ON LOVE; PART MCCXXVII
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ
GoodWill IS Love in Action
ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•ΑΩ•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).
In the last essay we discussed again how that the Greek and the Hebrew words of the bible ARE translated, rendered, and interpreted according to the doctrinal approach of those who have taken the authority to show others the intent of the scriptures. An honest look at the available lexicons shows a rather wide range of meaning for many Greek and Hebrew words and the ideas listed as definitions ARE generally according to the word’s presumed use. This IS especially True in many of the entries in Thayer’s where some degree of historic meaning based in the ‘classical use’ IS intermixed with his doctrinal thoughts on how these words ARE used by the New Testament writers. And while Strong’s seems to be have a more defining trend in showing the meaning of Greek words, this too IS often doctrinally skewed.
Vincent’s Word Studies, while more of a commentary than a dictionary, DOES help to define some of the ideas that ARE presented. While much of Mr. Vincent’s remarks ARE doctrinally skewed toward his Christian beliefs, his writings DO unveil much of the deeper meanings which go beyond the doctrinal ideas and into the realm of keeping His words. Two of Vincent’s conclusions which we frequently use ARE in his defining ideas of believing in and believing on and his view of the deeper Truth of vanity. To this we should add his commentary on the phrase ‘in the name of‘ which IS so much more than repeating a name in prayer, as well as his view on several words that ARE wrongly interpreted by much of the doctrinal world….words that have come to be seen in regard ONLY to sex and NOT to their deeper spiritual ideas. Unfortunately Vincent’s work DOES NOT address many critical words and this either because he DOES NOT see the need or because he DOES NOT have a non-doctrinal view of them
Beyond the ideas that we can take from the lexicons and Vincent IS the meaning that we ourselves see as the ideas that the Greek words ARE intended to convey and, while we ARE NOT Greek scholars, we DO have some degree of insight that allows us to offer a view that IS different from most doctrines which seek to mold the words of the Master and His apostles into their doctrinal view of Life. We often ask ourselves if we ARE guilty of the same thing—the molding of the word ideas of the Master and His apostles into our own sense of doctrine—and this IS likely True in some of what we say. However, our point of view IS ONLY to see the words of the Lord as He intended them and to show that the words of His apostles ARE intended to clarify and amplify Jesus’ words….that they ARE NOT intended to create doctrines that ignore, change, dilute or distort the most basic Truths which ARE that men should keep His words and, in so DOING, that their expression be Love.
Most ALL doctrinal views of the New Testament center upon the ideas of believing and of faith and these ARE at best nebulous ideas as they ARE presented; to this we should add the various ideas of atonement and salvation and try to see how that these ARE based in selected and out of context sayings by the apostles. The created doctrines of atonement and salvation, the doctrinal ideas of faith and believing, and ALL teaching that DOES NOT include the reality of the Master’s words, which ARE based firmly in the law as given by Moses, ARE ALL the doctrines of men and NOT the commandments of the Lord. It IS against this very thing that Jesus speaks against the religious leaders of the Jews as He repeats the words of the prophet saying “in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:9, Mark 7:7).
In the simplicity of the idea that Jesus IS repeating the words of Isaiah from nearly 800 years before, we should be able to see the timelessness of this idea and understand that this human tendency IS as much a part of the vanity, men’s “bondage of corruption” (Romans 8:20, 21), as any other human frailty. But the doctrinal church DOES NOT see such ideas as this being addressed to them; they DO NOT see the timelessness of the idea nor DO they see how that they ARE acting as the Pharisees and other religious leaders of the Jews as they base their doctrines on everything but the essential Truth of His words….the essential Truth of agape as the expression of everyman.
While pistis and pisteuo, charis and charisma, and moicheia and porneia ARE all words that ARE interpreted according to the doctrinal leaning of a church that DOES NOT look at these ideas apart from their desired meanings, the most important word that IS misrepresented and misunderstood IS agape and the kindred word agapao. We should try to see how that the biblical meanings assigned to agape, meanings based in the presumed usage of the word, reflect the ideas of the church fathers and the Jew’s own view of the Hebrew word ahab which IS rendered as Love. Neither word IS readily translated without the idea of Love as this idea IS commonly understood and, as we have discussed in previous essays, perhaps this IS why agape IS rendered as charity by the King James translators in our selection from the Apostle Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians which we repeat here with the word agape untranslated:
“covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way” (1 Corinthians )Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not agape, 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 not agape, 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 not agape, it profiteth me nothing” (1 Corinthians 12:31, 13:1-3).
“Agape suffereth long, and is kind; agape envieth not; agape vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Agape never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away” (1 Corinthians 13:4-8).
The verb agapao IS defined in the biblestudytool.com lexicon as: of persons: to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly; of things: to be well pleased, to be contented at or with a thing 2. These same words ARE used in the blueletterbible.org where they ARE called an ‘Outline of Biblical Usage’ 9. These ideas on agape ARE founded in the common understanding of Love and these can perhaps be found in some uses of the verb in the New Testament. However, these DO fall far short of the Truth of agapao as this word IS used by the Master and His apostles and, from a spiritual perspective one IS hard pressed to find these defining ideas in their use of this word. Our point here IS that these most general defining ideas for agapao ARE NOT in regard to the use of the Greek word but ARE rather in regard to the presumed use and a carnal idea of Love. It IS NO wonder that the average Christian’s idea of the meaning of agapao IS so lacking.
The noun agape IS framed in a similar fashion although here the lexicon entries DO better agree with the defining ideas from Thayer’s. We should note that for most words the lexicons repeat the Thayer’s definitions; here the lexicons define, or give their ‘Outline of Biblical Usage’ as: brotherly love, affection, good will, love, benevolence; love feasts 2,9; both use the same words but in a different order. Thayer’s defines agape saying that this IS: a purely Biblical and ecclesiastical word 9 while defining it as: affection, good-will, love, benevolence with citations and commentary that reads: John 15:13; Romans 13:10; 1 John 4:18. Of the love of men to men; especially of that love of Christians toward Christians which is enjoined and prompted by their religion, whether the love be viewed as in the soul or as expressed . They continue their commentary with many more biblical references and then add, with still more references the ideas of the love of God toward men and the love of God toward Christ 9.
Finally Thayer’s adds the idea of love feasts ; this idea IS taken from the context of the rather cryptic Book of Jude, from the single word agape which IS understood there as a plural term. In ALL of this we find NO True ideas on the nature of agape save in the words good will, love, and benevolence and here we should remember that the definition of agape IS also the definition of God; we must remember that “God is Love” (1 John 4:8, 16) as the Apostle John tells us. This however leaves us in the same place….with a group of defining ideas that can ONLY be seen in a carnal context and, while our own definition of Love which we present at the top of every essay embraces these same ideas, these ARE but an inkling of the carnal effect of the Truth of agape.
In the ideas of brotherly love, affection, good will, love, benevolence there IS a greater measure of agape than IS found in the common ideas of just what Love IS as ALL of these DO approach the Truth of “Thou shalt agape thy neighbour as thyself” but, in practice, NONE of these ideas as they exist in the world accomplish that goal. Love IS still seen as the selected attraction and attachment, both mental and emotional, that men have for others and for the things of this world and in this such affection, brotherly love, benevolence and even good will ARE doled out to that select few that one may claim to Love. And these ideas ARE compounded by the doctrines of men who see this brotherly love as Thayer shows us saying of agape that is IS: the love of men to men; especially of that love of Christians toward Christians which is enjoined and prompted by their religion 9.
Above we have the lexicon definition or the ‘Outline of Biblical Usage’ for agapao which ideas we said ARE difficult to find in a proper reading of the words of the Master and His apostles. Thayer’s definitions of this word, while NOT verbatim to our lexicons’ ideas, DO lean in this same direction; we read of agapao that this sense of Love IS: to have a preference for, wish well to, regard the welfare of 9 and in these defining words we should see ideas that ARE contrary to the Truth of agape and the most inherent defining idea that True agape IS with NO “respect to persons” (James 2:9). Thayer’s goes on to include such ideas as: to welcome with desire, long for 9 in defining agapao; ideas for which there IS NO relevance in the root idea of agapao as found in the Great Commandments and the Golden Rule.
Strong’s IS much more concise in their defining of agape and agapao; we read of agape that it IS: from G25; love, i.e. affection or benevolence; specially (plural) a love-feast:—(feast of) charity(-ably), dear, love . G25 IS of course the verb form agapao of which Strong’s says: perhaps from ἄγαν ágan (much) (or compare H5689); to love (in a social or moral sense):—(be-)love(-ed). Compare G5368. The comparison to G5368 IS reference to phileo which IS seen by most in terms of brotherly Love and IS a word that IS much more appropriately seen in regard to the common ideas of Love. The comparison to H5689 IS to the Hebrew word agab which to us seems an unlikely comparison as agab IS used in terms of: to breathe after, i.e. to love (sensually):—dote, lover 2 according to Strong’s Hebrew dictionary.
There IS another Hebrew word however, a seemingly related word, that IS used in the Hebrew version of “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (Leviticus 19:18); here the Hebrew word ahab takes on the same meaning as DOES agapao. While this same word IS found across a broad range of uses in this ancient language, the ideas of ahab seem a better comparison to agapao; Strong’s defines this as: a primitive root; to have affection for (sexually or otherwise):—(be-) love(-d, -ly, -r), like, friend 2. The standard for the understanding of the idea of Love from a biblical perspective should always be the Great Commandments and it IS evident that the single word Love DOES NOT make this easy; additionally, the defining ideas for the Hebrew and the Greek words, ideas based on the single word Love, only compound the difficulty.
Contrary to the lexicons’ and dictionaries defining ideas for agape and agapao IS the defining idea that comes from the Apostles John and Paul. John tells us simply that God IS Love and in this we should be able to see that Love IS God as well. In this we can easily turn agape and agapao away from the carnal ideas of Love and see the spiritual but the carnal mind of the average person has NO True comprehension of God and therefore NO ability to comprehend Love. The bible, the Old Testament in particular, shows God in the form of a personality and here we should try to see that this IS so because of the limited ability of men to KNOW the Truth. The Torah and the Pentateuch, the Hebrew and Greek names for the five books of Moses, ARE constructed and written for the consumption of men, superstitious and barbarous men to be sure, and in these there ARE many stories that ARE intended to show the idea of God as omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent while maintaining a personality that men can relate to.
This view of God was as God Transcendent, a God viewed as outside of the created world of men. In the New Testament Jesus introduces the idea of God Immanent and this without diminishing the previous idea of God Transcendent. If we can understand that this revelation of the Truth of God comes to humanity in stages, we can then likely see the way that religion IS a teaching apparatus designed to accomplish this steady unfolding of greater and greater Truths. We should try to see here that what IS lacking in the Transcendent view of God IS offered to us in the teachings of the Master. However, the early church was NO better at understanding this than were the Jews of the Old Testament and since it IS largely the teachings of the early church that still control the doctrinal views of men, there IS yet NO True understanding of the Immanence of God….the God and Christ within and the reality of the Holy Spirit.
Most still see God as Transcendent and while there ARE some ideas of God Immanent in some of the modern doctrinal views, these ideas ARE tied to one’s faith and believing along with the doctrinal ideas of salvation and being “born again“. Here we have three of those words with which we began this essay; three words that ARE misunderstood and misinterpreted by the doctrinal approach to God. In these doctrinal ideas God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit comes to live in a person who IS “born again” while the greater Truth IS that God IS Immanent in everyman born into this world….and this Immanent God IS the Soul, the Christ Within, which IS unrealized by a man until such time as he can come to see that there IS a greater Truth than his doctrines. We should also see here that this doctrinal idea of a God who comes to live in a person who IS “born again” IS contrary to Jesus own words as we read again in our trifecta:
- “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).
Here in these words, in the third part of our trifecta, we see the True criteria for one’s realization of God and Christ Within; here we should see that the nebulous doctrinal ideas of faith and believing ARE NOT the Way to have God and Christ Within, the realization of this; Jesus tells us that the Way IS to “keep my words“. There ARE versions of the Immanence of God in other religions while in Christianity this idea IS confined to the more esoteric and even occult views of God. The idea of God Immanent IS however a great Truth of Life and one which the Apostle John conveys to us in the Prologue to his gospel; John tells us of the Christ, the Logos if you will, “That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9).
To relate these ideas of the Transcendence and the Immanence of God to the reality of agape as the very nature of God IS to understand that in these ideas which ARE the singular view of the Godhead ARE the underlying reality of and the Truth of Love. Spiritually ALL ARE in God and God IS in ALL; in this there IS a Oneness and a Unity that CAN NOT be escaped nor denied except in the carnal minds of men and their doctrinal approach to the Lord. And this IS the vision of Truth that IS painted for us in scripture; first in the Old Testament according to the ability of the man in that day to understand such Truths and then in the New Testament where so much that can lead men to the Light IS so clearly written that it seems that Jesus’ words ARE intentionally ignored.
What seems intentional IS however but the working of the vanity of men, their illusion and their glamour, as they try to justify their own being as men rather that as part and parcel of our Transcendent and Immanent God. It IS in this understanding of God, this understanding of the essential unity of everyman with God, that the Truth of agape will be allowed to flourish and this through the teaching of the Master on Love. Jesus teaches us the Truth and the Way of agape while both He and His apostles link this Way to the law and the teaching of the prophets thereby creating an unfurling of that Truth. Men however have disrupted this event by leaning upon the Old while failing to see the most basic Truths of the New.
Jesus teaches us that our expression should be agape and that it IS the thoughts and the attitudes of men that matter in their journey from “the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:21). Jesus teaches us that it IS the thoughts and attitudes of men that lead to their actions and he teaches us that because others may NOT be able to be on the same Path to Truth at the same time, that those on that Path should have an attitude that turns the other cheek in any encounter that would carnally invoke a negative response. We should understand that this IS agape; we should understand that the Master’s words ARE NOT ONLY about being struck but when He says “unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also” (Luke 6:29), the reference IS to ALL encounters with the carnal nature of men.
This sense of agape IS beyond the carnal thoughts and ideas that ARE the vanity of men, their thoughts and ideas which keep them in that: perishable and decaying condition, separate from God, and pursuing false ends 4 as Vincent defines mataiotes which IS rendered as vanity. This sense of agape IS the reality of makrothumeo which IS Paul’s first defining word on agape in our selection above. While this IS rendered as longsuffering and seen by most in terms of patience, we should remember that agape IS the very nature of God and that in this Light makrothumeo IS so much more that the carnal mind can envision. Makrothumeo IS one’s ability to see beyond the carnal thoughts and ideas, one’s ability to see the vanity of men and understand the deep Truth of the Golden Rule which says “as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise” (Luke 6:31) without requiring that he be treated in the same way.
When we can understand that Paul’s words saying “Agape suffereth long, and is kind” ARE his telling us of the defining quality of agape, we can then better understand that longsuffering and kindness ARE NOT the defining qualities of God….these may be among His attributes but these ARE NOT defining qualities of our Transcendent and Immanent God of whom Jesus tells us “God is a Spirit” (John 4:24). Seeing Paul’s words untranslated in the Greek can perhaps bring us to see the deeper ideas that MUST be the defining qualities of God and while we have discussed these ideas several times in the last several essays, their importance requires that we look at these again. Paul uses three words here: “agape makrothumeo chresteuomai.
Even in the most common understanding of these words, that Love IS patient, Love IS kind, we have a very different dynamic than the lexicon’s definitions of Love which we cite above. Patience and kindness, while these may be virtues, DO NOT give us the ideas that must be taken from Jesus’ words on the operation of agape in the lives of men; these DO NOT give us the idea necessary to “agape thy neighbour as thyself” nor DO they give us the wherewithal to “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” (Matthew 5:44). It IS ONLY with a deeper understanding of makrothumeo and chresteuomai that we can come to see the brother, the neighbor….ALL men, in the same light and without our sense of Love being tainted by “respect to persons“.
We need to see these defining ideas of agape and of God in spiritual terms and NOT in carnal ideas and while there IS NO direct definition of these words to be found in the lexicons and commentaries, there ARE clues for us to follow which can lead us to the greater Truth. Makrothumeo and chresteuomai may lean toward the ideas of patience and kindness but these ideas CAN NOT be the fullness of their meaning and this because these virtues ARE NOT the fullness of agape nor of God. With these words Paul IS telling us what agape IS and he continues thento show us what agape IS NOT and while the translation of these words IS also lacking, this IS corrected by a spiritual view of makrothumeo and chresteuomai. We close today with Paul words on Love that have been our selection from Romans:
“Owe no man any thing, but agapao one another: for he that agapao another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt agape thy neighbour as thyself. Agape worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore agape is the fulfilling of the law. And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed” (Romans 13:8-11).
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 |
Quote of the Day:
Let the peace of God rule in your hearts
- 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
- 9a The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible on blueletterbible.org
- 9 Thayer’s Greek Lexicon on blueletterbible.org
- ** Autobiography of Mark Twain, Volume 3 (University of California Press, 2015)
Those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher
