Towards, unto, into and in Theos

In the previous blog we saw the juxtaposition of the Theos with a number of qualities, one of which is love.

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of the Theos; and every one that loves is born of the Theos, and knows the Theos. He that loves not knows not the Theos; for the Theos is love. In this was manifested the love of the Theos toward us, because that the Theos sent his only begotten son into the kosmos, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved the Theos, but that he loved us, and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if the Theos so loved us, we ought also to love one another. (1 Iohannes 4.7-11)

As we discussed in the previous blog, the Theos is defined by what he is, and will be, and what he is not, or will not be. He is definitively the Theos rather than any other theos and the qualities that define him are many and, in origin, exclusive to him. In the passage above, it is made clear that he loved us before we were able to love him. Indeed, loving him is an outcome of being loved by him. His love is demonstrated in that he sent his son as a ‘propitiation’/’mercyseat’ to declare his righteousness.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believes into (εις) him should not perish, but have aionian life. For the Theos so loved the kosmos, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes into (εις) him should not perish, but have aionian life. For the Theos sent not his son into (εις) the kosmos to condemn the kosmos; but that the kosmos through him might be saved. He that believes into (εις) him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed into (εις) the name of the only begotten son of the Theos. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into (εις) the kosmos, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes towards (προς) the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that does truth comes towards (προς) the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are worked in Theos. (Iohannes 3.14-21)

The premise for this passage is the brasen serpent that was erected in the camp of Israel for the people to look upon after they had been bitten by the deadly serpents that were sent into the camp following their disobedience. If they looked upon this elevated image, of that living scourge that had been reduced to a lifeless brass image, believing that in doing so they would be saved then they did not perish. The similarity is there for us to see that, in looking upon the elevated Iesous, both elevated in that he was lifted up on the stake and in that he also was lifted up in Theos (being lifted up in and by the spirit of the living Theos), the believer – seeing the man who had made that which killed us all (the flesh) powerless by his obedience and committing to following that same path – might also live.

This oft cited passage is not an unconditional offer based on the love of the father. It is a conditional offer based upon reciprocity. The salvation that is on offer is an outcome of the love of the father offering the people the representation of himself in his son which, if they were to look upon in belief, would be the gateway to their salvation. It is a passage accompanied by the directional eis (εις) and pros (προς), indicative of the bi-directional relationship enshrined in the kaporeth. Theos sent his son into (εις) the kosmos in order that those who believe into (εις) his name might be saved. He sent the light into (εις) the kosmos that those that do truth may come towards (προς) that light. There are a series of antitheses at play here. There are those that do truth and those that do evil. Respectively, their preference is for light and darkness. Overlapping the definition of those people are the epithets of belief and unbelief. The outcomes for these two categories of belief and unbelief are salvation unto aionian life and condemnation unto perishing/destruction. Overarching all of this is the love of Theos who presides over the outcomes for people dependent on their response. The love of Theos is not conditional, but the outcome is, dependent on the nature of the response. The only acceptable response is the journey of belief into/unto the name of the father revealed in the son. It is a journey of incrementally becoming him unto the age (aion), a journey characterised by continual belief, evidenced by works (words and actions).

The natural man sees love as an emotion, often times without rational basis, coming and going as a wave or a gust of wind. Clearly, the way of Theos is antithetical to that of man, so how do we determine what love is, particularly the love of Theos? How do we define it? Clearly, we can define it in the way scripture fills out its meaning. Often this can be in the form of yea and nay, in not and not/not terms.

You have heard that it has been said, Thou shall love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That you may be the children of your father which is in heaven: for he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love them which love you, what reward have you? do not even the publicans the same? And if you salute your brothers only, what do you more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be therefore perfect, even as your father which is in heaven is perfect. (Maththaios 5.43-48)

The behaviour of the believer, which is the only way to judge the love that motivates such works, is seen to be based on the behaviour of the father who is in heaven. We are called to represent him as Iesous did. Therefore, the love we should show is an outcome of determining the outworking of his love. The love, like the spirit, is the motivating impetus that drives him to actions which are directed both to the just and the unjust. If we behave like others then there is no reward because, by implication, we are not behaving as the Theos. There are many antitheses in play here but, ultimately the distinction is whether we are behaving as others or as the father. He first loved us which put us in a position whereby we were able to reciprocate that love. We were enemies to him but, when he showed his love to us by revealing himself in Iesous to the salvation of him and us, then we could become his friends and show love to him. If we offer love to our enemies, then they are in a position to reciprocate. Clearly, we can see here that love is not a natural emotion. If it were we could not love our enemies, that would be to go against natural sentiment. Instead, we have to overcome such sensibilities and love those we are disposed, naturally, not to love. The motivation for doing this is the utterances of the spirit. Love is an outcome of Theos’ spirit revealed in his word.

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve Theos and mammon. (Maththaios 6.24)

Again, we see a series of antitheses. Primarily, one is Theos and the other is mammon, a set of values based on material wealth and self-interest, couched in terms of another theos. Theos is exhorting us not to be anxious for the daily needs of the body but rather to focus on seeking first his kingdom and his righteousness and the requirement for food and clothing will be dealt with by him. If we seek to serve Theos we must strive to do so and not focus on the present age, with its anxieties and riches. There is one and there is the other; there is love and hate; there is holding to and there is despising; there are two potential masters. We must choose which one to be in subjection to.

But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, belief, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are anointed’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and desires. If we live in spirit, let us also walk in spirit. Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another. (Galatians 5.22-26)

The outcome, or fruit, of spirit is not only love but a list of other qualities which are of the same type as the qualities which describe the Theos. That is because the spirit is of Theos and therefore declares Theos and those who willingly receive it become Theos. The antithetical qualities which are delineated in the previous verses are those which are born of the flesh, that is of the mind which is antithetical to the spirit, the mind of the natural man. If love, amongst so many other positive attributes, is of the spirit of the Theos then that love must be the love of Theos. We can only manifest the kind of love which he shows. The love that he has shown to us in anointed is to willingly give himself for our benefit that we can be saved in becoming him. In becoming him, we can demonstrate that love to him and to others, as in the figure of the kaporeth. We can give ourselves up to him, that is to exchange our natural souls for his, and we can give ourselves up for the believers, or those who will become such, by similarly sacrificing our self-interest for theirs.

And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Iesous answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, Israel; The Lord our Theos, the Lord is one: And thou shall love the Lord thy Theos with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, teacher, thou has said the truth: for there is one Theos; and there is none other but he: And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. And when Iesous saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou are not far from the kingdom of the Theos. And no man after that durst ask him any question. (Markos 12.28-34)

Here we have the description of the two fundamental commandments which follow the pattern we have described above. The first commandment is premised upon there being one Yahweh, a promise of unity in which all those of his people who become him will all be one in him at the last day, fulfilling his name. In order to achieve that profound oneness requires a reciprocity which is born out of giving up all those things which underpin our identities – our own strength, mind, soul and understanding – in order to take on and reciprocate his identity and, in doing so, become him. This is the first thing to achieve. The second thing is to take this change of identity and become him in ministering that love to others and, in doing so, to do it like he has done for us, that is to esteem them as being of as high an importance as we consider ourselves. We have to love them in such a way as they, like we hope to do, become him. The context of this interaction between Iesous and the scribe is a context of reciprocity. Iesous has answered his questioners ‘well’. When the scribe reciprocates Iesous’ words, with understanding, Iesous similarly commends his reciprocity after the man has commended Iesous for answering the question he posed ‘well’. The judgment of Iesous is that the scribe is not far from the kingdom of the Theos they have been discussing. This is because, as we saw in the blog on baptism, the kingdom of the Theos is that wherein the Theos dwells. Iesous is speaking the words of Theos, so he is the place where Theos reigns, that is in him. The scribe is in a reciprocal kerubic relationship with Iesous, so he, that is in his mouth, is where Theos dwells and reigns. Finally, because the two are in agreement then they are as the kaporeth and, therefore the Theos dwells, and reigns, in between the two men, man unto his brother, as it were.

We have seen that commandments are a necessary outcome of the revelation of the name. Man must obey the commands that Yahweh has given him to inherit that name, to receive the possession. In the above passage, the relevance of love is seen in the two fundamental commandments on which the law and prophets hang. Iesous clarifies the relevance of love in respect of the revelation of the father’s name and the commandments which he gives to his disciples at the outset of this new covenant.

And the glory which thou gave me I have given them; that they may be one (εν), even as we are one (εν): I in (εν) them, and thou in (εν) me, that they may be made perfect in one (εις εν); and that the kosmos may know that thou have sent me, and have loved them, as thou have loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou have given me, be with me where I am (eimi ego  ειμι εγω) ; that they may behold my glory, which thou have given me: for thou loved me before the foundation of the kosmos. Righteous Father, the kosmos has not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou have sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou have loved me may be in (εν) them, and I in (εν) them. (Iohannes 17.22-26)

Firstly, it is worth noting the homographic occurrences of en (εν) and eis (εις) depicting, as they do, both the notion of oneness but also of being directed ‘unto’/’into’ and of residing ‘in’. As we shall see, a little later on, the journey of the name, of becoming him, ends with dwelling in him and him in us.

Antithetical to Theos is the kosmos, an ordered system that is antagonistic to Theos and to him revealed in Iesous. However, this ordered system is witness to Iesous and his ministration of the unity and love of Theos in himself and with the intent of that same unity and love being in his disciples. He has declared the name of the father to his disciples with the intent of them manifesting his name. That name being bound up in the twin notions of oneness and love. Iesous desires them to be in the same place where he is. That place where the ‘I am’ is the fulfilment of the ‘I will be’. That place where Theos has become man in love and unity, where his name dwells and reigns in Iesous and his disciples. The system in which Iesous has walked and been tempted and hunted by those seeking to ensnare him in his words when he only spoke as the kerub of Yahweh, though their kerubic response was one of antagonism and hatred and variance, yet his speech was of unity and love; that system was the Ioudaioi that surrounded him, once a created order of Yahweh, prepared for the dwelling of his name but becoming not a people, as in Hoshea’ 1. This same system was the one in which Iesous knew his disciples would walk, similarly offering the euangelion of love and reconciliation in the face of tribulation occasioned by animosity and hatred. In this context Iesous offers them the new commandments that lie at the heart of this new covenant.

A new commandment I give unto you, That you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another. (Iohannes 13.34,35)

If you love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the father, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may abide with you unto (εις) the age…In (εν) that day you shall know that I am in (εν) my father, and you in (εν) me, and I in (εν) you. He that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me: and he that loves me shall be loved of my father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Ioudas says unto him, not Iskariot, Lord, how is it that thou will manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the kosmos? Iesous answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my father will love him, and we will come towards (προς) him, and make our abode with him. He that loves me not keeps not my sayings: and the word which you hear is not mine, but the father’s which sent me. (Iohannes 14.15,16,20-24)

Above, the directional words eis (εις), en (εν), and pros (προς) have been indicated – unto/into, in, and towards, much as we saw in Iohannes 17. Again, we can consider that the first two of these directional words are also homographs for ‘one’. This is because the journey unto becoming one with and in Theos, and thus fulfilling the name of Yahweh, is to begin in a ‘towards’ (kerubic) relationship of being face to face, of travelling ‘unto’ that destination of becoming him until we enter ‘into’ and become ‘in’, and thus become ‘one’, Theos. This process is motivated by spirit which creates love, the outcome of which is reconciliation driven by Theos. The new commandment, not that it did not exist before, because, as we saw above, the commandment to love the Lord our Theos and our neighbour as ourselves was in the Old Testament, but rather that it is the foundation of a new, or renewed covenant with his people based on these manifestational principles.

The evidence of love by the disciples is the keeping of the commandments. This is the reciprocal part of the kaporeth relationship which fulfils the covenant name. Following on from such a reciprocity is the giving of the comforter, the spirit, which was to lead them into all truth. The comforter is described as ‘another’ comforter because Iesous was the first ‘comforter’. The Greek for comforter is parakletos (παρακλητος):

My little children, these things write I unto you, that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have a comforter towards (προς) the father, Iesous anointed the righteous: And he is the propitiation (ilasmos ιλασμος) concerning our sins: and not concerning ours only, but also concerning the whole kosmos. And in (εν) this we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that says, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in (εν) him. But whoso keeps his word, in (εν) him verily is the love of the Theos perfected: in (εν) this know we that we are in (εν) him. (1 Iohannes 2.1-5)

Iesous is the comforter because he manifests the comfort that is of Theos (2 Corinthians 1.3). He reveals him to us. That comfort comes from revelation of the truth. This same pattern of revelation that brings consolation and reconciliation is evident in the sending of the holy spirit in the name of Iesous which he is alluding to in Iohannes 14. This manifestation is the basis for the propitiation/mercyseat which concerns the removal of sin. It is in this context that we are able to behold Iesous’ manifestation of the love of Theos in the provision of him as a kaporeth, that we are able to reciprocate that love by manifesting him in keeping his commandments. It is at this point that we can see our way to becoming in, and one, Theos.

Love, like grace, spirit, and belief is the invisible force that creates tangible evidence of its existence. The evidence of the existence of love in Theos is his provision of his beloved son. The evidence of the love of Theos in Iesous is that there is no greater love than that a man lay down his soul for his friends (Iohannes 15.13 – where ‘lay down’ is the verb related to Theos). The love of Theos in Iesous in the disciples is shown in their reciprocal relationship with Theos in Iesous seen in the keeping of the commandments and that they too seek to manifest him in laying down their souls for the brothers (1 Iohannes 3.16).

We have seen, in both this post and the previous one, the qualities which define the Theos in such an existential sense that they are often just juxtaposed, although sometimes given the verb ‘is’. We have also determined that there is an equivalence between Theos and ‘el (אל), where Theos is derived from a verb meaning ‘to set’ or ‘place’ and giving a vertical orientation of manifestation (that is top to bottom), whereas ‘el (אל) is homographic with, amongst others, the words for ‘to’/’unto’ and one of the words for the negative and, because of its association with direction and the face to face juxtaposition of the kerubym on the kaporeth, has a sense of the horizontal orientation of manifestation (that is, face to face). The word ‘el (אל) also carries a sense of power, as in control, and, along with its directional sense, gives us the sense of impetus and directional energy. This being said, to say that the Theos is love; is spirit; is grace; is faithful; is the word, is to associate directional impetus with these qualities. Love, therefore, is a directional force. It is given by the one who has it to the one who does not. The outcome of the receiving of love is to, potentially, reciprocate it. The Theos sent (directed) his son as the embodiment of himself to give us the opportunity of giving up our souls (our natural identities) unto him in order to become him. Love is a selfless force, it is to give up for the other, to relinquish for the other. Theos gave of himself by giving his son, who manifested him, for us to give up of ourselves to reciprocate towards him. The question of love is missed by the rich young man who couches it in terms of, What can I do to get something? The real question is, What can I give (up) to be transformed into Theos. The rich young man has not kept the commandments because he has not yielded himself to the Theos in love, neither has he loved his neighbour as himself. This is why he is unwilling to give up his wealth to the poor, because he is in the mindset of getting not giving. Love is a force of giving. Theos is a giver; indeed, he loves a cheerful giver (2 Corinthians 9.7), one who is manifesting him.

Furthermore, in keeping with the meaning of the homographic אל we can see love and, in particular, the love of Theos being defined by negative and positive characteristics. As, indeed, we can see the definition of that which embodies Theos, and therefore the love of Theos, being expressed in a similar fashion. This is because the Theos is love and, therefore, he and love are indistinguishable. If Theos (and אל its equivalent) can be determined by negative and positive, so can love. We can see love for what it is and what it is not. Iesous is defined by what he is, the ‘I am’, the spirit, and what he is not, the mind of the flesh. The love of Theos is perfected in him; he is the yea and the amen. We saw in Maththaios that we should love those that are in an antagonistic relationship with us, that is our enemies, as the Theos makes his rain to fall on the just and unjust alike. We are required to be perfect as Theos is perfect. We saw the definition of love as a fruit of spirit in opposition to the qualities, such as hatred and variance, which are the works of the flesh. We are required to uphold love not hatred.

The Theos is love. If we keep the commandments of Theos in Iesous then we love him and, becoming him, become love.