Monthly Archives: September 2024

ON LOVE; PART MDXXVIII

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 some words from the Apostle James, words that we often use to show the need to keep the Master’s words. James tells us that we ARE deceiving ourselves when we believe that through our hearing of doctrinal teachings on the word we ARE ‘saved‘ if we can use that term here. Of course the apostle DOES NOT specifically say that we DO regarding doctrinal teachings but since that has become the way for most to be a “hearer of the word” we think it prudent to state it this way. Aside from the actual doctrinal teachings that most ALL churchgoers hear, there IS also their own idea of bible study; we would point out here however that whatsoever study one DOES IS colored by their individual doctrinal position. To read scripture in the absence of preconceived ideas that flow from one’s doctrinal leanings IS difficult but yet possible and, to be sure, this IS the ONLY way to read the word with clarity. The doctrines of men have been diluting and changing the Master’s words and the words of His apostles for 2000 years and we should try to see here how Jesus’ words to the Jews in His day were often prophetic regarding today’s religious climate. This prophetic idea IS the same as that which the Master introduces when He repeats the words of the Prophet Isaiah calling the prophet’s words prophetic; so here, we ARE DOING the same and calling the Master’s words prophetic. Any Truly intelligent reading of the Master’s words would perforce reveal this analysis as True. The Master says “Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:6-7). The state of the church today IS strictly doctrinal and when we understand the sheer number of differing doctrinal approaches to the Lord, we can then better understand where the Truth has been obnubilated, where the Truth has been diluted and changed to meet the ‘needs’ of men.

James’ words emphasize this; not from the perspective of dilution and change but rather from the perspective of hearing anything spiritual and believing that one IS ‘saved‘. We should understand here that the doctrinal ideas ARE generally NOT “the word” that James refers to; the apostle refers to the True words of the Lord, the commandments if you will, that have been subjected to dilution and change. James tells us “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed” (James 1:22-25). In the last post we looked briefly at the ideas that follow James’ picture of deception, how that a man will leave hearing the word, or whatever qualifies as the word in his mind, and feels right; “he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way“. James goes on to show us the fleeting nature of such feelings as one becomes again enmeshed in his daily Life in this world; he “straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was“. As we said, this can be based in hearing the True words of the Lord or in hearing ideas from whatsoever doctrines he may subscribe to. In either event, perhaps moreso with the doctrinal message, the feelings engendered ARE lost as the man begins again to focus on himself and the self in this world. It IS ONLY when one can hear the word in whatsoever way that it resonates in his mind, whatever causes him to comprehend and understand, and then “continueth therein” that he can be Truly ‘saved‘. While James phrases this as that “this man shall be blessed in his deed“, the reality IS the same as the nebulous ideas of ‘salvation‘ that ARE bandied about in the church. We should note here that these ideas correlate closely with our trifecta where the results for he that “continueth therein” IS discipleship and we should remember here that discipleship IS the goal for ALL who Truly seek the Lord; that discipleship IS the Way par excellence to True salvation which IS the reward of ALL points of our trifecta. The Master 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).

In the first part of our trifecta we have the same idea of continuing in His words that James offers us in saying “whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed“. The Master offers us the ‘blessing‘ of discipleship and of having the Truth while James offers us the more universal idea of being ‘blessed‘. We should note that the idea of ‘blessing‘ IS rather undefined; James uses the same Greek word, makarios, as DOES the Master in His list of ‘blessings‘ which we call the Beatitudes. The word IS rendered as happy and as blessed² and the defining ideas from Strong’s^9a and Thayer’s⁹ offer us little more. Today’s dictionaries define the idea for us in spiritual terms saying that to be blessed IS: consecrated; sacred; holy; sanctified and worthy of adoration, reverence, or worship* and this seems the way that the idea should be understood in the church. These ideas ARE NOT often those expressed in modern language and so we say that the idea of blessings IS rather undefined. Defining ‘blessed‘ then must be understood from the scriptural context in which it IS used and, to be sure, the defining makarios as happy works in but a few of the New Testament entries. To best define this we should look to the Beatitudes and to the Master’s statement above which, while it DOES NOT use the idea of makarios, DOES show us what the idea means in practical terms. In our trifecta this ‘blessing‘ IS discipleship or, perhaps better, one’s seeking discipleship, and Truth; and, from the idea that this “truth shall make you free“, we should see the spiritual nature of it. Additionally, should we apply the ideas from the Beatitudes and understand them spiritually as they ARE offered by Jesus, we can then best understand what it IS to “be blessed in his deed“.

Jesus’ words that ARE the Beatitudes have NOT been fully addressed in our blogposts and perhaps this IS our opportunity to seek out the True meanings of His words; apart of course from the doctrinal ideas that ARE often attached to them. The Beatitudes ARE a most fundamental part of Christianity but a part that IS ill understood from the perspective of the Master’s meaning in citing these ‘blessings‘, both their cause and their reward. Let us look at the Master’s words in some detail. Jesus tells us that:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you” (Matthew 5:3-12).

The first point, “Blessed are the poor in spirit” IS perhaps among the most difficult to understand based upon its rendering into English. Most ALL translations render Jesus’ words this way but a few lean toward a more carnal view saying such things as “Happy are people who are hopeless“; “You’re blessed when you’re at the end of your rope” and some crossover ideas saying “Blessed are those who recognize they are spiritually helpless” and “Blessed are those who are spiritually needy“. From our perspective NONE of these Truly make sense as the lead offering from the Master in His list of Beatitudes; we should especially note the rendering of makarios as happy as this IS totally irrelevant save for actually KNOWING that “theirs is the kingdom of heaven“. For us the idea of happy can ONLY be used in certain contexts of which there ARE but few; the idea rendered as blessed IS sufficient despite the fact that we have NO real understanding of makarios‘ deeper meanings. Vincent’s history of this word IS too lengthy to post here but for those interested here IS a link to Mr. Vincent’s commentary: https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/vnt/matthew-5.html. When we look at the idea of being poor, we should look upon it in the Master’s terms of forsaking as for us this IS the most relevant positioning of the idea and offers us a much Truer understanding of His intent. We should note that the word rendered as in IS NOT a part of the text so that it would read simply “Blessed are the poor in spirit“; neither IS the word rendered as are included in the Greek text so that this could easily be understood “Blessed IS the poor spirit“. Attaching this to Jesus’ words on forsaking that we have frequently discussed we can find common ground against the reward of “the kingdom of heaven“. This same idea IS also a KEY part of the Master’s message to the ‘rich young ruler’ whom we recently discussed. Jesus tells us “So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:33). In the end we should try to understand this Beatitude as that those that have forsaken “all that he hath” ARE Truly disciples and DO gain access to “the kingdom of heaven“. Can we see the point here and the spiritual logic that IS missed by the doctrinal church that denies the need to forsake anything?

The next Beatitude tells us “Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted” and this too has been misunderstood for centuries. The Greek word pentheo which IS rendered as mourn IS defined by Strong’s as: to grieve (the feeling or the act)^9a and by Thayer’s: as to mourn for, lament, one⁹. From our perspective the proper idea IS lamentation as in mourning there IS the sense of someone’s death. What IS it then that one would lament in this particular saying addressed primarily to disciples and aspirants to discipleship? Perhaps the best understanding comes from the Apostle James who tells us “Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up” (James 4:8-10). Here one’s affliction, lamentation as recorded in other translations, IS a personal sense resulting from the perceived difficulty of cleansing and purifying. We lament the difficulty that we believe that we face and James tells us this IS beneficial as one’s cleansing and purifying relies upon such inner feelings and results in our ability to “Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord“. Can we see the point here? Can we see how that our lamenting our situation as we work towards our goal to “Draw nigh to God” draws us away from our doublemindedness, away from our laughter and joy regarding our lives in this world? It is such that ARE among those that mourn or lament in Jesus’ words, it IS such that will be comforted in their success. While some commentators apply the idea of sin here and say that we mourn because of our sin, this would ONLY be True with respect to those that DO “Draw nigh to God” which IS what we ARE saying here. Otherwise mourning sin IS but a form of the way that Repentance works in the church, as ‘sorrow‘ for things DONE. Others apply this idea of mourning to reflection upon our everyday Life in this world and the ‘sorrow‘ we may feel for DOING what we have DONE but, unless this ‘sorrow‘ IS a part of True Repentance, it has NO effect on our journey to “Draw nigh to God“. Let us remember here the definition of Repentance; Vincent tells us that Repentance must be: Such a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice⁴.

The next Beatitude IS perhaps the most misunderstood of them ALL; the Master tells us “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth“. We should remember here that this idea of meekness IS grossly misunderstood in common language as it has taken on the idea that to be meek IS to be: humbly patient or quiet in nature, as under provocation from others; (Synonyms: yielding, soft, timid, weak, obedient, calm, pacific, unassuming, passive); overly submissive or compliant; tame; Obsolete. gentle; kind*. From these defining ideas we get NO real idea according to the way that the word IS used in the New Testament; even the obsolete ideas ARE insufficient to show us the reality of the word. Webster’s 1828 dictionary offers us some help as they defined meek as: Mild of temper; soft; gentle; not easily provoked or irritated; yielding; given to forbearance under injuries. Appropriately, humble, in an evangelical sense; submissive to the divine will; not proud, self-sufficient or refractory; not peevish and apt to complain of divine dispensations¹. Here, while a bit more aligned with the reality of the idea, these defining ideas DO NOT fully capture the reality of meekness. The lexicon offers us the following definition along with an analysis; they say meekness IS: mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness². They go on to add:

‘Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting. In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength to defend against injustice. Thus, meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting the injuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time (Isa 41:17, Luk 18:1-8). Gentleness or meekness is the opposite to self-assertiveness and self-interest. It stems from trust in God’s goodness and control over the situation. The gentle person is not occupied with self at all. This is a work of the Holy Spirit, not of the human will (Gal 5:23).

There IS little here to Truly defining the idea of meekness as it IS used by the Master who says: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30). In Jesus’ interactions with the Jews there was NO real sense of gentleness as we would understand that word; there IS however a reality of meekness as it should be defined according to its biblical use. In the Old Testament the idea of meekness IS used frequently in the psalms and occasionally by the prophets and while the idea can be understood in terms of gentleness, this IS NOT the writer’s goal. The Hebrew word ʿānāv IS rendered as meek in its one appearance in the Pentateuch where we read that “Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.” (Numbers 12:3). We should note here that “the man Moses” IS NOT gentle as we understand that idea and he IS not: poor, afflicted, humble⁹ as ʿānāv IS defined by Thayer’s along with its definition as meek. Moses was destined to control an entire population of Jews and, according to scripture, he DID just that through his authoritarian attitude as he issued what ARE considered commandments that ARE beyond the Ten Commandments. There IS NO gentleness here and while there may have been some inkling of humbleness, this IS quickly denied by his own actions against those that opposed him. Yet the scriptures define “the man Moses” as meek and from our perspective the ONLY way that this idea works IS in the very same way that it works for the Master. Both Moses and Jesus have immense Power over their physical environment and could cause immediate harm to others, especially to perceived enemies. Their meekness IS found in NOT using their awesome Powers which leads to our own defining idea for both the Greek and the Hebrew words that ARE rendered as meek. To be meek IS to have the Power to DO as one wishes against enemies and foes at most every level; to be meek IS to refrain from using that Power and perhaps here IS where the idea of being humble comes into play. Jesus shows us this Himself as He tells His disciples “Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?” as He accepts His own destiny at the hands of the Romans and the Jews. This IS the reality of being meek; this IS the reality of having the Power to attack and avenge but choosing NOT to use that Power and this same reality works out in our everyday lives. It IS such people that will “inherit the earth“. We should remember here the Master’s words saying “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” Matthew 5:38-39).

Understanding what meek means DOES NOT help us to understand the idea that the meek “shall inherit the earth” however; for this we need to look further. The idea of inheritance in this instance IS muddy at best and this IS True of many entries of the Greek word kleronomeo which IS rendered as inherit. Perhaps we should look at the idea from the perspective that as Souls ALL men ARE destined to ‘receive‘ eternal Life as this idea IS shown in scripture; the idea of receiving IS the primary defining idea in the lexicon where we read that kleronomeo means: to receive a lot, receive by lot. Other defining ideas refer to the idea of inheritance as the idea IS understood while the last defining idea IS presented as: to become partaker of, to obtain². When we can consider that ALL men ARE, as Souls, as the Christ Within, both part and parcel of the Godhead, the idea of this receiving and obtaining can be best understood in terms of our realization of our destiny. To obtain and to receive the Kingdom IS NOT a carnal idea but a spiritual one that must become the realization in the heretofore carnal mind. What IS it then that we receive as our inheritance? The Earth IS a rendering of the Greek word ge which IS said to be a: Contracted from a root word^9a by Strong’s which defines ge as: ghay; contracted from a primary word; soil; by extension a region, or the solid part or the whole of the terrene globe (including the occupants in each application):—country, earth(-ly), ground, land, world^9a. There ARE many interpretations of this idea that the meek “shall inherit the earth” with some positioning the idea as related to the death of the man who IS meek although this idea IS rather undefined in most ALL commentaries. Others such as John Gill suppose that this IS NOT our current planet, NOT the country, earth(-ly), ground, land, world as the idea IS shown us by Strong’s. Mr. Gill tells us that the idea IS: rather, the “new earth”, which will be after this is burnt up; in which only such persons as are here described shall dwell; and who shall inherit it, by virtue of their being heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ; whose is the earth, and the fulness thereof⁸. This IS a purely doctrinal idea with NO scriptural support other than being the intimations that ARE made by some commentators.

The word means the Earth as we understand it, with or without its inhabitants, and based upon this there must be some spiritual meaning that we must discover. Understanding this, what it IS that the meek will receive remains hidden but we can expand our understanding by looking at other examples of the use of kleronomeo. In the eighteen times that this word occurs in the New Testament it refers once to “everlasting life” (Matthew 19:29) and four times to the equivalent “eternal life“. Kleronomeo IS used six times to refer to the Kingdom with five of these being specific to the “Kingdom of God“. It IS also used four times to refer to “blessing“, a or the, once to refer to “the promises“, once to “all things” and once to salvation. The final idea IS from Hebrews where, speaking of Jesus, we read “Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they” (Hebrews 1:4). ALL of these uses ARE spiritual; NONE are carnal or mundane. Perhaps the final idea here from Hebrews can show us the real intent of our inheritance, that it IS NOT specifically “the earth” but rather dominion over it. For this we need to go again to the Master’s words saying “Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world” (John 16:32-33). The Master’s words here ARE intended to lessen the impact of His immanent departure from their presence and from the world. What we should try to see here IS that as Jesus IS trying to comfort His disciples, He IS at the same time showing them that they too can “overcome the world” which IS from their perspective to overcome the remnants of their vanity which keeps them bound to their lives in this world. The Apostle John offers us several saying that help us to understand the underlying theme that we too can overcome. First IS the apostle’s words saying “as he is, so are we in this world” (1 John 4:17); these words offer us a comparison of the Life of a True disciple with the Life of Jesus the Christ. We should try to see here that it IS in one’s identification with the Christ Principal in ALL men that we can overcome as He did. Here we should add these words from Jesus saying “The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master” (Luke 6:40) here He shows us our equivalency from another perspective.

John also tells us about overcoming from another angle saying “I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one. Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:13-15). The idea of “the wicked one” IS from the Greek word poneros which means evil most often and wicked occasionally. Where it IS personalized we should see the doctrines of men at play as they seek to show evil as the effects of an evil being, Satan; there IS NO such personal implication in the Greek. We can bring this back to Jesus words saying “I have overcome the world” through the last verse of John’s words were the previous ideas that we should “overcome the wicked one” ARE related to our relationship with the world. The apostle tells us to “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him“. Can we see the point here? Can we see how that it IS our relationship to the world that must be overcome? In the end we should try to see that our meekness IS a prerequisite to our discipleship and that the reward of being meek IS that we too can “overcome the world” which can be loosely understood as our ability to “inherit the earth“. But this IS the conundrum of this saying by the Master: as we seek to “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world” how can we inherit the same. Again, the answer IS found in our own overcoming; overcoming the world IS overcoming the desire for the things of the world, the lust if you will for our personal satisfaction. It IS this overcoming that cures our individual vanity and brings us ever closer to “the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:20, 21). Here we should complete the Apostle John’s words above; he continues to tells us that “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (1 John 2:16-17).

The next Beatitude IS easier to understand but, at the same time, it too IS misunderstood by much of the church. Jesus tells us “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled” and in these words we should NOT see the righteous but those that seek righteousness according to Jesus’ words saying “seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness” (Matthew 6:33). There IS NO conundrum in these words yet they ARE ofttimes misconstrued to reflect a doctrinal view of righteousness. The Greek word dikaiosune which IS rendered always as righteousness means: equity (of character or act); specially (Christian) justification^9a according to Strong’s and there IS naught in this definition that helps us to understand the Master’s point. Thayer’s defining ideas ARE summarized in the lexicon and tell us that righteousness IS: in a broad sense: state of him who is as he ought to be, righteousness, the condition acceptable to God; the doctrine concerning the way in which man may attain a state approved of God; integrity, virtue, purity of life, rightness, correctness of thinking feeling, and acting; in a narrower sense, justice or the virtue which gives each his due^{2, 9}. In its simplicity, righteousness should be understood as living according to the edicts of the Lord and while some of the defining ideas above allude to the idea of being ‘approved by God‘ there IS NO basis for this; our approval from the Lord comes ONLY from our own Souls, our individual Christ Within. The Master IS NOT commending the righteous here; He IS commending those that strive after righteousness which IS frames as our “hunger and thirst“; this IS the important point of this Beatitude. The idea of hunger here IS NOT related to the idea of physical hunger; Strong’s tells us that the idea is: figuratively, to crave^9a while Thayer’s tells us that peinao means: to crave ardently, to seek with eager desire⁹ along with the carnal ideas related to the word. We should look at the Greek word dipsao which IS rendered as thirst. Here Strong’s definition uses the same idea both literally and physically saying that the word means: to thirst for^9a. Thayer’s expands upon the idea of thirsting saying that: figuratively, those are said to thirst who painfully feel their want of, and eagerly long for, those things by which the soul is refreshed, supported, strengthened⁹. While this IS closer to the reality of our striving, it IS at the same time a doctrinal idea that portrays the Soul as an aspect of men rather than the reality that the Soul IS the True man.

Again, our view here IS that striving answers the same call as DOES hungering and thirsting and we should remember here the definition that we attach to our striving. The lexicon offers us four distinctive ideas regarding the Greek word agonizomai which IS rendered as strive; two ARE related to physical confrontations where one strives to get the better of another but these ARE followed by: metaph. to contend, struggle, with difficulties and dangers; to endeavour with strenuous zeal, strive: to obtain something². The main idea here IS that our striving will sometimes have difficulties and dangers as we endeavour with strenuous zeal. It IS this endeavor that we should see in Jesus’ words concerning them that “do hunger and thirst after righteousness“, that such Truly strive according to the Master’s words saying “Strive to enter in at the strait gate” (Luke 13:24). It IS the latter defining ideas from the lexicon and Thayer’s that ARE become the lead defining ideas in our modern dictionary where we read that to strive IS: to exert oneself vigorously; try hard; to make strenuous efforts toward any goal*. Our striving IS the result of our Repentance which becomes the cause of our Transformation and it IS in our Transformation that we ARE changed from carnal to spiritual as men in this world. In our striving after righteousness we ARE filled with righteousness by measure according to the Master’s words saying “with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you” (Mark 4:24). Simply, strive and you “shall be filled“.

We have covered the first four of the Beatitudes as they ARE listed in Matthew’s Gospel and we should note that our ideas concerning them ARE NOT as the doctrinal ideas of men present. These ARE spiritual ideas aimed as aspiring disciples to show the spiritual benefits, rewards if you will, that ARE attached to men as they strive to bring their own individual spiritual Truths to bear on the lives in this world. We will continue with Jesus’ words from Matthew’s Gospel in the next post along with a discussion of the truncated list offered by Luke.

We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.

• ¹ Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1828 and 1913 from https://1828.mshaffer.com/
• 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