\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 our last essay our discussion centered on the Apostle James Epistle and specifically his words on the relationship between faith <\/em>and works<\/em>. As we cited, there ARE several different doctrinal ideas at play regarding this relationship where, on its face, there appears to be a conflict between James’ words and those of the Apostle Paul that had been discussing. The central part of the apparent conflict IS found in the idea that Paul IS against works <\/em>as a way to ‘salvation<\/em>‘ while James IS telling us that “faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone<\/em>“. While many say that there IS NOT conflict because they address different situations, this IS NOT how the ideas ARE actually viewed by most who claim that: men cannot earn their way to heaven through good works or deeds<\/em> ***. The KEY idea here IS the “good works<\/em>” which Paul promotes in his words from Ephesians that began our study. Paul says that “by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. 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 2:8-10). While the doctrines of men focus <\/em>on the idea that “by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves<\/em>” and apply the idea of “Not of works, lest any man should boast<\/em>” to works<\/em>, they seem to miss Paul’s point in saying “we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them<\/em>“. That some believe <\/em>that these words on “good works<\/em>” apply post ‘salvation<\/em>‘, that IS after one IS ‘saved<\/em>‘ by grace <\/em>through faith<\/em>, seems to rely upon the idea that everyone IS ‘saved<\/em>‘ by their performance of whatever doctrinal precepts apply. However, much of the preaching remains against works <\/em>even for these that ARE considered instantly ‘saved<\/em>‘. In our view these ideas further add to the nebulousness of their ideas of pistis <\/em>and pisteuo <\/em>which ARE rendered as faith <\/em>and believing<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In our reality the doctrinal ideas DO NOT work to the benefit of men who ARE Truly seeking some form of salvation <\/em>which, when properly understood, IS salvation <\/em>from the vanity <\/em>into which they were born, nurtured and indoctrinated and NOT merely a ‘green card’ by which they can enter heaven after death. It IS unfortunate that this latter idea IS the objective of so many Christians who DO NOT think about their being “ We should understand that Paul IS NOT writing about the “good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them<\/em>“, and when doctrines combine “good works<\/em>” with the rote works<\/em> they commit their congregants to a deception <\/strong>that keeps them bound to their vanity<\/em>. James tells us about this deception<\/strong> saying “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves<\/em>” (James 1:22), a saying that IS unfortunately ONLY narrowly and doctrinally understood. Understanding that Paul IS NOT writing against “good works<\/em>” helps us to see that James’ words ARE in NO way contradictory nor based on different situations. Their words ARE totally in sync and paint a picture of the True Way to “the glorious liberty of the children of God<\/em>“. Repeating James’ words:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also<\/em>” (James 2:16-26).<\/p>\n\n\n\n We begin where we left off in the last essay, with James’ words saying Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble<\/em>. The point made in the end of the last essay IS that while most ALL of the church sees James’ reference to devils <\/em>as his reference to those spiritual beings who were cast out of heaven<\/em>*^, the reality IS that James’ IS showing us the nature of the carnally focused <\/em>man. We made reference to those in the doctrinal churches whose focus <\/em>IS yet carnal, those deceived <\/strong>according to James words cited above, and to those who DO NOT have any doctrinal allegiances; in the spirit of James’ writing, he IS referring to the former. Those who ARE “hearers only<\/em>” ARE deceived <\/strong>in many ways and here James IS showing us one the ways as he uses the more nebulous idea of pisteuo<\/em> as believing<\/em>. Speaking to those whose focus<\/em> IS upon the Godhead, those who by measure <\/em>KNOW God, James says “thou doest well<\/em>“. Regarding those whose focus <\/em>IS carnal, the daimonion<\/em>, those that can be understood as a d\u00e6monic being<\/em> 9a<\/sup> as Strong’s defines the idea, James tells us that they tremble<\/em>. This idea of tremble <\/em>IS from the Greek word phrisso<\/em>, a word that IS ONLY used here in the New Testament. The word IS alternately rendered as shuddered <\/em>and IS also expanded upon by some who render as the phrase “tremble with fear<\/em>” or “shudder with fear<\/em>“; these expansions highlight the doctrinal ideas of devils <\/em>or demons<\/em>. Strong’s tells us that the phrisso <\/em>IS: apparently a primary verb; to “bristle” or chill<\/em> 9a<\/sup> while Thayers tells us that its defining quality IS to be rough; to bristle, stiffen, stand up<\/em> 9<\/sup>. These ideas, when applied to James words signify, that these devils <\/em>ARE trembling<\/em> or shuddering <\/em>which IS indicating a cognizance of their appointed doom<\/em>9b<\/sup> according to Vines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ALL of this IS purely doctrinal fiction and this because there ARE NO devils<\/em>, there ARE NO demons<\/em>, except in the minds of those indoctrinated to believe such things. Vincent offers us some ideas on phrisso<\/em> that can help us to apply the idea to the carnal man who James calls daimonion<\/em>. Vincent tells us of phrisso <\/em>that: It means, originally, to be rough on the surface; to bristle<\/em> 4<\/sup> and gives us examples of its use as the fields with ears of corn; of a line of battle bristling with shields and spears<\/em>. In both of these examples we should try to see the idea that Thayer’s shows us; to: stiffen, stand up<\/em>. Applying this to James words we can see the carnal man, the daimonion<\/em> or d\u00e6monic being<\/em>, the man yet caught up in his vanity <\/em>and focused <\/em>upon the self and the things of the self, as stiffening<\/em>, as standing up<\/em>, for his nebulous beliefs<\/em>. We should be able to see that this IS the general attitude of the doctrinal adherent who believes that he KNOWS God but has failed and has remained in his own deception<\/strong>. We should remember that John shows us the reality of KNOWING God saying “hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him<\/em>” (1 John 2:3-4). In the midst of telling us about the relationship between faith <\/em>and works <\/em>James tells us “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble<\/em>” with a purpose which IS discoverable through our right understanding of the preceding and succeeding verses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the last essay we discussed James’ words saying “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works<\/em>” and assigned this part of the verse to the idea of the Jews who lived by their works<\/em>, their dead works<\/em> of the law as Paul would see this. In the idea that “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works<\/em>” we should try to see the man who lives by works <\/em>justifying his way while James’ retort IS “shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works<\/em>“. Here, this imaginary man should be understood to have NO faith<\/em>, the idea of faith <\/em>as the Christian understands it IS largely absent from the Old Testament. From this perspective Jews have ONLY works<\/em>, ONLY those things that they DO according to their interpretations of the law. They DO believe <\/em>“that there is one God<\/em>” as this IS foundational in the Jews’ religion and here perhaps we can see the idea of devils <\/em>more clearly. Again the Greek word here IS daimonion<\/em> and the full Strong’s definition of this IS a d\u00e6monic being; by extension a deity<\/em>. Strong’s definition, while it gives power to the rendering as devil<\/em>, IS misplaced by that rendering. As we discussed, the idea here IS better understood as motivated by a spiritual force or genius and inspired<\/em>; an elemental force which contains an irrepressible drive<\/em>; and the dynamic unrest that exists in us all that forces us into the unknown, leading to self-destruction and\/or self-discovery<\/em>^. The simple rendering as devil <\/em>relates ONLY doctrinal ideas and seeing daimonion<\/em> in these terms can help us to understand James’ intent which we see in terms of those who have NO True faith<\/em>; it IS such that while they acknowledge that there IS One God, they tremble <\/em>as we discussed above. In this IS our connection between these seemingly unrelated verses; the man, the Jew or any with NO True pistis <\/em>but ONLY works<\/em> that comport ONLY with doctrines, IS among them that “believe, and tremble<\/em>“.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this understanding the verse IS NOT out of place but follows upon the previous verse. This IS disrupted however by the doctrinal view and the idea of demons <\/em>and devils <\/em>which yet permeate much of Christianity. This leads us to the next verse which we should see as addressing the man who says “Thou hast faith, and I have works<\/em>“; to this man James says “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?<\/em>“. The KEY word here for us is vain<\/em>; in this misunderstood biblical concept IS the reality of these verses, two realities to be sure. First IS to the Jew who believes in One God and that his salvation <\/em>IS through “the works of the law<\/em>” (Galatians 3:10), the idea IS that such faith<\/em>, such believing <\/em>in this salvation<\/em>, IS in vain<\/em>. The second IS to the man who has that nebulous faith <\/em>that poses as pistis <\/em>in Christian doctrines; NOT the faith <\/em>that Paul references which IS Truly KNOWING. To this man the message IS that this faith<\/em> IS dead <\/em>because it has NO works <\/em>and to believe otherwise is vanity<\/em>. James may NOT have intended to show us these two versions of faith<\/em>, the nebulous faith <\/em>of many in the church today and the simpler faith <\/em>of the Jews in those days who believed they were saved <\/em>by their works<\/em>. He may NOT have had such foresight as to see what Christianity would become but here today we can have both versions clearly in mind. We should remember however that there ARE other forward looking statements in the New Testament than ARE NOT directed at the Jews in those days. People that hold onto both of these versions of faith <\/em>ARE those that James calls “O vain man<\/em>“, both ARE mistaken regarding the reality of their ‘salvation<\/em>‘ yet today. For the Jews that still carry forth their traditions and their mitzvah sans those parts of the 613 ‘commandments’ that have become obsolete; and for the doctrinal Christian who sees his ‘salvation<\/em>‘ in the rites and rituals of certain denominations or those that hold to the idea of ‘salvation<\/em>‘ ONLY by faith<\/em>, James makes this claim of vanity<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Greek word used here by James IS kenos <\/em>which IS generally rendered as vain <\/em>and as empty <\/em>in some places in the King James Bible. Others render the idea as foolish <\/em>while others hint at stupidity <\/em>but these ideas ARE NOT really implied in the definitions of the Greek word. Strong’s tells us that kenos <\/em>means: empty (literally or figuratively)<\/em> while adding (in) vain<\/em> 9a<\/sup> as a allowable rendered word. Thayer’s tells us that the idea of kenos <\/em>IS: properly, of places, vessels, etc.,which contain nothing (Judges 7:16; Genesis 37:24); metaphorically, empty, vain; devoid of truth<\/em> 9<\/sup>. Today’s idea of vain <\/em>primarily goes to ideas of personality but in Webster’s 1828 Dictionary the idea of vain <\/em>was: Empty; worthless; having no substance, value or importance<\/em> 1<\/sup> and from this we should see how that kenos <\/em>became vain<\/em> in older versions of the bible. Vincent tells us that kenos <\/em>IS: empty, without spiritual life<\/em> 4<\/sup>. Can we see James point, his reasoning for calling such persons vain<\/em>? While this Greek word IS different from the word rendered as vanity<\/em>, mataiotes<\/em>, we can gain some additional understanding of James intent through our understanding of this word which IS that this vanity <\/em>IS our perishable and decaying condition, separate from God, and pursuing false ends<\/em> 4<\/sup>. The similarities of these words IS shown more clearly by Thayer’s which defines mataiotes <\/em>as in similar terms to kenos <\/em>saying that it IS: what is devoid of truth and appropriateness<\/em> 9<\/sup>. We should add here that the idea of vanity <\/em>IS widespread in the Old Testament, especially in Psalms and Ecclesiastes, and the Hebrew word hebel <\/em>IS rendered as mataiotes <\/em>in the Septuagint thereby aligning it with the Greek. Our point IS simply that James IS telling us of the futility<\/em>, another rendering of mataiotes<\/em>, of having faith <\/em>without works<\/em> and, from our perspective, those who follow either version of faith <\/em>identified above ARE living in vanity<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n AS we have been posting from nearly the beginning of our blog posts, vanity <\/em>IS the human condition. Vanity <\/em>IS the state of mind of most ALL who have NOT yet awakened <\/em>to the Truth that flows from one’s own Soul. It IS vanity <\/em>that Paul frames as being “conformed to this world<\/em>“, a state into which ALL ARE born and then nurtured and indoctrinated into this idea of conformance<\/em>….essentially we DO NOT KNOW any better until we begin to awaken<\/em>. It IS this awakening <\/em>that Paul shows us as “the renewing of your mind<\/em>” ( Romans 12:2) and it IS this awakening <\/em>by the Truth, this sense of KNOWING if you will, that leads to our Transformation<\/strong><\/em>. Just as we ARE Transformed <\/em><\/strong>by measure<\/em>, Transformed <\/em><\/strong>bit by bit, we ARE also awakened <\/em>in the same way through our works <\/em>which should be primarily understood as keeping His words<\/em>. This IS the True works <\/em>of the Christian from which ALL else flows and we should understand here that the principal IS the same for the non-Christian as every True religion leads us to the same spiritual values. This IS the natural relationship between pistis <\/em>and delivered<\/s> made free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God<\/em>” (Romans 8:20-21) here and now. This “bondage of corruption<\/em>” IS their vanity <\/em>which we should try to see as Vincent shows us saying that our vanity IS a: perishable and decaying condition, separate from God, and pursuing false ends<\/em> 4<\/sup>. We should try to see and to understand that it IS through our “good works<\/em>” that we can escape <\/em>this condition and the primary point of these “good works<\/em>” IS that we keep His words<\/em>; that we strive <\/em>to DO so. It IS in keeping His words<\/em> that we come to KNOW God and, when we can understand that this KNOWING IS the reality of pistis <\/em>and pisteuo<\/em>, Paul’s words saying “by grace are ye saved through faith<\/em>” take on a very different meaning. We must add to this the reality of the apostle’s intent in using the idea that salvation <\/em>IS “Not of works<\/em>“. Paul’s meaning here and elsewhere IS that these works <\/em>ARE the rote performance of the mitzvah of the Jews, their 613 religious duties found in the Torah that guide Jewish life, ritual, and ethics, their laws which are the foundation of their traditions against which the Master constantly speaks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n