The Liberating Power of Lovingkindness

"O continue thy lovingkindness unto them that know thee; and thy righteousness to the upright in heart," Psalm 36:10.

If it is that we do not know what the Bible’s "righteousness" is, we may now know, according to this psalm, that it is its "lovingkindness." "Lovingkindness" is, in the Bible, another term for "righteousness," even as it says, "I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness," Hosea 2:19, and, "I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart…I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation," Psalm 40:10.

What then is "the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man"? Titus 3:4.

The Bible’s “righteousness” is for the spirit of our conversation's mind, in that it would have our conversation "perfect, as pertaining to the conscience," Hebrews 9:9. What is according to the conscience is without external or outward manipulation, which is why it says, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation," Luke 17:20. What is with "observation" is with religious deeds and labors, and if "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," John 3:6, and if our mind is "to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man," Ephesians 3:16, and if "wisdom strengtheneth," Ecclesiastes 7:19, then the Bible’s salvation is a kindness mainly occurring within the mind.

We learn this fact from how it says, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: that the blessing of Abraham might come," Galatians 3:13,14

"The kingdom of God" is herein understood to be no literal or tangible kingdom, but rather a spiritual procedure to recover the organs of our devotional conversation. Because "God is a Spirit," John 4:24, and because "a spirit hath not flesh and bones," Luke 24:39, this goal cannot be achieved by ay deed or act. If we think that it should, we should question whether or not what is invisible ought to care for what is physical.

A reality without the religious law dominating the conversation's conscience is preached to us through the crucifixion. A transaction occurred on the tree, where one manner of "life" was abolished and where another manner of "life" took the place of that abolished "life." "Life," to the Bible, is a term denoting one’s personal devotional conversation. Through the tree, one type of religious conversation was blotted out while another replaced it, and we know what replaced that "old" religious form from how it says, "He took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham," Hebrews 2:16. 

In the Bible, the word "angel" is used to denote a minister or messenger of the scriptures. If the living God's chief apostle took on the "nature" or the "seed" of Abraham, and if this man Abraham received his blessing not "through the law, but through the righteousness of faith," Romans 4:13, it is then evident that the "nature" or the "seed" of the angel is contrary to this position.

The "angel" is a minister demanding that "righteousness come by the law," Galatians 2:21, while the "nature" of Abraham states, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness," Romans 10:4. The issue at hand is how the word "righteousness" is defined: to the "angel," righteousness is but the appearance of sanctity through religious deeds and laws; to the Bible, “righteousness” is alleviation and continual growth and development of the heart and mind.

But there is an issue. If we would have the Bible’s lovingkindness, and if we would continually advance in its manner of righteousness, we must know its devotional character. This is why it says, "O continue thy lovingkindness unto them that know thee; and thy righteousness to the upright in heart," Psalm 36:10.

Our mind is to become a free canvas for the impression of the Bible’s devotional character. Its impression is not to be our impression. Its impression is not to be the impression of a political religious tradition. When once the mind is willing to stand alone, the mind can then experience its words for knowledge to live by, which is why it says, "Through knowledge shall the just be delivered," Proverbs 11:9. 

Our conversation's conscience is to be delivered from some thing, and "having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances," Ephesians 2:15, we may know that our faith's mind is to quit "the handwriting of ordinances," Colossians 2:14, of whatever Moses should preach, "You are justified by the law," Galatians 5:4. This is how we begin to have a right mind to live by.

What is preached through the illustration of the crucifixion is liberty of mind from the box of a political faith for the mind’s personal devotional growth and development. This life, according to the wisdom within the Bible, is absolutely too short for us to spend it in the box of personal and religious policies. Self-cultivated and inherited ethics limit who we are, and when who we are is limited, the things and people around us suffer. They suffer because we, by our philosophy, care to limit every thing and every one else.

The Bible’s counsel for our conversation’s conscience is the means whereby our heart’s mind is liberated to not only soberly love self, but to also know and love every word that has ever come out of its mouth. This is why it says, “Hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him,” 1 John 2:3,4.

For Jerusalem's Sake

If there was something within the Bible calling for the conversation’s regeneration, what would it sound like? One of the issues I’ve found among individuals wanting to understand the Bible is the problem of expecting the Bible to be what is imagined. This isn’t too cool to do because while the Bible plainly articulates its own character, we venture into it assuming a character for it. By doing so, we miss its essence. 

The Bible advises the Jerusalem of its mind to wake up. It says, “Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O captive daughter of Zion,” Isaiah 52:2. 

These words are present tense. When dipping into the Bible, Jerusalem is presently captive, and this “Jerusalem” is not a reference to any literal connotation we may think of. In the Bible, “Jerusalem” is a “city” and , in context, is a reference to an assembly. We read:

“And they shall call them, The holy people, The redeemed of the LORD: and thou shalt be called, Sought out, A city not forsaken,” Isaiah 62:12. 

“…and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel,” Isaiah 60:14.

“Therefore shall the strong people glorify thee, the city of the terrible nations shall fear thee,” Isaiah 25:3.  

“…the city which is called by thy name…thy city and thy people are called by thy name,” Daniel 9:18,19. 

In context, a “city” is a “people.” In context, “Jerusalem” is an epithet for an assembly of individual conversations reflecting the living God’s devotional character. If a member of “Jerusalem,” one is a figurative member of a congregation whose conversation possesses the Bible’s devotional character. This is why there is a call for Jerusalem to quit their slavery. 

The message is philosophical. There is, within denominations subscribing to a Jewish religion, conversations having the potential to become members of “Jerusalem,” or members of the Bible’s intended congregation knit together in unity by mind. It would be remiss of me not to say that this congregation is “the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven,” Hebrews 12:23, not literally but, again, in mind and in devotional character. 

This assembly, this city, is invisible to the eyes yet visible in character. The Bible’s mind counsels potential members of its assembly and classroom to awake from their denominations and to begin to cultivate the character of their conversation. This cultivation is necessary because the individual is to be a member not of a religious denomination and not of their of self, but of the mind within the Bible. 

The illustration of shaking from the dust sends the mind back to Adam in Eden’s garden. Adam was created from and taken out of the dust. What does this mean? The meaning of “dust” is found in the saying:

“Thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth,” Genesis 28:14.

“And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth,” Genesis 13:16. 

In right context, “dust” equals “seed.” Adam arose from the ground of a seed of people, or from a denominated assembly. The record of Adam in Genesis is an allegory pointing to the regeneration of a conversation from a religiously erroneous denominated world. This train of thought is further emphasized by how it says, “…and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation,” Revelation 5:9. 

Bible philosophy is simple. The goal of the Bible’s philosophy is to redeem the conversation from out of people or nations (denominations) to personally cultivate a conversation matching the devotional character within it. This can’t happen if unwilling to awake or resurrect from one’s present self-cultivated or inherited belief. 

The Bible can only benefit the conversation willing to regenerate from the ground of its belief. Every message within this book, when held in right context, points to the fact of personal devotional resurrection. By letting go of what is believed, a living belief is to be assigned to the conversation, allowing our joy in the Bible to be where we know it should be.  

The Movement

Every movement, organization, or crusade has a mission.

Without a mission, the movement is seemingly put on pause. 

The Bible discusses the movement of the living God’s chief apostle. That “crusade” is understood from how it says, “I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house,” Isaiah 42:6,7. 

The Bible says that this messenger, along with liberating prisoners and healing the blind, is to be given for a covenant of “light.” Is this true? Was the man to become, or to be transformed into a literal covenant? We find our answers by contrasting certain verses:

“Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people,” Isaiah 51:4. 

“For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life,” Proverbs 6:23. 

“…by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many,” Isaiah 53:11. 

“…he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles…the isles shall wait for his law,” Isaiah 42:1-4.

These verses allow us to understand the context behind the Bible alluding to or saying that “one” is given for a covenant. In reality, it is not the man that is to be taken for a covenant, but rather the “law,” the “knowledge,” or the “commandment” that is to come from his mouth. The living God has given no man as a covenant, but rather a specific philosophy from that man. 

The Bible makes a clear separation between that man and that man’s understanding. Our traditional religious or theological culture unlawfully and falsely combines the two, leading us to believe that the man is the understanding and that the understanding is the man. This confusion contributes to a legend that the man is more than a man, even like as it was said of Daniel, “I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee,” Daniel 4:9. 

Why is this present review relevant? Why is it well to separate the fact of the man’s mission from the fiction of the religious tradition emboldening his aura? Why is it important to know the man’a actual movement and to learn how to disassociate the person from the theological theory forced upon that mission? Why does this matter? 

How would you feel if, after you led an intellectual and philosophical movement, your actual cause found itself hidden by an intention given to you by history writers? How would you feel if you, after having died for a cause deeply touching your heart, had your reason for willingly sacrificing yourself turned into something grossly far and contrary from your concern? This is what happened, more than 2000 years ago, to the living God’s chief apostle. 

Mission matters. Fact matters. Reality matters. The man’s actual cause means much to our conversation’s  growth and development. It means much because our devotional experience is to mirror that man’s philosophical and devotional movement. 

This man taught the living God’s “good will.” That “good will” is a commandment or a “law” of devotional wellbeing. We owe it to our conversation’s thoughts and feelings to let it know the experience intended for it. This is why understanding the actual man’s movement matters. This is why he said, “If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death,” John 8:52.