ON LOVE; PART MCDXLXXIII
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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” (Mark 12:29-31).
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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 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.
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
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” (Matthew 7:12).
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
We ended the last essay with the Apostle Paul’s words saying “though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled” (2 Corinthians 10:3-6). We discussed in some detail the idea of the spiritual warfare that the apostle shows us and the role that striving plays in this fight for spiritual supremacy over the wiles of the flesh that ARE founded in vanity and enhanced by our nurturing and indoctrination into the ways of the world. We discussed also the role of doctrines as we tried to show how that it IS the doctrines of men that ARE the strongholds of those who deem themselves religious and cited again the Master’s words against the doctrinal practice of religion. While Jesus’ words saying “in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:7) ARE seen by the church as directed toward the Jews alone, they fail to recognize the way that Christianity had and still DOES follow in the way of doctrinal replacement for the Truth as did the Jews. Jesus makes the failure of the Jews quite clear in the gospels and DOES so in a very blunt fashion as He continually shows them the error of their ways. That men seek to live as men in this world IS the product of that vanity of which Paul tells us that “the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because expectation that the creature itself also shall be delivered made free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:20-21). This vanity, along with the ensuing nurturing and indoctrination into the ways of the world, can in fact be seen as the creator of the vanity which surrounds the churches yet today. We should realize that ALL of this has created those doctrinal ideas that shun works of any kind despite the way that the Master tells us that our rewards ARE ever tied to our works, our ability to act according to His words saying “Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid” (Matthew 5:14). This Light IS NOT what IS depicted by the church; this Light IS the Way of the man focused on the things of God that shines exemplarily on ALL that he may say and DO.
This of course IS NOT understood as the Master intended as He tells this to His disciples; His intention should be clearly seen in terms of keeping His words and expressing those spiritual qualities through the flesh as True followers of the Master. We briefly noted the idea of legalism as an idea that the Jews ARE accused of and this IS a rightful accusation albeit from a wrong perspective. The legalism of the Jews was NOT in works according to His words but in works according to their doctrines, their mitzvah that summarizes the commandments of Moses with little or no regard for the Way of Love and Truth. Jesus shows this in saying “go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice” and “if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless” (Matthew 9:13, 12:7). It IS the expression of agape that the Master refers to in His words on mercy, yet another concept that IS sorely misunderstood yet today. While mercy may fit into the common ideas affixed to this word idea, it IS a much more powerful attribute of agape. We have often discussed the way that mercy should be understood as the expression of agape here in this world, it IS NOT reserved for the carnal ideas that have been attached to it. And this IS the Master’s point in His words to the Pharisees who treasured their carnal interpretations of the law above the essence of the law which IS agape. Their legalism IS founded in this idea as they made their Truth into a set of rote practices that must be followed but which the Master shows them ARE NOT central to the word of God. This legalism however IS much misunderstood by the church despite the way that the Pharisees ARE depicted in the New Testament. Surely they ARE NOT Truly following the Lord but they DO believe that they ARE and this has NOT changed for most ALL for 2000 years. What also has NOT changed IS the way that most ALL of the Christian world believes and acts the same way, as though they were DOING and teaching the Truth that was brought to them by Jesus through their doctrines. This IS surely a stronghold and one that IS seemingly impossible to breach. An example of the Christian ideas on legalism IS found in this from Wikipedia:
“In Christian theology, legalism (or nomism) is a pejorative term applied to the idea that “by doing good works or by obeying the law, a person earns and merits salvation….The Encyclopedia of Christianity in the United States defines legalism as a pejorative descriptor for “the direct or indirect attachment of behaviors, disciplines, and practices to the belief in order to achieve salvation and right standing before God”, emphasizing a need “to perform certain deeds in order to gain salvation (works)”.
We see the idea of the first part of this as correct; legalism has become a derogatory term in modern Christianity; it IS used to depict those that ARE DOING as the Lord commands as acting contrary to the edicts of the church. The ONLY shred of Truth in this idea IS found in the second part where the idea IS that men DO keep His words to achieve salvation and right standing before God but even this IS suspect. It should be everyman’s desire to be in right standing before God and the reality here IS that too many believe that they ARE because of their doctrinal approach to the Lord which, for the most part, ignores the commandments of the Lord. As we previously discussed in our posts, the Apostle James speaks to this in apparent conflict with the words of Paul. This apparent conflict DOES NOT exist when we understand that Paul’s objection to works IS NOT an objection to keeping His words but rather to the Jew’s attitude toward their own doctrinal approach to God. The Jews emphasized the DOING of such things as their ritualistic practices regarding the ancillary commandments. For them the crux of their religious experience revolved around such things as diet, ritual cleaning practices, religious observance of special days and periods, circumcision, as well as their extreme views on the ONLY part included in the Ten Commandments, the sabbath. It IS based on this that the Master says such things as “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath” (Mark 2:27) and “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone” (Matthew 23:23). We should try to see here that the reference to the “tithe of mint and anise and cummin” IS but an example which IS expounded upon in the rest of Jesus’ list of woes. It IS against such ideas of works that Paul rebels and NOT against those that can be easily attached to his own words saying “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2:10). Such ideas ARE frequent in the epistles and ARE a reflection on Jesus’ own words saying “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).
It IS in this regard that James offers this seemingly rhetorical question that asks: “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?“. James DOES answer this clearly with another question asking “wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” and concludes his words saying “as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also” (James 2:14, 20, 26). In understanding these ideas from Jesus and His apostles we should be able to break down the barrier of legalism as a valid Christian argument against Truly striving to keep His words. That this may start with men’s idea that they will DO so to achieve salvation and right standing before God IS a meaningless caveat as it IS within such striving that we find True Repentance and Transformation. We have always held that Paul’s apparent aversion to works IS NOT as this IS interpreted by the church which chose to interpret his words according to the carnal ways of men in this world. The other choice of course would have been to choose God over mammon and this regardless of what one may believe what this Chaldean word mammonas actually means. In understanding mammon as money the church has chosen mammonas over God and has ever taught followers to follow the path of money through the many other considerations that could be attached to the Chaldean idea. These other considerations are in regard to the comportment of men as they seek to better their position in Life and, to be sure, this IS likely the right path for those whose lives ARE centered around their worldly existence. This however IS NOT the way that such a path IS taught; it IS NOT the way for the carnally centered alone but IS taught as the path for ALL including those that would choose God over mammon according to the interpretations of these words by the church. It IS here that they introduced their caveat; it IS here that they define mammon as riches (where it is personified and opposed to God)2. That mammon IS men’s following the carnal path IS shown us by the Apostle Luke calls who calls mammon unrighteous as he shows us the same theme as we read from Matthew’s Gospel. Luke gives us the Master’s words as:
“I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations. He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon“.
Luke 16:9-13
Perhaps the KEY to understanding these words from Jesus IS found in the part that Matthew DOES NOT include: Jesus rhetorical question that asks “If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?” We should understand that the Master goes on to describe just what ARE “the true riches” as He tell us that we must choose either “the unrighteous mammon” or choose God. The point here IS that mammon, ALL that IS of the world, IS “unrighteous mammon” but there ARE other seemingly hidden points to consider here. Jesus IS apparently speaking to men who ARE trying to “serve two masters” which places the emphasis of His words straightforwardly onto those that deem themselves religious. It IS in trying to “serve two masters” that such men “have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon” as they try to share their allieagence with both; this, through Jesus’ words saying “Ye cannot serve God and mammon” IS NOT possible. Logically then if a man IS committed to mammon, committed to his Life in this world without God, he IS “faithful in the unrighteous mammon” and will likely succeed. This of course DOES NOT mean that one who shares his allieagence between “God and mammon” will have NO success; it DOES mean however that he will NOT find the fullness of either pursuit. This IS the state of most ALL men who deem themselves religious; they may have tidbits of success in both the things of God and the things of the world but will NOT likely excel in either. Can we see the point here? Luke offers us the above words from the Master at the end of the Parable of the Unjust Steward which is ONLY found in Luke’s Gospel; we read:
“And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward. Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses. So he called every one of his lord’s debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord? And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty. Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore. And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light“.
Luke 16:1-8
It IS said that no other New Testament parable has been subject to as much controversy as IS this one from Luke’s Gospel. With this in mind, let us explore what it IS that Jesus IS telling us in this parable that IS addressed “unto his disciples“. We begin with the Greek word oikonomos which IS rendered in the King James Bible as steward. Others render this as servant while still others call the man a manager, household manager and general manager, while one other calls the man a bailiff. To be sure, this man was in charge of his employer’s, the rich man, goods. Perhaps we can relate this steward to the story of Joseph who, as the servant to Potiphar, becomes “overseer in his house” (Genesis 39:5). Vincent shows us the idea of a steward saying: Steward [οικονομον]. From oikov, a house, and nemw, to distribute or dispense. Hence, one who assigns to the members of the household their several duties, and pays to each his wages. The paymaster. He kept the household stores under lock and seal, giving out what was required; and for this purpose received a signet – ring from his master4. For this steward his job IS his livelihood and career and while the story tells us that his employer IS unhappy with his performance, we should assume that this was NOT always the case. The complaint IS that the steward wasted the goods that he was responsible for and in this idea we should see Strong’s defining idea that the goods were squandered9a, NOT stolen as many would believe. Vincent describes this rendering that he had wasted [ως διασκορπιζων] saying: Lit., as wasting. Rev., was wasting; not merely a past offense, but something going on at the time of the accusation and here we should see that this had become the way that the steward did his job4. The employer, because of the accusation, then demands that the steward “give an account of thy stewardship to justify or NOT what he had been DOING; it IS this that sets the stage for the remainder of the parable story. Realizing that he was NOT well equipped to DO other jobs, he seeks to embellish his accounting in ways that DO seem strange to us. The steward IS NOT summarily fired from his job and while many commentators see the steward as a thief of sorts, this IS NOT the story; the story IS more to the way that the steward allowed the rich man’s goods to be wasted and while we can apply all sorts of ideas to this wasting, theft IS NOT primary among them. The gist here IS that the rich man has informed the steward that because of the accusations he “mayest be no longer steward” hence, the steward must account for his prior actions which apparently ARE NOT reconcilable.
From here the steward sets out to plan for himself a future that IS NOT as his current role and in this lies the ‘moral’ to this story. We should remember that the steward was NOT immediately fired from his position based upon the accusations leveled against him and this can show us that his fault was more his attitude of paying little attention to his duties than it was a matter of theft or manipulation of the rich man’s assets. Thinking of the future and seeing the likely outcome, the steward realizes that he “cannot dig” nor IS he inclined to beg; in this his motivation becomes finding ways that “they may receive me into their houses“, to curry favor with his employers debtors. Then comes the plot; the steward says “unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?” and the steward, still with some power as steward, cuts the debt in half saving the debtor fifty “measures of oil“. “Then said he to another, And how much owest thou?” and upon the answer he makes a similar deal saving the debtor a portion of what he owes. So what IS the moral here and how does this relate to the average man? Simply by showing that as ALL men DO have a spiritual goal, realized or NOT, they generally DO NOT pay attention to that goal; they DO NOT focus upon the end result. When pressed however they DO NOT Repent and change their ways; rather they embark upon another carnal plan to get them by with little or NO consequence in their everyday lives. The steward simply moves on to another carnal calling while disregarding the reality of his loss of position by his lord and here perhaps we should note the change as the Master reframes the rich man as lord. Jesus ends this by commenting on the wisdom of the steward, on his ability to maintain his carnal focus upon the things of the world. While this interpretation of the Master’s parable IS NOT aligned with the interpretations of the churches, it IS nonetheless a valid argument based in the idea that this IS a parable, a story that embraces a spiritual goal. We should NOT be fooled by what we see as the final idea of this parable saying that “the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light“. We should try to see that the idea of “the children of this world” IS NOT complimentary but shows that one focused upon the things of the world ARE superior to those focused on the things of God, “the children of light” if you will, but ONLY from the perspective of that worldly focus which IS essentially what Jesus IS teaching against throughout the gospels. This for us IS the end of the parable as the Master proceeds to offer instruction to those who choose mammon over God, that they should DO so with vigor; an idea which ends in the reality that “Ye cannot serve God and mammon“….one CAN NOT DO both.
It IS from this point that we should try to see the idea of “mammon of unrighteousness“. Addressed to those that choose mammon over God, the Master tells us that we should “Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness“. To DO so will leave men in control of their worldly lives but we should remember that such ARE also divorced from their spiritual lives. Can we see the admonition? Can we see that if one chooses mammon over God that they should concentrate their efforts on living in this carnal world with success? Mammon IS essentially unrighteous and this IS a point that both James and Paul press. James tells us that “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 4:4) while Paul shows us that “to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be” (Romans 8:6-7). Both confirm for us the necessary dichotomy between God and mammon but this IS seldom seen in the doctrinal churches that in many ways promote a Life in mammon over the reality that Jesus and His apostles ARE showing us. Jesus goes on to introduce the idea of being faithful which should NOT be confused with the general idea of faith as this IS taught in His words. His admonition here IS complimentary to the previous idea that the carnally focused man should “Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness“. Again, if one IS to focus on the things of the world one should DO so faithfully and NOT try to be a part time adherent to whatsoever spiritual ideas one may be attracted to. Again, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon“. This IS the overriding point that the Master IS making but one that IS NOT appreciated in most ALL of the church. Men have come to believe that their part time and partially earnest approaches to the Lord through their doctrines IS their ‘salvation‘ but there IS naught in scripture that tells them this IS True save for their interpretations of certain sayings. On the contrary there ARE many places were we should see the greater Truth that “Ye cannot serve God and mammon” and NOT ONLY from Jesus’ words but in the careful reading of the words of His apostles as well. Careful reading IS NOT difficult; it requires ONLY that one put aside their doctrinal ideas, their indoctrination if you will, and approach the apostle’s words in their context. In Paul’s words that begin our essay we should see an example of the problem.
Most doctrines teach that these strongholds ARE as John Gill tells us saying: By strong holds are meant, the strong holds of sin and Satan; such as unbelief, pride, hardness of heart with which the heart of man is walled (so (bl twryq) , “the walls of the heart”, ( Jeremiah 4:19 ) ) against God and Christ, and the Gospel of the grace of God, and by which Satan fortifies himself….4. Here we should see Mr. Gill’s strongholds as ALL that IS vile in our lives and while this may be a factor, it IS NOT the whole story. Men’s strongholds ARE the very doctrines that they rely upon for a ‘salvation‘ that IS ONLY promised to those that keep His words. In context, this idea of strongholds shows us that they ARE “imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God” and that the Way to “the pulling down of strong holds” IS clearly that we must be “bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ“. We should note that Paul says “every thought” and NOT just some ideas and that these should be brought “into captivity“, the captivity of our obedience to the words of the Christ. Paul DOES NOT say obedience to the doctrines of the church but rather to the words of the Master of which we use our trifecta to show their depth. Repeating our trifecta we read:
- “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32).
- “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21).
- “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. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, 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. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me” (John 14:21-24)
The ideas in the verses above ARE our True salvation; it IS the disciple that IS Truly saved according to the True meaning of the idea. It IS the disciple and the True aspirant to discipleship who strives to keep His words that will have the Truth, and the revelation of the mysteries as their realization of that Truth. It IS the man who keeps His words that IS the disciple that has access to the Kingdom of God, NOT as a place of rest for the ‘good’ Christian after death but as that same sense of realization that puts a man into a Kingdom frame of mind here in this world. Here we should remember the Master’s words saying “the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21); it IS NOT as the Jews then waited for it to come, nor IS it a place somewhere in the sky as many DO believe. Finally, it IS having the Presence of God through the activity of the Soul, the Christ Within, in one’s mortal Life; a Presence that Truly Transforms a man into an expression of the Love and Truth that ARE our God. Here we should see the accepted words from the Apostle John saying “God is love agape” (1 John 4:8, 16) as we try to comprehend the vast expanse that the word agape must occupy in our lives and in world affairs. This IS True salvation and there ARE many more places in scripture where aspects of this salvation ARE revealed to us, aspects that DO NOT include the heavenly ideas manufactured by the church over the centuries mostly for the comfort of men. And this too IS a moral or the story, of the Parable of the Unjust Steward. Jesus asks “If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?“. The point here IS against being doubleminded and while the dynamics of these words IS elusive, meditating on them in the absence of our doctrinal indoctrination can reveal the deeper points that ARE embedded in them. While the ideas here ARE treated as instructions for Life in this world from Jesus, they DO go much deeper into the spiritual Truths that ARE revealed in our trifecta. Again, we should look at the religious when we discuss these words as those whose focus IS wholly carnal ARE generally “faithful in the unrighteous mammon” while the seemingly religious ARE sharing their focus between God and mammon. To be sure there ARE likely few that ARE solely focused upon their carnal lives as most ALL men DO at least pretend that they ARE somewhat aware of the things of God. We should also note that some that ARE most focused upon the things of the world ARE at the same time among the most philanthropical although the places of their giving ARE ofttimes self-serving. We have touched upon this dynamic in past essays and should cover it more intently in future posts.
We should try to understand what the Master IS offering us in saying that “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much“. Of course “that which is least” refers to mammon while the idea of much IS the things of God and from here we could develop our prior point regarding those that ARE fully focused upon their lives in this world. It IS these that would be faithful strivers should they awaken to the greater Truths; it IS these that ARE already single-minded. ALL of this resolves itself into the point of the parable and Jesus’ explanatory notes: that “No servant can serve two masters” and that “Ye cannot serve God and mammon“. Can we see the point of the parable here? Can we see the picture painted of the man whose focus IS upon himself and the way that he manipulates the circumstances of his potential demise? And, can we see that while the reality of the parable casts this man as wise, as commended by his employer for his focused worldly wisdom, that the reality IS that he IS but an “unjust steward“? If we can see the points here regarding his focus and the Master’s admonition that one should be focused, we can perhaps see the greater reality of this story as it relates to True salvation.
Finally we should note the Greek words used by the Master and Luke to frame this parable and the ensuing explanatory words from Jesus. The Greek word pistos IS used here and rendered as faithful; as in most ALL uses of this word the idea DOES NOT refer to that nebulous Christian faith taught by the doctrines of men. The idea here in Jesus’ saying that “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much” shows us the attention paid to either “that which is least” or “that which is…much“, a man’s focus if you will. The steward of the parable IS faithful, NOT to his employer but rather to himself and his own interests. This IS evident in the opening idea that although he commanded his employer’s goods, he IS accused of wasting them or letting them go to waste as he attended to his own desires. With the prospect of losing his employment, the steward remains faithful to his own self; this we see in his negotiations with his employer’s debtors from which he expects that “they may receive me into their houses“. We should try to understand that the idea of houses IS NOT in regard to the domiciles of the debtors but rather that the steward hopes to be received into their company so that he may continue his way of living. Through the whole of this parable and the Master’s words afterward we should see ONLY one thing; two things should stand out here. First IS that a choice must be made regarding the focus of our lives. DO we focus upon the self and the things of the self, mammon to be sure, or DO we focus upon the things of God. It IS here that we must be faithful; it IS here that we must commit to one or the other because the second thing IS that “Ye cannot serve God and mammon“. And here IS the rub: those that ARE faithful in much ARE faithful to their spiritual calling and few there ARE that can make this claim with certainty; those that ARE “faithful in that which is least” ARE faithful to their lives in this world and, according to the Master, can easily become faithful in much. This sets aside ALL those that try to be faithful to both, faithful to their lives in this world and faithful to the Lord. Many millions believe that they have accomplished this way of living, this way where their thoughts ARE mostly on the mundane affairs of their lives and occasionally on the things of God. Of course this idea of occasionally has broad meaning in religious circles but regardless of the extent of one’s intermittent focus on God there IS still the Truth that “Ye cannot serve God and mammon“. “No man can serve two masters“.
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
- 4 Word Studies in the New Testament; Marvin R Vincent D.D. 2nd edition
- 8 Bible commentaries on BibleStudyTools.com
- 9 Thayer’s Greek Lexicon on blueletterbible.org
- 9a The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible on blueletterbible.org
Those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher
