I picked this up from the “The Externalization of Our Spiritual Nature†thread where Ned quoted it (wrongly). Of course, in the Greek the word ψυχικός (psuchikos) is used, which doesn’t mean “unspiritual†but “sensitive” that is, “animate” (in distinction on the one hand from the higher or renovated nature; and on the other from the lower or bestial nature): - natural, sensual.
If we read the text in its context, it is quite true of a number things we have written about widom and spirituality.
Jam 3:13-18
Who’s wise and knowing among you?
Let him show his works by good behaviour,
in meekness of wisdom.
But if you have bitter jealousy
and contention in your heart,
do not boast and lie against the truth.
This is not the wisdom coming down from above,
but earthly, beastly, and devilish.
For where jealousy and contention,
there confusion and every foul deed.
But the wisdom from above is firstly truly pure,
then peaceable, forbearing, yielding,
full of mercy and of good fruits,
not partial and not pretended.
And fruit of righteousness
is sown in peace for those making peace.
Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (Sovereign Grace Publishers) -but similarities are also here:
Youngs Literal translation
Jam 3:15 this wisdom is not descending from above, but earthly, physical, demon-like, King James Version
Jam 3:15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. International Standard Version
Jam 3:15 That kind of wisdom does not come from above. No, it is worldly, self-centered, and demonic. American Standard Version
Jam 3:15 This wisdom is not a wisdom that cometh down from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
The term “unspiritual” is an interpretation that goes further than the Greek.
A-2 Adjective Strong’s Number: 5591 Greek: psuchikos
“belonging to the psuche, soul” (as the lower part of the immaterial in man), “natural, physical,” describes the man in Adam and what pertains to him (set in contrast to pneumatikos, “spiritual”), 1Cr 2:14; 15:44 (twice),46 (in the latter used as a noun); Jam 3:15, “sensual” (RV marg., “natural” or “animal”), here relating perhaps more especially to the mind, a wisdom in accordance with, or springing from, the corrupt desires and affections; so in Jud 1:19.
The NIV probably went with unspiritual versus sensual because of the contrast with pneumatikos. But I’m not sure it makes much difference really. The point remains the same as far as I can see.
Do you have a point here Bob other than taking the NIV translating team to task? I guess I’m not seeing it.
Those who wish to be seen to be wise and intelligent may do so by humility and “beautiful†deeds. I know that Luther didn’t appreciate this epistle, but I find it to be the one that shows true devoutness to be very much like the behaviour of the sage in other religions and spiritual movements.
Those people, who move amongst the pious and offend the peaceful message of the Gospel by conspiring for dominion over others, conceive themselves in the service of God, but in fact it is contention and jealousy that motivates them. They are enemies of verity and servants of another spirit.
The “Sophia†from above or holy “chokmah†is what Y’shua was envisaged to be by the early Christians. It is this wisdom that was with God at the beginning of time.
(Pro 3:19-20)
Jhvh founded the earth by wisdom;
He founded the heavens by understanding;
the depths were broken up by His knowledge,
and the clouds dropped down the dew.
The earthly, beastly and the devilish is the physical existence that is allowed to rule over the body and mind, and leads to all of those things we wish to overcome: resentment and strife, disorder and spoiled endeavour. Thus sin is the rejection of, and salvation is the reconciliation with the holy chokmah, which establishes life and understanding and knowledge.
All of these things have been said about Y’shua and surely he is what the world needs now. I feel we need to reconnect to this understanding, rejecting the piety that is concerned with the materialistic side of life, trying to make God into some kind of physical entity, failing to understand that God is life itself, in which “we live and move and exist … for we are also His offspring.â€
The visions of those who wish to see the holy chokmah as a king, a warrior and a judge, fail to see that this is how those will experience him, who have failed to gain the awareness that is prepared for them. Salvation lies in the thankful acceptance of the Grace of God, demonstrated in the selfless surrendering of Y’shua as a last and final sacrifice for the sins of mankind.
As usual I agree with most of what you say but feel that this approach has to be balanced by Paul’s writings and the behavior of the apostles in Acts. They were unafraid to preach their message of a risen savior over and above the prevailing worldview of the day and did not sit in silence and meditative distraction. Having humility and raising a voice in the marketplace to defend the truth of the gospel or attack the false truths held up by others are not mutually exclusive.
Of course not, but what is fascinating for me is the fact that your answer even entertains exclusivity! Not that I am attacking you personally, but this is an approach that I often meet but which isn’t warranted by anything I say. In fact, if anything I am the person who is for an inclusive approach. My overall intention is to show Christians what they collectively have, at least since Luther, and still do tend to deny. It is a meditative approach that is more the eastern Sage than the western philosopher.
Hi Mas,
I believe that the differentiation that Jakob/James is trying to make is wound up in the “proof of the pudding†and that he is simply saying that when contention and jealousy is our motivator, then we have chosen the most base of our abilities which, in its consequence is bestial.
The construction of “higher†and “lower†wisdom is just that – a construction. It just helps us describe things that are non-material and spiritual. Therefore, the wisdom “from above†is a spiritual entity, whereas contention and jealousy comes from our bestial or sensual side. The adornment comes from above to those who bow down to it. The adornment that is taken – like Napoleon took the crown – is despotic.
So when we exercise our minds for intellect to attempt validating our superiority, we are at our lowest state, against the converse of seeking wisdom to edify others as the higher state?
Yes, it’s something we experience in the psychological make-up of bullies too. They are invariably insecure personalities who are literally validating their superiority the only way they know how to. The stabilised personality has found its balance and direction and rests in the ability to subordinating themselves, serving the higher goal which is the well-being of the collective. I see this as a subjective “higher state†which is deeply felt by most human beings even though it has numerous expressions throughout the cultures.
Religion in the form we have it today, especially Christian religion, seem to have separated itself from this outlook and took on the reverence of the initiators of such awareness. Jesus is no longer just the firstborn amongst the “enlightened†Jews and an archetype of the Jewish Sage, but his sacrificial death as the personification of the “holy chokmah†redeemed the world by the Grace of God. Taken as a variation of the משׁיח (mâshîyach) or Messiah idea (in the NT only in John’s Gospel), the idea internationalised as the Christ or “Christos†– the smeared or anointed one.
However, even Paul complained that the Greek and Roman understanding of this mystery were often diluted, which suggests that the complexity of the Jewish background of this Mythos was already being oversimplified. I see Jakob/James as someone who attempted to enlighten from another side, similar to the author of the Thomas Gospel and numerous other writings. Perhaps they were not as eloquent and popular in the Greco-Roman world, but at least the Thomas Gospel seems to have provoked the writer of the Gospel of John to present an antithesis.
There would certainly have to be agreement about the disparity between the Jew and the Greco-Roman, culturally and wisely.
From my experience with Israeli’s, they are almost always calm, thoughtful, reserved people. Perhaps it is just engrained aculturism?
Is the Gospel of Thomas considered a pseudopigrapha because the author is unkown, or that the individual(s) responsible were not somehow recognized/sanctioned by the establishment.
It seems to be written in a very authentic eastern tone, without the necessity of directness, appearing more Gnostic than “Church Christian” in its overall construction linguistically. Which is in stark contrast to any version of the canon that I have read.
Why do folks want to tie spiritualism always with set religion? Religious and spiritual are two different things. You can be one without the other.
Of the two I see spirituality as a more honest and true soulful exploration thing, even Satan worshippers can be spiritual as can athiests, agnostics etc…
Religious is following a preset path, never exploring to the right or left.
I completely agree with you, excellently said. There was a fascinating book that I read a couple of months ago that changed my whole perspective on western religions and spiritualism. The book is called “Balance Point” and though that wasn’t the main topic, it had an awesome message. Essentially, it’s about one man’s adventure to answer some questions posed by his dead aunt (long story). It’s about the destruction of the earth by the western world and their ignoarnce and denial of it. And it’s a true story which makes it so much better. Again, the book is called “Balance Point” by Joseph Jenkins.
A little background on the quote I’m going to give: The man, Eduardo, who I am quoting is a shaman that lives in the rainforests of Peru. The main character, his wife, his daughter and her friend are visiting him. They get on the topic of religion and spirituality…
“…Spiritual balance has nothing to do with religion. Nor is it exhibited as unusual behavior…Spiritual balance is the natural state of the human being, and of all beings. It is normal. It is abnormal when we are imbalanced. We are spiritually balanced when we live in harmony with the greater whole - with each other, with all of life, and with the Earth mother. When entire societies such as yours become spiritually imbalanced, wallowing in the pit of selfishness, great harm plauges the Earth mother.”
Really it is more a disparity between the Semitic and the Greco-Roman; the Semitic includes the Arabian (and therefore the Muslim) of course. However, we also have to take into account that the Jews themselves became influenced by the Greek when they went into the Diaspora and indeed, for a while, lost the tie to their own Hebrew Tanakh.
I think that oppression and the Shoa have taken their toll, but they have also made Jews wary. I’m sure that Jews would tell you that there are ruffled, thoughtless and outgoing people amongst them as well. I think that they have not been as resistant to other cultures as many assume, but have made Israel a melting pot of such influences.
Generally there is dispute whether the canon was accepted early on, but people have realised since Nag Hammadi that there were more facets to Christianity than had been acknowledged. The problem apparently was that there was a theology in circulation around 400 AD which sought to establish the church and refute its subversiveness in the empire, but those who promoted Gospels like the Thomas Gospel refused to do that. Many have pointed to the compromise that was made with Constantine with regard to elements of the Mithras cult, which probably points to the separation from the Semitic beginnings.
Elaine Pagels makes the point that “… if Matthew, Mark and Luke had been joined with the Gospel of Thomas instead of with John, for example, or had both John and Thomas been included in the New Testament canon, Christians would have probably read the first three gospels quite differently.â€
Hi Kriswest,
Spirituality needs a vehicle and Christianity is such a vehicle. There are others, I would agree, but many of us are brought up on Christianity – plus the fact that Christianity and Islam are very predominant at the present, though their forms of fundamentalism and monarchism more than as a spiritual path.
With respect Bob, I must disagree. Spirituality does not need a a vehicle.
Unless you count a need to know yourself and a need to learn your path, as a vehicle, then I would have to agree about that.
Religion is an organized and sanctioned way to comfort and lead souls down a specific chosen path. The soul does not stop and view the path or look side to side for it accepts what it has been told about the path, it already knows the path.
Spirituality is about searching, looking observing, wondering, curiousity, learning, testing, questing. If it follows a path that others have been on and have told it what to expect, it is never satisfied, it must see for itself. Spirituality changes paths it does not just follow.
Spiritualty is not just religion.
Two children side by side observing a flame. They are told that they will be harmed if they touch the flame. One child listens and walks away from the flame not risking harm, the other child is drawn to test what it has been told even at the risk of being harmed.
The first child accepts boundries and parameters, the second child explores boundries and parameters even knowing that harm may or will befall it, This is spirituality.