Barnes church of Christ

This week we will be looking at Hinduism. For a starter, just what do you know about Hinduism? It may surprise you to learn that Hinduism is the third largest religion in the world. The first two are: 1) “Christianity” and 2) Islam. While searching for a few facts about Hinduism, it was learned that there is an estimated 1 billion Hindus worldwide; while about 80 percent of the India’s population regard themselves as Hindus. However, about 30 million Hindus live outside of India.
The first question that generally comes to mind is: “Does Hinduism have a “god,” a deity?” There is, as viewed in Hinduism, “One Supreme Reality” know as Brahman, but manifested in many gods and goddesses. Here is one statement found in my search: “The components of Hinduism can vary from individual to individual but generally include the belief that there is one Supreme Being that is the Creator and the Unmanifest Reality, the belief in four divine Veda scriptures, the belief that the universe will go through multiple creation cycles, the belief in karma, the belief in non-injury, the belief in the reincarnated soul and the belief that there are divine beings living in unseen worlds.” To help our understanding of Hinduism; here is another statement I found: “One of the more interesting Hindu teachings it the teaching of non-injury. Non-injury, or nonviolence, is one of the teachings that the spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi used throughout his political career. The idea of non-injury is that all life is sacred and should not be harmed through actions, words or even thoughts. Instead, all life must be revered. Many Hindus are vegetarians because they do not want animals to be harmed in any way as animal life is “life” and should be held sacred.”
Nearly everyone knows something about cows and India. However, here a few things you might not know. Thirty percent of the world’s cattle live in India! Also, there are 26 distinctive breeds of cows in India. Three of the types are: 1) the hump, 2) the long ears, and 3) the bushy tailed. This brings to the question, “Are cows really regarded as “sacred?” The first thing a person visiting India would notice is that there are cows everywhere! As one who has visited India, I can testify that cows indeed are everywhere; and they are free to roam inside stores! To help us see the high place the people of India hold the cow, here is a statement Mahatma Gandhi wrote: “If someone were to ask me what the most important outward manifestation of Hinduism was, I would suggest that it was the idea of cow protection.” There are some who trace the cow’s sacred status back to Lord Krishna, who is one of the “faith’s” most important people. It has been said that he appeared in a herd of 5,000 cows! He is described as “bala-gopala,” which means, “the child who protects the cows;” while another of Krishna’s holy names is “Govinda” which means: “one who brings satisfaction to the cows.” On the other hand, another of their scriptures identifies the cow as the “mother” of all civilization, while its milk is said to nurture the population! However, there is a question when it comes to the cow, which is regarded as “sacred,” the Hindus do not exactly worship the cow as deity; at least this is true of some; however, it is not true of all. On the Hindu calendar, on the 12th day of the 12th month, a cow ritual is performed in Jodhpur place which is in western Indian state of Rajasthan.
Finally, in this article, the question of sacred, there is the Mahabharata, an epic poem and we find Bhishama saying: “Cows represent sacrifice. Without them, there can be no sacrifice … Cows are guileless in their behavior and from them flow sacrifice … and milk and curds and butter. Hence cows are sacred…”
Is one religion as good as another and no worse? You can see that there is a great difference between “the teaching of Christ” and Hinduism! On the one hand, all you need do is just look at the nation of India and compare it with America, over the history of each. While America was advancing and modernizing, India was locked in time! The nation was not allowed to advance, as this is not the nature of Hinduism! While hunger is evident throughout India, there is the cow roaming free; and it is against to law to kill and eat!

Frank R. Williams

As you read this article, keep in mind, the overall subject is: “pluralism,” which says that: “One religion is just as good as any other and is no worse.” The “good” in the statement must be defined or everyone will put their own definition on it. After looking at the meaning of the word, I found two words that defined the word “good,” as used here; the two words are: 1) profitable and 2) advantageous. You may have to think on this for a while! To help with this, a question or two will help: 1) Is good ever unprofitable in the long run? And 2) Is good ever disadvantageous in the long run?
Before leaving the above, hear Paul as he wrote to Timothy: “For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). “Godliness” is piety toward the one true God, the God revealed on the pages of the Bible! “Godliness,” unlike “bodily exercise,” is both “profitable” and to our advantage, “having promise of this life that now is, and of that which is to come.” These words can never be said in truth of any other religion; other than: Christianity as revealed in “the teaching of Christ!” This means that “godliness” is included in “the teaching of Christ;” it is in the gospel of Christ; and it is in the “truth” that has the to power to make us free!
With these thoughts in mind, let us turn our attention to the subject of Peter and his being the first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. In the first place, the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church is not allowed to marry. This doctrine means that Peter is totally unqualified to be Pope! Why is this true? It comes as a total surprise, to some, to learn that Peter was married! Did you question: “How do you know this?” We shall allow the apostle Matthew to answer: “And when Jesus was come into Peter’s house, he saw his wife’s mother laid, and sick of a fever” (Matt. 8:14). We might say, not only did Peter have a wife, but he also had a mother-in-law! But, this is not the only place that we get such information. Paul wrote: “Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” (1 Cor. 9:5). Clearly Paul knew that Peter (Cephas) had a wife and he took her with him in his work in the kingdom! This makes Peter totally unqualified to be Pope! Just as an afterthought, so to speak, Paul wrote of this doctrine which is not of “the teaching of Christ,” but that it would come later than inspiration. Here is what Paul had to say: “Forbidding to marry, …” (1 Tim. 4:3). The context of these words is very important! Let Paul give the context: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly,that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; (2) Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; (3) Forbidding to marry, …” (1 Tim. 4:1-3). The teaching of not being allowed to marry is in bad company, to say the least! “Forbidding to marry” is a false doctrine and it is not of Christ.
On this same subject, through the years we have learned what this false teaching has done to some who have reached the level of “priest” in the Roman Catholic Church, as they have been caught up in acts of homosexuality with young boys. This has become a “blackeye” upon the whole Roman Catholic Church through the years. It is a problem they have brought upon themselves; as it is their teaching which has no part in “the teaching of Christ:” “forbidding to marry!”
Peter was a married man, unqualified to be the first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church! But, this is not the only problem the Roman Catholic Church has as it relates to Peter. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that Peter was in Rome, serving as the first Pope as the New Testament was being written. However, not one verse in the New Testament has Peter in Rome. This means there is no inspired record of Peter ever being in Rome. This is a major problem to the claim of the Roman Catholic Church! There is one verse, and within this one verse there is one word, that the Roman Catholic Church uses in trying to prove that the New Testament has Peter in Rome. Just what verse would this be? Peter wrote: “The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son” (1 Pet. 5:13). So, how does this help their case? They have made “Babylon” a figurative word, to be Rome and not the actual Babylon Peter was in! However, there is really no evidence for making “Babylon” figurative; thus, making it Rome. It is most likely, literally, Babylon on the Euphrates!
In conclusion, right at the foundation of the Roman Catholic Church, we learn that this religion is not equal to, or anywhere near the religion of Christ!

Frank R. Williams

It is the nature of religion to mold and develop the character of those who follow it. In our quest to address the subject of “pluralism,” which teaches that one religion is just as good and no worse than any other. Here is a little point with a big application, if two religions teach the same thing, then, there is no need for one of them. The reason attention is called to this point is that some have made the claim that their religion teaches the same thing as does “the teaching of Christ,” but they refuse to be identified as a “church of Christ,” which follows “the teaching of Christ!” Think on this, would “the teaching of Christ” produce anything not the “churches of Christ?”
Therefore, the question is put forth, if your religion teaches the “the teaching of Christ,” then, why not just accept “the teaching of Christ” and we can have unity; we can be one! Surely, no one desires division just for the sake of having division! Do they? Unity means we have power to reach the lost; as we all speak the same thing. In fact, “the teaching of Christ,” teaches this, for the apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10). However, there is a question that must be addressed; does your religion really teach the same thing as “the teaching of Christ?” If so, why are you known by another name?
Here we will take up one religion, the Roman Catholic Church, and notice only a few of its teachings that are not in harmony with “the teaching of Christ.” Many people, who study the New Testament, are aware of the claim, in the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, which says that Peter was the first Pope and that the church was built upon him. Therefore, the question: “Is this claim true?”
First, let us notice the verse upon which this claim is based. It says, as recorded by Matthew while Jesus was speaking to Peter: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). The Greek words for Peter and “rock” have been added to the text so they may be easily identified! In looking at Thayer, it will be noticed that the Greek word “Petros” is capitalized while the Greek word for “rock” is not. This is, of course, totally human; as all the letters in the Greek text were capitalized. So, why bring this point up at all? Simply because it reveals the mind, the thinking, of one Greek Scholar. But, it is not just the scholarship of Thayer, but also of Strong, as he also capitalized the Greek word “Petros” but uses the lower case for “petra.” So, just what does this mean? It means that “Petros” is a proper name; while “petra” is not a proper name. It should also be noticed that the word “church” is never capitalized in the translations; such as the King James and American Standard, nor the English Standard Version; meaning it was understood by the translators that the word “church” is not a name! In fact, the Greek word “ekklēsia,” (church) means: “a calling out.” It relates to the “rock” and not Peter, as we shall see in the following!
Second, the meanings of the two words also comes into play here. First, taking the word “Petros (Peter), Thayer gives this: “a rock or a stone;” and Strong says: “Apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than “lithos” and gives the meaning as: “a stone.” If this sounds like such a small matter, think of it this way; “a stone” is not a “rock” in Greek! Peter was called a “Petros,” a “rock” which is a little larger than a “stone.” However, “Petros” (Peter) is a “piece of a rock but not the “rock” itself. Second, the word “rock” which is the Greek “petra.” Thayer gives this: “a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): – rock.” “Petra” is “a rock,” the “massive” rock and is not a piece as of “rock” as is Peter. To this point, we have a “massive rock,” upon which Jesus said he would build his church; and we have a “piece of rock,” which is Peter, but Peter is too small to be the “rock” upon which Jesus said he would build his church! Therefore, Peter is not the “rock” upon which Jesus built his church.
Third, let us take up the gender question. Peter (Petros) is masculine in gender but the “rock” (petra) is feminine in gender! We all understand that there must be agreement in gender. It is necessary that we look for a feminine word to go with the feminine “rock.” That word is the Greek “ekklesia,” translated “church.” Therefore, Jesus never promised to build his feminine “church” upon the masculine “Petros,” Peter! It is a simple truth, the feminine “church” sets a top the feminine “rock” and that “rock” is not Peter! Peter was too small for the “church” to be built upon!
It is clear that “the teaching of Christ” is not the same as, in that it does not agree with, the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church! The Roman Catholic Church can NEVER be the church that Jesus built; the church that Jesus build was not built upon Peter; as he is too little and unsuited for such! Nevertheless, the doctrine of “pluralism” would have us all believe that all religions are equal with each other! Two religions, one built upon truth; while the other is built upon that which false; are not equal, neither can they every be!

Frank R. Williams

In our study of the words, “The world and the earth,” several verses have been studied and this is as much a part of our study as the words themselves. Little good would be gained, if we only studied the words, but no verses or context. In this, what may be the last in this series, we will look at the Greek “aiōn,” which is used and greatly misunderstood in Matthew chapter twenty-eight and verse twenty: “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (aion).” This word means: “1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity, 2) the worlds, universe, 3) period of time, age” (Thayer). As with many other word, or group of words, the context must determine how the word is used! So, what meaning best fits the context?
We have already learned that the “world” does not equal the word “earth;” therefore, to what “world” does Jesus have in mind? Dismissing the idea of the “world” being equal to the word “earth;” therefore, it appears that Jesus has in mind “the end of the age.” Now, just why is this the best meaning of the word and context? Jesus is talking to his apostles, as verse sixteen identifies them: “Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.” Now believing in Jesus’ resurrection, they finally go to the place Jesus had appointed before his death. He tells them that he has been given “all authority (power) in heaven and earth.” Notice the word “earth” in Jesus’ statement. The Greek word is “gē” and this is the same word used in Peter’s writing about the end of time: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). Therefore, when addressing the end of the earth, so long as it exists, Jesus has “authority” over the “earth” and Peter said it would end. But, this is not the Greek word Jesus used in Matthew twenty-four, verse twenty: “… lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (aion). It is most important that we hit hard on the word “world,” that Jesus did not use the Greek “kosmos,” as he did in Mark 16:15. No, Jesus used the Greek “aion” and it is best understood to mean, age. Therefore, Jesus is promising to be with the apostles, until the end of the age. This does not tell what “age” Jesus is talking about, however.
When Luke recorded the words of Jesus to the apostles in “Acts of the Apostles;” he said: “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (verse 8). Wait, did you see it? Did you see that Jesus used the word “earth,” in this, his commission to the apostles! So, how do we put Matthew twenty-eight, verse twenty and Acts one, verse eight together? If you are a careful reader, you will have noticed that in Matthew’s account, that Jesus said to the apostles, “… lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (aion).” If we correctly put the two accounts together, Jesus is saying to the apostles, that he would be with them as they “received power, after the Holy Spirit is come upon you: …” Now, let us reach over and bring the words Jesus said to the apostles in John 14:17: “… for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.” Jesus is here talking about the “Spirit of truth,” which is the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit would give the apostles “power, after” he came upon them. In the Holy Spirit’s coming upon the apostles, he would guide them “into all truth” (John 16:13). Notice these words: “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me” (John 15:26). Jesus would be with the apostles, as the Holy Spirit testified of Jesus and confirmed their teaching with the “spiritual gifts!”
Here is a most interesting statement made by Jesus to the apostles: “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you” (John 14:18). Did you get it? So, how did Jesus come to them? Jesus came to the apostles in the Holy Spirit as he “testified” of Jesus! One last point just here: “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever” (John 14:16). Once more I ask, did you get it? What is “it?” It is the word, “forever,” which is the Greek “aion” the same word Jesus used in Matthew 28:20! But, there is another word, tied to “aion,” in the text and it is “eis.” With this word, we get, the Holy Spirit “abid(ing)” with the apostles, “unto the end of the age!” This age could not go longer than the apostles! For it is said of them and no one else! The “age” (aion) cannot point to a time that reached beyond the lifetime of the apostles!

Frank R. Williams

By this time each reader is asking the question: “How many articles are you going to write on this subject?” Truth is, the answer is unknown!” It is believed that more verses need to be covered which address the “world,” as in the nation of Israel.
Here is a question that will reveal one of the difficulties in any study of the word, “kosmos,” “world” as found in the New Testament: “Just what was the world of the New Testament?” There are at least four worlds in the New Testament: 1) Jewish world, 2) the Hellenistic world, 3) the Samaritan world, and 4) the Roman world (Though other divisions can be made, but this will do for our study). In trying to look at each of these, in any detail a larger series of articles would be required, which we do not intend to address; but only in calling attention to the four “worlds” just identified. If it were our purpose to really study the larger context, we would have to engage in a deep investigation of the following, as the words relate to the four “worlds” of the New Testament. The three areas are: 1) cultural, 2) social, and 3) historical contexts. We shall not do so; however, it is necessary to identify at least one verse where each “world” is seen. First, the Jewish “kosmos,” When Jesus sent out the twelve, he said: “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:5-6). Here Jesus has introduced three “worlds:” 1) the world of the Gentiles, 2) the world of the Samaritans, and 3) the world of “the house of Israel,” the Jewish world. It might be, that Jesus is using the words, “the Gentiles,” as a reference to the Roman world. This leaves us with one more to identify; and Luke will handle this for us. When the first problem arose in the church, Luke wrote: “And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration” (Acts 6:1). Here Luke has pointed out for us, two “worlds” within the church; and they are: 1) “the Grecians” and 2) “the Hebrews;” at this time. Just who are these two “worlds” called: 1) “the Grecians” and 2) “the Hebrews?” Even when we think we know who the “Hebrews” are, do we really? First, “the Grecians” and to keep it simple, were called, from the Greek word “Hellēnistēs,” which is used throughout the New Testament to refer to Jews born in a foreign land who spoke Greek. Second, the “Hebrews,” and the Greek word is “Hebraios,” which means: “any one of the Jewish or Israelitish nations (the tribes, frw) who spoke in what was then termed the Hebrew language. Therefore, in only two verses, we have identified the basic four “worlds” of the New Testament. No effort here will be made to address a larger context, as this serves our purpose.
The following will be useful to us; “Read just a few chapters in one of the Gospels (There is but one “gospel” given in four accounts. frw), and you’ll encounter Romans and Herodians, Jews and Gentiles, Pharisees and Sadducees, teachers of the law and ordinary country folk, and many others” (Mel Lawrenz, “How to understand the Bible.”) This is quoted to help us see that the “world” of Jesus’ time, could be divided into smaller groups, “worlds.” The words written and put above the head of Jesus on the cross, helps us see this; they were: “And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS” (Luke 23:38). These words divide the “worlds” of Jesus’ time into three “worlds:” 1) Greek, 2) Latin, and 3) Hebrew. However, do we understand what is meant by the word “Greek?” If we have not done at least some study, more than likely the answer is, “No!” It may come as a surprise that the Greek word translated, “Greek,” is “Hellēnikos;” and means: “Grecian.” Adam Clarke wrote about this verse: “The inscription was written in Greek, on account of the Hellenistic Jews, who were then at Jerusalem because of the passover; it was written in Latin, that being the language of the government under which he was crucified; and it was written in Hebrew, that being the language of the place in which this deed of darkness was committed.” The Bible Illustrator gives us this: “It was the custom of the Romans, that the equity of their proceedings might more clearly appear when they crucified any man, to publish the cause of his death in a table written in capital letters, and placed over the head of the crucified.”
So, you think there is nothing else? Wrong! There is at least one more group, “world,” of people. Let Mark introduce us to this group: “And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him” (Mark 3:6). The internet page, “Got Questions,” has this: “The Herodians held political power, and most scholars believe that they were a political party that supported King Herod Antipas, the Roman Empire’s ruler over much of the land of the Jews from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39. The Herodians favored submitting to the Herods, and therefore to Rome, for political expediency.”
The “world,” and here the word “world” stands for all of humanity, in the time of Jesus and the apostles of Christ was complex, to say the least! It was to this “world,” that Jesus commissioned the apostles: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” (Mark 16:15).

Frank R. Williams

Studying the two words: 1) world and 2) earth; it is necessary to call attention to verses that reveal how the word “world” is used. Many times, we just read the word, without thinking, how the word “world” is used in the verse. One of the reasons is very simple; in that we are giving the word, “world,” a meaning without much thought! We read the word “world” and think “earth” in an almost automatic manner!
In this fifth article about, “The world and the earth,” attention is called to a verse, that is so well known, it is called “the golden text of the Bible.” Yet, even without any thought the word “world” is read and the meaning is so clear, no one calls attention to it. Of course, the verse reads: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). So, the “world” that God so loved, “that he gave his only begotten Son,” is not the “earth,” neither is it “the things in the world.” God, of course, did not love the things on the earth; neither did he love the physical earth; no, God loved the souls of the inhabitants of the earth. The “world” of this verse can “believe,” and escape perishing and have “everlasting life.” Just to add a little understanding here, the “earth” is appointed for, as Peter wrote: “…the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). There is nothing that can be done, to save the “earth” and “the works that are therein!” But, God has provided the means of saving the people of the earth!
So, you are saying, “I know all this, so why are you writing so much on this subject?” With this in mind, notice the next verse of John three: “For God sent not his Son into the world (kosmos) to condemn the world (kosmos); but that the world (kosmos) through him might be saved” (verse 17). Three times the word “world” appears is this verse and each time it is the Greek “kosmos.” Is the word “kosmos” used in the same manner each time or could it be used differently? Let us just paraphrase the verse: “For God sent not his Son among the inhabitants of the earth to condemn them; but that all the inhabitants through the Son might be saved.” This goes “hand in hand” with the commission Jesus gave the apostles: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:15-16). Here one verse sheds light upon another verse, in that it means, God would use because of this love, to save the world, the inhabitants, is the gospel! Let it be clear, the blood of Jesus is in the gospel!! Therefore, Paul wrote: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16); but the apostle did not stop here, as he also wrote of the appearing of Christ: “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 1:8).
Looking a little more at the Greek word “kosmos,” Strong gives this: “kósmos” (literally, “something ordered”) – properly, an “ordered system” (like the universe, creation); the world.” Please notice the words, “ordered system.” Strong then says, “(like the universe, creation).” It never occurs to some people that Judaism was an “ordered system!” Despite this, many folks never look beyond the creation and the universe! Before continuing, Strong says the Greek word “kosmos” appears about 187 times in the New Testament. Look at the words of the apostle John: “For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world (kosmos) and this is the victory that overcometh the world (kosmos), even our faith” (1 John 5:4). Put your thinking “cap” on and answer the question: “How does John use the word “kosmos?” Is John referring to the earth, when he ,” writes: “overcometh the world,” the earth? Is John referring to the inhabitants of the earth, when he writes: “this is the victory that overcometh the world,” the people of the earth? Or, is John referring to the things of the world,” when he wrote: “this is the victory that overcometh the world, the things of this world? Of course, the victory comes by means of “our faith!” In order to help you, in trying to answer these questions; read John: “Love not the world (kosmos), neither the things that are in the world (kosmos). If any man love the world (kosmos), the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:15). In John’s uses of the Greek “kosmos,” one thing is very clear, if one loves it, “the love of the Father is not in him.” However, this might be called “punting the ball,” in modern terms. Therefore, I will not do it! The word “neither” needs to be noticed here, Strong says it is “a continued negation,” of “if any man love the world.” It should be noted, that John also wrote: “For God so loved the world,” (John 3:16). Is God “allowed” to love what we are not? In a word, “No!’ It appears to this humble writer, that the “world,” we are not to “love,” that the second use of the word “world,” is but a continuation of the first! F. F. Bruce noted the difference thus: “It is the world-system organized in rebellion against God which is in view…” Bruce also wrote showing the difference between two types of “love,“ as he wrote: “it is self-sacrificing love; (John 3:16, frw) here it is acquisitive love” (1 John 2:15, frw).” Let me put it this way: 1) one is the greatest love ever shown to mankind, while 2) is to love less and less, until there is no love at all.
This has turned into a “many” article series, but personally, I believe it is good to look at the verses which have been covered and will be covered.

Frank R. Williams

In an earlier article, it was pointed out that at times, the words “world” and “earth,” shed light on each other. This may appear at first reading as a most unlikely thing to occur! Nevertheless, it is true and in this article, it will be shown where this is the case. Keep in mind as we approach the subject, that God never does the unnecessary and does not use more than is needed to complete the task! With these two thoughts before us, let see how the words “world” and “earth” shed light upon each other.
We have all read the apostolic commission more times than we can recall; however, more than likely most people have missed the point that is to be made here. As Mark states the commission, he wrote: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15). First, just notice that the word “earth” is not in the text. The Greek word Mark used is, “kosmos,” which means: “the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family.” Yes, the word “kosmos” has other meanings, but in using this one, the text will become very clear. Nevertheless, for the sake of honesty, here is all that Strong gives: “Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): – adorning, world.” This will allow you to put any or all of these into the text; so, you can see for yourself, what might be the best meaning of the Greek word as used by Mark. It is helpful to notice that Paul used the same Greek words, when he wrote: “… the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; …” (Col. 1:23). The Greek words, translated, “every creature” is the Greek: “pas ktisis,” in Colossians and is the same Greek words used by Mark: “pas (every) ktisis (creature).” You do not need, as the old saying goes, “you don’t have to be a rocket scientist” to see what is the best meaning of the word “world,” the Greek “kosmos” in the apostolic commission! However, this has not answered the question, “How does the word “world,” having the meaning: “the inhabitants of the earth,” shed light on the word “earth?”
Therefore, let us get to the task! Let us here recall that God does not do the unnecessary; as he is perfectly frugal, in that God does not waste time, energy, or material. Luke in writing “The Acts of the Apostles,” covers the apostolic commission in these words: “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). We are here interested in the words, “unto the uttermost part of the earth!” The Greek word for “earth” is, “gē,” and means: “1) arable land 2) the ground, the earth as a standing place …” The word “ge” is used in the same manner as Peter used it, when he wrote of the “willingly” “ignorant” of the first century; when he wrote: “the earth (gē) standing out of the water and in the water: (6) Whereby the world (kosmos) that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: (7) the heavens and the earth (gē), which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved …” (2 Pet. 3:5-7). Therefore, it is easy to conclude that Jesus used, as written by Luke, the word “earth” to mean the same as did Peter. Just for your information, the meaning of the word “ge” is “arable land,” which means, “fit for;” thus, the earth is “fit for” the intended end: “reserved unto fire!” Now, let us conclude this part of the article by simply pointing out, that Mark has Jesus addressing “the inhabitants of the earth,” in his use of the word “kosmos,” while Luke in Acts has Jesus pointing to the “earth” (ge).
Question, did Jesus mean for the apostles to go to the North Pole and preach the gospel, when he said: “unto the uttermost part of the earth”? In my research, I found this interesting statement: “No-one and nothing (animals or plants) lives on the North Pole.” Excluding scientists, the population is 0! And in the time of Jesus, there were no scientists at the North Pole! Virtually all of Antarctica (5,400,00 sq. miles, 98% covered with ice) is uninhabitable, and much of Australia is still uninhabited. So, the question, knowing the nature of God, would Jesus send the apostles into such uninhabitable places, even though they are part of the earth? No! Therefore, the word “earth” (ge) in Acts 1:8 is limited by the word “world” (kosmos, the inhabitants) of Mark 16:15.
You knew this all along, but may never have stated it. You fully understood that God, through Christ, would never be so wasteful, by having the gospel preached where no humans were present to hear it. Here is another point, the time for the apostles to fulfill their commission, was time limited! Yes, it was time limited! As the apostles were not going to live on this earth forever! Therefore, the “world” sheds light upon the word “earth!”
On another note, Paul has, by the Holy Spirit, declared that the commission had been fulfill when he wrote.

Have you ever read, or seen an article written on the subject: “The World and the Earth,” before the ones you are now reading? To the best of my memory, I have not! Just because few, if any, have written on this subject, does not in itself, make it necessary that articles be written; however, the reason these articles are written is because we have a tenuously to read the words “world” as “earth” as meaning the same thing. This produces a mis-understanding in the mind and more than likely a failure to understand the text.
There are any number of texts, wherein the two words would give a different understanding (meaning) of the text, had the writer used the word “world” and not the word “earth.” Let us look at one such text, just here. On the day of Pentecost, after the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, Peter quoted the words of Joel: “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: (18) And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: (19) And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: (20) The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: (21) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:17-21, Joel 2:28-32). This text has been mis-understood by many, for many years and no doubt such will continue; however, it is not our purpose here to bring out the meaning of Joel’s words as quoted by Peter. Our purpose is to notice the word “earth” in verse 19: “And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke.” Question, where were the “signs” to take place? Peter said, they were to be “in the earth.” The Greek word he used is “ge” and it means: “1) arable land 2) the ground, the earth as a standing place 3) the main land as opposed to the sea or water 4) the earth as a whole 4a) the earth as opposed to the heavens 4b) the inhabited earth, the abode of men and animals 5) a country, land enclosed within fixed boundaries, a tract of land, territory, region” (Strong). This is all that Strong gives and it is thought necessary to give the full meaning; so, the reader will be able to see it all. Now, notice the first meaning: “arable land.” The word “arable” means: “fit for or used for the growing of crop arable land.” (Merriam-Webster). So, the “land,” the “earth,” at the time these “signs” would take place was a “fit” land unto the purpose of the “signs!” Therefore, it would appear, that the “earth” was not always “arable” land! But, starting here without trying to prove, that the “land,” the “earth” was fit for all the “signs” leading up to and during the A.D. 70 destruction of Judea (Jerusalem) and that the “land,” the “earth” was properly prepared for the events that fall into the figurative language: “signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke: (20) The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come” (verse 19-20). Please notice here, that the prophecy of Joel used the word “before,” “before that great and notable (Joel, “terrible”) day of the Lord come;” therefore, the “signs” would start “before that great and notable day of the Lord came,” referring to the destruction of Jerusalem! Though these words are directed at the ‘earth,” and not the “world,” the inhabitants of the land of Judea, nevertheless, the people would suffer severely!! Therefore, Joel and Peter are pointing in the direction of the utter physical destruction of the “land!” Jesus will help us get the picture of what (things on the land) Joel said in referring to the event: “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (Jesus is pointing to the temple area, Matt. 24:2).
On the other hand, Jesus in Matthew twenty-four, pointed to the personal, physical, suffering! He said: “For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. (8) All these are the beginning of sorrows. (9) Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake. (10) And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another (Matt. 24:7-10). It was not a pretty sight, but one of utter personal suffering and destruction!
Now, let us be honest! Have you ever noticed the fact that Joel’s prophecy used the word “earth” and not the word “world,” in the text? More than likely, you have never paid any attention to the little word “earth,” in this text! It can make a real difference in our being able to understand the text!

–Frank R. Williams

The world, the world, and the world. This is where we stopped in the last article on the subject: “The World and The Earth.” The words come from “The Gospel According to John,” when he wrote of Jesus: “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not” (John 1:10). Each time the word “world” is used, it is the Greek “kosmos.” The general rule is, that if a writer uses the same word, in the same context, it will have the same meaning. However, there are exceptions to the general rule. Long ago, I remember my English teacher telling the class, the rules about the English language as it is written. Then, after a long list of rules, she said, “except!” My question was, “How do I know when the exception is used and how am I to know when not to use the exception?” It was here that English became a mystery and those who read my writings, will testify that it is still a mystery to me!
So, what about John’s use of the same word, “world,” three times in the verse addressing Jesus. How was Jesus: 1) “in the world;” 2) then the “world was made by him;” and 3) “the world knew him not.” Let us first recall, the word “world” is not the same as the word “earth!” In the days of Noah, the “world” was destroyed save eight souls, and the “earth” was forever changed; as Peter wrote: “Whereby the world (kosmos) that then was, being overflowed with water, perished” (2 Pet. 3:6); therefore, we know that the word “world” (kosmos) can and does refer to the inhabitants of the earth, while not referring to the “earth.” However, this does not answer our question: “How is the word “world” used in John 1:10 but it sure does help! If we understand the words, Jesus “was in the world,” to mean that Jesus lived and died among the inhabitants of the Jewish nation, then, we have made a major step in the right direction! Keep in mind, John is writing in the past tense, after the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus! Therefore, Jesus “was,” at one time “in the world.”
Now, this moves us to the second phrase: ““world was made by him;” here attention is called once more the past tense of the word “was.” Keep in mind, the “world” is not the same as the “earth;” therefore, the words do not refer to the opening statement of the Genesis: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). The word “God” as used here is referring to the “Godhead,” which includes: God the Father, God the Son (Word) and God the Holy Spirit. It appears that many commentaries have varying opinions on this verse; thus, there are verging degrees of understanding and some miss the real meaning all together! It would be worth our time to note some of the views of the different commentaries, but space and time will not allow us to do so. If we are going to follow the general rule about the use of the same word in a text, that it is used in the same way; then, by the words: “the world was made by him (Jesus),” John is saying that Jesus “made” the Jewish nation, “world.” The words, “was made,” is the Greek “ginomai” and means: “to come into existence.” It was God who created the Jewish nation by calling them out of Egypt, baptizing them in the Red Sea (1 Cor. 10:1-2), and giving them the law of Moses; thus, they became a “world,” the Jewish nation. Remember, of course, that the home land was just waiting for them to take. Thus, the second member of the “God” includes the God the Word” of John 1:1-2; 14). Therefore, the words, “the world was made by him,” more than likely means the Jewish world as in the first case: Jesus” was “in the world.” He was in the same “world” he “made.”
The third phrase, “the world knew him not,” is used in the same way as the first two phrases: “the Jewish world.” The Greek word, “ginōskō,” our English word “knew,” refers to a very intimate, essential; innermost, relationship. The Jews were very aware of the person named Jesus, they knew his “hometown,” they knew of his father, and his mother, but they still “knew him not! They did not “know” him as the “Word,” which “was made flesh, and dwelt among” them (John 1:14), they did not “know” him as the “Son of God;” they knew him only as Jesus who came from Nazareth. Therefore, they crucified him!
It does appear to this writer that the “world” in John 1:10 is used the same way in all three phrases! Finally, verse 11: “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” The words, “his own,” once more refers to the Jewish nation. And it appears the word “world” has no reference to the word “earth” in verse ten.

Frank R. Williams