Category Archives: Children of God

ON LOVE; PART MDXXXV

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 thoughts on the Apostle Paul’s words that tell us with certainty that “charity agape never faileth“. This IS something that should be able to realign our view of agape away from the common ideas of Love and this IS an important step in seeing the reality of agape. That “agape never faileth” IS a great Truth that IS the ONLY logical reality when understood in the same way as we try to understand the Apostle John’s words saying that “God is love agape” (1 John 4:8,16). The point here IS that as God never fails and neither DOES His very nature as agape. Of course we should understand that Love as it IS generally understood DOES fail and while there may be instances of enduring Love, this IS NOT the norm. If we can use this simple idea that “charity agape never faileth” ONLY to establish the difference between the common ideas of Love and the reality of agape, we will have DONE ourselves a great service as we try to understand what IS meant in the Master’s exaltation of this idea of agape to become the very foundation of the Great Commandments. It IS here that we can separate these two ideas from each other and establish that they never should have been combined; this combination has DONE much to delay the understanding of men regarding everyman’s relationship with his neighbor. Still, after we ARE able to separate Love from agape, we have NOT yet established just what agape means nor how it functions in this world. In past essays we spoke about the dawning of a New Age….the Age of Aquarius. From its onset there came a new recognition of the plight of our neighbor and the errors of war. With this however also came the freedom of Love and of expression in this world. While this sense of Love expressed itself in mostly carnal terms, there IS behind this a greater understanding of the idea of agape. We must remember that on the world stage there IS most always a counter to whatsoever new spiritual energy IS unleashed on our planet; the Master Himself inaugurated the Way of agape and while this has been misunderstood for 2000 years, the reality of our New Age can correct this misunderstanding.

We should try to understand that the misunderstanding of the Way of agape IS based mostly in the self-centered attitudes of men over the centuries and we should try to see that this has NOT abated much. While the application of agape has been largely in carnal terms based in the idea of Love as the singular meaning of the Greek word, the New Age brought in yet another factor that has emerged in this world as wokeness. Several posts back we discussed the idea of woke in rather specific terms and we included defining ideas, worldly ideas to be sure, in an effort to understand how that agape’s appearance as wokeness can be understood today. Repeating these defining ideas we read that woke IS:

• aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice). (Webster’s Dictionary)
• Woke. When this term became popularized, initially the meaning of this term was when an individual become more aware of the social injustice. Or basically, any current affairs related like biased, discrimination, or double-standards. (Urban Dictionary)
• Originally: well-informed, up-to-date. Now chiefly: alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice; frequently in stay woke. (Oxford Dictionary)
• Woke is a political slang adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) originally meaning alertness to racial prejudice and discrimination. Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as racial injustice, sexism, and denial of LGBT rights. (Widipedia)
• informal, often derogatory. the behaviour and attitudes of people who are sensitive to social and political injustice. (Collins Dictionary on wokeism)

The overriding theme here IS that wokeism IS mankind’s greater awareness of racial or social discrimination and injustice and this it surely IS and more. We should note that the idea of wokeness has been steadily growing in the hearts and minds of men and this especially affects later generations. We should note as well that the phenomenon began long before the word that describes it was coined and here we should look back to the second half of the last century. Like ALL things that move, such as our Solar System against the backdrop of the galaxy that contains it, there IS a meeting place of the effects from each segment through which the Solar System moves. Astrologically this concerns the Solar System moving from one segment of the backdrop to another or, in common language, the moving from one sign of the zodiac to another. This IS a cosmic event and far removed from any interpretations that men may offer other than the reality that we ARE moving against this backdrop. To say that ALL that exists emits its own unique form of energy IS but a way of saying that each segment of the backdrop, the zodiac if you will, IS expressive of its own unique energy and that we, as a planet within our Solar System, ARE subjected to that energy as we pass through its influence. This influence has a beginning in the previous segment as there ARE NO boundaries that separate one from another. Let us imagine that each segment, each sign of the zodiac, has its own specific color which IS tuned to its particular emitted influence; with NO boundaries the different colors have NO hard end but can ‘bleed’, if we can use that idea here, into each other at the place perhaps where a boundary would be. This area can be understood as the cusp, an area between the center points of two segments where the effects of each can be felt. If one segment emits a green light and the next emits a yellow light there would be various shades of green/yellow as the boundary IS approached and again as we move away from the boundary to the point of the next full color. This could be seen as the beginning of the effect of the next segment upon the previous and in this we should try to see the concept of measure; a concept that applies to most ALL things.

Using the above ideas we should try to see that the influence of the New Age began when the ‘Light’ of Aquarius could first be felt during the Age of Pisces. We should note here that this IS more related to astronomy that it IS to the practice of astrology which has become but a shadow of its reality. From our perspective this first effect began around the 1960’s and while we DO NOT KNOW when we will reach the center point of we can say that the influence of this New Age will continue to intensify until then and so will the changes to the human psyche. This IS the beginning of wokeness, a psychological effect without a name that has morphed into the ideas that ARE prevalent today where there IS unprecedented awareness of the plight of others and the social injustices that still exist. Our point here IS that we should try to see this as an effect of agape as this sense of Love grows in the hearts and minds of men as wokeness. Again, we should remember that with every inch of societal progress there IS resistance and it IS unfortunate that much of this resistance has come from the very churches that should be promoting such progress; the effects of this can be easily seen in the current political discourse. We should note as well that it IS the incoming generations that these changes have the largest effect upon; in most every facet of living the younger generally sees things differently than the older as the older ofttimes mocks the changes and the differences. Perhaps the single most evident effect IS found in the world of music.

We should try to see here that these changes and their effect upon the human psyche ARE a part of the Grand Scheme of agape and we must remember here that “God is love agape” (1 John 4:8,16). The influence of agape upon the human psyche should be evident to ALL intelligent observers but unfortunately this IS NOT the case, especially in the Christian world. Nonetheless this IS a Truth but one that has had limited effect on the world and a church establishment which ARE yet in the hands of older and tradition oriented ‘elders’. It IS the protests against this that we should watch and we should understand that there ARE some in this ‘reign’ of elders that themselves ARE more progressive because they too feel the effects of the changing energies to which our world IS exposed. The current pope IS an example as well as some older political leaders who espouse the ideals of the next generations and this too should be seen as a part of the plan. The Pope has come out against the stagnation of his church which IS grounded in tradition and in doctrines that run counter to the express will of the people in the church. Here we should also recognize that the idea of church itself revolves around the people and NOT the building nor the clergy which changes from time to time. Surely there ARE exceptions in parts of the world where religion IS yet far too emotional but we should understand that change will come to these as well.

Our point here IS to shine a light upon the working out of agape in this world through such ideas as wokeness and the basic changes in attitude that have come upon men. Some accept the changes while others reject the changes and this IS the natural way of change which happens slowly; we should try to understand here that save for some monumental hinderance the reality of change CAN NOT be halted. As Heraclitus the ancient Greek philosopher said “The only constant in life is change“. Within this idea of monumental hinderance IS the effective rejection by what we should try to see as conservative thinking, a thought process that IS generally seen in politics but which IS surely a large part of the religious landscape as well. Much IS well documented on this front and any who seek the Truth should explore current and past events that ARE intended to sway the attitudes of the masses. Returning to our main topic of agape Love we should try to see how that the effect of this IS brought to bear on societies. It IS from this effect that True spiritual progress IS made toward the ancient idea that “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” as well as the Master’s injunction that clearly tells us that “all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matthew 7:12). Regarding both of these the Master tells us of their past importance and from this we should be able to sense their importance for the generations since His departure as well as future generations. Jesus tells us that “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” in regard to the commandment that “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” and He tells us that “this is the law and the prophets” as regards what we have come to call the Golden Rule. The importance of these two edicts shows us the importance of agape and, while agape IS NOT explained explicitly in Christian scripture, it IS well-founded in the Master’s words and His example.

Perhaps the biggest clue that we have in the bible regarding the sanctity of agape IS found in the writers’ words regarding the actions of the Master. Such ideas as “Now when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them” (Luke 4:40) show us the reality that He healed everyone while never judging their religious or moral status as men in this world. This IS the Universality of His expression of agape and in this can be seen also as His expression of mercy. Again, we should try to see mercy apart from the common understanding; we should try to see mercy as our expression of agape in this world….a Universal expression if you will. There ARE several instances of this expression of mercy by the Master in the New Testament; Matthew tells us that “his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them” (Matthew 4:24). While these examples ARE from the beginning of Jesus’ recorded ‘ministry’, this expression of agape through mercy continues throughout His time with us; Matthew tell us later that “the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him. But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all; And charged them that they should not make him known: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles” (Matthew 12:14-18). We should see here the introduction of the idea of the gentile which we define as ALL men but which IS described biblically as the ‘non Jew’ including those that were considered as pagans and heathens.

Our point here IS that throughout the New Testament the Master “healed them all” (Luke 6:19) without any question as to their being ‘deserving’ of His mercy and His expression of agape Love for ALL. While these instances DO show us the Master’s example regarding His expression of agape and mercy to ALL, they at the same time show us a deeper reality to James’ words saying that “if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors” (James 2:9). In His healing the Master shows NO “respect to persons” as He “healed them all” and we should note here that this point IS shown to us regarding the Godhead by the Apostle Paul as well; Paul tells us “there is no respect of persons with God” (Romans 2:9). It IS through this ‘nature’ of the Godhead that the Master’s examples of healing should be understood and, at the same time, this precept should itself cast aspersions upon the common Christian understanding of receiving favor from God. We should remember that the Lord tells us of the Godhead that “he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45) while Luke frames this as Jesus’ saying that “he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil” (Luke 6:35). It IS through such ideas that we should understand the that the very nature of agape Love IS that, when it IS Truly agape, it IS our expression to ALL. This brings us back again to Paul’s final idea from our selection from his First Epistle to the Corinthians where he tells us that “charity agape never faileth“. We should try to see here that the failures of Love ARE based in the fact that they ARE NOT Truly agape and should we use the idea of “respect to persons” as the test of True agape, we would DO well. Paul lists a number of other aspects regarding the idea of agape; let us discuss these next after we repeat the apostle’s words; Paul tells us through the Corinthians that:

“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity 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 charity 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 charity agape, it profiteth me nothing. Charity agape suffereth long, and is kind; charity agape envieth not; charity 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. charity 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 13:1-8).

Having discussed Paul’s final point first, we begin here with his first critical point regarding the nature of agape Love. Paul tells us that “Charity agape suffereth long” and we should understand here that there IS NO sense of suffering in these words which ARE a phrase that reflects ONLY patience. The Greek word makrothymeo which IS rendered as “suffereth long” has the specific meaning of: to be long-spirited, i.e. (objectively) forbearing or (subjectively) patient^9a according to Strong’s while Thayer’s primary definition IS that makrothymeo IS: to be of a long spirit, not to lose heart⁹. While these ideas reflect the common usage of the idea rather that the spiritual intent that would be found in using makrothymeo as the nature of agape, they DO suffice to help us to understand the apostle’s point. Perhaps we should try to see that agape has unending patience which idea can also be attributed to the Godhead. Thus, the man expressing agape should have this trait: that he IS exceedingly patient in ALL situations. James points us to the way that this idea of patience can effect our own journey on the Path saying that we should “Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh” (James 5:7-8). We should try to see here that this patience IS NOT necessarily waiting for the return of the Christ; it should be understood as each man’s own struggle to bring the fullness of agape into his Life as James reminds the True seeker that “the coming of the Lord draweth nigh“. Ponder on this.

Paul’s next point regarding the nature of agape IS that agape “is kind” and here we need to understand the deeper meaning of the idea of the Greek word chresteuomai. Strong’s defines the idea of chresteuomai as: to show oneself useful, i.e. act benevolently^9a; while this IS more revealing that the simple idea of being kind, there IS yet more to discover. Thayer’s offers us a similar look at the idea saying that chresteuomai IS: to show oneself mild, to be kind, use kindness⁹ and we should remember here that we ARE speaking about agape; NOT people, but the agape that they express. We should note that this IS the ONLY place that this word IS used in the New Testament and while chresteuomai IS said to be the middle voice of chrestos, the meaning IS much expanded. The idea that “love IS kind” as this idea IS expressed in the church IS rather meaningless as if there IS NO kindness then there really IS NO Love. To be sure the idea that agape DOES act benevolently IS our guidance to understanding the apostles inferences here and when we understand that the defining ideas for the words that chresteuomai IS a derivative of, chrestos and chraomai, ARE offered in terms of use, we can likely better understand. Chrestos IS defined as: employed, i.e. (by implication) useful (in manner or morals)^9a by Strong’s while the root word chraomai IS defined simply as: to furnish what is needed^9a. The idea of kindness being attached to these words IS most likely based upon the perceived usage of the words in their context. There ARE many words in the Greek that convey the idea of kindness better than those related to chraomai and through this we should try to see that kindness was NOT the apostle’s intent. The better ideas can be found in the usefulness of agape and its benevolent actions; here we should try to see that agape IS NOT an idle word but one of benevolent action.

The next idea presented by Paul in this verse IS that “charity agape envieth not” and here again we have a rendering that implies carnal ideas. Carnally this brings out ideas of jealousy which IS never the Way of agape and again we must look for the more spiritual idea that can be applied to this ‘God kind of Love’. The Greek word here IS zeloo which IS the verb form of the noun zelos which we have discussed several times in regard to emulation which IS a largely misunderstood word in the English language. To best understand the idea of emulation we go to Webster’s 1828 Dictionary where we read that emulation IS: The act of attempting to equal or excel in qualities or actions; rivalry; desire of superiority, attended with effort to attain to it; generally in a good sense, or an attempt to equal or excel others in that which is praise-worthy, without the desire of depressing others. Rom.11. In a bad sense, a striving to equal or do more than others to obtain carnal favors or honors. Val.5¹. Contrasting this with the definitions offered by today’s dictionary saying that emulation IS an: effort or desire to equal or excel others* should show us the inadequacy of today’s understanding. Before we begin to analyze this word we should first look at how we arrive at emulation as our understanding of zelos; Vincent tells us of zelos that: The word is used in the New Testament both in a bad and a good sense….From it is our word zeal, which may be either good or bad, wise or foolish. The bad sense is predominant in the New Testament….The rendering envying, as A. V., more properly belongs to fqonov, which is never used in a good sense. Emulation is the better general rendering, which does not necessarily include envy, but may be full of the spirit of self – devotion. Rev. renders jealousy⁴. Again we should remember that the discussion IS on what agape IS and IS NOT so that any personal ideas ARE easily eliminated in favor of the spiritual connotations. From this we should try to see that agape DOES NOT emulate, it IS NOT attempting to equal or excel in qualities or actions or have rivalry; desire of superiority at its heart. Agape stands as it IS as the very nature of the Lord and the singular spiritual force in this world; agape IS NOT affected by anything that can happen….agape simply IS. While this may not help us understand anything about agape, it surely DOES show us what agape IS NOT.

The next idea, again from the same verse, IS that “charity agape vaunteth not itself“. It IS the Greek word perpereuomai that IS rendered here as vaunteth and in terms of boasting and braggadocio in other translations. Again we must understand that we ARE talking about the actions of agape and NOT of the man himself who IS prone to such boasting and braggadocio. The idea then would be that the man who IS expressing agape will NOT be so prone to act in such a manner. The influence of agape in one’s Life CAN NOT cause a man to “think of himself more highly than he ought to think“; he would rather “think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith” (Romans 12:3) as Paul so aptly frames this idea that “charity agape vaunteth not itself“. Following in Paul’s previous words on agape we should try to see also that the man who IS NOT expressing agape but who thinks himself to be secure in his religious pursuits IS subject to another of Paul’s sayings; the apostle tells us that “if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself” (Galatians 6:3). While the ideas here should be clear, they ARE NOT as many in and out of the churches go about their lives pretending that they DO have agape as their expression and allow themselves to use this belief as a way to promote themselves as persons living in the Light if we can use that idea here.

The next idea in this same verse has a similar effect to perpereuomai. Paul tells us that agape “is not puffed up” and here the Greek word phusioo IS used to render “puffed up“. Others render this as conceit, arrogance and pride and here again we have the most normal ways of men in this world as they look upon themselves. Agape DOES NOT allow the man to act in such a way and to DO so implies the absence of one’s expression of agape in this world. Paul’s words to the Romans and to the Galatians above apply equally to this idea of phusioo. We should note here however that the word has little to DO with the ideas attributed to it in the various translations. Strong’s tells us that phusioo means: to inflate, i.e. (figuratively) make proud (haughty):—puff up^9a. While the figurative ideas applied to the word ARE imported by its literary usage. Thayer’s tells us that the primary meaning IS: to make natural, to cause a thing to pass into nature⁹ which, again has ought to DO with being “puffed up“. As a secondary meaning Thayer’s tells us that the idea IS: to inflate, blow up, blow out, to cause to swell up; tropically, to puff up, make proud: 1 Corinthians 8:1; passive, to be puffed up, to bear oneself loftily, be proud⁹. Vincent tells us that Paul’s use of this idea IS consistent with the times and shows us a relationship between phusioo and perpereunomai saying that phusioo refers to inward disposition, while the previous word perpereunomai denotes outward display⁴. ONLY Paul uses phusioo in his writings; six times in this particular epistle and once in his Epistle to the Colossians. Perhaps the best explanation regarding the idea of being “puffed up” IS from earlier in this epistle where Paul tells us that “Knowledge puffeth up, but charity agape edifieth” (1 Corinthians 8:1). Through these ideas we should be able to see what behaviors and attitudes the man who expresses agape DOES NOT possess in this world and that those that DO exhibit such behaviors and attitudes have NOT yet found the necessary measure of agape in their lives.

Paul goes on to tell us that agape “Doth not behave itself unseemly“. The various renderings of these words ARE mostly carnally oriented as IS unseemly but to a lesser extent. The ideas offered tell us that agape IS NOT rude, unbecoming, or ill-mannered; they show us that agape DOES NOT “dishonor others” nor “force itself on others” among other ideas ALL of which are purely carnal behaviors. Spiritually we should try to understand that the man who IS “rooted and grounded in love agape” (Ephesians 3:17) would NOT have such issues. Unseemly however casts a different pall; rude IS too specific, unbecoming IS ill-defined and ill-mannered IS rather meaningless especially as a spiritual idea defining what agape IS NOT. The Greek word here IS aschemoneo which Strong’s defines as: from G809; to be (i.e. act) unbecoming:—behave self uncomely (unseemly)^9a; the root word here IS askemon which they define as: from G1 (as a negative particle) and a presumed derivative of G2192 (in the sense of its congener G4976); properly, shapeless, i.e. (figuratively) inelegant:—uncomely^9a. Without going deeper into the etymology we should take the ‘proper‘ idea of shapeless or, as Thayer’s tells us, deformed. If we can apply this to the attitudes of men we can perhaps discover the apostle’s intent in using aschemoneo which IS ONLY used two times in the New Testament and both in this epistle. From ALL of this we should take the ideas of shapeless and deformed and carry them forward into our word aschemoneo where the idea can be understood as that the agape that we should express IS NOT shapeless, unseemly, or deformed, unbecoming, in its actions in this world through the Life of a man. Agape then would act as it aught to, as an aspect of the Godhead expressing the Universal singular attitude of this ‘God kind of Love’ in this world. This idea that agape “Doth not behave itself unseemly” then has naught to do with our carnal behaviors save for in the Life of a man who has reaches some measure of the expression of True agape in his Life. If this man behaves in such ways as ARE depicted by the defining words, the reality then IS that he IS NOT expressing agape at ALL. Can we see the spiritual inferences here?

While the next two points continue to speak specifically about carnal behaviors, we should try to see how that these should be seen in much the same way as being or acting unseemly. Paul tells us that agape “seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked” and in these word ideas we should see a clarity that DOES NOT require us to delve into the Greek words save to offer that the idea of “easily provoked” IS NOT as the idea should be framed. Other translations render in more carnal terms; some cite sefishness, others render that agape “does not insist on its own way” which IS a specific form of selfishness. Still others render as “It does not demand its own way” with some rendering as NOT insisting while one renders as agape “takes no thought for itself“. This last one is best suited to show the apostle’s thinking and this also captures the essence of agape “seeketh not her own“. In the end we should try to see the idea of “seeketh not her own” as covering ALL of these other renderings and then some; agape seeks nothing for the self, neither as the Soul, the Christ Within, itself which IS for humanity the equivalent to the agape Love that God IS. Nor DOES the expression of agape in this world ever seek for carnal favor or treasures understood as the Master presents this saying “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:21). Regarding the idea of being “easily provoked” we should try to see this as Vincent shows us saying: Easily is superfluous, and gives a wrong coloring to the statement, which is absolute: is not provoked or exasperated⁴. Again we should remember that we ARE talking about the action of agape and while its expression by men IS important we must be able to separate the two; agape IS NOT provoked but rather stands steady as a Universal quality of the Godhead. While others render in terms of anger and being irritable, these carnal qualities DO NOT apply to agape but ONLY to the man who may claim that he IS expressing agape. To be angry, irritable or even provoked shows one’s lack of such expression or even a necessary measure of that expression.

The final words of this verse sum up much of what Paul has previously said in a single idea that IS misunderstood by most. Paul ends with saying that agape “thinketh no evil“. From a purely carnal perspective this idea of evil relates to the gross behaviors of men but from a biblical and spiritual perspective the idea should be understood much the same as sin; both should be understood as our focus on the things of the self. We should note here that the idea IS that agape DOES NOT think about evil and this IS of course the telling statement. Somehow this has been rendered into such ideas as that agape “takes no account of evil” and that agape “does not keep a record of wrongs“. None of this makes any sense spiritually. Strong’s defines logizomai which IS rendered as thinketh as: to take an inventory, i.e. estimate (literally or figuratively):—conclude, (ac-)count (of), + despise, esteem, impute, lay, number, reason, reckon, suppose, think (on)^9a and from our perspective the idea of thinketh covers ALL of the applicable ideas in this list. Paul DOES NOT show that this idea IS conveyed upon any carnal action; he merely tells us that agape IS NOT focused upon the self or the things of the self. We close again with our trifecta as we DID NOT work it into our text. 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).

We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.

Aspect of  God	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

• 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
• 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