DOES NOT frame it quite this way. Paul tells us to “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 12:2). It IS in our Repentance <\/em><\/strong>that we ARE able to cease being “conformed to this world<\/em>” and here again we should understand that this idea of Repentance <\/strong><\/em>IS our starting point; it IS our: virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice<\/em> 4<\/sup>. It IS through this change in the life and practice<\/em> that we ARE able to cease being “conformed to this world<\/em>” and it IS here that our Transformation <\/strong><\/em>begins. We should add here that in our Transformation<\/em><\/strong>; IS our ability to discern<\/em>, a better rendering than prove<\/em>, “.what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God<\/em>“. A discernment <\/em>that IS possible because we ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“, because we ARE “the children of God<\/em>“. These words, indeed this whole chapter, IS deeply spiritual and can ONLY be fully understood by those that ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“, a claim that we DO NOT make for ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paul goes on to deepen our understanding of these spiritual ideas but we should note that we can have little or NO understanding until we ARE striving <\/em>to “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. The apostle tells us next that “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together<\/em>“. The idea of heirs <\/em>here IS related to the idea of adoption <\/em>and to Mr. Merivale’s depiction of this saying that: “The process of legal adoption by which the chosen heir became entitled not only to the reversion of the property but to the civil status, to the burdens as well as the rights of the adopter – became, as it were, his other self, one with him<\/strong><\/em>“. Can we see the point here? We should remember that Paul’s framing here IS “if children<\/em>” so that his point relies upon the ideas discussed above; that we must be “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>” with ALL that this entails. Next we ARE shown the idea that we ARE “joint-heirs with Christ<\/em>“. We can understand this as Jesus or we can understand this as being “joint-heirs<\/em>” with ALL who ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. We can also understand this as both as Jesus Himself was “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. We should NOT be confused here by the church’s rhetoric regarding Jesus as “the only begotten of the Father<\/em>“; this refers to Jesus’ unique status of being born as a Son of God as His purpose and His destiny. A few posts back we briefly discussed Jesus’ temptations <\/em>through which He could have asserted His carnal Power to DO as He pleased in the world. We KNOW of course that He DID NOT, that He overcame <\/em>whatever temptations <\/em>were presented to Him as He set His Life to the Will of the Father, the Will of the Godhead of which Jesus IS as functional part. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Paul goes on to give us additional conditions to this idea of being “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ<\/em>” and we should try to see this condition in relation to being “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“. Paul tells us “if so be that we suffer with him<\/em>” and this phrase must be parsed to be understood in human terms. The KEY word here IS of course suffer <\/em>which IS from the Greek word sumpascho <\/em>which IS defined by the lexicon as: to suffer or feel pain together<\/em> 2<\/sup> hence the rendering of “suffer with<\/em>” which is nearly universal in our library of bible translations. What DOES this mean? What IS the apostle trying to tell us is necessary for us to be “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ<\/em>“. John Gill, in his Exposition of the Bible, tells us: Christ and his people being one, he the head, and they the members, suffer together; when he suffered, they suffered with him and in him, as their head and representative; and they partake of the virtue and efficacy of his sufferings; and they also suffer afflictions, many of them at least of the same kind with Christ<\/em> 8<\/sup>. From our perspective this IS ALL quite meaningless; the idea here should be understood NOT as an as idea currently spoken of by Paul but rather as an enduring idea of suffering <\/em>that affects every generation over the centuries since His departure from this world. Strong’s defines sumpascho <\/em>saying: to experience pain jointly or of the same kind<\/em> 9a<\/sup> and in this we must try to see, other than the crucifixion, what suffering <\/em>the Master endured. If we could try to see that Jesus’ suffering <\/em>was a suffering <\/em>of the Soul, a suffering <\/em>whereby His whole being ached at the way that the Jews had destroyed their religion and how that the world in general was essentially Godless, we can gain much insight. This IS the suffering <\/em>that we, as aspirants to discipleship, as True followers of the Lord, must “suffer with him<\/em>” and here in this idea is a conundrum of sorts when applied to our current time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jesus Truly cared about the people with whom He interacted and He Truly cared even about those that were beyond His reach. This, in today’s verbiage we would call this ‘woke’, and idea which IS clearly defined as: awareness of social inequalities<\/em> 7<\/sup>. In Truth the idea should have a broader definition than this but even without considering how that such inequalities <\/em>can be corrected, the idea of ‘woke’ should be a deeply rooted Christian idea. Jesus’ wokeness was a KEY part of His suffering <\/em>and NOT in a bad way. In His caring about ALL men He sees their problems clearly and He reached out to both teach them and to heal them. Jesus was ofttimes anguished by the plight of the people in a world where many were relegated to menial roles and to servitude with NO real hope of escape <\/em>save through His teachings. And His teachings were the KEY for many who, while they may NOT have actually escaped<\/em> their roles, were brought into a sense of peace <\/em>that DID NOT rely upon outside forces. The result was the realization <\/strong><\/em>of His words saying “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid<\/em>“. The combination of seeing the plight of one’s neighbor<\/em>, of everyman to be sure, and having the peace <\/em>which Paul describes saying “the peace of God, which passeth all understanding<\/em>” (Phillipians 4:7) should be the deeper definition of being woke. The way that this idea of being ‘woke’ has been dismissed by the political right and by parts of the church IS clearly a un-Christian action that will be remedied as the pendulum swings back to the side of righteousness<\/em>. Paul continues to tell us that “if so be that we suffer with him<\/em>“, if we take on the plight of our neighbor as He did, if we Truly care, then “we may be also glorified together<\/em>“. This idea of glory <\/em>and glorification <\/em>are additional word ideas that ARE misused in the doctrines of men. The meaning of the Greek word sundoxazo which IS rendered as “glorified together<\/em>” IS defined by Strong’s as: to exalt to dignity in company<\/em> 9a<\/sup> and by Thayers as to approve together, join in approving<\/em> 9<\/sup>. The idea of glorifying <\/em>IS missing from these although it IS included in a secondary definition by Thayer’s; the idea of glorify <\/em>IS largely a doctrinal one. In the end the idea should be understood as that “if so be that we suffer with him<\/em>” as we describe above, then we will be understood as being with Him, as being exalted <\/em>with Him. Of course this exaltation <\/em>IS NOT from the world of men but rather in the \n
love<\/s><\/em> agape<\/em>” and, to be sure, those that ARE “led by the Spirit of God<\/em>“, those that ARE “the sons of God<\/em>“, Truly follow in the words of the Father. They DO express <\/strong><\/em>“perfect love<\/s><\/em> agape<\/em>” which IS the hallmark of those that keep His words<\/em>. Next Paul gives us an idea that the church has seized upon without proper understanding; many believe that ALL who ARE ‘saved<\/em>‘ according to their doctrines ARE adopted <\/em>“sons of God<\/em>“.<\/p>\n\n\n\n