ON LOVE; PART MDXXVII
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 commentary from John Gill from whom we DO take much of the doctrinal ideas that we apply in our blogposts. While we DO sometimes find common ground with Mr. Gill, his commentaries ARE largely doctrinal and seem to ignore the most basic aspects of the Master’s words and instructions, His commandments if you will, as he puts forth a largely carnal understanding of scripture ofttimes based upon similar Jewish ideas. There ARE other commentaries that disagree with Mr. Gill’s presentation, and most ALL we have seen disagree with us as well. The reality here merely points out that men ARE interpreting scripture according to the minds of men which ARE steeped in vanity, steeped in their individual nurturing and indoctrination. It IS for this reason, to show that the many interpretations of the New Testament and the Old ARE just that: many interpretations of the One Truth that IS exposed by the texts, that we write. The Prophet Isaiah addresses this to the Jews saying “Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men” (Isaiah 29:13). We should note from this that these words ARE NOT in the form of a prophecy but ARE a commentary on the religious behavior of the Jews. Jesus however refers to them as a prophecy and here we should try to see that the ideas were yet current in the Jews’ religion which was perhaps more a product of doctrines than in Isaiah’s day. Jesus tells those Jews in the New Testament “Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:7-9).
While the Master calling Isaiah’s words prophecy should have struck a chord with the Jews when He spoke them again regarding the then state of the Jews’ religion, they DID NOT. In fact the Jews’ religion IS largely unchanged from the time of Christ as traditions and interpretations of the law have superseded the Truth of the commandments and here we refer specifically to those commandments that the Master emphasized in His words. This we discussed in the last essay as part of our understanding of the story of the ‘rich young ruler’. Jesus intentionally lists the commandments that ARE of importance to men who Truly seek God and through this list which IS repeated for us by the Apostle Paul we should have some inkling of that importance. Paul tells us “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 love thy neighbour as thyself” (Romans 13:9). While there ARE some differences in this list, namely the inclusion of covetousness and the leaving out of “Honour thy father and thy mother“, both leave out what should be understood to be a part of Moses ancillary ideas of governance. Of course we must remember that Moses lists many more commandments for the governance of the barbarous and superstitions population but we should try to see from the listings of the Master and Paul that ALL of these ARE of much less importance. Yet the Jews have incorporated ALL of the commandments of Moses into their mitzvah and, from our perspective, they have done so giving ALL rather equal weight. They DID NOT and DO NOT see that there ARE commandments that DO outweigh others and, from the lists above, we should see that these involve the expression of agape. In fact, Paul’s words above ARE from a segment of his Epistle to the Romans that deals specifically with agape as he ends his words saying “Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law” and begins them saying “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law” (Romans 13:8, 10).
While we DO understand that the Jews’ in general have NO reason to listen to the words of the apostle nor to the words of Jesus, we should at the same time try to see that the most basic objective of the original words from Moses have ever been subjected to manipulation and voluminous commentary and interpretation over the last 3500 years. It IS in the interpretations of men that the Jews’ mitzvah was born much as it IS in the interpretations of men that the Christian world has developed the multiplicity of doctrinal approaches to God that exist today. It IS with this idea in mind that we have developed our idea of the use of the Master’s words as a prophecy against the state of Christianity over the last 2000 years, a state that continues till today. Jesus’ clearly tells us that “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). While many see these words in regard to ‘how to honor the Lord’ the deeper meaning IS much more the idea that Jesus intended for the Jews and for us to see. An internet quote from Life Bible-Presbyterian Church tells us that “God will not accept our worship if it is offered in the wrong way. We cannot create or invent our own forms of worship, and think that God will accept it“. In this rather simplistic quotation ARE the seeds of Truth but they then go on to say “As God says in v.9, ‘In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” while at the same time DOING just that, seemingly unknowingly. This IS the power of Christian doctrines that were built over 2000 years: most ALL believe that their doctrines ARE expressive of the Truth of the Lord’s words. They go on to show an example of what the “commandments of men” would be saying “in some churches the leader will say, ‘Let us give God a clap offering.’ And then the whole congregation will break out into loud applause. This is not biblical (Though some think that it is mentioned in Psalm 47:1 but the context of that psalm is not praise at all but exultation over the defeated enemies of Israel.) Clap offerings are a man-made innovation which is borrowed from the world of entertainment where applause is customary after a performance by a skilled entertainer. But God is not an entertainer who performs for our pleasure!“**. While these ideas ARE from a single church source, a study of the matter would reveal that most ALL have the same or similar ideas regarding the Master’s words as they consider their own doctrines as extensions of the Master’s and the apostle’s words.
However such doctrinal ideas and most ALL doctrinal ideas ARE NOT founded in the Master’s teachings but in the doctrines developed by men. Doctrines of worship, of rites and rituals, and of the way of living as men in this world have supplanted the Truth and the reality of the Master’s teachings and the end result IS that most ALL ARE teaching ONLY “the commandments of men“. To this we should also add the way that much of the church believes that such words were addressed to the Jews alone. For us however, the way that Jesus coverts, if we can use that idea here, the words of Isaiah into a prophecy for the Jews in His day should also be as prophetic for ALL succeeding generations of Christianity. While it may seem unimportant to dwell upon this idea of the inadequacies of the doctrinal ideas of men, it IS rather of the highest importance if the church IS to ever see their error. Most ALL have forsaken the plain language of the Master as they dwell upon interpreting the obscure and parabolic parts of His teachings. Perhaps this was predictable; perhaps the drama involved in interpreting the obscure and uninterpretable ideas from the Master’s words allowed for religion to define itself away from the most simple ideas that would effectively impinge upon the ability of men to live as men in this world. While the simple ideas ARE plentiful, most ALL still choose to reflect on the parabolic and on the ideas of faith and believing which ARE but nebulous ideas without True meaning save for the man who Truly seeks to follow the Lord. Rather than teach the Way that we can “love thy neighbour as thyself“, the church seeks to redefine the idea of neighbor as they spend their time exploring such fantastical ideas as the rapture and the state of Christians in the end times. Such doctrinal ideas ARE from the doctrines of men and NOT from a True reading of scripture where such fantastical ideas ARE born and where there IS NO given explanation. Among the clear ideas that the Master offers to us IS our trifecta, our list of sayings from the Master that show us the Way, the Truth and the Life, yet another idea that IS totally misconstrued by the churches. Repeating our trifecta we read:
- “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32).
- “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21).
- “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me” (John 14:21-24).
In the last essay we discussed the many ideas that revolve around the Master’s words on riches and treasure or, from a modern perspective, wealth and the pursuit of it. Most ALL doctrinal teachings ARE contrary to the Master’s words on wealth and its accumulation. Jesus describes forsaking such things as the Way to discipleship and, to be sure, the Way to “the glorious liberty of the children of God” and the Way to becoming “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4), forsaking runs through our aspiration to be His disciples. It IS this forsaking that IS the subject, the main subject, of Jesus interactions with the ‘rich young ruler’ in the story that we have been discussing but, as we see from John Gill’s commentary at the end of the last essay, this IS NOT how the church understands the idea. Most ALL deflect the Master’s words by dwelling on the idea of the camel and “the eye of a needle” and how that one can have wealth and keep it as they pass through a particular gate at Jerusalem. And many especially lean on Mark’s version of this story where the idea of trust IS introduced without explanation; the Master says “how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!“. But the Master’s words ARE clearly NOT about undefined ideas of trust, nor are they about the camel nor “the eye of a needle” (Mark 10:25); His words ARE about our ability to forsake our wealth. We should understand this undefined idea of trust in the context that it IS offered, as one’s focus on wealth and riches as Jesus tells the ‘rich young ruler’ that he must change his focus and “sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor“. In this we should see the Master’s rule for discipleship which tells us, also clearly, that “whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:33). To be sure, this criteria for discipleship IS about much more than wealth; this criteria includes shedding whatever thoughts and attitudes we have that keep us bound to our lives in this world, that keep us in our “bondage of corruption” (Romans 8:21).
It IS the plainly clear ideas from the Master’s words that should first take the attention of men who Truly seek the Lord. While doctrinal churches bandy about the obscure ideas presented in the New Testament, while they try to interpret the obscure ideas and make sense of the Book of Revelation, the Path to success IS ever found in the clarity of Jesus’ words. To be sure there DOES need to be some thought given even to the clearly worded ideas as we try to separate the Master’s words from our carnal inclinations, but here we should realize that His words ARE intended to separate us from these same carnal inclinations. This IS the reality of Repentance. We should remember that Repentance IS but our decision to change; it IS NOT the change itself. The change itself IS the product of our Transformation and while Repentance can be as a flash of Light in the carnal mind that IS motivated by the steady prompting of the Soul, Transformation IS the slow and steady reaction of the man to this decision to change. The Greek word metamorphoo which IS rendered as both Transformed and Transfigured IS used a scant four times in the New Testament; twice as Transfigured, once as Transformed and once it IS rendered as changed. There IS another Greek word, metaschematizo, which IS also rendered in terms of Transformation and which has similar meanings attached to it but which seems to have a more carnal application that metamorphoo. If we consider the one metamorphoo to be the spiritual change induced by the Soul to change the man and metaschematizo to be a change to one’s appearance we can likely understand both. Vincent helps us by comparing the two word ideas saying: “Be not conformed to this world,” is suschmatizesqe; i e., be not fashioned according to the fleeting fashion of this world. So Rev., fashioned. See, also, 2 Corinthians 11:13, 2 Corinthians 11:14, 2 Corinthians 11:15, where the changes described are changes in outward semblance. False apostles appeared in the outward fashion of apostles of Christ; Satan takes on the outward appearance of an angel. All these changes are in the accidents of the life, and do not touch its inner, essential quality. On the other hand, a change in the inner life is described as a change of morfh, never of schma. Hence, Romans 12:2, ” Be ye transformed [μεταμορφουσθε] ; the change taking place by the reviewing [sic] of the mind4.
Most importantly IS the idea that a change in the inner life is described as a change of morfh, never of schma; here, so that ALL is clear, morfh represents metamorphoo and schma represents metaschematizo. Mr. Vincent goes on to explain saying: Why, then, it may be asked, is a compound of morfh employed in this description of the transfigured Savior, since the change described is a change in his outward appearance ? It may be answered, because a compound of schma, expressing merely a change in the aspect of Christ ‘s person and garments, would not express the deeper truth of the case, which is, that the visible change gets its real character and meaning from that which is essential in our Lord – his divine nature. A foreshadowing or prophecy of his true form – his distinctive character – comes out in his transfiguration4. Both the Transforming from Romans and the Transfiguring from Matthew’s words saying “And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light” (Matthew 17:1-2) then show us a spiritual event that has physical effects upon the Life of the man in this world. Of course the one, Transfiguration, IS much more spiritually dynamic than IS Transformation which IS but a part of the process that leads us to first Redemption and then, finally perhaps, to Transfiguration. Repentance however remains the very first step in our journey to becoming “partakers of the divine nature” and, from the perspective of the man in this world, it IS the most important as it allows us to enter onto the Path to “the glorious liberty of the children of God“.
That the idea of Repentance IS misunderstood and misconstrued by so much of the church should not be surprising as most ALL word ideas that involve a virtuous change in the life and practice4 ARE so misunderstood and misconstrued. Ofttimes such word ideas ARE intentionally misinterpreted as men, and it IS ever men who devise the worlds doctrinal approaches to the Lord, endeavor to retain their humanity which they define according to the ways of the world. Vincent cites Paul’s words to the Romans as he tries to explain metamorphoo as that change that IS one’s change in the inner life as men begin to look away from being “conformed to this world” and begin to focus upon “the renewing of your mind“. Again this begins with Repentance; it IS ONLY in True Repentance that we have the wherewithal to effect the necessary change in the inner life which change IS effectively “the renewing of your mind“. While Paul’s words ARE rather clear, they ARE NOT understood as they ARE intended by a church that believes that their mere believing on the Master as savior IS sufficient to effect “the renewing of your mind” as they fail to see the reality of the apostles words that we should “present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service“. In these words we have the reality of our need to “mortify the deeds of the body” if we expect to Truly become “partakers of the divine nature“. How clear ARE Paul’s words depends upon one’s reliance on their indoctrination into the various denominations and sects, an indoctrination that obnubilates the necessary vision of the man seeking the Truth. Paul tells us that “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God“. The apostle goes on to show us that a man IS “not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith” (Romans 12:1-2, 3). Here we should understand soberly as thinking contrary to our indoctrination and understand “the measure of faith” as our measure of KNOWING the Truth and NOT the nebulous faith of the churches.
While one may think that this idea of thinking soberly has any reference to intoxication, it DOES NOT. Strong’s tells us that sophroneo which IS rendered as soberly means: to be of sound mind while Thayer’s IS more verbose saying that the idea IS: to be of sound mind9a; to be in one’s right mind; to exercise self control, to put a moderate estimate upon one’s self, think of one’s self soberly, to curb one’s passions9, 2 which IS the same as the lexicon defines the idea. The point here IS simply that whensoever one IS in the state of Transformation, in the state of being “transformed by the renewing of your mind“, that one should NOT revert to allowing the carnal mind, which was heretofore the primary way of thinking, to create an aura of superiority. Once in this state of Transformation one must come to ignore the emotional/mental way of thought that one previously uses to gain in this world. We should try to see here that this Transformation IS what the apostle IS referencing in his earlier saying that “if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live” (Romans 8:13). In this we should try to see how that in being Transformed we DO perforce “mortify the deeds of the body” and here we should remember that ALL IS included in this idea of “the deeds of the body“; ALL thoughts, attitudes and actions. We should remember as well that ALL of this begins with the idea of Repentance which makes Repentance the primary goal of ALL who Truly seek the Lord. Again, this Repentance IS NOT in the form of the common ideas attached to this word. While the idea of sorrow may be attached in some way at times, the reality IS that our Repentance must be: Such a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice4. This IS True Repentance and here we should perhaps expand upon the idea by introducing another of part of the Master’s words at the beginning of His ‘ministry’ words that include the idea of baptism. The gospels ALL begin with the idea baptism and two of them bring this idea to the reality of Repentance; perhaps looking at these word ideas together will help us to understand what we ARE expected to DO.
We should remember that we ARE first shown the idea of Repentance by John the Baptist who says such things as “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire” (Matthew 3:11). There ARE two things to try to understand here; first that John IS called the Baptist because his primary focus IS upon the baptism of men. The church has made this a rite and a ritual in most every corner attaching to the idea their own ofttimes strange doctrinal ideas. Many denominations and sects go beyond the traditional idea presented by John and offer congregants a baptism “with the Holy Ghost“. Most ALL baptismal rites and rituals offer ONLY doctrinal solace as, almost from the beginning, the deeper meanings of the Greek word baptizo were ignored; that deeper idea IS to immerse the subject in the teachings and Truth over the doctrines of men that prevailed at the time. This ignorance of the deeper meanings of the Greek word have resulted in the lexicon’s own defining ideas which define baptizo as: to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk); to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe; to overwhelm2. From this, which IS taken from Thayer’s9 defining ideas for baptizo, the ONLY definition that comes near the True meaning IS to overwhelm but this IS also lacking as it comes with NO explanation. Strong’s however DOES offer us a deeper idea regarding baptizo; they tell us that the word IS: from a derivative of G911; to immerse. However, even Strong’s leans toward the doctrinal ideas as they continue saying that: to immerse, submerge; to make whelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism:—Baptist, baptize, wash9a.
There IS little else in the commentaries that we use that defines the idea to our satisfaction save for the story that we have previously posted; a story that defines the idea of baptism using a vegetable. While we CAN NOT be sure, there seems to be some confusion between the Greek words bapto and baptizo, a confusion that IS cautioned against in our story. This, from Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989 offers us a profoundly different take on baptism and one the DOES much more closely agree with the way that the word IS used by the Baptist. We read from the entry for baptizo that: Not to be confused with 911, bapto. The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped'(bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g. Mark 16:16. ‘He that believes and is baptised shall be saved’. Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle!**
While Mr. Boice DOES present us with a more valid view of the Greek word baptizo, this has little or NO effect upon the way that baptism IS used in the church. It IS but a rite and a ritual upon which the church places doctrinal meanings according to the particular denomination or sect. Understanding the deeper meaning of baptism also brings us closer to understanding the relationship of baptism and Repentance which relationship IS shown us in scripture through Marks’ words saying “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4) as well as the Baptist’s saying cited above. What then IS the “baptism of repentance“? We can best understand this simply by combining the meanings of both words; NOT the common doctrinal understandings which the phrase itself outwardly denies but the deeper meanings ascribed to these word ideas. In Repentance we have the choice to stop following the ways of the world, to stop conforming “to this world” as Paul states this, and to follow the Lord or, again as Paul states, to be “transformed by the renewing of your mind“. We should remember here that our Transformation IS a process that begins with our Repentance; a process that begins with our choice to focus upon the things of God. Again, as Vincent shows us, True Repentance must be: Such a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice4. It IS here in this reality of Repentance that the idea of baptism plays its role; NOT as a rite or ritual, but as the reality of our immersion in our newfound Repentant Life. It IS through such immersion that we can Truly Transform our lives away from our carnal thoughts, ideas, attitudes and actions and onto our: union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle. Can we see the point here? Can we see how that these two seemingly disparate spiritual ideas actually work together in the True salvation of a man? John the Baptist baptized through a ritual those who were Truly Repentant in their time; men came from far and wide to seek the man that they considered a prophet of God. Undoubtedly there were those among the participants in this baptism ritual in the Jordan River that walked away from their decision upon realizing that it required a Life change and perhaps here we would find the majority. There ARE some however that took the Baptist’s message to heart and continued on; among these ARE some that become Jesus’ disciples.
We have ofttimes said that it takes some measure of dissatisfaction with the course of our lives that allows us to better hear the prompting of our own Souls and we should try to see here that this sense of dissatisfaction can easily begin with such things as our baptism. Of course this requires that we understand the very purpose of baptism and willingly submit ourselves to the changes that it will bring; changes that can easily represent our Repentance. Of course the actual rite or ritual of baptism DOES little to bring about the necessary changes that define Repentance or baptism which ARE again that:
- Repentance is: Such a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice4.
- Baptism is: More than mere intellectual assent….There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle!**.
These ideas define Repentance and baptism according to the reality of the context in which they ARE presented in the New Testament and, according to the Baptist and the commentary from the Apostle Mark these Truly work together. While we may find it difficult to understand the idea of “the baptism of repentance“, the idea can be most clearly understood through the defining ideas above. In the change that one must volunteer for, the change that IS our Repentance, one IS perforce immersed, baptized if you will, into the reality and the Truth of scripture and onto a new course of Life that Transforms us “by the renewing of your mind“. It IS our Transformation that allows us to Truly be “partakers of the divine nature” by the same measure that we put into our newfound Path; it IS our Transformation that can deliver us, make us free, “from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:21). In True Repentance and True immersion into the Truth and the Love that IS the Lord we come to understand the idea that we must keep His words and as James shows us those that DO NOT Truly Repent find themselves embedded in the apostle’s words saying “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves“. James goes on to show us the nature of the man who IS among those that ARE “deceiving your own selves” saying that: “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, 23-25).
While these words may seem obscure, they ARE NOT. The simple message IS that the “hearers only” will believe in their ‘salvation‘ according to the doctrines that they profess and that this belief IS but a part of their own deception. Our view of the apostle’s words would point to the way that the hearer believes what he IS listening to and comes away from that hearing in a seemingly ‘spiritual’ state of mind and emotion. This IS what James IS saying in regard to the man “beholding his natural face in a glass“; that this man sees himself as the man that just heard a ‘spiritual’ message as “he beholdeth himself” as the doctrines of his church allow. However, as he “goeth his way” back into his normal Life in this world he even “straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was” just moments before as he DID when he had “he beholdeth himself“; perhaps as a holy man. This fleeting experience IS the natural way for millions upon millions who spend their time hearing what they believe ARE spiritual messages. Men spend the allotted time in church attending to the words of the minister and hearing, being a “hearer of the word” if you will, the chosen message of the day. For some the message will stick for a while but in the clamor of daily living most ALL DO revert back to their normal daily lives and this IS because they ARE NOT “doers of the word“; they ARE “hearers only“. James compounds his message of being “doers of the word” by telling us that “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“. This “perfect law of liberty” IS explained by Vincent who tells us that it IS: Lit., the perfect law, the law of liberty4 which IS how some render this idea.
We should understand that “perfect law of liberty” IS the full context and content of Jesus’ words as He restates and reasserts the commandments of God as they should be understood for the succeeding generations. The more important part here however IS NOT that we “looketh into the perfect law of liberty“; it IS rather that we “continueth therein” and become “a doer of the work“. Here we should see the idea of work has replaced the idea of the word; this should clearly show us that the whole objective IS seeing the Truth and then DOING it. The compound message then of our essay IS that we must be “a doer of the work” and that this work revolves around our Repentance and our True baptism into the Truth and the Love that ARE the pinnacle of ALL spiritual existence.
We will continue with our thoughts in the next post.
| Aspect | Potency | Aspect of Man | In Relation to the Great Invocation | In relation to the Christ |
| GOD, The Father | Will or Power | Spirit or Life | Center where the Will of God IS KNOWN | Life |
| Son, The Christ | Love and Wisdom | Soul or Christ Within | Heart of God | Truth |
| Holy Spirit | Light or Activity | Life Within | Mind of God | Way |
- 2 New Testament Greek lexicon on biblestudytools.com
- 4 Word Studies in the New Testament; Marvin R Vincent D.D. 2nd edition
- 8 Bible commentaries on BibleStudyTools.com
- 9 Thayer’s Greek Lexicon on blueletterbible.org
- 9a The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible on blueletterbible.or
- * Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2020
- * Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laissez-faire
- ** from Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989
Those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road
Voltaire, Writer and Philosopher
