God's Elect or World's Elite? XXXIX

"concerning the pneumatikon, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant"

(I Cor. 12: 1)

In the previous chapter we began to consider how the believer in Jesus, because he possesses the Holy Spirit, and the "spirit of Christ," is "spiritual" and acquires spiritual gifts and things. Thus, he is superior in status than are the world's rich ruling elite. He is the truly elect, the one graciously favored by God, the real elite or special one. He is the one "set apart" and distinguished, of a higher "calling." 

His wisdom and knowledge about God and the world is from the Holy Spirit and from the word (logos) of the Spirit. His special status, his calling, his uniqueness, is owing to his being indwelt by the Spirit. His power, authority, and privileges come from his being born of the Spirit. Though the believer is among the "base things of the world," yet he is not so in his standing with God nor in regard to his appointed exaltation. The believer is not "base," but high and lofty, though such does not yet fully appear to be so, as we have previously observed. 

We have seen how the believer is "noble" because he is "high born" in being born of the Spirit, in being the begotten children of God. We have seen how being thus indwelt and led by the Spirit and the words of the Spirit the believer is strong and mighty and elevated in his thoughts and understanding. In all this we have seen how the believer, though he is often in this world characterized as "of low estate," of base standing, yet he has been "raised" and "lifted up" by his new standing in Christ. He is raised to life from a previously dead state, morally and spiritually speaking. He is elevated in his values and beliefs, in his goals and aspirations, in his language and conduct. 

"Standard of living" with the believer is not to be connected with material well being, with economics and social standing in the present world, but with living an abundant life in the joy of the Spirit, in pleasing God. "A little that a righteous man has is better than the riches of many wicked." (Psalm 37: 16)

In the passage at the head of this chapter Paul says that believers ought not to be ignorant in regard to the "pneumatikon." Whenever you see an "ikos," "ika," or "ikon" ending on a Greek word, it means characterized or controlled by. This is like in English words that have "itis" for a suffix. The suffix means "inflammation." Therefore pneumatikōs or pneumatikon means to be controlled by or characterized by the Spirit, or to what has its source in the Spirit. Sarkikos means to be controlled by or characterized by the flesh. Psychikos means to be controlled by the psyche, by the soul, by natural reason. 

The KJV and other translations add "gifts" and render the Greek word as "spiritual gifts," but "gifts" is not in the original, hence the reason why it is italicized in the KJV. The word is plural and may be best translated as "spiritualities" or things pertaining to the spiritual, except that in such a case we have substituted a noun for an adjective, which the word is. It would be set in opposition to "carnalities." Perhaps we should translate the plural adjective "ton pneumatikon" as "the spirituals" or "spiritual characteristics." 

The verses following do talk about spiritual gifts and things. It seems that Paul, up to chapter ten had a lot to say about what is carnal, about what is natural and debased, and so in the beginning of chapter twelve he can finally discuss in more detail what are the true evidences and characteristics of spiritual men and things. We could possibly translate the text as "concerning the characteristics of being spiritual I would not have you to be ignorant" or as "concerning spiritual gifts and things." 

The adjective implies a noun to which it is the modifier. Another way to look at the text is to put quotation marks around the word "spirituals." Paul may well be saying "brothers, I don't want you to be ignorant on the use of "spiritual" as an adjective for anything." Or, "I don't want you to be ignorant of "spiritual" as a label or designation." 

The gifts or things of the Spirit are called pneumatikon, whereas "spiritual gifts" proper are rather called charismaton, denoting "grace gifts." (v. 4). Sometimes in scripture usage we have simply domata, without a qualifying adjective, meaning "gifts" (Eph. 4:8). Spirit gifts are indeed grace gifts, and vise versa.  

Not only in his Corinthian epistles but elsewhere too Paul spoke of what it means to be spiritual, even in passages where he does not use the word pneumatikos, as in this passage:

"There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." (Rom. 8: 1-10)

The words "according to the Spirit the things of the Spirit" (κατὰ πνεῦμα τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος) mean what the singular words "pneumatikon" or "pneumatikos" mean. As stated, "tikos" means "from" or "concerning" or "pertaining to." But, in the above, Paul uses "kata," which similarly means "according to," or pertaining to. The "things of the Spirit" denote not what comes from man's internal spirit, as the Gnostics affirmed, but what comes from the Holy Spirit. The things that originate with God's Spirit are "spiritual." The above words of Paul give us a good definition of how we are taught of God to define "spiritual." 

The sarkikos man is governed by the appetites of "the flesh" and the fallen nature, by his animal or beastly instincts. Over these he has no control, but is rather controlled by the flesh and by the soma (body). The scriptures affirm that such people are "slaves of sin," in bondage to their carnal appetites. Self control and liberation from this bondage must come from the Spirit and word of God. Both the man ruled by the psyche and the man ruled by the sarx fight a losing battle with those powers. So, they raise the red flag of surrender to those powers and are overcome by them and made slaves. So wrote the apostle Peter:

"While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage." (II Peter 2: 19)

The man of the flesh, who lives merely to please the body and the flesh, is a "slave of corruption," of immorality and vice. The sarkikos man has his reasoning or justification, his excuses, for living such a morally reckless life, a life of pleasure, indulgence, deviance, and perversion. His life is all about "the pleasures of sin." (Heb. 11: 25) His fleshly depraved nature produces "vile affections" (Rom. 1: 26) for it is infected with the disease of sin, with the curse pronounced upon all men by the one sin of Adam (Rom. 5).

Men of the world, men who are without the Spirit, often promise "liberty" to others through the advice and philosophy that they promote. Especially is this true with the worldly wise, with "the mighty" of this age, with the worldly "nobility," the wealthy and successful, with "the disputers of this age." The most immorally debased people, the worst criminals, have their justifications for such a hedonistic life. Their motto is "let us eat and drink today for tomorrow we die." (I Cor. 15: 32) Their idea of "carpe diem" or "seizing the day" equates with having as much physical pleasure as possible. In Greek society, as in others, there were "pleasure cults," which were more like clubs for those seeking to please the flesh. Many of the religious cults had orgies, and paid prostitutes, and all kinds of lewd behavior. We may mention the feasts of Bacchanalia, of the philosophy of the Epicureans and Dionysus as examples. Wrote Paul along this line:  

"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,  backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,  undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them." (Rom. 1: 28-32)

That is the description of the man governed by either the soul or flesh. Immoral behavior is compared to sweet tasting food in the bible. Men do it because it brings pleasure, even though the pleasure often brings pain afterwards. Perversion and deviancy are fun. Men would rather participate in worldly parties and festivals, as Peter described when he wrote: 

"For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry." (I Peter 4: 3 NIV)

The NASB translation translates as "having pursued a course of indecent behavior, lusts, drunkenness, carousing, drinking parties, and wanton idolatries." It is the party spirit, the lust for the "wild side" of life. We see this in the unbelievers among the redeemed Israelites who sinned and died under divine judgment in the wilderness. Wrote Paul:

"Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand." (I Cor. 10: 7-8)

By "rose up to play" denotes a making merry, a "partying." It was lewd and debauched. All was designed to please the flesh and the lusts of it. Though these fake believers had been brought out of bondage in Egypt, yet they showed that they were still in bondage to the lusts of the flesh. It is ironic. In the above words of Peter such "playing" involved debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing, and such things. Wrote Paul along this line:

"Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law." (Gal. 5: 19-23)

There are two sources, two governing principles, that produce human behavior. One is the flesh (which in this context would include the soul) and the other is the Holy Spirit. Each one is known by the things each produces. Both the Romans 8 text (above) and the Galatians 5 text (above) affirm this. 

"Works" is from the Greek word "ergon" the root word for many words in English, such as in ergonomics. Strong says it means "business, employment, that which any one is occupied," or "that which one undertakes to do, enterprise, undertaking," and "any product whatever, any thing accomplished by hand, art, industry, or mind." We might also include in "ergon" the idea of "energies," or "activities," or "practices" (habits). Paul did not use this word when he referred to those things produced by the Holy Spirit but rather used the word "fruit." Doubtless the "fruit" involves works, deeds, and activities, yet the choice of "fruit" instead of "works" is most interesting. Works of the flesh versus fruit of the Spirit.

Those who are "of the flesh" and who "walk after the flesh" focus their minds upon "the things pertaining to the flesh," to its desires. Those who are "of the Spirit," and who "walk after the Spirit" focus their minds upon "the things pertaining to the Spirit." 

In the passage above from Romans chapter eight, Paul spoke of "law" in several ways. There is "the law of the spirit of life," and "the law of sin and death," and "the law" and "law of God" (references to the OT scriptures). The idea behind each of these uses of "law" is that of "governing principle." The first definition of "law" given in dictionaries is that of a civil code of conduct, or rules contained in statutes. But when we speak of "physical laws," such as in law of gravity, law of motion, laws of thermodynamics, etc., the meaning does not refer to statutes and ordinances but to observable governing principles. Even in the social sciences there are laws of human behavior. A law is what governs conduct. 

God's moral law was given to govern man's thinking and behavior. But, it was "weak" (impotent or powerless) on account of "the flesh." The law, Paul said, is "spiritual." But, a man without the Spirit is carnal, fleshly, hedonistic. His sinful nature is opposed to the law and word of God. Thus, he has "enmity" towards God, is at war against him and his spiritual law, and so "is not subject to the law of God." But, "what the law (statutes) of God could not do" was to give man liberation from his flesh and his sinful nature. The law was never intended to be the means for man's redemption. It was designed to reveal to man his bondage, his impotence to do what is right and pleasing to the Lord. "The man who is after the Spirit," on the other hand, is the one who "sets his mind (thinking) upon the things of the Spirit." 

If a man kept a record of what he thinks about, and about what he does, he would discern what was governing him. Being possessed by the Spirit results in being governed by the Spirit. The entrance of the Spirit of God into the spirit of a man brings spiritual "life." "The law (ruling principle or power) of the Spirit" says the apostle, liberates one from the bondage of the flesh and sinful nature, sets free from "the law (ruling principle or power) of sin and death." The words "things of the spirit" are what is meant by the singular word "spiritual" (pneumatikos). The words "Spirit of life" mean "life giving Spirit," being an objective genitive.

W. E. Vine said:  

"The phrase “the Spirit of life,” is not subjective, “the Spirit who has life,” but objective, “the Spirit who gives life.” “It is the Spirit who quickeneth” (John 6:63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.")." (Collected Writings)

A physical law or scientific law is a scientific generalization based on empirical observations of physical behavior (i.e. the law of nature). It is a word that denotes what is universally observed to occur in regard to a given event or situation. In the case of human behavior, in relation to God, everyone born of Adam is under the curse of original sin. That curse has resulted in man's alienation of affection towards God and holy or spiritual things. In this condition "there is none that does good, no not one." There is "none that seeks after God." (See Rom. 3: 10-18) Under the law of sin and death the sinner's heart is "fully set on doing evil." (Eccl. 8: 11) His will is a slave to his flesh, being governed by the "law of sin." Unless the Spirit changes his will and beliefs he will remain a slave to the flesh. The Spirit must work in the sinner "both to will and to do" the things that are spiritual and pleasing to God, and things related to salvation. (Phil. 2: 13) The will of the sinner is under the governing power of sin, of the flesh and its lusts. "The law of sin and death" speaks to the governing power of sin and death. It takes a greater power, another law, "the law of the Spirit of life," to liberate from this law and power of sin.

Said one commentator:

"The "law (principle) of the Spirit" is analogous to the "law (principle) of aerodynamics" and it's effect on lifting a plane off the ground thus "countering" effects of the "law (principle) of gravity" (see F B Meyer's note). The Spirit similarly lifts believer's lives to a new plane, to "fly" at a new altitude that heretofore was not possible under the "law of sin and of death" when they tried to attain righteousness in their own power and/or by keeping the Law (or religious rules - anything that we do with the intent to try to make us more pleasing to God." (See here)

Paul used "law" in the sense of governing principle also in Romans 7. There he wrote:

"I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin." (Rom. 7: 21-25)

Paul says that the "law of sin" is "another law" in addition to "the law of God," to the governing power of the Spirit and the word. There are two different Greek words for "another." One is from "allos" and means "another of the same sort" while "heteros" means "another of a different sort." In "another law" the Greek word is heteros. The law of sin is a law of a different kind than is the law of God (or the law of the life giving Spirit). Both are the same in the sense that both are "laws" but the kind of law is different in nature and effects. The Spirit rules and governs the believer but the psyche and sarx rule and governs the unbeliever. 

Discerning the Spiritual Man

"But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.” 10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ." (I Cor. 2: 9-16)

From what we have already seen from our study on the meaning of spirituality we should be able to easily identify the kind of character we are, or are others. The qualifiers of the spiritual man and the qualifiers of the carnal or natural man are clear and easily recognized. What men think, believe, and do reveals what kind of people they are, whether they are spiritual or fleshly. We have seen that a spiritual man first and foremost is a man who has welcomed the Holy Spirit, welcomed God the Father, and welcomed Christ Jesus and the Gospel and word of God into his heart, soul, mind, and spirit. 

We have seen how the spiritual man is "spiritually minded" and enjoys "life and peace" as a result. On the other hand, those who are "carnally or fleshly minded" are in a state of moral and spiritual death without peace. The spiritual man "walks according to the Spirit" while the fleshly led man "walks according to his fleshly lusts." The Spirit of God transforms the thinking of the believer who is possessed by the Spirit. He has "the mind of Christ," a spiritual mind, as Paul affirms in the above text. He has spiritual insight and understanding. He knows "the mind of the Lord." 

In the above text "the Spirit of God" is set in opposition to "the spirit of the man" and to "the spirit of the world (cosmos)." Likewise "the things of a man (human)" is set in contrast to "the things of the Spirit."

The way in which man acquires the knowledge of himself, and humanity, is by the human spirit. The way in which a man acquires the knowledge of God and spiritual things is by the divine Spirit. No man can know his own mind, his own plans and intentions, but himself, his own spirit. So likewise no one knows God like the Spirit of God. 

One of the "things of the Spirit" that Paul focuses upon is the Gospel and word of God, yea, upon those things God "has prepared for those who love him." These things are "revealed" by the Spirit and the Spirit makes use of the word preached to accomplish that enlightenment in the things of God. It is by receiving the Spirit via the word of God that men come to "know the things of God." Wrote Paul:

"Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3: 2-3)

Through the proclamation and teaching of the scriptures by the Spirit, through "the words," not of "man's wisdom," but of the Spirit's own words, men are given revelation. When a psychikos or sarkikos man hears the Gospel and teachings of scripture, he is unable to receive it. He does not understand it nor believe it. It is contrary to his thinking, going against the grain of his depraved nature. He is not interested in the afterlife but in the present life. His flesh rules his thinking. The thing he values most is "enjoying life to the fullest," and this does not include living a godly life. He is not interested in repentance and turning away from such a life. He thinks that holy living is stupid and a waste of time. The only religion he is interested in is that which allows him to indulge his lusts and bring him sensual and bodily pleasures, for which many of the Pagan cults are infamous. 

The psychikos man, though he is a thinking and rational man, and one who is more educated and cultured, yet he also is highly influenced by the flesh, by his depraved nature, and believes nothing but what he himself thinks is right. He does "whatever seems right in his own eyes." (See Judges 21: 25) He "leans upon his own understanding." (Prov. 3: 5) He follows that "way that seems right unto a man," not knowing that "the end thereof are the ways of death." (Prov. 30:12) "Every way of a man is right in his own eyes," said Solomon, "but the LORD weighs the hearts." (Prov. 21: 2)

The sarx man has no desire to love God, being one of those who are "lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God." (II Tim. 3: 4) Of these Paul said: "whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame—who set their mind on earthly things." (Phil 3: 19)

The psychikos man sees love to God, religion, as irrational. Overly religious people to him are "superstitious," of weak minds. He may even show a willingness to "love God" but it is never the leading reason for his life, not the thing which motivates and controls him. He will not be governed by God or religion but is governed by his own mind, his own soul. The Psalmist describes them: "Who have said, “With our tongue we will prevail; Our lips are our own; Who is lord over us?” (Psalm 12: 4) Such people serve themselves, make gods of themselves. They may pretend to honor God or the gods, for selfish ends, but it is pretense. The sarx man does not want God in his thoughts at all. "God is not in all his thoughts" said the Psalmist. (10: 4) The natural man, the psychikos man, the man guided by his own mind, by his own ego or self, does "not like to retain God in his knowledge." (Rom. 1: 28) 

The natural man, the man who listens to his soul and obediently follows it, has no problem being viewed as a "lover of God," so long as he is the one who designates which "god" or "gods" he shows love. Though the man of the flesh (sarkikos) has his "belly" for his "god," the man of the soul (psychikos) makes his rational mind to be his god. Of course, as we have stated, a man may be both sarkikos and psychikos, sometimes led by his carnal reasoning and sometimes by his fleshly appetites.

God's Elect or World's Elite? XXXVIII

"you who are spiritual" 

(Gal. 6: 1)

In the previous chapter we looked at how the believer is enriched in faith, enriched in his understanding of the being, works, mind, and ways of God. He is enriched in his religion and worship. His religion is "pure and undefiled before God." It is manifested in his good works and in his keeping himself morally clean ("unspotted from the world"). It is intimately connected with "spirituality." But, what is spirituality? It is as broad in definition as is the word "religion." How one defines "spiritual" and "religion" is varied and difficult, much the same way other words are hard to define, such as "life." 

Today, as in previous times, we have lots of claims to being "spiritual." "Spiritualists" and "spiritualism" in the occult world denotes something far different than what Paul or Peter meant when they spoke of people and things being "spiritual." 

Spiritual People

"But he that is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (I Cor. 2: 15)

Who is the "spiritual man"? What characterizes him? How is he defined by the various religions? How is he defined by the new testament writers, the only ones to commonly use the term? Likewise, what are "spiritual things"? Paul had more to say about being "spiritual" in his Corinthian epistles than anywhere else. Why is this? Do the rich and powerful, the wise and learned, of this present age, claim to be "spiritual"? Is every human a spiritual man? Or, is it only the world's gifted elite who are spiritual? Or, is it as Paul affirms, only believers in Christ that are spiritual men and women?

The Greek word for "spiritual" is "pneumatikos" and is an adjective describing a person or thing. Strong says the word means "non-carnal, i.e. (humanly) ethereal (as opposed to gross), or (dæmoniacally) a spirit (concretely), or (divinely) supernatural, regenerate, religious." One of its definitions involves what pertains to the human spirit, to the non physical part of man, to the non material world. Paul was the only one to use it, with the exception of Peter, who used it in one sentence. (I Peter 2: 5) Paul, however, used the term frequently in his epistles and it is from his usage of the word that we discern its meaning. The word is found 26 times in the New Testament. It is translated"spiritual" in every occurrence, so we are not troubled with discordant renderings. The adverb form of pneumatikos occurs two times and is translated "spiritually" in both occurrences. 

Paul used this term more frequently in his first letter to the Corinthians. Being spiritual was important to the Corinthians as it was to the apostle. But, what did they think was the essence of spirituality when they were Pagans versus what Paul taught them about it? Was it even a term used by Pagans? Or, was it a word that Paul gave birth to? Certainly his concept of spirituality is at odds with how most people today, including modern Polytheists, use the term. For instance, the word "spiritualist" (or "spiritualism") is used frequently today and denotes one who believes in communicating with the spirits of the dead. Some think "spiritual" is a synonym for "religious." But, Paul never used it in this sense, although his concept of spirituality involved religion. In fact, he would affirm that false religions are not spiritual, being rather "carnal," "natural," or "fleshly." Many people claim to be spiritual but not religious and so the terms are not synonymous with all.  

Many scholars have written on the meaning of pneumatikos and spirituality. As concerns its usage in the new testament many scholars have rightly focused on how Paul contrasted both "psychikos" ("natural" or "sensual" KJV) and "sarkikos" ("fleshly") with pneumatikos. He also contrasts it with "soma" the word for the physical body. For instance, Trench the scholarly linguist, wrote (here):

"According to Scripture, the psyche (soul - SG), no less than the sarx (flesh - SG), belongs to the lower region of man's being. Since psychikos often is applied to man's lower level, it is no more honorable a word than sarkikos. According to Scripture, the psychikos is one for whom the psyche is the highest motivation of life and action. On the one hand, such a person suppresses the pneuma, the organ of the divine pneuma. On the other hand, the pneuma of the psychikos is as good as extinct, because the divine Spirit has never lifted such a person to the spiritual realm (Rom. 7:14; 8:1; Jude 19)."

What is the governing principle of men who do not possess the Spirit or presence of God? What motivates them? What causes their behavior? What influences their choices? It is often man's soul or psyche, his reasoning, the way he interprets things, that guides his beliefs, choices, and habits. It is often his flesh, denoting his corrupt, beastly, animal instincts, his sensuality, his immoral lusts and pleasures. Though the man governed by the psyche is higher in status and position than the man governed by materialistic and physical desires, yet he is not superior to the spiritual man. Paul, like many Gnostics, viewed men as either men of the flesh, men of the soul, or men of the spirit.

Said Trench:

"According to Scripture, both the sarkikos and the psychikos are opposed to the pneumatikos. Sarkikos and psychikos refer to different ruling principles, each of which is antagonistic to the pneuma. When Paul reminded the Ephesians of how they once behaved, "fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind" (Eph. 2:3), he described them first as sarkikoi and then as psychikoi. In unregenerate people, who live their lives apart from God, there are two forms of life. Although every unregenerate person partakes of both forms, either form may predominate. In the sarkikoi, the sarx predominates; in the psychikoi, the psyche rules. Sarx often is used in the New Testament to refer to the entire domain of our fallen nature, to the source of sin (Rom. 7:18; 8:5). Thus the erga tes sarkos (Gal. 5:19-21) not only are sinful works done in and through the body but also include sinful acts of the mind. More than half of the sins listed in Galatians 5:19-21 belong to the latter class. Although sarx can include everything in man that is alienated from God and from his life, it is limited when contrasted with psyche."

One way of discerning the meaning of "spiritual" is to look at the words used as its opposites, to its antonyms (in addition to any synonyms of it), words such as "carnal," "natural," "sensual," "fleshly," as Trench does above. Thus, "spiritual" denotes what is supra natural, or supernatural, what is not subject to physical laws. Thus also, "spiritual" denotes negatively what is not carnal, not fleshly, not brutish or beastly, not animalistic, and what is positively of a higher excellence, a higher level of thought and life. 

Notice how all three words (standing for types of men) "refer to different ruling principles." This is true. Thus, we may ask of every man - what governs you in your choices and behavior? In neither the soul governed man nor in the flesh governed man does the Spirit and word of God rule. What rules is the ego, the "I," the "self," in men governed by the soul and flesh. 

Trench, citing another, said further: 

"Thus psychikoi are those who "do not have the Spirit" (Jude 19), however much they shine with the most exquisite natural gifts, cultivate the mind, the most excellent part, with all types of education, and direct their life very strictly according to the dictates of reason. Finally he calls psychikoi those to whom he previously had appealed as the wise, the scribes, the scholars, and the leaders of that age that they suppress any natural or acquired rank, in order that human reason may be able to increase with its natural strength "psychikos is one who yields in everything to the reasonings of the soul [psyche], not thinking there is need for help from above," as Chrysostom has rightly stated he is one who has nothing extraordinary in himself except a rational soul, the light and guidance of which alone he follows." 

The worldly wise, the mighty and powerful, the elite, are not spiritual people, but are carnal, natural, and governed by the depraved soul and by the lusts of the flesh. This being so, they are not truly elite, being presumptuous in that respect, not being God's chosen and favored ones. The spiritual man is superior to the carnal man though the former be among the poor and weak of this world and the latter among its ruling rich elite. The elites of the world, those who are judged to be the wise, noble, educated, rich, etc., are mere low level men, men ruled by their depraved souls, by their morally corrupt hearts and minds. 

Trench continued:

"Grotius made similar observations: A psychikos person is not the same as a sarkikos individual. Psychikos is one who is led only by the light of human reason; sarkikos is one who is controlled by bodily desires. But usually psychikoi are in some way sarkikoi as the Greek philosophers, fornicators, corrupters of boys, snatchers of fame, slanderous, envious. Nothing else is denoted here (1 Cor. 2:14) but a person who thrives on human reason alone such as most of the Jews and the Greek philosophers. The question of how to translate psychikos is not easy to answer. "Soulish," which some have proposed, has the advantage of having the same relation to "soul" that psychikos does to psyche, but the word would certainly convey no meaning at all to ordinary English readers. Wycliffe translated psychikos as "beastly," which is equivalent to "animal" (animalis occurs in the Vulgate). The Rhemish Version has "sensual," and this was adopted by the Authorized Version in James 3:15 and Jude 19, instead of "fleshly," which appears in Cranmer's Version and in the Geneva Version. The other three times psychikos is used in the New Testament, it is translated as "natural." "Sensual" and "natural" are both unsatisfactory translations, but "sensual" is even more so now than at the time when our Authorized Version was made. The meanings of sensual and of sensuality have been modified considerably and now imply a deeper degradation than they formally did." 

Pneumatikos is a compound word linking "pneuma" with "tikos." The former simply means "spirit," the literal meaning of which is air, breath, or wind, and generally denotes that which is invisible and non physical, or immaterial. Air and wind are metaphors for spirit beings. The latter (tikos) means "pertaining to, or from." It is what concerns the spirit, or has its source in spirit. In Paul's teaching spiritual is defined as "what pertains to or is from the Holy Spirit." It is set in opposition to psychikos ("natural" or "sensual") and to sarkikos ("fleshly"), as we have observed.

Said one writer on the "pneumatics" among the Greeks and Gnostics:

"The pneumatics ("spiritual", from Greek πνεῦμα, "spirit") were, in Gnosticism, the highest order of humans, the other two orders being psychics and hylics ("matter"). A pneumatic saw itself as escaping the doom of the material world via the transcendent knowledge of Sophia's Divine Spark within the soul." (See here)

Spiritual men are indeed "the highest order of humans," but who are the true spiritual men? Who are the supermen, the elite specimens of humanity? On a lower level are those governed by soul and flesh.

This philosophy of the pneumatics is also what those who embrace the "new age movement" believe. They believe that they are "spiritual" because they are in communication with the spirits of the dead, with the demons, with the intermediary gods, and have the "divine spark" within them, a divinity with which they find all the wisdom and knowledge they need, a kind of mystic intuition and insight. They believe that they have divinity already within themselves, in their own "spirits," and all they have to do is to tune into it or connect with it. Many of them call this inner divinity "the Christ within you," or "the god within you," or "the secret knowledge that is within you." 

The author says further:

"In the New Testament a contrast is made between the psychikoi and the pneumatikoi, in the former of whom the mere animal soul predominates, the latter exhibiting the working of a higher spiritual nature (Jude 19; Cor. 2:14–15; compare also 15:44–46). In the Valentinian system this contrast is sharpened, and is made to depend on an original difference of nature between the two classes of men, a mythical theory being devised which professed to account for the origin of the different elements in men's nature; the psychic element being something higher and better than the mere material element, but immeasurably inferior to the pneumatic. It may well be believed that in the language of the Gnostic sects, the "pneumatici" are "spiritual men who have attained to the perfect knowledge of God, and been initiated into these mysteries by Achamoth" herself (Adv. Haer. I. 6, 1), ordinary Christians being branded as "psychici.""

In the Gnostic belief system, hylics, also called somatics (from Gk σώμα (sōma) "body"), were the lowest order of the three types of human. The other two were the psychics and the pneumatics. Humanity thus comprised matter-bound beings, matter-dwelling souls, and the matter-free or immaterial spirits. Somatics were human in form, but since their entire focus was on the material world, such as eating, sleeping, mating, or creature comforts, they were seen as doomed. The pneumatic saw himself as escaping the doom of the material world via secret knowledge, through initiation into the "mysteries." Somatics were thought to be incapable of understanding or insight. As we will see, Paul would agree that what is spiritual denotes a higher state of being or consciousness and also that such an elevated state involves possession of special knowledge. Where Paul would disagree with the Gnostics, however, is in how to properly define spiritual and who to judge as being spiritual. Paul would also agree that spiritual knowledge was integral to being spiritual, or having spiritual life. Said another on the subject:

"Barclay - Paul has just been talking about the difference between the man who is spiritual (pneumatikos), and who therefore can understand spiritual truths, and the man who is psuchikos, whose interests and aims do not go beyond physical life and who is therefore unable to grasp spiritual truth. He now accuses the Corinthians of being still at the physical stage. But he uses two new words to describe them. In 1 Corinthians 3:1 he calls them sarkinoi. This word comes from sarx which means flesh and is so common in Paul. Now all Greek adjectives ending in -inos mean made of something or other. So Paul begins by saying that the Corinthians are made of flesh. That was not in itself a rebuke; a man just because he is a man is made of flesh, but he must not stay that way. The trouble was that the Corinthians were not only sarkinoi they were sarkikoi (sarkikos), which means not only made of flesh but dominated by the flesh. To Paul the flesh is much more than merely a physical thing. It means human nature apart from God, that part of man both mental and physical which provides a bridgehead for sin. So the fault that Paul finds with the Corinthians is not that they are made of flesh--all men are--but that they have allowed this lower side of their nature to dominate all their outlook and all their actions." (As cited here)

Again, the discussion centers around what it is that governs a man's thinking and behavior.

The same writer says:

"John Eadie Comments: Pneumatikos is, indeed, in a generic sense opposed to sarkikos (pertaining to what is human or characteristic of human nature = human, natural) in 1 Corinthians 9:11, and in Ro 15:27; while in 1 Corinthians 15:44-46 pneumatikos is employed in contrast with psuchikos (natural, sensual.)-the latter term descriptive of an animal body, and the former of a body elevated above animal functions and organization, with which believers shall be clothed at the last day. Similar usage obtains in Eph 6:12; 1 Peter 2:5; 1 Corinthians 10:3; 1 Corinthians 4:3. But in all other passages where, as in Eph 1:3, the word is used to qualify Christian men, or Christian blessings, its ruling reference is plainly to the Holy Spirit. Thus-spiritual gifts, Ro 1:11; a special endowment of the Spirit, 1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Corinthians 14:1, etc.; spiritual men, that is, men enjoying in an eminent degree the Spirit, 1 Corinthians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 14:37; and also in Galatians 6:1; Romans 7:14; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; and in 1 Corinthians 2:13, “spiritual” means produced by or belonging to the Holy Spirit. Therefore the prevailing usage of the New Testament warrants us in saying, that these blessings are termed spiritual from their connection with the Holy Spirit. (Commentary on Ephesians)" (Ibid)

So then, who is the real spiritual man? In the above definitions we see how the comments are mostly upon identifying "spiritual" people, not spiritual things. Few of the definitions above apply to spiritual things, such as spiritual food, spiritual house, etc. Inanimate and material things, as food and houses, do not have souls, hearts, and minds. They do not have spirit. So, how do we define "spiritual" when it is applied to non human things? Is "spiritual" the same as mystical? As religious? As otherworldly? As metaphysical? As supernatural? As heavenly? As transcendent? As divine? Is spirituality connected with asceticism as some think? How is it connected with knowledge in Gnostic thinking? Is the realm of thought and imagination a spiritual realm? In the new testament it is an adjective as in "spiritual things," "spiritual gifts," "spiritual food," "spiritual drink," "spiritual body," "spiritual blessings," "spiritual songs," "spiritual wickedness," 

"spiritual understanding," "spiritual house," "spiritual sacrifices," "spiritual rock."

In some of these instances "spiritual" seems to carry the connotation of "antitype." This is true with regard to Paul calling the food (quail and manna) and drink (water from a rock) of the Israelites in the wilderness "spiritual." In this sense material things become types of spiritual things (antitypes). 

What was spiritual about the manna and the rock and the drink? If spiritual means immaterial or non physical, then how can there be a "spiritual body"? Is that an oxymoron? Is such a thing not an impossibility with such a definition? Is it not the same as saying "immaterial material"? Like saying "physical spirit?" The same with "spiritual drink" or "spiritual food." How can we speak of non physical material? Clearly the usage of spiritual as an adjective describing physical things proves that spiritual cannot be equated with what is non physical. Many believe that a "spiritual body (soma)" means a "supernatural body," and this is reasonable. It surely means a physical body that is no longer governed by itself, or by the soul, but by the Spirit of God. 

The reasons why the food and drink and the rock were "spiritual" is because they had their source in God and his Spirit, and because those things "concerned" or "pertained to" antitypes, things invisible, to the things they pictorially represented. So Paul says "that rock which followed them" (the Israelites) in the wilderness "was Christ." (I Cor. 10: 4) That is, it was a picture of Christ. The rock, food, and drink were physical things but were spiritual in that they conveyed messages from God. It also means that those things were produced by God, the Holy Spirit. Visible things are often used as metaphors for invisible things. The manna was called "angels food." It is also called "the bread of heaven." (Exo. 16: 4; Neh. 9: 15; Psa. 105: 40; John 6: 31-33)

“And had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the corn of heaven. Man did eat angels’ food: he sent them meat to the full.” (Psalm 78:24-25)

“Manna,” “the corn of heaven,” “angel food,” the "bread of heaven," and “meat” are all different ways of describing the same food. But, it being "spiritual" food did not mean it was not material or physical. Said Dr. Gill:

"And did all eat the same spiritual meat. Meaning the manna; and which the Jews also call "spiritual food", as also their sacrifices, "spiritual bread": not that the manna was so in own nature; it was corporeal food, and served for the nourishment of the body; but either because it was prepared by angels, who are ministering spirits, at the command of God, and hence called angels' food, Psalm 78:25 or rather because it had a mystical and spiritual meaning in it; it was not the true bread, but was typical of Christ, who is so." (Commentary on I Cor. 10: 3) 

Notice how Gill sees the word "spiritual" as sometimes denoting that which is an antitype, the thing represented by visible symbols, to the mystical meaning. It clearly seems to denote such in this text:

"And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." (Rev. 11: 8)

Commented Albert Barnes on the use of "spiritually": "Here it seems to be used in the sense of metaphorically, or allegorically, in contradistinction from the literal and real name." Others agree. We could also substitute the word "divinely" for "spiritually" to denote what God and the Spirit call the earthly city of Jerusalem. Here "spiritually" seems to be equated with "morally" and so may read "which morally is called Sodom and Egypt." "Spiritually called" by whom? By the Spirit of God. 

"Spirituality" is defined as "the quality of being concerned with the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things." Spirituality is a broad concept. Some think it denotes a belief in something beyond the self and the visible world. The Cambridge dictionary defines spirituality as, “The quality that involves deep feelings and beliefs of a religious nature, rather than the physical parts of life.” Collins dictionary says, “Spiritual means relating to people’s thoughts and beliefs, rather than to their bodies and physical surroundings.” The Oxford dictionary defines it as “Relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.” In none of these definitions, however, is there reference to the Spirit of God. If it does not come from or pertain to the Spirit of God, then it is not spiritual.

In the next chapter we will continue our look at how the believer is of a higher status of being because he is possessed and led by the Spirit.

Laboring To Rest

The KJV translates Hebrews 4: 11 as "Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest." The above translation has "be diligent" instead of "labor." "Labor" or "diligent" is from the Greek word "spoudazō" and is elsewhere translated (KJV) as "endeavour (3x), do diligence (2x), be diligent (2x), give diligence (1x), be forward (1x), labour (1x), study (1x)." It means "to hasten, make haste, to exert one's self, endeavour, give diligence."

Notice these various ways the KJV translates the word:

"forward to do" (Gal. 2: 10) 

"endeavored the more abundantly to see your face with great desire" (I Thess. 2: 17)

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God" (II Tim. 2: 15)

"be diligent to come" (II Tim. 4: 9, 21; Titus 3: 12) 

"give diligence to make your calling and election sure" (II Peter 1: 10)

Thus we may substitute these words for the text of Heb. 4: 11 and have

"let us go forward to the entering of that rest"

"let us endeavor to enter that rest"

"let us study to enter that rest"

"let us be diligent to enter that rest"

We have "examples" in two different types of Hebrews who left Egypt and began a journey to Canaan's land, the land of "rest." In Caleb and Joshua, we have true believers who persevered, who did not lose faith in God and his words of promise, who did not murmur and complain, who did not worship the idol, and who did not participate in fornication. The others, those killed by God in the wilderness, whose "carcasses" were strewn in the desert, were the unbelievers, the hypocrites. True believers, the patient and persevering ones, entered God's rest. The unbelievers did not. God is showing us in this who will finally enter God's eternal rest and who will not. 

The message is simply this: Labor on towards the future promised rest. Keep your eyes on the prize. Labor on, or press on, as Paul says: "press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." (Phil. 3: 14) 

Said Dr. Jeremiah Bass on this point (emphasis mine):

"Reach forth, pressing forward for the prize – that’s what it means to labor to enter into God’s rest. Or, as the apostle Peter puts it, “Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God” (2 Pet. 3:12). In other words, all of life is to be lived in light of eternity. My choices and priorities, and the way I spend my time, ought to reflect that. Does it?" (See "The Rest of the Story" here)

Here are some other verses that speak of exerting effort towards the goal of final salvation.

"Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." (Luke 13: 24)

“Do not labor for the food which perishes, but (labor) for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.” (John 6: 27)

"Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it." (I Cor. 9: 24)

"For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life. And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart." (Gal. 6: 8-9)

Some think that this teaches salvation by works. But, this is a non sequitur. What it teaches is that salvation is progressive. A believer is one who has been saved, is presently and continually being saved, and will yet be saved in the future after the resurrection and glorification of believers. What these verses show is that final salvation follows a life of faith, a life of doing the will of the Lord, of doing good works. These verses show that salvation is conditional, not in the Pelagian or Arminian sense, but that salvation in some sense is the result of conditions. But, as Augustine taught, based upon the bible, is that what God requires of us for salvation he freely gives, so that the performance of those conditions is guaranteed or made certain, the result of grace, the gift of unconditional and unmerited love. Wrote the prophet Isaiah:

"LORD, You will establish peace for us, For You have also done all our works in us." (Isa. 26: 12)

The apostle agrees, saying:

"Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." (Heb. 13: 21)

Thus, the very works and effort that believers exert towards the obtaining of the prize are the products of God's working. Thus, he gets the credit. Also, the reward given to those who persevere and labor to enter is not merited, for their very perseverance is the result of God's grace and his internal work in the soul and spirit.

Staying focused on the prize, and desiring it above all things, will cause one to persevere and endure. Those who give up, who "faint," or quit the race, manifest that they did not truly desire the prize to start with, having judged it as not worth the effort. These, like the shallow ground hearer in the parable, "persevere for awhile but when persecution arises because of the word by and by he is offended" and falls away. They were half-hearted believers, shallow in every respect, having "no root in themselves," that is, no firm connection with Christ. 

God's grace and work receive all the credit for all that is involved in salvation. So Paul said:

"But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." (I Cor. 15: 10)

"For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?" (I Cor. 4: 7 NIV)

It seems to be an oxymoron to speak of laboring to find rest. But, so it is. The slothful man will never truly enjoy rest. Said Solomon: "The sleep (rest) of a laboring man is sweet" (Eccl. 5: 12) The hardworking man enjoys his rest far more than does the lazy man. Again, Solomon said: "As the door turns upon his hinges, so does the slothful upon his bed." (Prov. 26: 14) The truth is, lazy people do not really know the joy of peaceful rest. All true believers are "laboring" men and women. On the other hand, hypocrites are lazy servants. In the day of judgment the Master will say to some "you wicked and slothful servant" (Matt. 25: 26) before he condemns them to punishment. 

The true believer is "not slothful in business," but is rather "fervent in spirit" in "serving the Lord." (Rom. 12: 11) This is because believers love to live and labor for the Lord. They too find will and strength to endure hard labor for the Lord because they know that they have a reward in Heaven. Lazy servants, lukewarm believers, will not inherit eternal life. Said the apostle: "That you be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." (Heb. 6: 12)

Faith and patience (endurance) are not qualities of the slothful but rather of the hard working. It is they who are seekers and who are characterized "by patient continuance in well doing" who obtain eternal life. (Rom. 2: 7)

"Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord." (I Cor. 15: 58)

You Will Gladly Forget Your Life?

"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind." (Isa. 65: 17 nasb)

The statement about those who have eternal life in the new heavens and earth not remembering the former old heavens and earth, and by inference, their history and life in it, is profound and worth meditating upon.

How much will we remember of our lives on earth? How much will we remember about the history of the world, of the old heavens and earth? 

Problem: will we not remember the life of Christ upon the old earth? Will that be forgotten? Will the gospel be forgotten? How could it? But, if the former things of old earth are not remembered, would this not include our knowledge of the life of Christ, of the story of man and his redemption? 

Problem: if we know that our family and loved ones are in Hell, how can we be happy in heaven? Would one possible solution be in the fact that former things are not remembered? 

Will it be a case where we gladly forget the old world in which we were born and lived?

What think ye?

God's Elect or World's Elite? XXXVII

"One Lord, one faith, one baptism" 

(Eph. 4: 5)

We have already seen how the believer is "enriched" (or "abounds") in 1) wisdom, 2) knowledge, 3) power and authority, 4) riches and inheritance, 5) logos or speech, 6) birth, class, and status. We have seen how "status" was very important to the Sophistic and elitist thinking of the Corinthians, including many who became converts and members of the church in Corinth. Sophistic and Greek ideas about status in the world were ingrained in the minds of the first converts in Corinth (and in other parts of the world too). This included ideas about  

1) being "gifted," by nature or the god(s), especially in wisdom, knowledge, rhetoric, and 

2) being "graced" or favored by the god(s), and 

3) being "chosen" by the god(s) (by way of merit, or in order to give excellencies), and 

4) being of a higher "calling" or station in the world, and 

5) being  "sanctified," i.e. distinguished, special, "set apart" from others, and 

6) being "noble" or high born, naturally superior in family and ancestry

These are the chief areas of status. They are the standards of measure for determining elite rank. This is true with status in "the age that now is" as well as in "the age to come." The former deals with status within human society, within the social world, and the latter deals with the church or body of Christ, with the society of believers in Jesus, with status with God in Christ. 

Elite status with God is not determined by elite status in the world. In fact, as we have seen, Paul avers that very few of the world's elite have good standing or status with God. Being unbelievers "the wrath of God abides upon them." (John 3: 36) This is contrary to the thinking of the world, especially of its rich ruling elite. They rather believe that their status in the world proves that they are the ones that God or the gods have favored or chosen. They believe their superior wisdom and knowledge, their superior gifts of speech and reasoning, etc., are evidences of their favored and elite status. 

Yet, as we have seen, when we look closer at the subject, believers in Jesus, though not now the elite of the present evil world, are nevertheless the truly elect, the ones favored of God and blessed with wisdom and knowledge, riches, and gifts, that far surpass anything unbelievers possess, although what they now possess is but a foretaste or down payment, for their elite status will become fully manifested in the age to come.

We have focused on Paul's words in his first epistle to the Corinthian believers where he said "you are enriched by him in everything," mentioning specifically the believer's enrichment in "all utterance (logos) and knowledge." (1: 6) We have seen how he also depicted the believer as being superior to the Sophist elites of Greek society in several other areas besides speech and knowledge, such as in wisdom, power, authority, rights and privileges, in family connection and noble birth, etc. In this chapter we will look at how the believer excels the unbeliever in regard to faith and religion.

Enriched In Faith

"Therefore, as you abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all diligence, and in your love to us, see that you abound in this grace also." (II Cor. 8: 7)

Enriched in faith would encompass several things. Faith, in the sense of subjective "trust" in another, or in God, is one way in which the believer is "enriched," increasingly "abounding" in his confidence in God and his word and promises as he is tutored in faith by the Holy Spirit. His convictions become firmly settled in his heart and mind as he increases in faith. There is a being "persuaded" and a being "fully persuaded." (Rom. 4: 21; 14: 5) Christians, being thus enriched, become more and more confident of the truth of the scriptures as they live the Christian life and "grow in grace and in knowledge of the truth." (II Peter 3:18) In fact, "confidence" would be a good word to use in some passages rather than "faith" or "belief."

But, "faith," or "the faith," oftentimes denotes not subjective trust or the act of believing, but denotes objective faith, that which is believed, i.e. "belief." In this sense "faith" or "belief" denotes the believer's "articles of faith," or religious "creed." Thus, by "the faith" is denoted the whole Christian system, or the entire written revelation. It is used as a synonym for "the doctrine," and for "the truth." Sometimes "the faith" is equated simply with "the word" (logos, translated as "utterance" in Corinthians). 

Let us notice some passages where "the faith" has such a meaning. The Greek noun for "faith" is "pistis" and one of its definitions is "the religious beliefs of Christians." In this definition, "faith" is almost always used with the definite article "the." 

The Faith Given To All Men

"Because he has appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained; whereof he has given assurance (pistin) unto all men, in that he has raised him from the dead." (Acts 17: 31)

The word "assurance" is from "pistin" and we must inquire as to why in this one place, and no other, did the KJV translators so translate it. But they are not alone. Others are similar to the KJV. Some give "proof" or "evidence" for the Greek word. None give "faith" or "belief" as the best English equivalent and yet this is the common way it is translated in all other places. 

There are several places in the new testament where "faith" is said to be given to some while not given to others. Faith is "the gift of God." (Eph. 2: 8; Etc.) Jesus said "no one can come to me except it be given to him of my Father." (John 6: 65) Thus, Paul affirms "all men do not have faith." (II Thess. 3: 2) But, it may well be said, all men have religious belief. But, the text in Acts 17: 31 says that God has given faith or belief to all men. Is this a contradiction? Obviously, translators realize that by "faith" (assurance or proof), in this instance, is used in the sense of "the faith," that is, of things to be believed, of the objects of faith. It is objective faith not subjective faith.

Faith, in this sense, is not mere opinion or unproven theory. The "faith" that God has given to all men is a set of facts, facts which have been verified. As such it is to be received by all creatures of God. To reject God's proofs, his testimony given in scripture, is most rebellious and merits condemnation, death, and everlasting punishment. When men reject God's revelation, his prophets and commissioned heralds, yea, his own Son and his oracles, they are rejecting the faith that God has given to them. The resurrection of Christ was the stamp of approval, the undeniable proof, of the veracity of the divine revelation of the holy scriptures.

The rejection of God's faith, God's religion, results from inborn depravity and original sin, from the bias and prejudice of carnal hearts and minds at war with God. This sin of rejecting God's revelation is increased even more when men not only refuse to worship God but give to other imagined gods and goddesses their religious devotions. Wrote the apostle John:

"If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son." (I John 5: 9)

Men do not have a problem believing "the witness of men," especially when perjury is a serious crime. But, why then do they generally reject the "witness of God"? The resurrection of Christ, besides all the miracles of the Bible, demonstrates the reliability of the scriptures, of the apostles who were eye and ear witnesses of the things that Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God, did and said. The verse at the heading of this chapter says that "the faith" is none other than a "declaration of those things most surely believed among us" as believers of the word of God and of the witnesses' testimonies of the resurrection of Christ. Even the testimony of the eye witnesses, of the apostles, was attested to by miracles and supernatural phenomena. 

What a superior "faith" has God given to all men by the fact of the resurrection and glorification of Christ! The proof for the Christian faith lies in the resurrection of Christ. His resurrection, if true, is proof of his claims, which included claims of inspiration, claims to speaking without error. The fact of his resurrection is indisputable. Wrote Luke the historian: "To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days..." (Acts 1: 3) The "infallible proofs" are the foundation, the essential elements of "the faith" that God has given to all men by the resurrection of Christ. The resurrection of Christ substantiated the authority and truth of the holy scriptures. 

The superiority of this faith, this body of beliefs, lies chiefly in the fact that it is worship of the one true and living God. All false belief, all false worship and religion, has as its foundation a belief in a false god or gods. Of all Gentile false religions the apostle wrote: "the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons." (I Cor. 10: 20) Notice how all false faith and religion is "not to God," that is, not directed to the one true and living God, but is rather directed to idols, which in themselves are nothing, non entities, yet they are connected with demons which are real, as symbol is to substance, they being false gods, or demigods. Earlier Paul also said:

"We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. However, there is not in everyone that knowledge." (I Cor. 8: 4-7)

When Paul says "we know," he intends believers in Christ, believers in the holy books. Christians are they who know that there is but one God, known from ancient times as "Father," the Creator of all things. This is not believed by all polytheistic religions. Christians also know that the Father is one with his one and only Son, the Lord Jesus Christ and that "through him" are all things. Such a "faith" or set of beliefs is what is embraced by Christians as foundation for their entire belief system and it is unique to them only. So Paul says "there is not in every man that knowledge." What does "that" refer to? Is it not to the propositions given by the apostle? To possess "that knowledge" is what constitutes one a believer or Christian. To not possess that knowledge constitutes one an unbeliever, an "infidel." Further, the scriptures testify abundantly that faith in the gospel, in Christ, in the holy scriptures, guarantees eternal salvation, while disbelief assures of final condemnation and eternal punishment. 

Bible Description Of False Religion

False religion, as previously stated, is never characterized in scripture as being a "faith," although it is so used today. To Paul the Pagans were people of "no faith," even though religious. We have observed how Paul referred to apostate Judaism as "the Jews religion" and of how James spoke of "pure religion" (and by implication "corrupt religion"). Other words used in the Bible to denote false religion and belief are "worship," "devout," "devotion," "way." Notice this text:

"Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, You men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious." (Acts 17: 22)

"Too Superstitious" is from the Greek word "deisidaimonesteros" and is often interpreted to mean "more religious," or perhaps  "overly religious," or "very religious." It involves fearing or reverencing a deity or deities, or demigods. It literally means “fearers of demons.” This fact would lend credence to the KJV's use of the words "too superstitious," for superstition often involves the spirit world. W.E. Vine says that δεισιδαιμονία (Feminine Noun Feminine of deisidaimon) literally means being "reverent to the deity" (deido, "to fear;" daimon, "a demon," or "pagan god"), occurs in Acts 17:22 in the comparative degree." 

Why does Paul refer to the deities of the Athenians as demons to be feared and worshiped, rather than as "gods" (Greek theoi)? He could have used either term in his Athenian address. He used both at times when he referred to the deities of the Polytheists in his writings. In fact, some Pagan Athenians supposed that Paul taught that Jesus was a demon or demigod. The Athenian demon servers (worshipers) said: "He seems to be a setter forth of strange gods (Greek demons): because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection." (Acts 17: 18) 

In the Greek pagan world there was a hierarchy of gods and goddesses. There were the lower and the higher gods. The higher gods were the gods who were never human, were always gods. The lessor gods, the demigods and/or demons, were lower level gods, were mortals who became immortals, such as may be seen in the case of some of the Greek heroes. In ancient Greece the word "daimon," derived from the Greek verb “daiesthai,” meant to divide, or to distribute, and had decidedly positive overtones. From the demons it was expected that good fortune could be obtained, they being the distributors of it. 

There were other Greek compound words that have "daimon" as one of its words besides "deisidaimonesteros," such as kakodaimon, agathodaimon, or eudaimon. The “good” demons were referred to as “Eudaimon,” Eudaimonia, or as “Agathodaimon,” meaning connotatively "noble spirits." The not so good daimons, resembling the jinns, or genies of Arab folklore, were called “Kakodaimon,” such as the “Keres,” daughters of Nyx (Goddess of night) and Erebus (personification of shadows), who escaped from the box, opened by Pandora. Inspired thoughts, intelligent observations, and creative force were all believed to come from a person's daimon according to Plato and Socrates. The demon or ascended spirit possessing a person was the reason for a person being a "genius" according to Greek and ancient thought. The demon was a kind of tutor. 

The Pagans who heard Paul denouncing the gods of the polytheistic world, said this about Paul's teaching regarding the gods:

"Moreover you see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods (theos), which are made with hands." (Acts 19: 26)

Why would the Pagans object to Paul's affirming that the pantheon of gods of the nations were "not made with hands"? Were their gods "made with hands"? Obviously these are the idols made of gold, silver, or costly stone. Paul affirmed, as we have seen, that the idols were "nothing at all," not real gods. They were imaginary deities that men set up in their minds and imaginations. (See Eze. 14: 3) As previously stated, though the idols are nothing but physical productions, statues, nevertheless the demons and gods of which they are a representation are real. Paul, in writing to the Galatian believers who were once polytheists, said: "But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods (theos)." (Gal. 4: 8) Most commentators think that "by nature" the apostle means "not real." 

Demons are demigods, believed to have divine or super human power, existing between heaven and earth, playing the role of intermediaries between humans and gods. "Demigod" is "a being with partial or lesser divine status, such as a minor deity, the offspring of a god and a mortal, or a mortal raised to divine rank." They were a kind of "half breeds," or hybrids, having a god for one parent and a human for another. The higher gods (theoi) were gods who descended from other gods and had no human parents. 

The Greeks, like other Pagan societies, had what is called a "pantheon" of gods and goddesses. Each polytheistic system had its own pantheon of gods and goddesses. It was a hierarchical system in the world of spirit. There were the firstborn gods, then the later begotten gods, then the demon gods, then the gods of the various physical substances, of emotions, etc. So there is a god of the wind, a god of the water, a god of the sky, a god of luck and fortune, a god of war, etc. 

Paul's use of the word "deisidaimonesteros" (KJV "too superstitious") is debated by scholars as I have intimated. Was it a positive or negative remark? Was it a kind of flattery? Flattery often was first on the list of priorities for a Sophist trained rhetorician as a method for setting the mood of an audience and winning their favor at the outset. But, Paul was not one to flatter in the least. So, to translate it as "I see that you are very religious" is probably not the proper translation to convey Paul's meaning. On the other hand, to translate it as "I see that you are too (or overly) religious" would have Paul beginning with a negative observation about the people, and though this is possible, it does not seem correct either. Some think that Paul was being ingenious in using "deisidaimonesteros," cleverly choosing this term precisely for the sake of its ambiguity, a kind of "back handed compliment." That is better. But, perhaps the literal is even better, and so we should translate as "I see that you all reverently fear the demons or demigods." In this same discourse to the Athenians Paul said:

"For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you." (Acts 17: 23)

"Devotions" is from the Greek word "sebasma" and denotes "whatever is religiously honoured, an object of worship of temples, altars, statues, idolatrous images" (Strong). 

Notice that religious devotion must have an "object of worship." If we judge faith and religion by the quality of the deity or deities religiously served, then the faith of the Christian is superior to all other religions and belief systems. Another word, similar to "devotion" is the word "devout." It is used of people who are very religiously minded. "Devout" is from the Greek word "eulabes," an adjective literally denoting "taking hold well." It denotes one dedicated to religion. 

In another place, Paul referred to all false religions, most of which are historically polytheistic, as "will worship" or "self-imposed religion." Said Paul about the religion of the Gnostics:

"These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion ("will worship" KJV), false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh." (Col. 2: 23)

Religion and religious exercise involve both internals and externals. The internal involves the state of heart and the mind of the worshiper. The external involves religious ceremony and ritual. Paul acknowledges that false religion has "an appearance of wisdom," a "show," but not the real thing. Elaborate temples, statues of idols, choirs and symphonies, sacrifices and feasts, celebrations, finely dressed priests, numerous altars, toasts and words of praise directed to the various deities, etc., these are the stuff of religion. Of these we will have more to say in the next chapter. Some translators think that "appearance" is not the best translation and say "reputation" is a better word. The Greek word is "logon" (a form of the word 'logos') of which we have spoken already. I think it denotes in this context the rhetoric and message of the false religion, being a reference to the religious language of the various cults. It denotes "wise words," which would be a religion that promotes certain mottoes, certain maxims, proverbs, adages, slogans, formulas, keys of knowledge, etc. 

Paul mentions some of the religious observances of the false religions and their adherents, such as "false humility" and "neglect of the body." Many of these false Pagan religions had all the paraphernalia for exhibiting "humility," such as bowing, kneeling, prostrating of the body, "neglecting of the body" (as in abstinence rituals and vows of fasting and celibacy), yea, even in mutilating the body.   

All false religion is self created. It is the product of man's carnal reasoning in things pertaining to God. It is designed to please the flesh, the carnal man and his appetites, and not to please God. They are religious systems designed by men and for men. These make slaves of men who become bound by them. Bringing men into subjection to a man made religion is to put a "yoke" upon the neck of the worshipers. (See Acts 15: 10) In being "initiated" into one of the Pagan religions (or any false monotheistic religion) with its "mysteries," one became a "servant" (slave) to the deities of those religions, and this always involved itself into allegiance to the priests of those religious sects. Though this "service" to the false deities had its enticements and enjoyable aspects, yet it also had its detriments. All false religions, all false belief systems, have been created by the imaginations of sinful men. But, as we will see, the inspiration for these elaborate belief systems comes from the spirit world.

The Faith vs The Doctrines of Demons

"Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." (I Tim. 4: 1-3)

By "the faith" Paul means "the body of divinity," or "the bible's teachings." Luke, in the verse at the heading of this chapter, describes "the faith" as "a declaration of those things most surely believed among us." 

Notice how "the faith" or doctrine of Christians is set in opposition to the "doctrines of devils (Greek demons)." Paul could have said "faiths (beliefs, religions) of demons," for doctrine is a statement of faith, being religious dogma. However, Paul, as previously stated, never spoke of non Christian religious belief as being a "faith." We today use the word "faith" to speak of a person's religious belief, as when we say "Muslim faith (belief)" or "Pagan faith," etc. But, Paul does not refer to other religions in this way. When he refers to apostate Judaism he calls it "the Jews' religion," not "the Jews' faith." (Gal. 1: 13-14) When Paul refers to false religions he always refers to them as having "no faith," of being "without faith." When Paul says "all men have not faith" (II Thess. 3: 2) he does not mean "all men have not religion." He means all men have not true faith and religion; And, if you do not have Christian faith, then you have no faith.

Notice also how the "doctrines of demons" is a body of "lies," a body of false divinity. Teaching false doctrines is equated with "speaking lies." However, one who is teaching Christian doctrine is speaking truth. Notice also that when bible teaching is referred to it is called "the doctrine," and it is always in the singular. But, the false teachings of men and demons is in the plural, as in "doctrines of demons," "the doctrines and commandments of men" (15: 9; Col. 2: 22), and "various and strange doctrines" (Heb. 13: 9). Paul warns all professing believers to be careful not to be "carried away by every wind of doctrine." (Eph. 4: 14) The doctrine of God is a unified system of teaching, a single system. The doctrines of men and demons are not so. Wrote Paul:

"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." (I Tim. 6: 10; see also verses 20, 2)

To err from "the faith" is to err in religious belief, in things pertaining to God. Rather than depart from the teachings of scripture, believers are exhorted in scripture to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 1: 3) The word "contend" implies opposition, and the Christian is exhorted to affirm and defend the truth in confrontation with those who oppose the Christian faith. Said Paul: "Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." (II Tim. 3: 8) Every false religionist is "reprobate concerning the faith." 

The believer is enriched in faith. His faith is superior. In fact, he is the only one who has faith, true faith. His faith, based upon holy scripture, is truth, is real, is genuine. All those who reject God's revelation are they who "resist the truth," and we might add, resist the Holy Spirit (See Acts 7: 51). This is because they are possessed of "corrupt" and "reprobate" minds. Sin and the depraved nature blinds the sinner. His only hope is in God who is able to deliver him from such a state and enlighten him and give him revelation.

"How Long Is The "Coming" of Christ?" (II)

This posting will be a follow up to my previous posting "How Long Is The "Coming" of Christ?" (here)

J.A. Seiss in "The Apocalypse" (pg. 578-79, here) elaborates on what I presented in that posting, showing how the "coming" of Christ is no singular event nor encompassed within a particular moment or 24 hour day. He said (emphasis mine):

"When we speak of the day of the Lord, or the judgment period, many have the notion that it is but one day, or a very brief space of time. They are consequently led to wonder how we can speak of the impending nearness of that day, and yet look for the rebuilding of a great city then to be destroyed. The difficulty, however, does not lie in the nature of the things, but in the popular misapprehensions of what the day of the Lord means, and the length of the period which it covers. The mistake is in taking the day of the Lord, or the coming again of our Savior, as if one particular moment of time, and one single event or scene were to be understood. What the Scriptures describe as the day of the Lord, and the second coming of Christ, is no more limited to a single event or moment of time than was the day of his first coming, which extended over more than thirty years, and embraced various stages and successive presentations. If we take the prophecies concerning the first advent, we find it impossible to apply them to any one day, year, or scene, in the evangelic history. Micah said that Christ should “come out of Bethlehem” (Ephratah), but Hosea said that he would come “out of Egypt.” Malachi said that he should “suddenly come to his temple,” and Zechariah that he would come to Zion “riding upon an ass, upon a colt the foal of an ass;” whilst, according to Isaiah, “the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali” were to see the “great light.” All these presentations were his coming. He did come when he was born at Bethlehem; he did come out of Egypt; he did come when he announced himself at Nazareth; he did come as a great light among the people of Northern Galilee; he did come riding into Jerusalem on the ass; he did come suddenly to his temple when he twice drove out the money changers; and he came when he reappeared after his resurrection. Each one of these particular incidents is alike called his coming; but they were only so many separate presentations, at different dates, extending through a period of thirty-three years, all of which together are required to make up the first advent as a whole. And just as it was then, so it will be again. The second coming, like the first, is complex and distributive, extending through a variety of successive and diverse scenes, stages, events, and manifestations, requiring as many, if not still more, years." 

I think that any bible believer should be able to understand and accept as true these words of Seiss even though it goes against the "popular" shallow thinking of many upon this subject. 

Seiss wrote:

"The Antichrist does not appear at all amid the scenes of the Apocalypse until after the seven seals have been opened, and six of the succeeding trumpets have been sounded. How many years those seals and the six trumpets may consume we are not informed, but we have every reason to believe that they may be counted by tens, if not by scores, subsequent to the opening of the door in the heaven and the taking up of the saints, which is the first act in the great drama. The space occupied in narrating what occurs under the seals and trumpets would indicate this. The long waiting of the Ten Virgins for the coming of the Bridegroom, which is subsequent to the first translation, indicates the same thing. Forty years, at least, perhaps a whole jubilee period of fifty years, or even a full seventy years, answering to the period during which the judgment was upon Israel for its sins, are likely to be embraced in what the Scriptures call the day of the Lord, and the second coming and revelation of Jesus Christ."

Seiss is a Pre Tribulation Premillenialist. He has Dispensational leanings. Yet, he did not, like many of them, believe that Antichrist would come into the world till late in the great tribulation. Many today want to put the appearance of the Antichrist in Rev. 6: 1 in the appearing of the white horse rider. But, in this they are wrong. Though Seiss is wrong on his putting the rapture in Rev. 4: 1, yet he is right in where he chronologically puts the rise of Antichrist.

When he says that "many years" take in the time of the seals and trumpets of the Apocalypse he is correct. Though he does fit Daniel's Seventy Weeks prophecy of the seventieth week (7 years) into the time period of the day of judgment (great tribulation) he does not limit the entire time period of the tribulation to those seven years, but sees it as much longer, as I do. See my posting "Tribulation Period - 7 Yrs. Or More?" (here). Though I do not think the great tribulation, or the day of wrath and judgment, will be twenty to fifty years, yet I do believe it will be longer than seven years as does Seiss. 

Seiss wrote:

"Supposing, then, that Babylon should not even begin to be rebuilt until after the day of the Lord has commenced in the rapture of the eagle-saints (Luke 17:34-37; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17; Revelation 4:1), there still would be ample time for it to come up in all the grandeur and force indicated before the great acts of destruction in which that day reaches its consummation. Much can be accomplished in forty, fifty, or seventy years."

Seiss wrote this in the latter part of the 19th century. Were he alive today he would see how the world has the technology today to build a new mammoth city in quick time, especially when all the world is united in its construction.

But, the rapture does not take place before the building of Babylon. Babylon will be built either immediately before the great tribulation or at its commencement.

We do not have two comings of the Lord in Revelation, one in Rev. 4: 1 (rapture) and the other in Rev. 19. There is only one second coming. There are so many arguments to prove this. We have mentioned them many times.

In closing let me say that the main point of this posting is to see how the "coming" of the Lord, or his "day," is not to be limited to a single day but rather encompasses years, just as did his first coming. 

On the building of the commercial city of Babylon (Rev. 18) I will have more to say in an upcoming post, the Lord willing.

Ordo Salutis Thoughts

I have written on the "ordo salutis" much over the years, both in this blog and in the Baptist Gadfly (see link) and have criticized the "born again before faith" idea, or said in another way, "regeneration precedes faith." I have shown that this is not the historic faith of Baptists until the rise of Hyper Calvinism, especially in its Hardshell form. I have shown how the historic view of Baptists, and of the vast majority of Christians, is that faith and regeneration (or new birth) are inseparable. If this is so, then arguing over which comes first serves no good purpose except to create unneeded division and strife of words, mere logomachy. In fact, a large majority of those who promote the "regeneration before faith" idea will avow that regeneration instantly produces evangelical belief in Christ and the Gospel so that there is only a priority of regeneration to faith logically, not chronologically. I have addressed this apology in previous writings. 

It seems to me that the biblical writers did affirm that the new birth was by means of faith, a faith sovereignly given to the elect. In other words, they taught that conversion via the Gospel (the chief elements of which are love, faith, and repentance) produced a regeneration. They did not teach that regeneration produced a conversion as the "regeneration precedes faith" view affirms. For, "regeneration (new birth) before faith and repentance" is the same as "regeneration before conversion."

Some Calvinists say that regeneration is one side of a single coin while conversion is the other side. That is perhaps allowable to say, in some sense, however the more biblical way of expressing the matter is to say that regeneration is conversion, or that regeneration or new birth is the result of conversion.

Certainly John 1: 11-13 shows that conversion precedes regeneration, or is the same thing. Does it not? "To as many as received him to them gave he the right to become children of God." It does not say "as many as he gave the right to become the children of God received him." 

In either case, the fact is that one is not born again who is not converted, who is not a Christian.

The Coming Collapse of the Dollar?

I believe what FDR said when he said:

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

This may very well apply to the Covid Pandemic. It may indeed be purposely caused by the world's global elite. Evidence for this seems to be mounting.

It may also apply to other things now being secretly planned by the world's ruling elite. I suspect that the Democrats in the USA are supporters of a new world order where there is one government, one currency, one system of weights and measures, one trading center, etc. In order to bring this about, the Pandemic, along with a crash of the American dollar, and other things, are means to such a planned end. 

The ruling elites know that a crash of the dollar is coming. They are running up government debt now just like those nearing bankruptcy run up their debt in credit cards even further in anticipation for filing for bankruptcy. 

If you know you are going to go bankrupt in the near future, and you are dishonest and cunning, you will run up the debt as much as possible before filing. Is this what is being done now? Is it part of a plan to bring about a one world currency and banking system? 

The dollar is the currency used now in global trading, and has historically been so, although efforts are at work to change that. The crash of the dollar will force the governments of the world to find a new currency for international trading. What will that currency be? Bitcoin? Or, the new currency of the new world order? 

What think ye?