Tag Archives: Fifth Sunday of Easter

Acts, Language, Teaching

Acts 8:26-40 – Willing sacrifices for the greater good

Leave a comment

An angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a wilderness road.) So he got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over to this chariot and join it.” So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to get in and sit beside him. Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this:

“Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter,
and like a lamb silent before its shearer,
so he does not open his mouth.

In his humiliation justice was denied him.
Who can describe his generation?
For his life is taken away from the earth.”

The eunuch asked Philip, “About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus. As they were going along the road, they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?” He commanded the chariot to stop, and both of them, Philip and the eunuch, went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing. But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he was passing through the region, he proclaimed the good news to all the towns until he came to Caesarea.

——————————————————————————-

This is the Acts selection for the Easter season, coming from the Episcopal Lectionary for the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B 2018. It will next be read aloud in church by a reader on Sunday, April 29, 2018. It is important because it tells of an Apostle following in the path of Jesus (fulfilling his “Follow me” instruction), as Philip was led into his own wilderness experience. The Ethiopian eunuch then epitomizes the mission of Apostles as reaching out to Gentiles and not being limited to Jews.

This selection begins by stating, “An angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a wilderness road.) So he got up and went.”

It is easy to assume that Philip was the disciple from Bethsaida who chose to follow Jesus, as reported in the Gospel of John (John 1:43-48). That Philip was one of the eleven who were filled with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost Sunday (the first day of the week), who was equal to Simon-Peter and John of Zebedee, and other Apostles who were prepared for ministry during the forty days Jesus spent teaching them, prior to his Ascension and the subsequent Fiftieth day. This means a holy call to the wilderness would not be required of Saint Philip; however, there is another Philip to consider.

In chapter six of the Acts of the Apostles, we are told of the need to choose “good men” from among the Hellenistic Jews and Hebrew descendants, who would attend to the needs of the widows that were being overlooked. Two of the seven named “good men” were Stephen and Philip. Although Stephen was said to be “a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit,” the others were growing in their faith, so the Apostles could continue to devote themselves “to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” (All from Acts 6:1-7)

It would make perfect sense to see the Philip named in chapter 8 of Acts as referencing this newly ordained priest named Philip. Therefore, when “an angel of the Lord said to Philip … go toward the south … to Gaza (on a wilderness road),” it was another Philip’s divine call to have the metal of his goodness tested.

When the reader is presented the translation, “So he got up and went,” it produces an image of Philip getting up off the sofa of his home and taking off, in order to do as told. That misses the point of Philip having just encountered “an angel of the Lord,” and it is a poor translation.  This is reminiscent of Peter standing up on the day of Pentecost, where Acts 2:14 says he “raised his voice,” giving the connotation of Peter speaking loudly.  The deep meaning says Peter’s voice was “lifted up” (“epēren“) spiritually.

The text shows pause (by comma or implied) in the words, “kai anastas , eporeuthē.” That pause says there was space between Philip “having been risen up” (“anastas”) and his “going on a journey” (“eporeuthē”) for the Lord. Because he was told to “Rise up” (“Anastēthi”) by the angel, that meant more than “stand up from a seated position,” as it spoke volumes as a command to become “Elevated” or “Raised” in Spirit. By seeing this language in this way, one can then see Philip was called to a test of his “Raised” Spirit, just as all Saints are called by God and Christ to prove themselves.

When the translation then transitions to say, “Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch,” importance is lost in the absence of pause, where the actual text says, “kai idou , anēr Aithiops,” or “and behold , a man an Ethiopian.” By understanding a pause, so one fully grasps “Behold,” one can then realize this is a one-word statement that can also translate as “Discern, Perceive” or “Experience.” That focus allows one to see how the information presented in Holy text says Philip went to be tested and “Experience” that test, before meeting a man who was an Ethiopian. Such a translation as “Now there was” [instead of “Behold”] can then be realized as a stand alone statement that Philip had been in the wilderness being tested for close to forty days. Then he came upon [following the pause of a comma]  “a man an Ethiopian,” after Philip’s testing had prepared him to impact a traveler in the wilderness.

In the Greek text, the “Ethiopian man” is identified as that, with commas offsetting the additional information that he was a “eunuch.” That was another stand alone statement, which was then followed by an explanation, such that his impotency was relative to the man being “a court official [a potentate or ruler] of the Candace.” That information is offering insight into the Ethiopian man’s character, more than some unnecessary words being written.

When the translation says, “the Candace,” that says a person’s name was not being stated, but a proper title. That title is more properly spelled as “Kandake,” which states how the “Ethiopian man” worked as an emissary of a Nubian or Kushite “Great woman,” who was then identified as a “queen of Ethiopians.” By use of the Greek word “dynastēs” [“a ruler, potentate, member of the court”] with control of “all her treasure,” this “man an Ethiopian” might well have been “a eunuch” (“eunouchos”) by choice (rather than by forced castration), choosing to “abstain from marital sex,” due to knowing the treasury could not be entrusted to one not having complete control of a rational (business only) mind.

Kush was where Sudan is now.

The southern edge of Kush came close to where modern Ethiopia is, with Meroë the place of the Kandake.

With that background established, it is important to catch that this man was important because he was “in charge of her entire treasury.” The history of the Kingdom of Kush (as a nation led by powerful women), it is believed Kush had been conquered by the Roman Empire (around 100 BC), and by the time of Nero’s rule (after Jesus’ crucifixion), Kush had become a “client state.” That would have made Kush like the Herodian kingdom, which included Judea and Galilee and other regions.

The Herodian “client states.”

Rather than jump to a conclusion that this Ethiopian man was in some way Judaic, it would be better to see him as a traveler to Jerusalem so he could do business with the Romans there. The modern Ethiopian connection to Judaism was still hundreds of years its onset, although this man might have descended from the Makeda of Ethiopia (Queen of Sheba).  For the Ethiopian man to have a scroll of Hebrew text, from a land that did not commonly read, that says he was of royal status and thus educated; however, he did not understand the meaning of the text, which would indicate that scripture was being read for the first time.

The “passage from scripture” that he was reading aloud was from Isaiah 53:7b-8b. The verse-plus that leads into those two verses quoted in Acts says, “All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth.” (Isaiah 53:6-7a, NASB) The last segment of the total three-verse selection (Isaiah 53:6-8, NASB) adds, “For the transgression of my people he was punished.” Because all of that was not read aloud, the Ethiopian man was touched by words that made sense personally to him, as he knew the silent sacrifice, humiliation and justice denied him, even though he was “of the court of the Kandake.”

This view then takes one back to the statement (separated by commas, so it stands alone as important) that the “man an Ethiopian” was a “eunuch.” This becomes the sacrifice that had been made by the Ethiopian ruler, whom Philip met. The removal of his lusts and desires of the flesh – by whatever means necessary – ensured his subservience to “the Kandake,” so the valuables of the kingdom would be in safe hands.  This says that it was because the Ethiopian man was a eunuch that he understood the scripture of Isaiah as his own self-allowed humiliation for the better good. The Ethiopian man had given up his life (as it normally would have been otherwise) on earth, in the same way the writer of the scroll had prophesied the Messiah of God would.

Now, twice we read the word “chariot” (from “harmatos” and “harmati”) and can get the impression of a warrior’s vehicle, as depicted in the old movie Ben Hur.

The word can equally translate as “vehicle,” and the image one should get is more like a “stagecoach,” where the Ethiopian man rode comfortably inside a horse-drawn carriage, driven by attendants. Inside this “vehicle” is space for a scroll to be unrolled and read, without getting in the way of any other passengers.

The reading of scripture can then be seen as a standard pastime of long-distance travelers, where one goes to the airport newsstand and buys a book to read before a flight. Probably, this scroll was just one of the choices he had to read during a long ride back to Egypt, before taking a boat to Kush (going south along the Nile).  The Book of Isaiah might have been one of several that seemed interesting. Perhaps one of the high priests in the Temple of Jerusalem had an extra scroll for sale in the book store there?

We then read, “Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over to this chariot and join it.” So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah.” The word “Spirit” is capitalized, as “Pneuma,” which can also translate as “Wind” or “Breath,” meaning it was a divine “Whisper” within the mind of Philip. This can be seen as the Mind of Christ that spoke to Philip as he was in the wilderness; and it not only told him to approach the vehicle and enter it.  As Philip was running to reach the carriage, the Mind of Christ was telling him what was being read inside, by the Ethiopian man. Thus, more than Philip asking the man inside the carriage if he understood the meaning of what he was reading, it was the knowledge of Jesus Christ that was pouring from Philip’s lips, to one known to be thirsting for insight.

It is important to see how the Ethiopian man asked Philip about the meaning of the scripture he was reading, rather than expect “someone to guide” his knowledge. For Philip to ask, “Do you understand what you are reading?” was like the thoughts the Ethiopian man was having.  Because he could not possibly understand without guidance, his response was to ask, “About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?”

His asking becomes an example of “Ask and you will receive.” Because the Ethiopian man felt a personal connection to the scripture he was reading, even though he did not understand it, he wanted to know more. The scripture was touching him to cause him to want to know more.  His asking was then like a prayer, with Philip’s appearance being the answer to that prayer.

In this reading selection, the Ethiopian man is called “the eunuch” four times, after having first been identified as “a eunuch.” He was not identified as a man, or as an Ethiopian, or as a potentate, ruler, or court official. The fact that this man traveled in a vehicle of luxury, with a driver and attendants he commanded, as a man of power who controlled the entire treasury of a nation means little in this story. At the core of this man’s identity was the fact that he was a man who voluntarily abstained from marriage, such that he was not led by his innate drives to procreate, regardless of whether or not he had been willingly castrated to physically prevent that or if he somehow used extreme powers of will to quell all dangerous emotions that might overcome him.

The aspect of the Ethiopian man and Philip (driver, et al) coming upon a body of water on the wilderness road to Gaza means they came upon a wadi where rain had collected. The knowledge Philip had imparted a thirsting man led them to water for cleansing. The baptism Philip performed was symbolic with physical water, but because the Holy Spirit was upon him at that time, the Holy Spirit also came upon the Ethiopian man, cleansing his soul.

A human being whose emotions had been sacrificed to serve a queen were suddenly overwhelming, as he “went on his way rejoicing” knowing he now willingly served the Father and the Son. Philip, however, did much as Jesus was known to occasionally do, which was suddenly disappear.  When we read that “Philip found himself at Azotus,” his wilderness journey might well have led him physically there, instead of along the road the Ethiopian man’s carriage took.  Thus, when Philip reappear in Azotus, it was after he had spiritually left his body, so the Lord could show him the power of the Holy Spirit to find seekers, wherever that may be.  This is the element of synchronicity.

As I have stated previously, reading scripture should have the effect of placing the reader in the scenes depicted, where the one of least value is who the reader must identify with first. One must ask oneself, “How do I have the same flaws of character?”

In this reading, it becomes too easy to identify with Philip, as if one is a truly devout disciple of Christ, who is married to God in one’s heart, so one can hear “an angel of the Lord” speak. Few are able to make that claim, as such people would be explaining scripture to the world of Gentiles (and Jews) who read it, but do not know how to understand, “unless someone guides me.”  On the contrary, most Christians shun study of the Holy Bible, leaving that “head trip” to the professionals.

This means the vast majority of readers ARE “The eunuch.” That symbolism can bring with it elements of being intelligent, yet pagan controllers of wealth. It can mean one spends more time at work than with family – always on the road for another dollar bill. It can strongly suggest that one is most sacrificing of the emotions of the world, because one is more driven to acquire the things offered by the earth. However, the biggest element of being a eunuch is to see oneself as barren, thus unable to reproduce baby Jesus within.  It is the absence of sperm or egg, where being fruitful and multiplying … for the purpose of supplanting one’s religious values into those personally brought forth into this world … has been lost.

From the Game of Thrones comes a prototypical eunuch, who may parallel the heart of the Ethiopian man met by Philip.

The lesson of this reading, which is presented during the Easter season of personal Resurrection of Jesus Christ in Apostles, is to rejoice in knowing that one’s ill-advised life decisions have not kept one from redemption and everlasting life. Just as children brought into the world maintain a lineage of physical genetics, spreading the Gospel of the Holy Spirit maintains the lineage of Jesus Christ, allowing one’s soul to become one with God as a truly Spiritual being. Just as Philip was a good man who was chosen to serve, he was then then called by the angel of the Lord to be proved by fire.  Philip responded and was made a reproduction of Jesus Christ, so that body could then pass that Spirit onto a Ethiopian man, who felt a need for redemption and a new life purpose.

Because a eunuch acts as a statement of a lack of desire to join with a partner, for the purpose of sexual release, that is rejecting the basic notion of joining oneself with another self, so a child can result.  It represents the epitome of selfishness. This lack of physical emotions (either forced upon or willingly chosen) makes one’s heart cold and hardened.

That symbolism is then one’s inability to love God with all one’s heart, either because one feels forced to doubt (from flimsy explanations or “in your face” examples) or one willingly chooses not to believe in the unseen (from peer pressures and philosophical teachings). Being a eunuch is then what keeps one from understanding Scripture, because one’s own personal troubles keep one from seeing the truth that has already been rejected.  Without a personal wilderness experience that tests you as potentially being the weak link to God, the purpose in waiting for redemption is seemingly never worthwhile.  One cuts off any chance of knowing God, choosing impotency over fruitfulness, from big brains that are blind to the truth.

When the Mind of Christ led Philip to join with the Ethiopian man, that Mind knew the Gentile had just read a passage that opened a wound, causing the heart to pump extra blood of emotion. The eunuch saw himself in the sacrifice of Jesus, as prophesied by Isaiah. Such and opening sent the Holy Spirit to the man, in the form of Philip, so the Ethiopian eunuch could feel the Scripture totally being about him.  That truth came to him when he became one with Jesus Christ. His sterility would be undone by being reborn as Jesus Christ – his guide to Scripture meaning within – so he could then have new children in Christ, just as Philip could then claim a relationship with the Ethiopian man.  They were then brothers in Christ.

When we then read that Philip immediately was no longer seen by the eunuch, but “the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away,” so he “found himself at Azotus,” this is the life purpose of a Saint. Paul wrote frequently about the dependencies adult human being have with sexual relationships. It is how some say that men are led more by their little brain than their big brain, which means sexual drives make many human beings forget about spiritual purpose when physical emotions control their bodies.

When one is led by sexual appetite, one can break any number of religious rules. Doing that too often makes one less able to sense the error of those ways, so that people defend themselves with excuses that prevent their hearts from receiving the Holy Spirit – opening up their hearts for God with love. A Saint is ready to receive God and Christ, when one has made the sacrifice to become a eunuch, where the castration is not the removal of sexual organs, but the removal of an ego that can be misled by sexual urges.

That is what Paul wrote of. It is how Jesus said, “These [strangers] are my mother and brothers,” because family is less about physical bloodlines, and all about being a productive “living vine” of Christ. Thus, being called to proclaim the good news in all the towns means one is always going home to family, wherever one goes in ministry and evangelism.  Those we are led to by the Holy Spirit will be those who we will be related to, through being Jesus Christ.

———————————————————————————————————

Note: The cover art depicts The Hanged Man Tarot card, specifically from the Mythic Tarot deck.  The character from Greek mythology that is used to depict the “willing sacrifice for a higher good” symbolism of The Hanged Man is Prometheus, who gave fire to humanity against the orders of Zeus.  In the spirit of the Easter season, it would be worthwhile to read about Prometheus, whose name in Greek means “Foresight.”  Since the Resurrection of Jesus Christ within a Saint requires a willing sacrifice be done first, reading this mythology can help enlighten one as to the impact the reading from Isaiah had on the Ethiopian eunuch.

1 John, Language, Teaching

1 John 4:7-21 – All you need is God’s love

Leave a comment

Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love. God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins. Beloved, since God loved us so much, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.

By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world. God abides in those who confess that Jesus is the Son of God, and they abide in God. So we have known and believe the love that God has for us.

God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them. Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness on the day of judgment, because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love. We love because he first loved us. Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also.

—————————————————————————–

This is the Epistle selection from the Episcopal Lectionary for the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B 2018. It will next be read aloud in church by a reader on Sunday, April 29, 2018. This is important because John goes into great detail about the love that is the bond between a Saint (Apostle) and God, which brings about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ within those lovers. John also makes it clear that not everyone knows this love of God.

In the 326 words of this reading selection, the word “love” (or “loved) appears 27 times (roughly 8.3% – a high frequency), according to this English translation. According to the Greek text, variations of the words “agapē” or “agapō” are found.  The breakdown is as follows: agapē – 15 times; agapō – 1 time; agapōn – 4 times; agapōmen – 3 times; ēgapēkamen – 1 time; and ēgapēsen 3 times. Those words translate into (in order of listing here): love; [I] love; loving; [we should] love; [we] loved; and [he] loved. These are in addition to the two times John referred to the recipients of his letter as “Beloved” (“Agapētoi”), which addresses the objects of one’s love.

This preponderance of words placing focus on “love” is reminiscent of the translation of John 21:15-19, where Jesus and Peter had an exchange about “love,” when Jesus told Peter to “feed my lambs,” “shepherd my sheep,” and “feed my sheep.” The reality of the Greek in that selection is that Jesus asked asked Peter twice, “agapas me pleon toutōn?” (“Do you love me more than these?”) and “agapas me?” (“Do you love me?”), using the word “agapas.”  The word “agapas” asked in the second person singular, “do love you.” The response Peter gave to those questions was the same each time: “sy odias hoti philō se.” (“You know I have affection for you.”)

The word “philō” says, “I have affection for.” In a reading where it is important to see oneself as Peter, which makes it YOU who was asked by Jesus Christ, “Do you love me?”  One then has to see how one, like Peter, will hear the question and respond to the question of love as if asked, “Do you have human affections for me?”

That reading demonstrated how there is a difference between LOVE and the warm, fuzzy feelings that a human brain automatically thinks to remember, when that word (in all its shapes and forms) is heard. What John was writing about in his epistle goes beyond the physical sensations that are interpreted as “love” and explains the Spirituality of LOVE that is so much more. That is why Jesus asked Peter if he understood what “love” meant, but Peter (not yet filled with the Holy Spirit) was blinded from seeing the intent of Jesus’ question.

That prompted Jesus to ask Peter a third time, “phileis me?” (“Do you have affection for me?”) That time Peter (who was grieved at having been asked the same question about love three times – remembering that Peter had denied knowing Jesus of Nazareth three times) said, “panta sy odias” (“all things you know”) , “sy ginōskeis hoti philō se.” (“you realize that I have affection for you.”)  Peter responded (according to John) with two different words that translate as “know.”

Each time Jesus heard Peter’s answers, Peter had equated “love” to caring for others.  Peter was like all those disciples who loved Jesus. Still, Peter failed to grasp the significance of what questions about love demanded as acts that proved Spiritual love and human affection for family.

When Jesus said “feed my lambs,” he meant give the knowledge (food for thought) of God’s love to those newly in the fold (newborn sheep), who are then hungering for it. When Jesus said, “Shepherd my sheep” (or “Tend my sheep”), he meant to support those who would grow into Apostles and Saints, in the name of Jesus Christ, with God’s love. When Jesus then to Peter to “have affection for” him by “feeding my sheep,” he meant for Peter to show human feelings toward other Christians, as a support form of God’s love. In all cases, the follow-up Jesus made, using my, projected Peter as being Jesus Christ, through the love of God.  Thus, the question,  “Do you love me?” is also a command: “You do love Peter,” when you become “me.”  Therefore, Jesus said, “When you become me via God’s love, you as me will feed and shepherd lambs and sheep as I have done with you.”

The conversation John remembered, via the Holy Spirit, was the same that Jesus has with all disciples that are about to be tested as metal is proved by fire.  It is the conversion requirement all true Christians will face.  The irritation Peter displayed (as felt by John), where he mildly snapped at Jesus, “You know all things,” represents the hesitancy disciples have receiving God’s love.  Still, to be Christian, one cannot expect God knows all things, so words of “affection” prove a commitment of the heart.  After all, Peter – Jesus’ lead disciple – still held onto the raw guilt of having denied “knowing” this man three times.  It is easier to deny “knowing Christ,” than it is to receive God’s love.

For John to use Greek to recall a conversation most likely held in Aramaic, where there may or may not be different words for “love,” one must realize John wrote both his Gospel and his epistles from the Christ Mind.  John, therefore, knew the intent of the questions, by knowing the mind of the questioner.  The Greek then becomes a guide to find the intent and purpose, from language subtleties.

Again, this lesson shows the differences of speech and language that the human brain misses (like Peter’s had).  It is human tendency to think we understand the words, when in reality we do not.  Three times Jesus asking the same question is symbolic.  His changing of terms is also symbolic.  The exchange between Jesus and Peter says we can depend on our human emotions as signs of our Christianity, hearing “love” in human ways.  However, because we have not yet elevated our minds to spiritual abilities to truly grasp the meaning of LOVE, it becomes easy to mistake the love in Jesus (from God) as a lesser human emotion.

From this understanding, look at what John wrote, by taking his explanations of love and examining the meaning, step by step.

First, John wrote, “let us love one another, because love is from God.” That is not explaining that love is a physical attraction to someone, due to increased levels of hormones making one’s head swell from desire to have sensual contact with another. That becomes a human emotion that stimulates outreach to another, where the cause is based on laws of attraction and not based on love from God.  That is a low concept of “love,” because sensual “love” is fleeting, always seeking new sensual experiences.

To love another because love is from God means one emits God’s love to another, simply by one being in love with God. God’s love becomes one with the core of one’s being, which naturally projects outwardly to others, attracting them to one. The misunderstanding of “love” is to seek external sources that fill one’s inner lack. Thus, without God’s love within, one is incapable of projecting anything other than human feelings to another, which will be a love that changes (like emotions do) to varying levels (or definitions) of love.

To understand this concept better, I recommend reading The Path to Love, by Depak Chopra. (Disclaimer: Depak Chopra may not claim this love source to be  identified as the One God, the Father of Jesus Christ, but his concept is valid as sourced within, not external.)

Second, John wrote, “everyone who loves is born of God and knows God.” This is actually a divided statement in the Greek, with a comma separating the two.  It should be read as: “everyone loving , from God has been born.” This has a double meaning (as Scripture has intended multiplicity), where true LOVE is not something that adult human beings freely exude. As babies (having been born into the world), love is natural and from God.  Everyone is naturally attracted to infants and babies. Over time, however, this love becomes hidden and diminished, eventually lost and confused with a plethora of human feelings that make it difficult to mentalize what “love” means. Therefore, the dual aspect here is being reborn as Jesus Christ, which comes from the love of God having been born again.

Third, John wrote, “Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love.” The Greek word “egnō” is used here, as a form of “ginóskó.” which means “has known.” Thus, “has not known God” means to have not personally experienced God. It is a word that is at the root of “Biblically know,” which has sexual connotations, but really implies two who have never joined together as one have not known the other … even though the two recognize each other. When John said, “God is love,” the meaning is Spiritual love requires one having been joined with God as one, as the prerequisite for being able to love.

Fourth, John wrote, “God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.” As a Saint, John was speaking for all Apostles of Christ, who all had “God’s love revealed in this way” of becoming one with God. It says that God’s love is what brings forth the presence of His Son, Jesus Christ, “so that we might live through him.”

Living as the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is how one comes to know God’s love. It was “not that we loved God,” because human beings know only the changing emotions of which “love” is one of many. Human beings are therefore incapable of loving God before He loves them. Through submission to God, in a way that never tries to be equal to God … always saying, “You know” (ex.: Ezekiel 37:3), with head bowed down … God will love us by joining His love to us. Only by receiving His Son, sent by love, can one’s sins be atoned through the sacrifice of self to God, allowing one to become holy, which is what warrants the presence of the Savior … as a Saint.

We are all dried bones awaiting life, through the love of God. That is initiated with repentance.

Fifth, John wrote, “Beloved, since God loved us so much, we also ought to love one another.” This says John wrote to another Saint, who was likewise loved by God. The correct translation from the Greek is, “If so the [one] God loved us,” where the condition of love is from “atoning sacrifice” (Greek “hilasmon“), that gift is not for one, as many have been harmed in one’s history of angering God.  Thus, “since God loved us so,” that love is not to be held selfishly.

Just as Jesus was send by the Father to offer salvation of sins to all who know God, that presence cannot be limited. By saying, “we ought to love one another,” there is a debt of thanks owed by each Saint.  That debt is repaid by loving support of one another; and that is the essence of a Church of Jesus Christ, whose cornerstone is the love of God, through His Son.  We shine a light that attracts the sinful to salvation (feed the lambs); we guide the disciples to receive the Spirit (shepherd the sheep); and we love one another as ourselves (feed the sheep).

Sixth, John wrote, “No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.” When John said, “No one has ever seen God,” this is the reality that the Spiritual and Heavenly is beyond the detection of physical sense organs, such as eyesight. This is the meaning of God telling Moses, “You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” (Exodus 33:20) That means human beings can only face God after death, through the soul’s sense of sight; and then that can only be by wearing the face of God, as the righteousness of His Son, Jesus Christ. Therefore, we do not know God by sight. We know God through the new life given to us by the presence of His love.

A “Near Death Experience” means a soul release through death. While death is not permanent, God may be seen. Returning to life with this vision is like the Resurrection of Christ within.

That brings the desire to support the lives of others who have the same love of God in them. This means that when God lives in us, then we are alive in His love, with the “perfection” being the “completion” (the Greek word “teleioó”) of the Trinity within each Saint, where each have the love of the Father, as the Son reborn, through that presence sent via the Holy Spirit.

This theory is based on human “love,” but it can be translated on Spiritual terms: Submission to God = Commitment; God’s love within = Passion; the Resurrection of Jesus Christ within = Intimacy.

Seventh, John wrote, “By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world. God abides in those who confess that Jesus is the Son of God, and they abide in God. So we have known and believe the love that God has for us.” This more fully states the reason for saying, “his love is perfected in us,” by reading the Greek literally.  In that way it states (in translation), “The love of him having been perfected in us is.”

The word “is” is a statement of “being.” We have meaningful being through the Trinity – we in him and him in us, through the Spirit. The creation of Saints (reproductions of Jesus Christ in human form) allows God to speak through His Son (as we do testify), and the Saints then confess “that Jesus is the Son of God, and they abide in God,” as the Son reborn. That union as One is “so we have known and believe the love that God has for us.”

This is the essence of “being there.”

Walking on water is symbolic of doubt having been overcome by God’s love.

Eighth, John wrote, “God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them.” The first segment of this verse is often repeated – “God is love” – so much so that many Sunday sermons have taken those three words alone and preached them alone as the intended meaning of this reading. God is not the same “love” that human emotions know and which everyone in a congregation hears and identifies with having felt. However, when one adds the remainder of the verse, one knows the completeness of “God is love,” where one knows that presence of God within, as to abide in God, with God One with a Saint.  That is to truly know love.

Ninth, John wrote, “Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness on the day of judgment, because as he is, so are we in this world.” This verse is separated into four parts by three commas, rather than the presence of a colon and two commas. The literal translation of the Greek adds more insight into the intent of this verse (17).

Literally it states, “In this has been perfected [the one] love with us , that confidence we might have in the day of judgment , that even as he is , also we are in the world this.” Again, the “perfection” is the joining of three as One – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We abide in the Father and He in us, bringing about the Resurrection of the Son as us, through the power of the Holy Spirit in our souls. Just as Jesus of Nazareth was God incarnate, so are all Saints in his name.

The day of judgment is the death of a mortal body (our personal “end of the world”); but with a saintly presence, as Jesus Christ reborn, our souls are confident not to return to the earthly realm (via reincarnation). Just as was the righteousness of Jesus Christ, as God incarnate, we are also Jesus Christ in this world (as many have been, are and will be) … when we have been perfected by the love of God with us.

Art projects God’s love as a halo.

Tenth, John wrote, “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love.” Human beings are mortal creatures, which mean their bodies are temporal and destined to cease having a capability to support physical life for a spiritual soul. Once one learns to fear, one loses touch with the God love one is born possessing. Fear is a human emotion, much like doubt, shame, guilt, and remorse; but fear is felt and then repressed, just as is human “love.”

There is no fear in God, so there can be no fear in the Saints with whom God unites His love. The unity is the perfection of the Trinity, such that love casts out fear in the One. The fear of punishment is the soul’s fear of reincarnation (or worse – eternal damnation). Thus, anyone who fears anything (except God) is afraid of His judgment at a human host’s death.  Such doubts being present means that one’s soul has not “reached perfection in love.”

Without the love of God, one is a fool controlled by human emotions. Fear is not of God, but a sense of worldly danger.

Eleventh, John wrote, “We love because he first loved us.” We are loved by God when our soul is allowed reentry into a human form, as a newborn. We are therefore first loved before our brains develop beyond a point that keeps it from knowing love. The time spent living acts to pare away the love of God from us, as sins bring fear, doubt, remorse, guilt, and shame (all human emotions), which takes the place of God’s love. We live as children and adults thinking “love” is occasional moments to cherish, as God’s reward for the good things we do; but that is not God’s love. Only when we submit ourselves to God can we first know God’s love as having been reborn back into our souls.

The mythological rebirth, from fire and ashes comes an immortal resurrection.

Twelfth, John wrote, “Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also.” This becomes a further assessment of what a true Church is. What a true Church is cannot be seen as a general collection of people who say, “I “love” God.” This is at the root of the argument over what defines one’s relationship with Jesus Christ: Faith or works?

The Holy Bible is primarily a work that tells the stories that project the living vine of God’s love, which led to Jesus Christ and his living vine Saints. The peripheral figures that come and go are like those who say they “love” God, but cannot produce the works or acts God demands.  They cannot hear God’s voice, due to their own voices speaking to them so loudly.  The Church that was originated by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, devolved into the Judaic religion, which professes a “love” of God. From that (and due to that devolution) stems Christianity, the direct result of God’s Son, Jesus Christ.  The original spread of Christianity has to be recognized as ONLY being based on the proclamation: “I love God,” from the truest meaning.

When the statement of John says that there cannot be a state of God’s love, if members of a Church are those professing devotion to the One God, but then saying or demonstrating otherwise means that “church” is a lie.  To say, “We are Christians,” and then “hate their brothers or sisters,” those said to believe in Jesus Christ, is a lie of “love.”  To profess Christianity without love means to be a disciple in need of a guide (someone to feed the lambs with love). God’s love raises oneself above the pettiness and mutability of human emotions, such that love cannot change with the winds of time. To say one “loves” God, but then “hates” another male or female within a congregation means one is a liar.

The weak of heart will seek and find liars to follow.

The Greek word written by John, “pseustēs” (“a liar”), says one is not telling the truth, which is a statement (the duality of meaning) of not knowing the truth, such that lying is a common state of flawed humanity. As such, an alternate translation can be “a deceiver,” where one’s rejection of God’s true love means one deceives others by saying “love” and preaching “hate.” That causes disciples to mistake human “love” for God’s love.  However, the “deceiver” is more dangerous when seen as one’s punishment of oneself, where the denial of God’s love is mostly harmful to that self’s soul.

It is vital to realize that a “brother” and a “sister” are statements of familial relationship. As God’s love is the foundation of a Church, where the reproduction of His Son, Jesus Christ, IS the cornerstone of that Church.  That resurrection in male human beings (“brothers”) and female human beings (“sisters”) means all members of that Church have been reborn as the Son of God, completely enveloped in God’s love. That righteous state of being joins with others in the same state, so true love is shared between all Saints, all brothers and sisters in God’s love alike. Therefore, when John wrote, “The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also,” this is stating the rule that makes a Church true and strong.

A Church of Christ cannot have members that are not related to the other members, as family, born of the same Father, as the Son reborn in multiplicity.  It can act as a place of refuge (a sheepfold), but all who enter the gate (Jesus Christ) must recognize the shepherd’s call to come to him.  The sheepfold becomes discipleship, with the exit from it being one’s holy ministry with the Shepherd.  Each individual is responsible for his or her own reception of the Spirit, meaning all must listen for the voice of Jesus Christ – their Shepherd.  Once heard, one must act as the Good Shepherd, filled with God’s love.

By understanding this truth about God’s love, one can then see that the Church of Christianity is only One, with no denominations. A separate denomination means the rejection of another denomination, where that rejection can be classified as “hatred.” The Greek word written by John, which has been translated as “hate” is “misē,” also means, “to detest (on a comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.” (HELPS Word-studies).

Forks in the path?

That definition source further presents the word’s usage as an example found in Luke 14:26.  There the statement by Jesus, “If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple” (NASU).” The source above states how the word “miseo” translates better when meaning, “to love less than the LORD.” To be a disciple of Jesus, one must love God, first and foremost, with all others “loved” less (i.e.: “hated”).  That interpretation then leads one to understand Jesus meant his statement was directed to all who would have a lesser concept of “love,” than the love of God.  Familial love is the love of brothers and sisters in Christ, which may or may not include those who share physical lineage.

One cannot become the disciple of Jesus Christ if one cannot turn away from self and human emotions, and go beyond human relationships and physical bonds.  To transform, one must seek to begin the process that brings about the love of God and the resurrection of Jesus Christ within oneself (one’s soul).  When one submits to God in marriage, one is then welcomed into the Spiritual family that is the true Church.  That personal Transfiguration means one has been transformed from disciple to saintly Apostle.

As a lesson during the Easter season, when one is in the process of transformation from disciple to Saint, when the love of God will elevate one above the changeability of human emotions to the steadiness of Jesus Christ, one must realize a need to sacrifice human dependencies and take a leap of faith. When one has a human view of family, one becomes lost in the justifications of one family’s way, versus another family’s way, even if multiple families propose to be going in the same direction – to God, through Jesus Christ. Human paths lead in circles, which mean the birth, death, reincarnated rebirth cycle for eternity. This is opposed to a straight path of heaven and eternal life for a forgiven soul. The threshold to that path and the path one must find is God’s love.

————————————————————————–

In the title of this article is a modification of the song by The Beatles – All You Need Is Love.  The lyrics of that song make it clear to understand the total misinterpretation of love they intended, where the hippy-dippy days of peace and “love” had nothing to do with Christian Spirituality.

The multitude of Christian denominations are confused today about love because of this past focus on human “love” being the answer that had been missed since Jesus died.  When the Beatles suggested “love is all you need,” that was more a political recommendation than a demand to submit oneself to God, the Father of Jesus Christ.  No human “love” can fix a world that has always been in “love” with “hating” one another.

John, Language, Teaching

John 15:1-8 – The fruit of the true vine

Leave a comment

Jesus said to his disciples, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.”

——————————————————————————-

This is the Gospel selection from the Episcopal Lectionary for the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B 2018. It will next be read aloud in church by a priest on Sunday, April 29, 2018. This is important as Jesus taught that his disciples must become part of the true vine, required to bear fruit into the world. The symbolism of the vine fits his command to “lift up your stakes and follow me,” as the “cross” that IS oneself is that which raises the vine off the ground and allows the good fruit to come forth.

To grasp the context of this reading, one has to understand that John alone wrote of Jesus teaching the disciples this lesson, which took place during the evening of the Passover Seder meal (commonly called “The Last Supper”). While Matthew and Peter (the writer of Peter’s account of the Gospel is Mark) were present at these lessons given by Jesus, they were busy getting drunk on wine that is part of the Seder ritual (a standard objective into the night).  John, on the other hand, was paying attention to what Jesus had to say.

This is how Jesus could make a reference about “going to my Father’s house to prepare a room for you,” only to have Thomas say, “We do not know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” (John 14:1-5) Thomas was getting drunk, so he was not thinking clearly.  So, Thomas would not recall these lessons. John, however, was a child, so not freely welcomed to drink. Therefore, he stayed alert and listened to Jesus speaking, which was recalled in chapters 14, 15, 16, and 17. This reading then focuses on the second phase of Jesus’ Passover teachings, after the group had left the upstairs room (John 14:31).

In this reading, Jesus said, “I am the true vine,” where the Greek word “ampelos” more specifically means “grapevine.” This statement generates mental imagery, especially in those who have never grown grapes as produce, nor possessed a vineyard, where it is easy to mistake a grapevine as being like power lines and telephone lines along the roadside – seeming to go on endlessly. This concept that lacks a farmer’s mentality leads one away from the power of Jesus’ statement.

To say he is the “vine” is similar to Jesus saying he is the gate to the sheepfold. Both are self-contained, with limits, where the parameters or boundaries are of optimum value when those limits are full of purpose: a grapevine is full of grapes; and a sheepfold is full of sheep. This view of a “vine” being one (thus the “true vine,” implying others exist that are false), one can see how a vineyard is many grapevines together. Here is a diagram of one grapevine and a picture of a vineyard of grapevines in winter:

This imagery can then be used to see how the books of the Holy Bible tell of the previous harvests of good fruit, from Adam to Noah, from Abraham to Moses, and from David to the Prophets, with all being from the seed of God and the true vine of His Sons. In this reading from John’s Gospel, Jesus told his disciples how Jesus of Nazareth, the promised Messiah, was the true vine of God. He was speaking to the flowers that would soon bud into the branches that would produce his good fruit, the product of the Father. By understanding this terminology properly, everything Jesus told his disciples becomes crystal clear metaphor.

John remembered Jesus saying, “[The Father] removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit.” This is routine maintenance of a grapevine that bears good fruit. As such, at the time Jesus said this Judas Iscariot was absent, having gone to betray Jesus. He was a branch that would never bear any fruit in the name of Jesus Christ. Judas would never submit his ego to God and become Jesus Christ reborn. He was pruned the day Judas hung himself from guilt. Still, the branches that would bear the fruit of Jesus of Nazareth – the Apostles – they would all lose their lives so more Apostles could be produced. They were pruned for the good of the true vine.

Here is a branch that was pruned so the vine could bear more fruit.

When Jesus then said, “You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you,” the word “katharoi” was used and translated as “cleansed,” and the word “logon” translated as “word.” This states in two segments, “Already you are pure [or clean]” and “by reason of the word that I have spoken to you.” The element of cleanliness loses focus on the metaphor of vineyard cultivation. The root meaning of “katharos” is “purity,” such that the example of grafting a shoot system (scion) to rootstock (the “true vine”), then the shoot will develop buds based on the root system. This means the “word” is the command of the true vine to regenerate cleanly from the rootstock, not from the root system the shoots were pruned, for the purpose of grafting. Thus, this verse told of Jesus informing his disciples their grafts had taken hold and they were then prepared for producing good fruit in the coming new season.

From common stock to disciples attached to the true vine to branches one with the true vine (Apostles).

“Abide in me as I abide in you” is then a statement that the eleven (and John) were no longer separate, but had become one (each individually) with Jesus. While all the disciples had mortal mothers and fathers, such that the DNA of those mortals was what made them reproductions in the likeness of their parents, they had become spiritually grafted to Jesus, whose Spiritual DNA was from the Father. Because of that linkage, the souls of the disciples were one with the soul of the Son of God, such that the Spirit of Jesus Christ was then within each of them.

Jesus then moved beyond this oneness to explain, “Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches.” A branch (scion) that has been cut off from its root system is incapable of bearing fruit by itself. Once it is grafted onto good rootstock, the flow of growth is then passed onto the attached shoot (branch). The ability to bear fruit comes from the root. Since Jesus is the true vine (i.e.: rootstock for Apostles), his disciples were the newly budding branches, which were budding with the holiness of the Father, through the Son. Therefore, Jesus said, “I am the vine, you are the branches,” where each was grafted individually to the true vine.

It is important to grasp the implication of his next two statements. John wrote that Jesus said, “Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.” Rather than a statement of warning or threat, this was a statement of truth and fact. It goes beyond those who were gathered around Jesus, and well beyond the implication of Judas Iscariot being a discarded, as a withered branch.

These statements of Jesus say that the “true vine” is the only path to heaven and eternal life. Not only were the Jews not abiding in Jesus [as Jesus would soon be arrested by the Jews], neither were the Romans – who had their own religion that worshiped pagan gods. This truth says (without saying overtly) that no religion (as religion was known at that time) abode in Jesus, such that Islam (to come later, after Mohammed), Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Taoism (or Daoism), Shintoism, etc., etc., and all forms of pagan worshipers all around the globe (monotheistic or polytheistic) are rootstock of death, not eternal life.

Because a religion is defined as “belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power,” there is no “faith” that defines the process of a grapevine.  Just as Jesus was the “true vine of the Father,” there was no philosophy held by Jesus that defined what Jesus believed.
Jesus taught in parables that require one experience the meaning, rather than learn a set of rules to follow.  Because all ‘religions” fall into the error of belief in dogma, rather than being extensions (as reproductions) of the true vine, no “religion” seeks to become one with God.  As such, no “religion” abides in Jesus, who IS the true vine of God, the Father – the ONE GOD. Therefore, for Jesus to say, “Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit,” the whole world was, is, and is destined to be scions of false vines – the philosophical thoughts that act as “religion.”  The misled and misguided branches of philosophies will have to sever their shoots from their rootstock and seek to be grafted onto the Apostles … in order to become extensions of the oneness of true vine.

This broad stoke view of what Jesus said to his disciples should then be seen as John remembering a lesson for all who will sit and learn the lessons of Jesus Christ. The vast majority of proclaimed Christians around the world today are far from being branches that are producing the fruit of the true vine. The creation of branches within the “family tree” called “Christianity” (a religion), which veer wildly in many different directions, is not indicative of a grapevine producing fruit that carries the seeds of Sainthood. Instead, the millions who call themselves Christians seem to be at war with each other, more than simply being one with God’s love. It is more like the branches from the true vine have been pruned from truth and grafted onto false vine rootstock, making the present state reflect “Christianity” as weakened varieties of Jesus grapes, with none of them capable of producing good fruit.

Does this shape resemble the grapevine T-cross?

In this regard, I recommend the reader here look up the term “Cathars” and get a grasp of the original concept of true Christian. Much of their history has purposefully been destroyed, due to the hatred held by the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church against the Cathar people. Their name (as a group of people) was not theirs, as if they chose that name to be new branch of Christians. The name comes from the Greek word seen earlier – “katharoi” – which means “pure.”

Others, those who called themselves Christians, came to know these people (who primarily lived in Southwest France between 1,000 and 1230 A.D.) as those who were “pure” in their devotion to God.  They acted as those who were reborn as Jesus Christ, possessing profound knowledge of the word spoken by Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church exercised their first act of genocide to kill the Cathar people, because they would not convert to Roman Catholicism. To justify the first of several crusades known as Inquisitions, the Church called the Cathar people heretics, accusing them of being dualists and Gnostics, whose ways of life were not consistent with those philosophies held dear by the Vatican. In reality (in my opinion), the Cathar people were those who had “already been cleansed by the word that” Jesus had spoken, because they were true vine reproductions of Jesus Christ and knew the deeper meanings of Scripture, unlike typical Catholics.

Look up the Albigensian Crusade (aka Cathar Crusade).

From this awakening, which says true Christians should have more in common with Judaic teachings, where the communal commitment the Cathar people had to one another was similar to that of Jews living separately from Gentiles, the Cathar people were together as a Church of reproductions of Jesus Christ, as those reborn of his Spirit.  Jews, on the other hand, represented those branches growing from the vine of Moses, only to have grown wildly along the ground of the Promised Land, losing the “purity” of the “true vine” that Moses offered the Israelites through Law. Western Christians have likewise become wild grapes, through the ground clutter of philosophies that place more emphasis on the equality of inferior vines and branches, rather than seeking to maintain the “cleanliness of the word of Christ.”  American Christians today live among multicultural people they barely know, where governments force them to accept principals that are contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Unlike the Cathars, American Christians readily convert to the will of empires, with few willing to die for the way of the true vine.

This destruction of the true vine model can be seen in the statement of Jesus to his disciples, which said, “If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.” The promise that “whatever you wish will be done for you” meant – that night in Jerusalem, following Jesus’ last Seder meal – “whatever miracles you need to be able to perform in my name” – as the good fruit of the true vine – “you will have the power of God the Father available to you.” Modern Christians have mutated this statement into a weakened promise that makes Jesus Christ out to be some magic genie in a lamp, where you make a wish for wealth and it will be granted. All wishes today are selfishly based, with no one trying to heal any of the ills of the world, one Gentile convert at a time. All of this failure is due to no one abiding in Jesus Christ and he in one as Jesus Christ, Without that state of being reached first, all wishes can ONLY BE selfish, thus never granted by the One God.

In the last verse of this reading, John wrote, “My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.” The literal Greek makes this easier to understand, in terms of having one’s wish come true. The first segment says, “In this is glorified the Father of me.” That clearly says that “In this” abiding in the true vine, so the true vine becomes one’s Spirit leading one’s soul, then God the Father has made all desires for Oneness with God come true. By saying, “the Father is glorified,” where “edoxasthē” (from “doxazó“) is translated as “is glorified,” the reward of that wanted can only come from the sacrifice of self-ego, in “honor” and “praise” of the One God having entered one’s heart (and soul). When Jesus said, “the Father of me,” the intent is for a disciple to feel the power of the LORD within, such that one has to seek to become a rebirth “of me,” via “the Father.” Therefore, all desires cease to be of selfish motivations, only being wishes to serve the LORD’s needs, where “the Father is glorified” by the obedience of His servant.

The second segment can then be read literally as, “that fruit much you should bear.” This means that a branch extending from the true vine will produce grapes filled with the word of the Lord Christ. The succulence of full grapes from the true vine is then due to the holy water that has coursed through the xylem of that vine. From root system to branch to fruit, everything is filled with the word of God. It becomes a repeating of holy water poured out as in the miracle of Cana, which tasted as the finest wine that is usually served first. By keeping in mind how this “living water” that tasted like fine wine was taken from “purification” jugs, one can then see how the wedding guests had been cleansed by the word Jesus had spoken (to fill the jars with water).

The miracle of the purification water tasting like good fruit goes well beyond the physical.  It signifies the fermentation of the soul.  This means the disciples will produce more disciples, all who will become Apostles.  This miracle is opposed to the norm seen in the various denominations of churches gathering. like guests coming to celebrate a would-be marriage.  The norm can only expect a tithing pew sitter, who knows nothing that glorifies the Father, to show success by recruiting another tithing pew sitter, who also will know nothing of the Father.

The reason is a tithing pew sitter is a selfish ego and not one possessed by God’s love, reborn as His Son, Jesus Christ – the true glorification of the Father.  Today’s churches can be said by the master of the banquet to be typical, as the best wine of Jesus in his Apostles was served first, until the world was drunk and unable to notice that poor wine is now pouring freely.  Today’s Christians mistake their drunken state as being the fine wine from good fruit that glorifies the Father, when so much more is expected.

Finally, the last segment says, “and you shall be disciples of me,” where the glorification of the Father comes from “disciples of Jesus Christ.” This does not mean those who ONLY learn of Jesus Christ as pupils are true disciples. It means those whose hearts are afire with learning the power of Scripture, so their minds are filled with the knowledge of God – the Christ Mind – are those who thirst for truth. The purpose of learning is not to forever claim student status, but to graduate and become the teacher. The teacher (rabbi) was and is Jesus, who enlightens his disciples with a desire to become the Christ Resurrected. This is the call to all who seek the promise of eternal salvation, as that reward demands commitment to learn (deeply) and to apply that “education” freely, so others who are seekers of truth can find it alive in other human beings.

As a Gospel reading during the Easter season, a season when all lessons are calling disciples of Jesus to become the Resurrection of the Christ, we must grasp the concept of the grapevine and the branches that come from the “true vine.” In Scripture is the crucial point in time, when Jesus turned to his disciples and said, “If anyone wishes to come after me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me.” (Matthew 16:24) That command needs to be understood in terms of this reading and the dressing of grapevines.

First, the word translated as “wishes” is the Greek “thelei.” The same root Greek word, “theló,” was written here in John’s Gospel, meaning “wish, will, desire, intend, and design.” The intent of the word is therefore not to offer one a “wish” fulfilled, but to ask one if he or she “seeks” God, as their “desire, will, intent, design, or wish.” This means Jesus told his disciples on the evening of the Passover Seder, “whatever your heart desires, it will be fulfilled.” The result may or may not be God and the Christ Mind – thus the wisdom of “be careful what you wish for, as you just might get it.” When Jesus told his disciple to choose their path, he said, “If you desire to become me, then you must sacrifice your ego [deny oneself] and accept my righteous goals.”

Second, when Jesus told his disciples the path to “follow him” required one “take up his cross,” there are two grapevine elements contained in those words. First, the Greek word “aratō” means, “take away,” but it also means “raise” and “lift up.” It implies “hoisting,” as well as “carrying” and “bearing.” This becomes a demand for the strengthening of a grapevine, where years of growth and the crafting of the vines along a cross-wire create a T-cross that is capable of bearing weight. In terms of Scripture being the word spoken by the Christ Mind, like a tendril of a vine, one should always be close to Scripture and ever-reaching to see its deeper meaning.  That reflects a design to reach the optimum height, so the shoot strives to be uplifted and amplified in strength.  A vine does not reach high due to a philosophy or written plan.  It does so naturally, so it can not only produce branches, but also so it can grow to support the fruit produced. In spiritual terms, being “raised” means to go beyond self (“deny self”) and “[be-]come” Jesus Christ “after” him. This “uplifting” is in soul Spirit, where Christ abides in one and one abides in Christ.

In reference to the Roman Catholic Church and their genocide of the Cathar people, one can see how this can be reduced to a level of symbolic focus. The Church reveres the crucifix and loves to nail the body of dead Jesus to dead wood – not a living vine. The original symbol of Christianity was the fish, which is associated with the astrological sign Pisces. Pisces represents self-sacrifice for a Spiritual reward. Therefore, to read Matthew 16:24 as if Jesus were telling his disciples to foresee his crucifixion as his end and the disciple’s time to follow on without him, that avoids the point of self-sacrifice (which may or may not be death by crucifixion) for a higher soul self (as Jesus reborn).

See how dead driftwood has been fashioned into a symbol that screams “dead branch”?
See the difference in imagery when we have become grafted onto a living cross within?

The second element in “take up his cross” is the word that translates as “cross,” which is “stauron.” It has been the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church that has taken this Greek word and absorbed its meaning into the dead timbers of a crucifix, as though the word solely means the pain and suffering of Jesus of Nazareth. The reality is “stauros” means “stake in the ground that forms a T.” The stake hold the cross-wire, which symbolizes the inner strength the Holy Spirit offers.  A crucifix forms a T, but many other T formations existed long before anyone figured out how to nail human beings to two dead tree trunks hewn and nailed together, in the shape of a cross. People cultivated grapevines into the shape of a T-cross well before the Romans saw that shape was strong enough to bear heavy weights. Thus, Jesus was telling his disciples to form a strong shape, just as he had shown through his strength in supporting his disciples and the Jews who sought him.

In this fifth Sunday in Easter, in the year 2018, this message to become branches of the true vine, as the fruit of the Father’s vineyard, goes along with the reading from Acts, where Philip produced good fruit in the Ethiopian eunuch. He did that be being tested in the wilderness, led by an angel of the Lord, where his strength was proved to bear the weight of Sainthood. It also accompanies the Epistle reading from 1 John, which defines God as love. The fruit of the Father’s true vine is the love of Christ, which is only found in true Saints – the fruit of the true vine.

The Easter call is to heed the word of Jesus and become “clean” and “pure.” One must be washed clean of past sins, in order to be given the reward of eternal salvation. To desire that reward, one must be a living branch of the true vine and produce good fruit. To be a living branch, one must be resurrected as Jesus Christ, so he abides in one, as one abides in him.

The purpose of Jesus dying on a cross was to show his disciples how death is not a permanent state of being, as a soul can never die. The soul will graft itself to another root system and be reborn according to that root-stock. Therefore, the purpose of the seven Sundays in the Easter season is to drive home the point that it is not enough to let Jesus die and be Resurrected, then Ascended. Christians miss the point of the price they too must pay.  If they do not follow that same path to salvation, by being reborn as the fruit of Jesus Christ, they will lose as fruitless branches thrown into the fire.

Acts, Language, Teaching

Acts 8:26-40 – Even a eunuch can bring fruit through the Holy Spirit

Leave a comment

An angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a wilderness road.) So he got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over to this chariot and join it.” So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to get in and sit beside him. Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this:

“Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter,

and like a lamb silent before its shearer,

so he does not open his mouth.

In his humiliation justice was denied him.

Who can describe his generation?

For his life is taken away from the earth.”

The eunuch asked Philip, “About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus. As they were going along the road, they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?” He commanded the chariot to stop, and both of them, Philip and the eunuch, went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing. But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he was passing through the region, he proclaimed the good news to all the towns until he came to Caesarea.

——————–

This is the mandatory reading from the Acts of the Apostles that will be read aloud on the fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B, according to the lectionary schedule of the Episcopal Church. It will precede the singing a portion of Psalm 22, which includes the verse that says, “The poor shall eat and be satisfied, and those who seek the Lord shall praise him: “May your heart live for ever!”’ That song will be followed by a reading from the first Epistle of John, which says, “God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them.” Lastly, this Sunday will feature a reading from John’s Gospel, where Jesus said, “I am the vine, you are the branches.”

The first word of verse 26 is capitalized. The word is “Angelos” and it means “[an] Angel.” This is how it has been translated, only the NRSV [and others] ignore the capitalization that makes this word have divine importance. The same word can also translate as “Messenger,” and that is how it should be grasped, in order to deeply understand this reading selection.

In the verses that lead up to this selection [which are not read aloud], Philip had gone to Samaria where he encountered a magician named Simon. Simon was misleading the Samaritans, while Philip was baptizing them with the Holy Spirit. Philip sent for Peter and John to come; and, after they arrived Simon offered silver coins to them, in order to be taught the magic of the Holy Spirit. He was told by Peter to repent; then, Peter and John went back to Jerusalem, while Philip continued ministering in Samaria. That tells of some acts of Apostles, which then leads to the word “Angelos.”

The Greek word “apostolos,” which is translated into English as “apostle,” actually bears the meaning as “a messenger, one sent on a mission.” This means an Apostle [when capitalized to a divine state of meaning] is an “Angel,” where that does not mean ghostlike or invisible spirit, but a “Messenger” of Yahweh in the flesh. This is how verse 26 should be seen beginning, as it becomes a divine statement about Philip having spiritually transformed into one of God’s “Angels” [a.k.a. an Apostle].

The Greek text that has been translated as stating, “An angel of the Lord said to Philip” is this: “Angelos de Kyriou elalēsen pros Philippon.” Those words literally translate as, “Messenger now of the Lord spoke with this Philip.” In this segment of words there are three that are capitalized, such that all are elevated to a divine level of meaning. Having already discussed “Angelos,” the word “Kyriou” is a godly state of “Master, Sir, or Lord,” where the genitive says the “Messenger” is “of Master,” where “Lord” is both Yahweh and His Son risen spiritually, Jesus. The word “Philippon” is a name meaning “Horse loving,” which was the name given to one of Jesus’ disciples – “this Philip.” To simply translate “Philip,” the word would have been written “Philippos,” such that “Philippon” is indicating “this one named Philip.”

The capitalization leads one to look at the “Horse Loving” aspect of the name, where there is a military aspect that relates to a cavalry [He Who Leans On His Military Complex]. With it doubtful that Philip ever owned a horse or had any military experience, that essence of his name can be seen as why Philip was chosen to be the “Messenger” for this event. Due to a cavalry being a speedy movement of troops, albeit much smaller than an army, it is that element of speed that can be seen as the divine elevation intended here. Philip was chosen for this task because he was more prepared spiritually to respond quickly to a need.

The one verb connecting the three capitalized words together is “elalēsen,” the aorist active indicative 3rd person singular form of “laleó,” meaning “he-she-it talked, spoke, or said.” The two other words, “de” and “pros,” state first a timing that is “now” (“de”), which is relative to both when Philip had become a “Messenger” and when he received the Word “of God” (“Lord”). Second, the word “pros” is directional, as “to, towards, with,” but the word properly means, “motion towards to “interface with” (literally, moving toward a goal or destination).” (HELPS Word-studies) Thus, the segment becomes a statement that says: Philip is now a Messenger of the Lord; and, now of the Lord spoke with this Philip. That says as an “Angel of the Lord, Philip now spoke with the Master.” That becomes a major statement that says Philip is like Jesus [“the Lord”], who spoke what the Father had him say and routinely talked with Yahweh.

This needs to be seen as a divine relationship established between Yahweh and Philip, where Philip has become the ‘wife’ of God and is “now” one of His “elohim.” By seeing that union “with this Philip,” not separate from the Holy Spirit, there is no need for Yahweh to send in “an Angel” to bring a message, because Philip speaks freely with Yahweh. More evidence to this arrangement comes in the following two one-word segments, which state “legōn , Anastēthi,” which translates as “commanding , Appear”.

These two words have been translated simply by the NRSV, as “Get up,” where the quotation mark is the only indication Luke wrote the word “legōn.” The word stems from “legó,” which Strong’s defines thusly: “(denoting speech in progress), (a) I say, speak; I mean, mention, tell, (b) I call, name, especially in the passive, (c) I tell, command.” When the word “Kyriou” is understood to be one’s “Master,” the active present participle of a “Lord” makes more sense translated [not ignored] as stating, “commanding.” When one is a divine “Messenger of the Lord,” one waits to be given orders to deliver a message. The Calvary stand ready to move on command.

The word “Anastēthi” is capitalized, giving it divine importance. Simply translated, the word is written in the aorist active imperative, 2nd person singular, as a command saying, “arise, raise up, or set up.” The simple translation implies one is resting, even sleeping, such that the imperative is to quickly get moving and stop lollygagging around. However, when capitalized to a divine level of meaning, this is Yahweh telling a soul to elevate spiritually, to a non-human state of being. In other words, Yahweh commanded Philip to transcendentally leave his body of flesh.

Because this state of being needs to be seen here, in this reading, it helps to recall the visions of strangers on Easter Sunday. The young man seen “enthroned at the right hand,” who was “robed in dazzling white,” that imagery was of an angel. He gave a message to the women who arrived at the opened tomb. Later, Mary Magdalene saw a man whom she thought was the gardener, but was recognized by voice to be Jesus who told her she could not embrace him. I explained the reason was he was not solid, as he was a projection, like an angel with a message he gave to her. Finally, Cleopas and his wife Mary had walked with a stranger who fed them messages of meaning they did not realize; but when they invited him to stay with them for diner, he prayed and they recognized his voice as Jesus, then he disappeared. The one they invited into their home was likewise a transcendental image of Jesus’ soul, with that image appearing at the same time the risen Jesus first appeared to his disciples, showing how two can be in more than one place at the same time; and, that is the same scenario established by Philip being commanded to “Arise.”

All of the logistics are implying that Philip got out of bed, packed a bag and began a journey to the south, to the desert road leading from Jerusalem to Gaza. From Samaria (the town in the region of Samaria, also called Sebaste) to Jerusalem is 42 miles. From Jerusalem to Gaza is 50 miles. From Gaza to Azotus is roughly 24 miles, due north. If Philip was a trained traveler (by foot), it would take him two days to somehow find an Ethiopian eunuch on a chariot, none of which is explained. The logistics are stated simply to let the reader know where the soul of Philip was sent, as a “Messenger of the Lord,” because Yahweh knew a seeker was ripe for conversion through the Holy Spirit.

When we are told the eunuch was in Jerusalem to worship, he should be seen as a Jew, where the reason for him traveling all the way to Jerusalem to worship would be a commanded festival. Most likely, he had traveled to Jerusalem for the Passover and remained there until Pentecost, or even Sukkot. Most likely, he was one who lived so far away from Jerusalem that he made a once in a lifetime pilgrimage there; so, he then began a lengthy trip back. He must be seen in the light of those pilgrims who Peter and the eleven spoke to on Pentecost Sunday, who were seekers of the truth. They were transformed spiritually that morning, by hearing the truth spoken. This man’s heart was opened to receive the Spirit; so, he just needed one filled with the Spirit to come to him.

When the NRSV translates the Greek to show it saying, “Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury,” this gives the impression that this man was a high-ranking official of royal standing. This is not what was stated in the Greek text.

Luke wrote, “anēr Aithiops , eunouchos , dynastēs Kandakēs basilissēs Aithiopōn , hos ēn epi pasēs tēs gazes autēs , hos elēlythei proskynēsōn eis Ierousalēm .” This is five segments of words, which literally translate to say the following:

“man Ethiopian ,”

“eunuch ,”

“ruler Candace queen of the Ethiopians ,”

“who existed on the basis of every kind of treasury of her ,”

“who had gone to be worshiping in Jerusalem .”

This states first the lowliness of this man, as he was simply an Ethiopian. His lowliness makes a one-word statement that highlights his being a castrated male, which was ordinarily done to slaves or servants, especially those males who worked in service around females of a royal family. He could have been a warrior who was wounded in the groin, making him unable to sire children; but the implication is he was a servant. He was a servant in the house of Candace the Queen of Ethiopia, where it was her who had the sole power over her wealth (as “ruler”), not some lower man. The comma separating “eunuch” from “ruler” or “potentate” makes that word be a statement about Candace the Queen.

The following segment then states that everything that financed this trip to Jerusalem was at the expense of the queen. That becomes a statement of her generosity, while also being a statement that the man was a devoted servant to her. This makes the man similar to the Old Testament figure Esther. The man’s devotion to the queen, while also being devoted to his religion, made it possible for this man to earn a free round-trip visit to Jerusalem, all expenses paid by the Queen of Ethiopia.

To further exhibit the devotion this man had, as he rode in a “chariot,” which should not be seen as some Ben Hur battle chariot, but as a state carriage, with four wheels, drawn by a team of horses, much like a stage coach. As he was going on a long trip home, like anyone knowing there is a lengthy trip ahead, so that would be an opportune time to catch up on some reading, this man had a supply of scrolls of holy texts to read. It might have been based on an order from the queen, commanding him to return to Ethiopia with divine texts for her to read. In this regard, it is important to know that Ethiopian Jews [a.k.a. Beta Israel] did not begin until 325 C.E., so this story in Acts can be seen as told because Philip sowed this seed for Yahweh.

The NRSV translation above says, matter of factly, “he was reading the prophet Isaiah.” The Greek text introduces that with the word “kai,” which means it is important to know what “he was reading.” By knowing it was a scroll of “the prophet Isaiah,” that says it is important to know he was reading prophecy and (as will be evident later) he was reading a prophecy specific to Jesus.

Verse 29 then begins with the capitalized word “Eipen,” which brings divine elevation to that “Commanded.” In the lower case spelling, the word means “answer, bid, bring word, command” (Strong’s Usage), but capitalized returns us to the use of “legōn” as a one-word statement, where a “Master” would give orders to a servant. Here, that “Commanded” is “now this Spirit,” where the capitalized “Pneuma” is written. The “Command” of the “Spirit” is to “Philip” (the Calvary to the rescue).

This needs to be realized as Philip “has been raised” spiritually [importantly stated in verse 27, as “kai anastas,” or “having raised up”], so the “Command now this Spirit that Philip,” says Philip is in the state of being that is the “Spirit.” He is not truly in the flesh at this time “now” [from “de”]. He is riding the ‘horse’ of Yahweh, faster than any war horse could ever gallop.

The “Command” then makes a capitalized one-word statement, which is “Proselthe,” meaning “Approach” or “Go [or Come] near.” The capitalization means this “Command” is to make the “Spirit” “Available” to one Yahweh knows is seeking enlightenment. Thus, that one word is a “Call to Come,” which is made from the chariot; so, the one word is followed by the word “kai,” showing the importance of “uniting the soul of Philip [“glue yourself”] thereupon this chariot.” That must be seen as Yahweh telling the soul of Philip to appear by the chariot in the same way that the stranger came up to Cleopas and Mary and became united with them [and the other examples stated prior].

Verse 30 then begins with the capitalized word “Prosdramōn,” which adds divine essence to the illusion that says, “Having run up.” Knowing that a carriage rolling on a road, drawn by horses, is noisy; and, the physical act of running makes one breathe heavy, while hearing the sound of one’s own feet hitting the ground adds to the noise. Knowing what one reading inside a chariot would be difficult to hear outside, given the physical elements written.

To add to the confusion of “hearing him reading the prophet Isaiah,” the only way to hear that would be for the eunuch to be reading aloud; but why would he be doing that becomes the question. By seeing the “Spirit” of “Philip Approaching and uniting” with the “chariot,” the word “Having run up” is a divine statement about the quickness that Philip’s soul joined with the Ethiopian eunuch’s brain and knew his thoughts. The word is actually the aorist active participle 2nd person, so it importantly states Philip “Ran there.” The divine element added is how quickly Philip reached his destination.

It is at this point that one must visualize the Spirit of Philip being joined with the Ethiopian eunuch, such that the voice of Philip is heard in the eunuch’s mind as he reads to himself. The eunuch is reading words in Hebrew that he understands, but cannot decipher what message he is supposed to get from reading them. When Philip asks him, “Do you understand what you are reading?” that question is not suddenly coming from a stranger that was out for a jog in the wilderness and hopped into the chariot uninvited. That question is posed to the seeker by Yahweh, through the Holy Spirit taking the form of Philip’s soul. The eunuch is moved to ask himself that question [it seems to him], such that he responds to himself, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” This must be seen as the same response every seeker, in every age, has to Scripture, as the words can be easily understood, but the truth of the meaning demands guidance from a higher source.

This is when the Spirit of Philip appears as a rabbi – as Jesus appearing in the form of Philip – who just happened to be walking the road the chariot was traveling on. One can imagine that the body of Philip appeared ahead of the chariot, as a rabbi traveling alone. The eunuch would have been alerted by the driver of the chariot, so the eunuch would have looked out the window to see. Seeing a rabbi, identified by his tallit and kittle (robes), the eunuch would order the coach to stop. He could have even said to Philip, “You know, I was just asking myself a question about Scripture, and who better to ask than a rabbi? Glad you happened along!”

That is when an external figure appears and is invited to get in the chariot and sit beside the eunuch, to explain the meaning of Isaiah to him. The verses that Spirit was asked about were prophetic of Jesus. Just as Cleopas and Mary were sad because of what happened during Passover week in Jerusalem and as difficult as it was for them to understand why everything happened, the Spirit of Jesus appeared [looking like a stranger] who enlightened them to so much. They saw things they had not noticed and they had read Scripture all their lives. Still, they had not connected what they had read to what had happened. Perhaps, Cleopas and Mary had Isaiah pointed out to them by Jesus, just as the Ethiopian eunuch just read.

Skipping forward, explaining only that the eunuch was enlightened into the truth of prophecy leading one to realize the necessity of being reborn as Jesus, through marriage to Yahweh and merging one’s soul with the Holy Spirit, that divine baptism was explained by the Spirit possessing Philip’s soul. That teaching led the eunuch to exclaim, “Behold water! What keeps me from being baptized?”

Since the Gospels had not yet been published, there were no scrolls in the chariot that told of John the Baptist saying, “I baptize with water, but they will be one who will come after me that will baptize with the Holy Spirit.” Baptism by the Holy Spirit had to have been something told to the eunuch by Philip’s Spirit. However, the element of “water” [“hydōr”] must always be read metaphorically as inner emotions, which ebb and flow like physical water does. The Jews routinely used water for ritual cleansing purposes, so water was a figurative way to remove sins from one’s flesh. Therefore, the eunuch should be seen as exclaiming, “Behold [me, for I am] emotional!”

The element of physical water in the desert [verse 26 made a point of writing a complete sentence at the end that said, “hautē estin erēmos” – “this is desert,” relative to the road to Gaza] cannot be possible. The Scripture from Isaiah spoke of a sacrificial lamb, whose spiritual existence [“zōē” – “life”] was removed from the earth. Philip had explained that was Jesus, who sacrificed so others could be filled with his “spiritual existence.” Thus, the eunuch exclaimed that he was ready to sacrifice his life to Yahweh. His question was then, “What prevents me from being filled with the Holy Spirit?”

Verse 37 is not translated by the NRSV, with the reason being the entire verse is placed in beginning and ending brackets. That bracketed verse is then explained by a footnote that says:

“Other ancient authorities add all or most of verse 37, And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he replied, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

By reading that missing verse, one can understand that the eunuch told Philip that he indeed did believe wholeheartedly that “Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” The error in that NRSV translation of someone else’s translation is that the word “son” is not capitalized [as “huion”]. That means the soul of Philip explained that he was like the eunuch, who believed in Jesus, by saying, “I believe this son [Philip] who is of God to be this Jesus Anointed one.” In the same words, it becomes a confession that says, “I believe this son [the eunuch] who is of God [a lover in marriage to Yahweh] to exist who Yahweh Saves [the meaning of the name “Jesus”] a new Anointed one.” In that, the missed element is the capitalization of “Pisteuō,” which become divinely elevated from simple “belief,” to deep faith.

The same opportunity exists today. The element of self-sacrifice must be desired, as a love of God that is total – all one’s heart, mind, and soul. It is a prerequisite that takes one beyond simple belief in Jesus Christ and takes one’s soul to a divine union where one knows Yahweh as both Husband and Father. That level of pure faith is demanded for Philip to say to you, “Okay. Let’s stop this bus and get you married to Yahweh!”

Again, the verses that speak of coming to the water and baptism and coming up out of the water must be read as metaphor. When the translation says, “When they came up out of the water,” the Greek word “anebēsan” has been translated simply as “they came up.” The word needs to be read as “they ascended,” just like all New Testament inferences to rising, awakening, standing up, et al. Such uses have divine meanings attached to them. Thus, “when they ascended,” then “Spirit of the Lord carried away this Philip.” The eunuch then kept going, rejoicing, which was like the healed born-lame man did, when he “stood up.”

At that point, Philip is said to be “found in Azotus,” which is twenty-five miles north of Gaza, but nothing was stated about Philip and the eunuch having reached Gaza. From the desert road, between Jerusalem and Gaza, the shortest distance (maybe only ten miles) would be to fly there direct, over mountains, where there were no roads. However, when one is in the Spirit, then one does not have to abide by physical laws. So, when Philip was “passing through” and when he was “proclaiming the Gospel to all the towns up to Caesarea,” his physical body was probably still back in Samaria, doing the same. Physically, Philip never left Sebaste.

As the mandatory Acts reading during the Easter season, it is important to tie this story to those told before, as only the names change, while the song remains the same. The Holy Spirit of Yahweh, married with the souls of those who love Him completely, become reborn as His Son, all doing the same things Jesus did, as Jesus merged with different souls. Here, this shows that being transcendentally elevated, while in the Holy Spirit, can bring about the salvation of others that seek to know God. The gifts of the Holy Sprit are clearly associated with understanding what Scripture says. Few have a clue what this reading says, on a deep, Spiritual level, so fewer will be led like the Ethiopian eunuch was.

The Easter season is a time or preparing for ministry, by ACTING as Jesus, also an Anointed one of Yahweh. This reading began by declaring Philip to be an “Angel” or a “Messenger of the Lord.” The Acts of Apostles mean carrying the message of Yahweh to the world, which is the truth told by Jesus. To practice knowing the truth, one has to be married to Yahweh and reborn as the Son. That demands faith.

1 John, Language, Teaching

1 John 4:7-21 – To love or not to love; that is the question

Leave a comment

Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love. God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins. Beloved, since God loved us so much, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.

By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world. God abides in those who confess that Jesus is the Son of God, and they abide in God. So we have known and believe the love that God has for us.

God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them. Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness on the day of judgment, because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love. We love because he first loved us. Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also.

——————–

This is the Epistle reading selection for the fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. This will be preceded by a mandatory reading from the Acts of the Apostles (chapter 8), which says, “Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus.” That is followed by a reading from Psalm 22, which sings, “My soul shall live for him; my descendants shall serve him; they shall be known as the Lord’s for ever.” This reading will then come before the Gospel choice from John, where Jesus said, “I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.”

This reading taken from John’s first letter becomes the definition of New Testament “love.” It presents the word “love” in such a way that the truth of its meaning comes flowing out; but in that truth comes a danger warning. That warning says: Those who misuse the word “love” will find John’s words becoming a noose around their necks, no different that that believed to have hung Judas Iscariot to death.

Please, do not become a lost sheep meandering down a road that leads to some misunderstanding of “love,” and see it like the Beatles saw it, in between their divorces, rejections of Christianity and drug addictions.

In this NRSV translation, the word “love” is found appearing seventeen times directly, with variants of the word “love” totaling twenty-nine times. In all Scripture, repetition is a signal of importance, where that which is being repeated is telling the reader to take time to fully understand that which is repeated.

This specific words including some form of “love” in them, as written in the Greek text, are: “agapōmen” – “we should love” [three times]; “agapōn” – “loving” [four times]; “ēgapēkamen” [once] and “ēgapēsen” [three times] – “loved;” “agapan” – “to love” [twice]; “agapa” – “should love;” and, one capitalized “Agapō” – “I love.” That totals fifteen uses of words that include “love,” in some manner other than directly stating “love.” The words that directly states “love” are “agapē” and “agapen.” They are found written another twelve times [11 + 1]. That raises the number of times “love” appears written here to twenty-seven, but then one can add in the two capitalized appearances of “Agapētoi” (“Beloved”), for a grand total of twenty-nine references to “love” that are present. All of that is found in fifteen verses, with none of them appearing in verses 13-15.

Because fifteen verses of any Epistle [Peter, James, John, or Paul] demands so many words of explanation, following the rules of syntax that allows one to read divine text divinely, there is too much chopped off to do that depth of analysis here and now. Because too few people are interested in reading so much explanation [a statement confirming the gross lack of faith the world is in now], I will forgo attempting to confuse novices with graduate level discourse about Scripture.

By that – “graduate level” – I mean a graduate of the Yahweh school of divine meaning, which is not taught by any human professors. There are no school courses that teach what I have been shown by God. I have faith that I am led to expose the truth of Scripture, regardless of how many pious toes get stepped on in that endeavor. I, being human, run people off by attempting to do what I am led to do, when I get deep in interpreting more than five to eight verses. So, I will veer from this approach for this reading in First John. Instead, I will focus on the point I made about John explaining how misunderstanding “love” will condemn one’s soul to eternal death.

In John’s final chapter of his Gospel (21), he wrote what I call a series of dreams. I call his twenty-first chapter a dream chapter because there never was any reality to the disciples going fishing on the Sea of Galilee, after Jesus appeared to his family, followers and disciples on Easter Sunday [in Jerusalem]. In that sequence of dreams, John saw himself coming up to Jesus, who had been talking to Peter [a conversation John somehow was privy to]. The NRSV translation of that chapter places a heading that says, “Jesus and Peter.” The New International Version (NIV) calls this “Jesus Reinstates Peter.” I presume that title is given because Peter was not mentioned as one standing out when Jesus appeared to his disciples on Easter Sunday evening. That conversation reinstating Peter states why the reading from 1 John 4 is vital to understand properly; so, I will explain that now.

In John 21:15-17, Jesus asked Simon-Peter if he loved him three times. One can assume that the question was repeated because Peter denied Jesus three times. I presume that is the reason the NIV puts a heading that says Peter was reinstated. While they make that presumption, why would it not be just as easy for Christians today to deny Jesus, in the same way as did Simon-Peter, all the while thinking, “I believe Jesus is so loving he will forgive me, no matter how many times I deny that love”? That is not the point made by John writing of this questioning by Jesus.

In the Greek text of John 21:15-17, specifically relative to the parts referencing “love” [not including the parts about feeding and tending sheep], is this:

21:15

“Simōn Iōannou , agapas me pleon toutōn ?” – That translates as Jesus asking,

“Simon [son] of Jonah , you love me more than these ?”

“Nai , Kyrie , sy odias philō se .” – That translates as Peter responding to Jesus, saying, “Yes , Lord , you know that I love you .”

21:16

“Simōn Iōannou , agapas me ?” – That is the second time Jesus asked the same question, without adding “more than these.”

“Nai , Kyrie , sy odias philō se .” – That is Peter responding a second time with the exact same answer.

21:17

“Simōn Iōannou , phileis me ?” – Here, it must be noticed that Jesus has changed the way he stated “love,” so it matched the “love” answer given to him twice by

Peter.

“Kyrie , panta sy odias ; sy ginōskeis hoti philō se .” – This translates as Peter responding, “grieved” that Jesus would ask him a third time to confess his “love” for him, saying, “Lord , all things you know ; you know that I love you .”

In the first two questions asked by Jesus, he used the word “agapas,” which is the root word used twenty-nine times by John [the same author] in his Epistle. The root Greek word “agapaó” is defined as, “to love,” with its usage expanding to mean “I love, wish well to, take pleasure in, long for; denotes the love of reason, esteem.” (Strong’s) HELPS Word-studies says the of the word “agapáō: properly [means], to prefer, to love.” The Greek word “agapē,” which John wrote eleven or twelve times directly, is defined as “love, goodwill,” used as “love, benevolence, good will, esteem.” (Strong’s) Both of these definitions are the roots for all twenty-nine uses of “love” in his epistle.

All three answers by Peter were “philō,” which is not the same thing. The root word “phileó” is defined as “to love,” with the usage stated to be “I love (of friendship), regard with affection, cherish; I kiss.” (Strong’s) HELPS-Word-studies says it is “(from phílos, “affectionate friendship”) – properly, to show warm affection in intimate friendship, characterized by tender, heartfelt consideration and kinship.”

This is a significantly different statement about “love,” and the noose one ties around one’s proverbial neck is related to one responding to Jesus asking you, personally [all readers], “Do you agapas me?” and you continue to say, “You that are external to me I will always love you like a brother, which you can tell whenever I kiss your cheek [a Judas characteristic] and say, “I love my Jeesie-pooh.”

Here is where it is vital for one to grasp how Jesus asked Simon son of John, according to the Greek text repeated about the third question by Jesus, after he told how “Grieved” [a capitalized “Elypēthē“] Peter was to be asked, “Phileis me?” While the lower-case spelling was what Simon son of John heard, the actual question posed by Jesus [which brought about great “Pain, Sorrow, Vexation”] raised the meaning of “Love” to a divine state of meaning, based on the root word “phílos.” That was Jesus asking Simon bar Jonah, “All you give me is Brotherly Love?”

This needs to be seen as John, spiritually raised to a prophetic dream state, so Simon and Jesus were future future essences from what they both had been in physical life, such that Jesus represented the religion called Christianity and Simon Peter represented the institution he was named the patron Saint for. This capitalization is most telling, as John pointed it out in the repetition of Christ’ third question, meaning Saint Peter did not hear the divinity being asked; so, he never adjusted his answer to suit the needs of Jesus. Instead, he became emotionally upset.

By seeing this chapter of John as a dream, rather than a real event, Peter [the name given to Simon bar Jonah by Jesus] is spared this test of “love.” Jesus three times named the figure in this dream as “Simon son of John,” although John identified him as “Simon Peter” and then “Peter.” The human birth name then becomes metaphor for all who will claim to believe in Jesus, maintaining a physical lineage more than a spiritual relationship with Yahweh. Every time Jesus spoke in the Gospels, it was Yahweh speaking through His Son, so the question posed to “Simon son of John” is the same question Yahweh poses to all who call themselves “Christians,” because of the stories told of Jesus. This dream becomes God asking believers, “Do you love Yahweh will all your heart, all your mind, and all your soul.” To not be married to Yahweh brings out a truthful answer that cannot help but tell the truth, saying “I love the idea of You, but I love the physical reality of myself more. So, let’s just be brothers, rather than married to Yahweh, in the submission required of love [“agapē”].”

When one stays awake long enough to reach verse 20, which says, “Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars” [NRSV], that needs to be seen as a statement written by a prophet [John]. That says, “Saying “love” and being “love” are two different things,” just as are “agape” and “phileó.” To understand precisely what Yahweh said through the pen of John, here is what is written, in the Greek of 1 John 4:20:

“Ean tis eipē hoti , Agapō ton Theon , kai ton adelphon autou misē , pseustēs estin .”

That translates literally to state, “If anyone should answer that , kai who brother of him should hate [or despise, detest, be indifferent to, love less, or esteem less] , a liar [or falsifier, deceiver, one who misleads or distorts] exists .”

Here, the capitalized “Ean” projects a question of divine essence, where the “If” situation brought forth says the truth of “love” is conditional. The capitalization means one’s lowly human body, animated as alive by a lost soul, gets to make the determination as to whether or not one will marry Yahweh and become His wife [an act demanding “love”]. A true Christian is married to Yahweh and completely under His “love” [“agapē“]. A non-Christian [regardless of what calls oneself] is free and single to mingle, so only sees Yahweh as ‘a bud’ [“phílos“].

Next, realize that the word “eipē” is translated as “should answer,” where the “If” is relative to the proposal of marriage, presented by Yahweh to a lost soul. This must be understood in the same way Jesus kept proposing to Simon son of John, expecting him to give the right answer. The difference there was Yahweh proposing to Simon bar Jonah, by saying, “I am here because I see you winking at me and blowing kisses at me [“phílos”]. So, what about it … want to get married from true love [“agapē”]?” The response must be seen as an “answer” to a question that is conditional … yes or no.

Then, notice how the word “Agapō” is capitalized, so this is not in any way associating “love” with the human nervous system and physical symptoms that are emotionally related. The capitalization raises this to a state of “Love,” where the first person [an implied “Egó”] becomes a statement that one’s whole being is “Love.” To then connect that to a total commitment of “Love” [all one’s heart, all one’s mind, and all one’s soul] to “that” [from “ton”] emanating from “God,” that says one’s soul confesses to marriage to Yahweh, taking on His name [“Theon”] in that marriage. One is united with Yahweh and Yahweh is united with one. That is the definition of “Love” [“Agapō“].

The comma mark completes that statement, which should be the truth, based on the conditional “If.” What is not written is the mathematical symbol that is the left right arrow [⇔] and the statement of truth that should follow “I love God.” The following statement of truth would be, “I love my brother,” such that “I love God” means all brothers are also loved. Because the contrary is written, as the falsifier of the statement “I love God,” to feel anything less than complete love for a brother makes one a liar.

A “brother” [“adelphon“] means all who are reborn as the “Son” [Jesus], regardless of human gender. Because one can only be a “Son” through a soul’s marriage to Yahweh, all “brothers” are equally of Yahweh and all Jesus, born of “love” [“agapē“]. To not love a brother as Yahweh and as Jesus is to not be a true Christian, therefore a liar misusing that title.

I know from personal experience that anyone, such as myself, who says something that has not been approved by some preacher, some best-selling author on Christianity, or by some dogmatic leaders of a church, even though he, she, or it claims to be a Christian [read that as a “brother,” regardless of human gender], those calling themselves ‘Christians” will do the same to that person [like myself] as the Jewish leaders did to Jesus. They will speak out of one side of their mouths, saying, “I love God, and Jesus, and love of all kinds.” Then, they will spit out of the other side of the same mouth, saying, “I hate you for saying Nostradamus was not some evil charlatan and Satan lover!!!”

I just happened to find out Nostradamus was a true saint by listening to God and my sharing that with “Christians” had them try to stone me to death [figuratively]. That is the lie of saying “I love God,” and then turning on those who love God.

There is a group on Facebook called “Episcopalians on Facebook,” which is supposedly a “public group,” but one that requires approval to join. I am a registered Episcopalian, as was my wife [an Episcopal priest, deceased]. She invited me to join the group; but no one has ever approved me to post anything. When I read what is posted in that group, it is impossible to not see how there is a political faction that is all about forcing homosexuality upon Episcopalians, controlling it. Those Episcopalians who do not agree that is “the way God made people,” and promoting sinners as a misguided way of rewriting the Holy Bible, are outwardly hated. Because there are so clearly those who oppose a church embracing political-social agendas, rather than being a place for true Christians to enjoy the company of other true Christians, those whose agenda is to make the Episcopal Church Satan’s den of iniquity will lash out publicly, spewing hatred [certainly indifference] upon all who would dare to question their opinions that Jesus would love homosexuals – putting “love” [“phílos“] in his mouth for him.

This is why it is so important to grasp what John is writing in this selection. He is defining “love,” line by line, where every crutch these false “Christians” lean upon is knocked over, one by one. It gets down to John saying, “If you think love means what You think love means, rather than actually being one with “Love” [as Yahweh’s wife], then no matter what you say, you are a falsifier.”

John would continue by adding, “You would not know the truth if Jesus [looking like someone other than his pictures show him as] walked up to you and said, “What did you think Jesus would say?”

As a reading selection on the fifth Sunday of Easter, which is a season for practicing being Jesus, the lesson here is find the truth about “love.” There is no question that Peter was married to Yahweh and had become the resurrection of Jesus, as the Son reborn. A faker could not have healed a man born lame. Peter was “the Rock of Jesus,” with all the disciples risen by “Love” to also be Apostles. The dream of John then needs to be seen as Simon being the human that would become the patron saint of the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus was asking the Church that bore his name if they loved him.

An institution cannot marry Yahweh, any more than the Temple of Jerusalem could contain Him in a building, when He always demanded freedom to go where He wanted. Thus, a Church cannot know any way to answer Jesus’ question, other than admitting it represents something external, which will always be a friendly place for those who do “Love God” to gather, but nothing more.

So many these days “love” a Church, to the point that they will hate anything external to that Church. This makes it a good practice to see one’s soul as all that matters, because there is no Church that a human soul can marry, nor any Church that can marry a human soul to Yahweh. One must practice being one with Yahweh, so one practices being His Son, no matter how hard the world fights against that. The time to get used to rejection is now, before a ministry officially begins.

——————–

Optional reading: John defining “love.”

7

Love is from God, so love means knowing God – marriage to Yahweh.

8

Not knowing God, so God is not married to one, means one cannot know God’s love.

9

Love exists in the world as His Son, so all who know God’s love are His Son in the world.

10

The Son did not come because one loved God, but because God loved His wife He sent His Son to be reborn in one He loved.

11

God loves one and one loves God; so, all God loves will love one another.

12

God cannot be seen; so, we love one another because God is unseen within us, which is how we are made perfect and capable of love.

13

Our ability to love is proof that God lives within us, through the presence of His Holy Spirit.

14

By knowing the love of God personally, one can then testify to that presence as the truth.

15

All who have God abiding within them have become Jesus (as Anointed ones), as Sons of God, because God only abides in His Son.

16

We have come to know God, which becomes solid faith that God is one with each of us and God is the love we know, so we live in love as God lives in us.

17

The love of God has cleansed us of sins so that perfection allows us to know our judgment will be eternal life .

18

There is no fear in love and God’s love within us eliminates all fears in us, as only those who do not know God’s love will fear.

19

We love because God loved us first and offered us His love.

20

Anyone who says “I love God” and then hates a brother in God’s love is a liar. Not loving one who knows God means one does not know God and therefore cannot know love.

21

God’s love commands all His Sons to love one another as those who know God’s love.

John, Language, Teaching

John 15:1-8 – The fruit of the vine made of truth

Leave a comment

Jesus said to his disciples, ”I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.”

——————–

This is the Gospel selection for the fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. This reading will be preceded by the mandatory reading from the Acts of the Apostles [chapter 8], which states: “Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus.” That is followed by a selection of verses read from Psalm 22, which sings, “My praise is of him in the great assembly; I will perform my vows in the presence of those who worship him.” Then, the Epistle selection will immediate be read before this, where John wrote in his first letter, “Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers, are liars; for those who do not love a brother whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen.”

In this reading, it is important to realize the setting. John’s chapter 13 ended with Jesus, his disciples and John leaving the upper room in the Essene Quarter of Jerusalem, where they would then exit the gate and begin a downward trek, towards Gethsemane. The disciples, all being adults, were drunk on Seder wine and some may still be drinking wine taken along with them, because the tradition of the Seder meal is to stay awake as long as possible, while drinking ceremonial wine. This would be why none of the disciples could stay awake at Jesus’ hour of need, later to come. John, however, being a boy still, was not allowed to drink the alcoholic wine, so he was wide awake and listening to everything his father, Jesus, said to him. As such, John wrote four chapters that recite what Jesus said, while neither Matthew or Mark [present as the disciples Matthew and Peter] wrote anything that elaborates what Jesus said to them, between leaving the upper room and the arrest of Jesus.

With that understood, it is the Episcopal Church that has added the words that begin this reading, as John did not write, “Jesus said to his disciples.” While it should be intuited that Jesus spoke in their presence, the fact that the twelve were all ‘drunk as skunks’ says it is more probable that Jesus spoke for John’s benefit, knowing he would record this for prosperity [including his prayers for his disciples, himself and the world]. Therefore, it is misleading to add that introduction, as it implies the disciples were attentive and listening for another lesson from Jesus, when they were not; they were incapacitated at that time and Jesus knew that.

When the NRSV says Jesus spoke, saying “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower,” this is the simple translation that misleads. While the full truth is openly stated, it becomes missed because of the rules of ordinary language. When one realizes this is divine language written by John, the written Word says something more powerful. This begins by realizing the first word, “Egō,” is capitalized, making it be divinely elevated in meaning. This word clearly states “I,” but when divinely elevated it must be read as Yahweh speaking through His Son, meaning “I.”

By seeing that, the second word, “eimi,” is a word stating “existence,” where “am” is connected to Yahweh’s state of being, as “I am.” Seeing this becomes another identifying statement of Yahweh, who told Moses to tell the Israelites “I AM THAT I AM,” when Moses was sent to set them free. In that sense, it should be realized that Yahweh did not separate Himself from Moses, such that Moses became the manifestation of God on earth, so he could state “I am” is here as “that I am,” meaning the duplication of “I am” says Yahweh is within a human’s flesh, married to the soul attached to that flesh. In that way, Jesus was also like Moses, who said he spoke for the Father, not for himself. That submission of self [the “I am”] means Yahweh was speaking these words, through His Son.

Next, it is syntactical rules that cause English to take the Greek that literally says “vine true” and reverse that so it says “true vine.” What is a “true vine”? That translation weakens the truth, where Yahweh is saying, “I am this vine” [“Egō eimi hē ampelos”], which says Jesus is the vine of Yahweh. It is then that “vine” that is the channel of all “truth,” such that “hē alēthinē” says “this vine” is “this made of truth.” Because Jesus is the manifestation of Yahweh on earth, he is a tendril of “God’s truth” to the world.

While it can be argued that Jesus saying, “I am the true vine” says that [and the simple is still the truth, just not fully realized], the following comma, immediately followed by the word “kai,” says to translate “and” is a mistake. The first segment makes a separate statement that next needs to be importantly emphasized as Yahweh adding, “he Father of me” [from “hoPatēr mou”]. That importantly says Jesus is “this vine made of truth” because he is the Son of Yahweh, who made Jesus for that purpose.

Seeing the word “Patēr” capitalized is evidence of a divine elevation, beyond the simple word “father.” The capitalization allows the reader to know “Father” is a reference to Yahweh [God], which links back to “I am,” but “Father” becomes a necessary statement of the great “Progenitor,” whose spiritual presence has created the Son. Without Yahweh within one, merged with His Holy Spirit, the flesh is simply another human in the world. Simple humans have souls of animation breathed by Yahweh, giving the appearance of life in dead matter; but simple human beings cannot call God their “Father.” That is the lesson Yahweh is teaching through His Son.

Following a comma, the next segment of words says “this Father” is “this vinedresser existence” [from “ho geōrgos estin”]. In that, the word “geōrgos” is defined as “a husbandman” [in addition to “vinedresser”], with its usage implying “a worker of the soil, husbandman, farmer, farm-laborer, vine-dresser.” That says that Yahweh is the worker of “this vine of truth” that is Jesus. The word “estin” is the third person singular form of the verb “eimi” [seen in “I am” – “Egō eimi”], meaning the “existence” of Jesus, as the vine of truth, is due to the “work of the Father.”

The first verse of this reading is vital to fully grasp as Yahweh speaking through the Son, explaining that Yahweh made the “vine” and tends the vine [“the vinedresser”], so the “vine” is “made of truth.” The metaphor of grapevines and a vineyard owner is stated; but it is imperative to understand the reality of Yahweh saying He is the “Father” of all who grow from His “vine made of truth.”

With that understood, verse two then says, “He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit.” This becomes a statement about the “vinedresser,” such that a good “husbandman” tends to the plants so they become most productive. Therefore, “Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit” says the Father expects production and nothing less.

In verse 3, Yahweh says through Jesus, “You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you.” This becomes a statement about the preparation of the disciples, so they will bear fruit. This is an important statement, as the disciples had followed Jesus for three years, absorbing [not learning] the care of the Father, as their “husbandman.” The “vine made of truth” that was Jesus can then be seen as having twelve nodes appearing on him, as about to leaf and bud, as a natural development from divine caretaking. This means “the words that I have spoken to you” is the watering, which is most deeply relative to the flow of truth coming from Yahweh, through the vine, so the nodules are prepared through inner nourishing to burst forth, as fruit.

When verse 4 begins by stating, “Abide in me as I abide in you,” this is again the Father speaking through the Son, so the disciples have the same source of truth within them as Jesus has. This then led Yahweh to say, “Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me.” This says all must be alive in Yahweh, as there can be no fruit produced without His presence within. Not having Yahweh within one’s being means one is dead, not living. Death is metaphor for a mortal existence, such that life means one’s soul has become one with Yahweh.

In verse 5 is repeated the words that say, “I am the vine, you are the branches.” Again, “Egōeimi hē ampelos” is written, which restates Yahweh [“I am”] is the source of “this vine.” A semi-colon then begins a relative statement, which says, “you [are] these branches,” which are relative to “the vine” of Yahweh. While it is easy to paint a picture of Jesus speaking to twelve disciples, such that “I” and “you” become limited to those thirteen human beings, the importance comes from understanding Yahweh is the one speaking. When one hears that voice, then one can grasp how His words are speaking to all, at all times subsequent [including today], where Yahweh is the “vine made of truth,” which flows within as the blood of His Son, where one’s soul is cared for and prepared so all who become growths of Yahweh’s “vine” will be His “branches.”

With that understood, Yahweh then continued in verse 5 to say, “Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.” That says all disciples who will be reborn in the name of the Son, as Jesus renewed through the branches, producing “much fruit.” Only those reborn as Jesus will produce the fruit of “the vine made of truth.” By saying “apart from me you can do nothing,” this repeats the prior statement that said, “He removes every branch that bears no fruit.” One is “apart” because one has been “pruned” for being fruitless.

That leads to verse 6 saying, “Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers.” In that, the Greek word “exēranthē” is translated as “withers,” when a better translation would be “wastes away” or “dries up.” That imagery projects the flow of Yahweh’s “truth” as having been denied or blocked. Without that inner source of life, a branch produces no green growth; therefore it becomes pruned. That leads to the related statement, which says, “such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.”

The metaphor of burning must be seen as a judgment of condemnation of a soul. Because the “vine” is Yahweh, there can be no flaw of His perfection that will cause a branch to wither and be pruned. This then says that the branches that become “dried up” and “wasted away” have done so of their own accord. Here, it is important to know that Judas Iscariot [although not present for this analogy spoken] was a branch that had been prepared by the words spoken by Yahweh through His Son. Those words of “truth” fed all who listened to Jesus speak the words of the Father. Still, some denied that flow of truth to bring life to their souls, so their denial of the truth would become their condemnation, where the metaphor of burning of dried plant branches means reincarnation.

This then leads to Yahweh saying through Jesus, “If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.” Here, the element of “made of truth” and “cleansed by the words I have spoken” becomes a way of saying the fluid that flows through the “vine” of Yahweh is His Word. His Word gives life to dead matter. His life produces “much fruit.” This can only come from having consumed the Word and drank the blood of Jesus, becoming a reproduction of the Anointed one of Yahweh. When one has been reborn as the Son, everything one needs will be freely given. That is repeating the care of the “vinedresser.”

This reading then ends with Jesus saying, with the approval of the Father, “My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.” In that, the Greek word “edoxasthē” is written, which means “is glorified.” This is one of those words that has such nebulosity that everyone hears it or reads it and can only understand it as a good thing, but little more than that.

The root Greek word “doxazó” means, “to render or esteem,” with the implication being “to bestow honor.” The first person applies “is” to this verb,” which needs to be seen as the one receiving the truth of Yahweh is the one “being glorified.” Yahweh, as God Almighty, needs no “glory” given to Him, as He is the source of all “glory.” Thus, the literal Greek text makes this clearer.

Written by John is this: “en toutō edoxasthē ho Patēr mou,” which literally translates to say, “in this is glorified that Father of me.” The word “this” reflects back to one wanting and receiving. That means “in” is the Holy Spirit within one’s being, “in” one’s soul. When that presence is “in,” then one has received what it wanted. That then projects forward to “this is glorified,” where one receiving the Holy Spirit becomes the “honor bestowed” by Yahweh to the recepitent. That glory is the the ability for one to claim Yahweh as “that Father,” because the presence of Yahweh has made the recipient “of me,” reborn as Jesus.

When this says, “you bear much fruit,” this sets the expectation that each of the disciples will become extensions of the “vine made of truth,” which says they will be branches that will be the resurrection of Jesus. Just as a gardener knows the techniques of taking a cutting from a living plant and making it becomes a separate plant, that separate plant will still be the same plant as that from which it was cut. Thus, in the same way that Jesus was a cutting of His “vine made of truth,” so too will each of the disciples, in the same way that he bore the fruit of his devoted followers – all filled with the Word of the Father – also bear the same amount of fruit, or more, individually.

When this ends by Yahweh saying, “kai genēsthe emoi mathētai” or importantly “you will be of me disciples,” that can be confusing, when one hears Jesus telling his disciples that they will be still disciples of his. The truth comes from hearing Yahweh telling the disciples of Jesus, who had been prepared to become each a new “vine” like Jesus, that when they bear fruit they will be just like Jesus resurrected [who, at that point, was still alive, still not even under arrest]. That says Jesus was a “disciple” of Yahweh, as Yahweh was the Master and Jesus was the “pupil,” who always spoke only what the Father told him to speak. Seeing Yahweh telling branches prepared to produce good fruit they would be His “disciples,” says they will all be new ‘cuttings’ of Jesus, planted separately to do the same as he had done.

As the Gospel choice of the fifth Sunday of Easter, a season when preparation for ministry is the point, Jesus was speaking what the Father told him to speak, in preparation for those disciples of his to enter ministry. Entering ministry is when one bears fruit for Yahweh. All of those who stood or sat as drunken Jews, while Yahweh spoke through His Son, had been married to Yahweh when they signed on as students who followed Jesus all around. They had demonstrated their faith, even though they were clueless about everything Jesus said. That ‘watering by the word’ was preparing them to take bloom and produce fruit.

Once a branch has proven capable of producing fruit [on Easter Sunday they received the Spirit], it can then be cut and replanted, again under the care of the “husbandman” Yahweh. That replanting is when they are ready to enter the world as a new Jesus, extending the “vine of truth” so others will develop as “branches” and produce fruit – a continuous cycle of new growth.

Language, Psalms, Teaching

Psalm 22:24-30 – Living as a nation unto God

Leave a comment

24 My praise is of him in the great assembly; *

I will perform my vows in the presence of those who worship him.

25 The poor shall eat and be satisfied,

and those who seek the Lord shall praise him: *

“May your heart live for ever!”

26 All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord, *

and all the families of the nations shall bow before him.

27 For kingship belongs to the Lord; *

he rules over the nations.

28 To him alone all who sleep in the earth bow down in worship; *

all who go down to the dust fall before him.

29 My soul shall live for him;

my descendants shall serve him; *

they shall be known as the Lord’s for ever.

30 They shall come and make known to a people yet unborn *

the saving deeds that he has done.

——————–

This is the Psalm choice that will be read aloud in unison or sung by a cantor on the fifth Sunday of Easter, Year B, according to the lectionary of the Episcopal Church. This song will follow the mandatory reading from the Acts of the Apostles (chapter 8), which says, “He asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?’” A reading from John’s first epistle will follow, which says, “God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them.” Finally, this song of praise will precede a Gospel reading from John, where Jesus said, “Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers.”

The numbering of some Psalms do not always match, from version to version. In the BibleHub Interlinear version of this Psalm 22 it shows thirty-one verses, with the last being numbered above [NRSV] as 30. This means the verses numbered by the NRSV are numbered 25 – 31 by BibleHub. Psalm 22 has nothing missing, as the different numberings are relative to how some break up what is written.

Psalm 22 is read in its entirety on Good Friday. The NRSV gives this Psalm the title: “Plea for Deliverance from Suffering and Hostility.” BibleHub lists it as: “Psalm of the Cross,” which is due to the prophetic verses found in this song of lament that apply to the crucifixion of Jesus. This Psalm is divided into sections that are read at different times in the lectionary schedule.
As such, the last section is read after Easter Sunday, where these verses reflect the hope of revival that comes from the resurrected Lord, after the pain and suffering has passed. The first and second sections will be read during the Ordinary season after Pentecost (Year B and Year C), with the last section read today also read during Lent (Year B). This attention says Psalm 22 makes it an important one to become familiar with.

The first verse [not read today] is one Jesus began to recite while on the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning?” That was not Jesus questioning Yahweh, his Father, but David writing while filled with the Holy Spirit about all who will reject God within them. Jesus recited the first verse of this song. This makes Psalm 22 be a song of lament, leading to David foreseeing this scene: “they divide my clothes among themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots.” [verse 18] Still, the lament turns to rescue, which is the praise of this reading, begun in verse 22 as: “I will tell of your name to my brothers [“lə·’e·ḥāy”]; in the midst of the congregation I will praise you.”

Verse 25 [NRSV 24] repeats this. It begins with “in the great assembly” [“rāḇ bə·qā·hāl” from “qahal”], which means a large “assembly, convocation, or congregation.” The word “rab” means “much, many, or great,” such that this must be read [relative to David] as all of Israel, or all of the twelve tribes who claim devotion to the One God Yahweh. The Israelites were “those who worship him,” where the Hebrew “yə·rê·’āw” is actually a statement saying, “those who fear him.” Fear of God is the only fear allowed to those who serve Yahweh. Therefore, “my vows in the presence” [correctly “my vows I will complete in the face of”] are vows of marriage, so one has Yahweh within one’s being [i.e.: united with one’s soul, in one’s flesh]. It is from that complete submission that one’s own face is lowered so one then wears the face of Yahweh.

Verse 26 [NRSV 25] then places immediate focus on what one “eats” [“yō·ḵə·lū”], which after marriage to Yahweh must be seen as spiritual food. Thus, the word “anav,” which means “poor, afflicted, humble, meek” is not a statement about one’s material status in the world, but rather a statement about all who have yet to marry Yahweh. All are spiritually impoverished before that time, thus seeking spiritual uplifting. Being fed spiritual food by God satisfies all spiritual needs, eliminating all fears.

When verse 26 sings, “those who seek the Lord shall praise him: “May your heart live for ever!”, this is incorrect as a declaration for eternal God to live forever. Instead, it says those who seek Yahweh [led to the altar of marriage] will then “let live your heart forever.” That says the soul of the one who loves Yahweh [“lə·ḇaḇ·ḵem” – “your heart”] will find the reward of eternal salvation, as “heart” means “inner man, mind, will, heart.” (Strong’s Usage)

When verse 27 [NRSV 26] sings, “All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord; and all the families of the nations shall worship before him,” this becomes prophetic of Christianity and its spread around the world, when Yahweh would become available to Gentiles. This still reverts one back to verse 25, where marriage vows are statements of seekers, not those forced [at the point of a sword] to convert and call themselves “Christian.” Those from all over the world must seek to join as one with God, which is love that can only come from the heart.

When this verse sings, “yiz·kə·rū wə·yā·šu·ḇū ‘el-Yah·weh” or “shall remember and return to Yahweh,” the memory of God can only be from that space between physical incarnations, when one’s soul returns to be judged by Yahweh, before returning to a body of flesh. Because this memory is spread around the world, the presumption can be a reference to those souls who were once Israelites, but those who rejected marriage to Yahweh. Seen as those condemned to death in the wilderness [and many other examples] says their judgment was to come back as Gentiles [not sent to hell], having forsaken their birthright as Israelites. Their memories of past lives [or life] will be when they were taught to know Yahweh as their God.

This dispersal of lost souls all around the globe will then give rise to families and nations that will have some influence of the spiritual, which would develop into religions to false gods and philosophies. Those religions would then preach fear of gods, which would turn into fear of the priests who served those gods. Those pagan beliefs, having forgotten Yahweh, while retaining some sense of “god,” will make them lost souls still. They would be the cause of Israel’s collapse into ruin, so many Israelites would be scattered to the four corners of the earth. Still, having once known Yahweh will be the seed of insight within a list of souls, which will remain with those souls and draw them to seek the truth, life after life. When found, their memories of Yahweh will return, like they had become prodigal sons redeemed.

Verse 28 [NRSV 27] is one that needs to be read spiritually, so the metaphor can rise to the forefront. The translation says, “For kingship belongs to the Lord; he rules over the nations,” which leads one to think that Yahweh is the king of nations. That was not true for David, as Israel rejected that arrangement when the elders told Samuel to tell Yahweh to give them a human king, like other nations. When Jesus was asked by Pilate, “Are you a king?” Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this realm.” Thus, one must read this verse and see “nations” [“goy” – also meaning “people”] as each body of flesh ruled over by an individual soul. Each soul rules over the ‘nation’ of self. When that soul submits to Yahweh in marriage, God Anoints a new king [Jesus] to reign over that ‘nation,’ with the collective becoming His empire of ‘nations’ (Christianity).

Verse 29 [NRSV 28] then sings, “To him alone all who sleep in the earth bow down in worship; all who go down to the dust fall before him.” This speaks about the eternity of Yahweh’s reign as King. The metaphor of “sleep” and “dust” speaks of the mortality of all human life on earth, which makes a body of flesh become metaphor for a prison in which an unsaved soul must continuously return. Here, this verse is confusing, as to how someone came to this translation. To remove the confusion, the Hebrew needs to be closely analyzed.

The verse begins by stating, “’ā·ḵə·lū way·yiš·ta·ḥăw·wū kāl- diš·nê- ’e·reṣ,” which literally says, “shall eat and bow down all the prosperous of the earth.” In that, the first word returns the reader back to verse 26 [25], which began [NRSV] “The poor shall eat and be satisfied.” That verse and this verse each begin by stating “shall eat” [“yō·ḵə·lū” and “’ā·ḵə·lū”]. That has been ignored in this verse’s translation; but the point is the same, where spiritual food becomes the truth fed to the poor and the rich. It says the knowledge of Yahweh makes Him the ruler who even the “prosperous” [or “fat” – “dashen”] will “bow down before,” upon their deaths. That is when one either eats one’s words of self-importance, or one rejoices for having eaten the manna supplied to one by Yahweh.

Either way, all souls will be released when their bodies of flesh are no longer able to support spiritual animation; and, the return to the “dust” [“aphar”] from which those bodies came means death. The NRSV translation that ends the verse, saying “fall before him” actually says “even himself” [the “fat” of “self-worth”] “cannot keep alive” (or, “no human lives forever, no matter how rich with material wealth they are”). All must prostrate their souls before the Almighty God for judgment.

Verse 30 [NRSV 29] then says, “My soul shall live for him; my descendants shall serve him; they shall be known as the Lord’s for ever.” This sings praises to Yahweh, as a soul who has married Yahweh and led those after him or her to likewise marry Him. Here, the Hebrew word “zera” begins this short verse, which means “a sowing, seed, offspring,” implying “posterity.” That intent led the translators to use the “vine of truth” concept that shows all descendants who serve Yahweh must come from one who lived for Him. Thus, “zera” leads to “ya·‘aḇ·ḏen·nū,” which says “shall serve him.”

The translation that says, “they shall be known as the Lord’s for ever,” actually says, “they will be counted as those of the lord’s generation” [“yə·sup·par la·ḏō·nāy lad·dō·wr”]. In that, the word “lad·dō·wr” must be seen as where the Lord dwells, which becomes reinforcement that one is a nation unto Yahweh. Those who truly know Yahweh will be those who submit self so Yahweh lives in their hearts, with Jesus reborn as their Lord. It is that “generation” or “dwelling” that is the living branches of the vine made of truth. [John 15 reference.]

Finally, verse 31 [NRSV 30] says, “They shall come and make known to a people yet unborn the saving deeds that he has done.” This is a good translation that says all who have been sown with the seed of God’s Love in their souls will seek the same as returning servants, as souls returning to become Apostles and Saints that will lead seekers to find a marriage proposal from Yahweh awaits their decision. Those saintly human beings have prophesied of Jesus and Yahweh and Salvation [writers of Biblical books], so seekers can find themselves new teachers of truth [again married to Yahweh] and new pupils [those led to their first marriage to Him].

As the Psalm reading for the fifth Sunday of Easter, it sings praises to the love of Yahweh that saves souls. All Christians are now the same as were all Israelites, as the same Yahweh is King of all who have faith in Him. That faith can only come from a marriage that makes Yahweh personally known to one’s soul, felt throughout one’s flesh. It is this depth of personal experience that leads one into ministry, to save other souls that are lost. That marriage brings about the resurrection of Jesus, as a new Anointed one, which demands adjustment to that divine level of obedience and commitment. The Easter season is the time to find that comfort as Christ reborn on earth.