Chapter # 6 Paragraph # 3 Study # 4
Lincolnton, NC
April 2, 2006

• I. The Course of the Man of God.
  • A. Being a "man of God"...
  • B. Flight from...
  • C. Pursuit of...
    • 1. The question of structure: is there a pattern to Paul's list?
      • a. Righteousness and godliness have a commonality at the point of "dealings with others" with "righteousness" having its roots in "godliness".
        • 1) Righteousness is a most fundamental concept in the relational universe. God's creation has its roots in the inescapability of the trinitarian reality of interpersonal relationships. It is impossible, given the reality of the fundamental existence of a multiplicity of personalities and the creation of a greater multiplicity (angels and humans), for the universe to be conceived of in any form more fundamental than "relational". Since "relationships", therefore, exist at a most fundamental level, "righteousness" is a most fundamental concept. It is, at its most basic identity, the issue of persons treating persons in a way that can only foster harmony. Any treatment that tends to generate conflict is, thus, unrighteous.
        • 2) Godliness is an even more fundamental concept in the relational universe because it identifies the "standard" against which "righteousness" is measured in order to determine whether any given act is "right". Godliness is "God-likeness" and answers the question, "What is right?". Whatever God would do to "another" is "right" and whatever God would abstain from doing to "another" is "wrong". Thus, "God" is the absolute root for the determination of what is a legitimate course of behavior, and what is not. This absolute root is first the essential nature of God and then the automatic expression of that essence. It is impossible to consider a "spiritual" essence in God and not have "activity" in the essence (spirit produces action). It is impossible to consider a trinitarian essence in God and not have "right" activity involved in the essence. As there is an essential multiplicity of personalities in God as Spirit, there is an essential righteousness in God. And, this "righteousness in God" is the essence of what is called "godliness" -- the automatic expression of the divine essence. Thus, it is the essence of God that defines the particulars of righteousness.
      • b. Faith and love have a commonality at the point of being the "driving force" that is always behind man's activities with "faith" being the focus upon "how" and "love" being the focus upon "what".
      • c. Endurance and meekness have a commonality at the point of the strength of "commitment" so that one endures in spite of opposition and does so because of the reality of the relationship that exists between Father and son.
      • d. These "pairs" seem to have this pattern: the first mentioned element is less fundamental than the second mentioned element (godliness drives righteousness; love drives faith; and meekness drives endurance).
      • e. The "righteousness/godliness" pair are expressions of the "faith/love" pair as are the "endurance/meekness" pair. Thus, we have a kind of "paired chiasm" with "treatment of others" being driven by "Truth/Objectives" and "strength of commitment" being also driven by "Truth/Objectives". Thus, under all is "love". Out of that is "truth" that is "believed" as the staging ground for all actions that will be undertaken. All of those actions are to be "godly" in their "rightness" and none of those actions are to be considered "expendable" so that one can dismiss them instead of remaining under whatever is necessary in order for them to be accomplished because "meekness" says "I am not the epitome of love here; God is." At the root of all unrighteousness is the absence of meekness.
      • f. The order of the three "pairs" falls along this line: "godly action" is driven by "love explained" and, when the reaction sets in because of the reality of a fallen creation which rejects "godly action" in a knee-jerk way, the "counter-reaction" by the loving actor is one of "meek submission without compromise". "Love says this course of action is right, so I will do it no matter what the reaction of the unloving."