Thank you for that, dear FC (peace to you, dear one!). I have to wonder sometimes, though, about man's definitions. For example, Moses was apparently called/considered a "meek" man. And while I can certainly see him in this:
Quote:
"that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting."
I am NOT sure I can see Moses (and so truth) in this, though:
Quote:
In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength to defend against injustice.
Ummm... Moses killed a man, with his own hand (and so strength)... due to an injustice the man was committing. So, let's look at this from the POV of LOGIC:
1. Moses was called the MEEKEST of ALL men.
2. Moses used his own hands, and thus relied on his OWN strength, to KILL a man
3. Moses killed that man while defending an injustice
If MOSES was the MEEKEST of ALL men... then... LOGICALLY... the "MEEK"... CANNOT be "those wholly relying on God RATHER THAN THEIR OWN STRENGTH TO DEFEND AN INJUSTICE. Because the MEEKEST man of ALL... did just that: relying on his own strength to defend an injustice. Yes?
So, "meek" CANNOT mean what this author is saying it means.
Nor can I see truth in this:
Quote:
Thus, meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting the injuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time (Isa 41:17, Luk 18:1-8).
I don't think JAH is using evil people to purify His people. No, that's not accurate; I KNOW He isn't. Because He is using CHRIST to do that! By "subduing"... as WELL as by means of his blood/holy spirit (which is what cleanses/purifies!). I can see why someone would push this particular part of the definition, though: it doesn't even MENTION Christ (prolly because the person who authored it believes JAH and Christ are one person... versus)... although HE is the "instrument" that JAH uses to "purify" His "elect".
Can't see truth in this, either:
Quote:
Gentleness or meekness is the opposite to self-assertiveness
Both Moses AND our dear Lord were assertive (at times, VERY), even
self-assertive at times (although, rare), yes? As were the Prophets. Even Paul. Especially when dealing with hard-headed, hard-hearted, stiff-necked individuals of Israel... or outright opposers? But maybe we should consider the definition of "assertive" (from a non-theological POV):
"disposed to or characterized by bold or confident statements and behavior" (Merriam Webster)
"the quality of being self-assured and confident without being aggressive" (Wikipedia)
"Having or showing a confident and forceful personality" (Oxford)
Can you imagine if either ONE... Christ or Moses... or ANY of these... the Prophets, Paul, the Apostles... were NOT assertive?
Quote:
and self-interest.
This is accurate (NONE of these had any SELF-interest; ALL glorified God IN their assertiveness)...
Quote:
It stems from trust in God's goodness and control over the situation. The gentle person is not occupied with self at all.
Yes, as WELL as the workings of holy spirit... it's "fruit"...
Quote:
This is a work of the Holy Spirit, not of the human will (Gal 5:23)".
Yes! But shame... they won't give the glory TO that Holy Spirit! Do you notice, in this ENTIRE definition... not ONE mention of Christ... at ALL? You got God... you got "the Holy Spirit"... but no Christ. Not even AS the Holy Spirit. Even though, as the author states, it is HIS WORK in such one... and not their own will?
In contrast, if this is true as to the "elect"... that they are only "meek/gentle" because of JAH' spirit IN them, through Christ (which is entirely accurate)... wonder what "spirit" most believe is at work in those "evil" people? Somehow, I think the author would be of those who believe that NO ONE is evil, that ALL are God's children. Except for... well, who would be left (if ALL are God's children)?
This is a very good example of man's number: 666. CLOSE... but "no cigar." Unfortunately, we, mankind... will put our faith in such words, even though they DO "miss the mark"... because they SOUND "smart." "Smart," however, is not (necessarily) TRUTH.
Not trying to contend or "shoot down" what you shared, dear one, but just trying to maybe help you "SEE" what's REALLY being said in that definition. Hope I didn't offend, truly!
Peace to you!
YSSFS of Christ,
Shellamar