ON LOVE; PART MDXVII
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 Paul’s words to the Corinthians; words which ARE commonly discussed in the churches under the idea of Love but without much understanding what this sense of Love IS. The idea presented by Paul, as well as the vast majority of ideas pertaining to Love in the New Testament, ARE ideas that concern agape and NOT the common understanding of Love as it exists yet today. Agape IS NOT Love as most ALL understand Love and in reality agape IS NOT related to that Love at ALL. That it has been translated as Love for the centuries that span the first translations of the gospels up until today shows us ONLY that the idea of Love fit most comfortably in the translated texts, in English and most other languages, as a virtuous idea. Love however in the sense that it IS written about in the New Testament IS an illogical choice and here today we will explore some of these biblical entries. Before we begin however we should finish with the ideas that we began to discuss in the last essay which come from Paul’s writing to the Corinthians where we read:
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not
1 Corinthians 13:1-3charityagape. I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have notcharityagape, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have notcharityagape, it profiteth me nothing“.
These words show us the emptiness of religious activity in the church when that activity IS NOT accompanied by charity which IS from the same Greek word, agape, as IS the more frequent translation of Love. While we DO NOT KNOW what Paul means in saying that he DOES “speak with the tongues of men and of angels“, the idea has been linked to the ideas presented by Luke at the beginning of the Book of Acts where the disciples and aspiring disciples of the Lord ALL heard foreign words spoken in their own languages. Of this Luke writes that “Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:7-8). That some of the church has converted these ideas into the doctrinal idea of glossolalia, the gift of tongues, which IS another subject that the church has interpreted into doctrinal ideas based upon Paul’s words despite the fact that his ideas ARE undefined. For us the better understanding of Paul’s words here IS that he speaks as a man regarding spiritual matters and that his words ARE empty unless accompanied by a True sense of agape which we can define today as we did in the last post. This definition will ONLY a basis in the minds of men who accept the concept of agape Love as a vision of the world that creates in one’s psyche the reality that ALL men ARE ONE in essence; a concept that embraces the carnal world, as well as the spiritual, where we have the reality of One Humanity, One World and One God. Agape IS a realization in the renewed mind that this IS so and it IS with this realization that we act in agape for ALL, that we can “love thy neighbour as thyself” and that we can ‘do unto others as we would have others do unto us‘ as the Golden Rule IS often phrased. This IS at best a rudimentary explanation of the deepest of human ideals and virtues: our expression of True agape. Aside from speaking in tongues as the idea IS commonly framed, the apostle IS showing us other aspects that have become parts of Christian doctrine and their uselessness in the absence of our expression of agape.
Paul cites prophecy as a gift, a gift that many claim to have, as well as an understanding of the mysteries which he also tells us IS reserved for the disciple saying that they ARE “made manifest to his saints“. While the idea presented in Colossians seems restricted to one particular mystery “which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:26, 27) the greater reality IS found in the Master’s words. Jesus tells His disciples why He speaks in parables 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” (Luke 8:10). It IS such mysteries that Paul IS discussing in His words to the Corinthians as well as the Colossians and here we should see an even deeper issue that IS hidden behind Paul’s parabolic tone. The problem IS that to have such gifts one must be a disciple and to be a disciple one must be expressing agape but this reality IS NOT clearly stated but becomes evident to the aspiring disciple. Paul shows us that he DOES have such gifts and IS showing us the worthlessness of them if it were possible to have them in the absence of an expression of agape. The same should be understood regarding “all knowledge” and “all faith” and the idea here should be understood as that to claim such knowledge, such faith, such understanding and such prophecy without agape IS NOT ONLY meaningless but also NOT possible. IS it NOT somewhat paradoxical that so many believe that they have such gifts while reading these words from Paul that clearly point to their worthlessness in the absence of agape? We should remember here one more thing: the faith that “could remove mountains“. Such faith here points directly to the reality of pistis which IS KNOWING. This the Master shows us saying “If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done” (Matthew 21:21). The idea here IS NOT the nebulous ideas of faith that exists yet today in and out of the churches; the idea here IS KNOWING, namely KNOWING without any doubt. We ofttimes write about the translation problems with both pistis and pisteuo which IS rendered most often as believing and it IS such verses as this from Matthew that show us the reality of the Greek words. Mark shows us the same idea in regards to pisteuo, believing, as he cites Jesus’ words as “whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith” (Mark 11:23).
Finally the apostle shows us the same ideas of worthlessness, of nothingness, concerning carnal ideas which he frames first as “though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor” and next in the most obscure idea that “though I give my body to be burned“. While it may be motivated by virtue, the idea of giving “to feed the poor” IS a carnal endeavor that many perform in a rather unconscious way and the apostle’s message here IS regardless of the motivation, the act IS spiritually worthless in the absence of one’s expression of agape. The final point IS one that IS generally aligned to martyrdom and while many twist Paul’s words to suit their beliefs, the reality IS that this phrase IS NOT understood at ALL. Clearly the apostle IS NOT stating that he IS giving his “body to be burned” and reflecting on the profitless nature of the act in the absence of agape; he IS surely NOT DOING so. Perhaps we can find some meaning here in the realities of Transformation and Redemption as these ARE shown to us by the apostle. In Transformation one IS giving his body over to control by the Soul in an ever escalating way that coincides with one’s expression of agape. The whole idea of Transformation comes from Paul’s own words saying “be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2) and here we should try to see a ‘burning‘ away of one’s carnal motivations under the ‘burning‘ Light of the Soul. Similarly the idea of Redemption, an idea that IS ONLY mentioned once as Paul tells us of his “waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23) which idea should be seen apart from most other references to being redeemed. For us this Redemption IS the culmination of our Transformation where the whole of the carnal body IS ‘burned‘ away and ALL that IS left IS our expression as a Soul in this Earth.
The whole of Paul’s words here ARE intended to show us that regardless of what we believe, what we DO believing it IS spiritual, ALL of our efforts ARE worthless without our expression of agape which IS based in our realization in the renewed mind under the Power of our Transformation. Agape IS the Force par excellence that gives our Lifetime here in this Earth spiritual meaning and it IS in the Power of agape that we can change the world. This IS NOT an unknown concept; it IS a worldwide realization by many that it IS the selfishness of men that maintains that separation into the rich and the poor, the educated and the uneducated, and whatsoever other divisions one can imagine. We should note however that most ALL oof this realization IS apart from the church and IS motivated in the secular world by well meaning people of ALL backgrounds according to the New Age concepts of Love. Of course this sense of Love has been grossly misapplied from the beginning where the more carnal aspects of it filtered into the minds of men along with the deeper motivations toward agape. This gave the more conservative aspects of humanity reason to rebel against this evolutionary force and that rebellion IS still in full force as can be easily seen through the political resistance to the changes that ARE imminent. Our point here IS NOT to offer any sort of historical perspective save to note that the movement toward Love in this world IS an evolutionary movement that will NOT be stopped but can be harshly impeded by the religious and political forces at play in the world today. The greater point here IS that the ideas regarding agape have always been with us but because of the Power of the few rich and powerful, persons and nations, to be sure, such ideas of the Oneness of humanity have NOT been a part of any organized educational system. It IS the rich and the powerful persons and nations that seek to maintain their positions of wealth and power thereby subjecting the masses to their will but this need NOT be the way. The future IS in the hands of the people; while most will meekly go along with their leadership, chosen, appointed or forced DOES NOT matter, there ARE those in the world that can effect the changes that agape DOES bring. To be sure this begins locally and while it may seem to be but a finger in the dike, we should understand that as such movements grow there will be sufficient fingers to stay the flow of hate and prejudice and especially the selfishness that keeps such negative ideas alive.
We should understand here that the Master speaks against selfishness throughout the gospels and DOES so in clear and concise terms that ARE NOT appreciated as the commandments that they ARE. While the church and other religious forces talk much about Jesus’ words on Love, most ALL tend to ignore His words in their own attitudes and actions. Here again let us remind ourselves of the Master’s words from His Sermon on the Mount regarding the expression of agape and the elimination of the selfishness that prevailed in His day and still prevails yet today. The Master tells us in part:
“Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust“
Matthew 5:38-45
While this portion of the Master’s Sermon on the Mount has specific references to agape, it also contains ideas of such Love in the way that we ARE to “resist not evil“, that we NOT seek “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth“; that we NOT seek retribution. While these ARE difficult precepts to accept and understand, they ARE nonetheless critical aspects of our expression of agape where our egos ARE devoid of such ideas as revenge and vengeance. This may seem contrary to much of the ideas of vengeance outlined in the Old Testament as a Godly action but such ideas must be understood in their context. This idea of context IS shown us in the Book of Hebrews where we read “we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people” (Hebrews 10:30). The KEY idea here IS the relationship between these ideas of vengeance and judgement. To be sure there IS ever a sense of judgement at work in the world of men but this IS NOT the same idea of judgement that IS found in the doctrines of men who misinterpret the idea and lend carnal motivations to our God. The judgement of others IS clearly shown to us as a function of the Godhead and here we use that term, Godhead, to separate out any ideas of a personality invoking vengeance on any part of His creation. The reality of this idea of judgement by the Godhead IS in reality a function of karma which at its depths should be understood as a ‘self’ motivated payment for the errors of men in this world. Paul shows us a part of this saying “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not” (Galatians 6:7-9). Everyman IS essentially in control of his own destiny as a Soul in form in this world and while it IS our expressions of agape, our striving to keep His words, that “shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting“, it IS the opposing ideas of self and selfishness that “shall of the flesh reap corruption“. It IS this sense of corruption, our “bondage of corruption” (Romans 8:21) if you will, that will delay, in unimaginable terms, the freedom of our Souls from the cycle of Life and death in this world. This we should try to understand in terms of living and dying according to the Master’s view of these ideas and understand that to live IS to DO so spiritually and to die IS to live as a carnal man. This the Master shows us several times and according to different criteria.
In our discussion in the last essay regarding the ‘rich young ruler’ we cited the Master’s words from Luke’s Gospel to make our point. There Jesus tells “a certain ruler” that he should “sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me“. Today we should focus upon the idea that the Master leaves with His disciples saying “how hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God“. Our focus here IS on entering the Kingdom which IS an idea that has been interpreted to mean after one dies and ‘goes to heaven’ or to hell as the case may be. Such interpretations have served for centuries to make the Kingdom of God a far off prospect in the lives of men; such interpretations have created much uncertainty in the church’s teachings for any who apply the mind to the issues at hand. At the same time the church, through their doctrines, have minimized the very words that Jesus uses saying “how hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God” as they try to interpret the meaning of the next verse saying “it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God” to their benefit. The minimization of this idea has led to a carnal emphasis in the church where men ARE taught to be successful and to have such riches despite the overall message of the Gospels and the writings of the apostles. This however IS NOT our main point here. Our main point IS that we can “enter into the kingdom of God” and have “have treasure in heaven” and should we look at Matthew’s telling of the same story of the ‘rich young ruler’ we can then see the reality of the ideas presented. Matthew tells us that Jesus says to this “certain ruler” that “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments“. Jesus’ words here ARE in regard to Life and our entering into to it through keeping His words and this we should try to understand in the same tone as we understand men’s entering “into the kingdom of God“; neither idea requires that men must first die. This reality however IS NOT understood by the masses in the church and we would argue here that it IS NOT understood by most of the clergy as well.
Corroboration of the reality of our entering into the Kingdom and into Life here and now ARE shown us by the Master and perhaps the most direct IS His words to the scribe who asked Him “Which is the first commandment of all?“. This scribe goes on to affirm the Master’s answer saying “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices“. To this the Master says “Thou art not far from the kingdom of God” (Mark 12:28, 32-33, 34) and to be sure Jesus IS NOT saying that the scribe IS NOT far from his death. To better show the relationship between entering the Kingdom and entering into Life we go to Luke’s version of the same encounter where the Master’s words ARE “Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live” (Luke 10:28). Can we see the point here? Entering into Life as the idea IS framed in the New Testament shows us the duality of such ideas of Life and death and without explanation the Master plants the seeds to our discovering this Truth. In each of the gospels we have this idea of the duality of Life and death shown to us by Jesus who tells us such things as:
- Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it (Luke 17:33).
- For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it (Matthew 16:25).
- For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it (Luke 9:24).
- For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it (Mark 8:35).
- He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal (John 12:25).
- He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it (Matthew 10:39).
The first four verses above show us the idea of saving and losing and while the context of these words IS generally understood, the deeper ideas presented ARE NOT. An example of the church’s dilemma regarding these words IS found in the John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible where we read his commentary on Matthew 16:25:
For whosoever will save his life
Whoever is desirous of preserving himself from troubles, reproaches, persecutions, and death; and takes such a method to do it, as by forsaking Christ, denying his Gospel, and dropping his profession of it; and by so doing, curries favour with men, in order to procure to himself worldly emoluments, honour, peace, pleasure, and life,
shall lose it;
he will expose himself to the wrath of God, to everlasting punishment, the destruction of soul and body in hell, which is the second death, and will be his portion:
and whosoever will lose his life for my sake:
that is, is willing to forego all the pleasures and comforts of life, and be subject to poverty and distress, and to lay down life itself, for the sake of Christ and the Gospel, rather than deny him, and part with truth,
shall find it;
in the other world, to great advantage; he shall enjoy an immortal and eternal life, free from all uneasiness and affliction, and full of endless joys and pleasures8.
The above IS typically the way that Mr. Gill breaks down bible verses and we should note that most ALL of his words throughout his commentary on the bible ARE doctrinally oriented and that he had helped define Christian doctrines in his day. We should note that his words DO lean toward certain doctrinal philosophies and ARE accepted by much of the church. Mr. Gill IS telling us here that the whole objective of the Master’s words on saving one’s Life, Loving one’s Life and finding one’s Life in this world ARE aimed toward Life in the other world or, one’s Life in heaven or hell after one’s death. We should see here also another doctrinal idea that has prevailed for centuries which IS that the idea of losing one’s Life IS physical and a part of the whole of Christian ideas on martyrdom where one would die before he would deny him, and part with truth. Of course the Truth here is men’s perceived doctrinal Truth and NOT the One Truth that IS part and parcel of our expression of agape in this world. The Master defines for us the source of Truth saying that “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) but these words ring hollow yet today in the churches. The greater reality of the Master’s words IS far from the perceived ideas of living and dying in this world. The greater reality of His words show us the duality of the idea of Life aside from the actual Life and death of the body, a duality that IS NOT understood by the carnally minded men who teach as DOES Mr. Gill. We should note here that the Apostle Paul also echoes the Master’s words here in his Epistle to the Romans, in verses that we have been discussing over the last several posts. Paul tells us:
“they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For 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“. The apostle goes on to complete the idea saying “For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live“
Romans 8:6-7, 13
Paul’s words here both clarify and amplify the Master’s words but they ARE NOT understood any better than ARE Jesus sayings. The problem here IS that most ALL of the church believes that it IS by their ‘doctrinal salvation‘ that they ARE NO longer living “after the flesh“, nor ARE they minding “the things of the flesh” but this belief fails through the fact that ALL men who ARE NOT Repented and Transformed ARE DOING exactly that, endeavoring to “live after the flesh“. This IS the natural way of men in this world which IS in part based in the degree of vanity with which they came into this world, a degree which IS then exacerbated by the nurturing and indoctrination that they endured. But this IS NOT the end, throughout Life men ARE further nurtured and indoctrinated and should this happen in part through the doctrines of men in the church DOES NOT ‘cure’ the problem. In fact, as we have long maintained, one’s continued indoctrination in doctrinal matters further obnubilates the eternal Truths that the Master and His apostles actually teach us through their word. Paul’s words here ARE specific to the carnal lives of men and the shedding of their pervasive carnal attitudes; he tells us that we must “through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body” in order to live and this idea of living IS offered in the same way as IS the Master’s in His words above. It IS our focus on our selves, our lives in this world, that IS the single factor that keeps men from becoming “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4). While Paul tells us that we must “mortify the deeds of the body“, Peter tells in simple terms how that this IS DONE saying that we need to escape from “the corruption that is in the world through lust” (2 Peter 1:4). It IS trough this escape that we can “mortify the deeds of the body” and this escape IS part and parcel of our Transformation. Let us here look at some of the Greek words used by both apostles.
Our first word is mortify which in English means: to humiliate or shame, as by injury to one’s pride or self-respect.
Synonyms: abase, humble; and then to subjugate (the body, passions, etc.) by abstinence, ascetic discipline, or self-inflicted suffering*. The first defining idea here IS meaningless in Paul’s context and, while more accurate, the second paints a picture of religious hardship that IS NOT a part of the reality of Transformation itself as it more accurately describes the result sans the idea of self-inflicted suffering. Other bible translations offer us a view of different view of mortify with most offering ideas to the effect of “if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” but the idea we should take IS far beyond the actual “deeds of the body“. We must try to see here that ALL that we DO, ALL of our actions, our thoughts and our attitudes ARE indeed a part of “the deeds of the body” and we should try to see as will that our actions ARE most often the products of our thoughts and our attitudes. Can we see the point here? Can we see that our objective IS to change, to motrify if you will, our thoughts and attitudes which IS the basis for Paul’s instruction that we must “be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2). This IS the task at hand for those that Truly desire to follow the Lord. While the idea of mortify IS easy to comprehend, the Greek word thanatoo which IS rendered as mortify DOES NOT clearly show us the idea apart from that of death. The Lexicon tells us first that the idea IS to put to death2 which IS the likely source of the translation by most and here we should note that mortify IS the better rendering choice as death IS clearly NOT the apostle’s intent. We should note here that the word IS rendered as mortify ONLY in this particular verse in the King James Bible with ALL other uses of the word rendered in terms of death. This brings us then to Peter’s use of the idea of escape, a word that IS also NOT likely intended for its use in this verse where the escaping IS from one’s own self. While the idea IS presented that we must escape the corruption that IS in the world, this idea IS modified by the way that it IS presented as being in the world through the desires of men. This idea of corruption IS from the Greek word phthora which IS defined as: corruption, destruction, perishing by the lexicon before they add two strictly doctrinal ideas saying that phthora IS eternal misery in hell and then adding: in the NT, in an ethical sense, corruption i.e. moral decay2. Strong’s tells us simply that phthora IS: decay, i.e. ruin (spontaneous or inflicted, literally or figuratively) opening up an array of different interpretations. While moral decay IS the more common understanding of the New Testament use of the word this IS a limiting factor that has resulted in much of the churches fixation on moral behaviors rather that the reality of the vanity in which we live.
Paul uses this idea of phthora in two verses that we frequently quote and which have a large impact on the reality of the lives of men in this world. Paul tells us “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). Our reasons for changing the wording of these verses IS well documented in our blogposts; simply the ideas ARE first that the Lord has NO need to hope; second Vincent shows us that the idea of because should be that in his commentary4 and, finally, the Greek word eleutheroo IS ONLY rendered as delivered in this verse while elsewhere it IS “to make free“2. The idea of corruption here from the Greek word phthora where surely the idea IS NOT eternal misery in hell and DOES NOT reflect the idea of moral decay as such; the word IS intended to show corruption and men’s bondage to it as the effect of that vanity into which ALL are born. And, lest we forget, the idea of vanity IS a far reaching affliction of mankind which the church sees as the fall of man based in the story of Adam from the Book of Genesis. This affliction IS the state of mind that ensues from our birth as men in this world, a state that IS exacerbated by our nurturing and our continual indoctrination into the ways of the world. It IS vanity that Paul refers to saying “the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be” (Romans 8:7). To be sure, ALL men ARE born and continue throughout most ALL of their lives using the “carnal mind” and while some use the “carnal mind” to justify their doctrinal spiritual ideas such ideas ARE yet carnal. Vincent leaves us with an adequate explanation of vanity that we should apply to ALL such ideas regarding the “carnal mind” and its working in this world. Mr. Vincent tells us that this mataiotes, this vanity IS: a perishable and decaying condition, separate from God, and pursuing false ends4. It IS the “carnal mind” that IS pursuing false ends and we should note here that the idea of perishable IS a part of the lexicon’s defining ideas for phthora which IS rendered as corruption and which Strong’s defines primarily as decay. As to being separate from God, Paul shows us the nature of the “carnal mind” and thereby of our vanity saying “the carnal mind is enmity against God“. We will further tie these ideas together in the next post; today we close with our trifecta which shows us the Way out of our vanity. Jesus tells us:
- “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).
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
| Aspect | Potency | Aspect of Man | In Relation to the Great Invocation | In relation to the Christ |
| GOD, The Father | Will or Power | Spirit or Life | Center where the Will of God IS KNOWN | Life |
| Son, The Christ | Love and Wisdom | Soul or Christ Within | Heart of God | Truth |
| Holy Spirit | Light or Activity | Life Within | Mind of God | Way |
- 2 New Testament Greek lexicon on biblestudytools.com
- 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.or
- * Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2020
Those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher
