I John, 2:15-17
Bradley W. Maston · Dec 18, 2005
1 John, No. 12
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://www.hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/48262339557008

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

So, what I'd love to do is, how many of us have King James or variant of King James versions? Yeah? Okay. I'd love to, since I did this study this week in the New American Standard Bible, I'd love to have someone read it in the King James or variant. It should be 1 John chapter 2, so chapter 2, I apologize, verses 15 through 17.

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever. So it starts off with verse 15 and it says, Do not love the world, nor the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

So I'd love to start by highlighting that do not, and it says that do not is what forms a negative imperative here, which means it's a command not to do something. John has commanded us, in this case, not to love the world or the things of the world.

It's important to remember here what imperatives in these epistles are and what they are not. It's important to remember, and Vern highlights this so well each week, or many weeks, is that it doesn't mean we're entering into a new law. Not at all. He's not laying down a law for us to follow or anything for us to do. He's not saying, do not love the world or God will punish you. He's just telling you that if you're saved and you're in Christ, to be in love with the world is completely inconsistent with your position, with who you are in Christ.

I was talking to Vern the other day and he gave a great illustration. He said, if I go downstairs and I try to get in my car, and I see that there's someone in my car, that person has no right to be in my car, because it's my car. Even if it was the previous owner that I bought it from, still has no right to be in my car, because it's my car.

Well, when we love the world, when we let the sin nature rule us, it's like letting the sin nature drive our car, which God has bought. Now we are gods. Now we belong to God, so let sin nature control it. has no logical basis. We are bought, we are purchased by God.

That's just getting in there. Okay, this word for love is Agapao. Is it Agapao? Is that good? Okay, good. I read it. It's more difficult to read than to know. Anyway, to know than to read. The word Agapao, we use this word a lot. You see it a lot probably in Verne's studies and in a lot of the studies and obviously in the sermons and all over the place. Many will recognize the word as being a special word of the New Testament. There are certain words that the New Testament authors gave new and expanded meanings.

They stretched them all the way to their limits to try to fit all that they wanted to fit into them. A great example of that is grace. The word grace in Greek and Roman culture at the time didn't mean as much as Paul took it to mean. He stretched it and stretched it until it almost burst with meaning.

And it's the same with this word love. We take it to mean the love that is from God, the love that's in our heart, purely because of the Holy Spirit. However, in the culture, that's not necessarily its primary meaning. Its primary meaning was, as you'll see down here, love that is based on the value of something. Love of something because it is valuable.

So it's like saying, I love my car, my house, or I love my ring because it's valuable, because it's expensive. So here, when he says, do not love the world, he's using the more traditional, the more classical sense of the word agape or agapao, not the New Testament love that God gives us. to love the world because it would be almost, it would be impossible for someone to take the love that God gives them and then point that towards the world. put God's love towards the world, it just would be inconsistent to say that.

So anyway, where was I? Oh, yeah. So anyway, now let's talk about the tense. It's important to realize that the active verb in this phrase is love. The word me precedes it, may, sorry, may precedes it being negative. That me there is the Greek word may, or is to signify. Literally, we would read, not love, or do not love. However, it is also important to notice that it is a present tense and in the active voice. The present tense in the Greek carries with it the idea that our present continuous tense in English.

Thus, a more accurate translation of this phrase, do not be loving the world. for its apparent value, or do not be loving the world right now for its apparent value. One commentator said that it's written in such a way that he knows there are people doing it or he knows that this is an existing problem and he wants it to stop right now. So, it's not written in such a way.

You all do a big game, world system. Oh, perfect. We'll get to that. Are you going to come to that, are you? Page two. Yeah, we'll move on to page two. No, but you're absolutely right. In fact, I wish... What is the world system? I think that's what we're saying here. Look at the system in the world. I think you're absolutely correct. Politics, you're looking all... type of thing in the world system. Education, politics, I mean there's so much. You're absolutely right. You're absolutely right, Judd. Amazing. Absolutely true.

So the word, next one we got, the word for world here is cosmos. It's a couple of different meanings in the New Testament. One, it can mean the universe or the physical world which we live in. That's the world. Actually, as the Psalms point out, we're to glorify God for this. This brings us to praise God. Romans chapter 1 tells us that it's this physical world that makes it undeniable to the sinner that there is a God, as much as they want to pretend that they don't see it. It's so obvious that there's a Creator, and it's so beautiful at times, and so gorgeous, and yet also we learn a lot about God's judgment from the world and the harshness of it. Number two, it can also mean all the people in the world.

That's in John 3.16. For God so loved the world. It's not saying that God loves corrupt political systems. It's not saying that God loves all that Satan is doing in the world. It's saying that God loves the people in the world.

And just as this is true of God in John 3.16, we are to love the world in this respect. We are to love the people in the world, everyone we see, we are to be freely giving God's grace and God's love out to. So, as Christians, that's part of what we do.

However, this third respect, in which John's using it now, and it's most of John's writings he uses this word like this, this word world or cosmos. Most common in John's writings is to use the entire anti-God system. That's absolutely the best way to put it, as Doug pointed out. Anti-God system that is in place today.

This gets fleshed out a little bit more in verse 16, so we're going to talk about it more. but the things meant are clear. The system of the world that includes all the horrid, evil, anti-God things that we see, it extends to materialism as well as the thought patterns and programming that television, newspapers, radio and culture in general is programming our thinking with. Um, I love, uh, everyone knows Romans chapter 12, verse 2. Um, I had one, what is it, how does it go exactly? I'm gonna put everyone on the spot because I can't remember the first word either.

Just, just 12-2. Oh, please. And do not be conformed. that you may prove what the will of God is. That which is good and acceptable and perfect. I cut off the Bible verse. Yes, absolutely. You're absolutely right. And that word, um, do not be conformed, be transformed by the ruining of your mind.

We use the word transformed and it sounds like, almost as if God is up there like we're a toy going chk, chk, chk, chk, chk, chk, and then making us something better. But Arnold Fruchtenbaum, when I took his Romans class, said, it's actually more like being reprogrammed. absolutely, with a computer, having it absolutely wiped out to nothing and rebuilt by God. So, anyway, so that's kind of about what this world is.

We're programmed to think. Well, you've got to look out for number one. You've got to look out for you, make sure that you get yours, or make sure that you get your thing figured out. And you have to do this, and you have to do this, and don't do these things. And there's this whole worldly system, so that when we go into our situations in life, that's why we're such strangers in the world. Because the world doesn't understand what basis we're operating from, and why we make the choices we make.

So, anyway, it's all contained in that when John says the world, that's what he's talking about. So, just so long as that's clear. No, my thunder is your thunder. The things of the world. So this phrase can give the idea that John is simply rebuking the materialists. The things of this world could be translated or interpreted as fancy cars, houses, toys that people run after.

However, and that's true, that's absolutely true, John is telling us not to run after these things. But, he's also telling people who love money, which is not necessarily such a material thing, it's more theoretical a little bit. And he's condemning people with the attitude, he's condemning the attitude that causes materialism. That's what he's against.

Not all the things of these worlds are material. Many of them are ideological, philosophical, or other intangibles that are part of the system of the world. So, when we say the things of this world, we don't necessarily need to think, you know, oh, it's the house, it's the car, it's this, it's that. If we hold any of those things above God, absolutely, that needs to go.

But yet, at the same time, they're not inerrantly evil. That's one of the things that John taught against. He said, material is not inerrantly evil. The sin nature is what's evil. The sin nature is what needs to go. It's really kind of wild. I was talking to a girl at work the other day and spiritual things tend to pop up. Well, I was saying, you know, man is essentially fallen and evil. And man is essentially, basically wicked.

And she said, no it's not. And I said, Yeah, it is. And she said, well, you know, I believe that because of my religion. And I said, really, what religion are you? She said, I'm a Christian. The Lord put you right where you need to be. You just got Christian. That's good. It was wild.

But anyway, what I tried to explain to her, and I think we're on pause because we're on a break, so we have to talk a little bit more of course, but what I'm trying to explain to her was the fact that she has accepted this ideology that the world's given her. She accepted what maybe psychology or what her professors or what her teachers or what some friend told her and said, oh, you know, we're not basically evil, you're basically good. And to be fair, I don't honestly know what her denomination teaches, maybe her denomination teaches that, in which case they took it from the world. Christianity is never waffled on this. The Bible is never waffled on this.

It's only through compromise that that would come. I would love to take a brief moment to talk about, is there any other aspects of the world, non-material? that you can think that I missed, because I didn't cover very many, but I'd love for us to pinpoint them and point them out together. There's a real subtlety there, because the thing is, at one extreme you can become a, well I'm not going to have, nothing in this world is going to interrupt my thought process.

I'll deny every pleasure. And you make that into a law, you make that into a religion. I'm going to deny myself, no makeup, no fancy clothes. I'll be plain, I'll be nothing, I'll have no pleasures. Because I'll be more holy then. But God's not telling us to do that. No, He's telling us, That's not the object of your life. Christ is the object. So it's an interesting thing. First thought is, well, I know. I'll just deny all that stuff. I just won't do any of those things. I won't enter into any. Well, you're building a law system to yourself. Make one up. Make yourself look better. That's kind of the idea with the monks and things. Totally withdraw from the world. In the paper it said that modern churches are not going to have church on Christmas. It's amazing, isn't it? Well, what's interesting, we were thinking about that. We had the privilege of being overseas for a while in England.

And their tradition is they'll have a Christmas morning service. Remember Scrooge? He gets up and goes to church on Christmas Day. Well, that's kind of the practice. Well, our thought is what's happened here is that Christmas Day has become sort of a family day, and you can't have anything on that day. I agree, except this year it's on Sunday.

I know. I agree. What happens is, so you say, well, that is more valuable than going to meet with your brothers and sisters and worship with the Lord. You think, well, that's more valuable. And our society is kind of bought into that. Bonnie thinks it's the best day of the year to go to church. I agree with her. I like that in England. Whatever day of the week it was, it was Christmas morning. That was my favorite part of the day. I loved it.

But you can make that into a law too. It's interesting, man just wants to make laws. I'll make a law and God will really appreciate me more. Yeah, we hear that all the time. Well, like Vani said, the desert fathers, men who just, they learned and they thought, oh man, if I don't give everything up, then God's not going to like me. So they run out and live off locusts, because gosh darn it, John the Baptist was the best man of woman born ever, so if I go out and eat locusts for a couple years, my holiness level jumps to eight. So anyway, we need to realize, I had a friend, and this is something in humanity that's so, something, because it's such an easy law to grab after. Yeah, we love to do something, we want to do something.

I had a friend who was praying, he said, I was praying last night and God told me to give up my favorite band. So he threw away all the CDs of his favorite band and thought, now, why would God take all the time to come down and tell you to stop listening to this one band? I mean, now granted, I don't know. What the band was. Yeah, exactly. It could have been a band that might have been maybe giving messages that were not positive.

But even still. Even still, I just thought, and he looked at me and I couldn't really straighten him out because we had different theologies about the nature of revelation. But even still, he was just convinced that this decision to not listen to this band or to listen to this band made him holier. or made him better with God. Or if he didn't, God would be angry with him and stop communicating with him. He could be convicted by the Holy Spirit about what he's listening to, but as far as being holy or doing that, no. You're absolutely correct.

That's actually a really good point. I'm glad I didn't stop it. Essentially though, we're not going to do it by giving up things. That's why I don't want to attack an ancient tradition because I don't know a lot about it, but the idea of Lent to me, it just seems to be kind of a self-imposed law. I don't know if it's without value or without virtue, but just the idea of giving something up.

We'll talk about it in something else. If anyone... Sorry, it's designed wrong, so you either have to look into your Bible to find out where we are, or you have to look at, keep page one up to find out where we are. So we're looking for the if anyone, under if anyone loves the world. It's a conditional statement.

It's important to realize that in Greek, in the present tense, he put it in the present tense, not in the aorist tense. The Aorist tense would have more of the idea of, if anyone has loved the world, is that right? Would that be a good translation of the Aorist tense? Past point fact, basically. Yeah.

Okay, so if anyone has loved the world, or something like that, he could just talk about the idea of if anyone loves the world, or just as a general distant, but rather he puts it in the present tense. He goes through extra steps to put it in the present tense. And he says, in the present tense it reads more along the lines of, if anyone is loving the world. Weiss notes, and you can follow along with me, he goes out of his way to use the present tense, which tense is in the subjunctive mode, always, which tense in the subjunctive mode always stresses continuous, habitual action.

This marks this hypothetical person as one who loves the world as a habit of life to the exclusion of any love for God, this is an unsaved person." So he's saying that this person that John is talking about, Wiest is saying that the person that John is talking about is an unsaved person, someone who is continually loving the world above and beyond the things of God, has chosen the things of the world over the things of God. Now, with what we know about our position and our condition, How does that affect our interpretation of this verse? In other words, is it possible to covet after things of the world or desire things of the world in our condition because it is still being conformed to our position? yeah I think I I might agree with what kind of what we used to saying but at the same time because I think what we is saying is that this type of unsaved some of the time Oh, absolutely not.

No. No. You can be. No, I see where you're getting. We're all agreeing with you. I mean, you can't agree with Wiest, what he's saying, and believe that it could be one or the other. Absolutely. I absolutely agree. I think what Wiest might be talking about, and I mean, I read it, but for some reason it's not coming back to me.

What he might be talking about is this is a person who is never saved. Because we certainly doesn't operate under the notion that you can lose or change in your status of salvation. So I think what he's saying is the person who loves the world is the person who does not know the Lord. In other words, once you met Christ, you can no longer be this person that he's talking about once you become a believer. Well, but as you're pointing out, you got to talk about position and condition in your position, you're a new creation in Christ, right?

And I think I read the same thing. I read the same thing you read. And I think we didn't didn't expand it. Look far enough. And I noticed this before in first John. And we've we kind of attack us before you look at the verse and you can say, well, this could describe an unbeliever. But it could describe a believer who's out of fellowship. He's not walking in his position. He's walking in condition, letting his own nature drive him.

So I think that in many of these verses, you can see. And what I find is many writers, since they don't have that clear understanding, which I think he's an outstanding commentator, he doesn't look at the bigger perspective and say, well, that could be a believer that's not in fellowship, that's letting his sin nature drive him. And so I don't think Weiss was expansive enough for this. I don't think it was untrue. That could be an unbeliever, but it certainly could be a believer out of fellowship.

I agree with what Ben said. Take it in context. Look at the verse before. Verse before. Last week. I have written unto you, Father, because you have known him as your son. I have written unto you, young man, because you are strong. Word of God abideth in you, and you have overcome the world. We put, man put the verses in.

It's a continuous. It was originally written. And I think you put in that verse with it, in context, it does not mean an unsafe person. Right. Absolutely. Can we all stack into that? What's that? No, I know. I agree. I think First John is primarily condition for this is position. You have to position condition.

But but you'll notice that many, many people will look at it and and they don't understand that. So they'll say what they can't grasp. They're not distinguishing position and condition. They think, well, it's got to be unbeliever. And that's that's not that's not the focus of First John. First John is written to believers. And I would say they don't understand. I'm afraid so. Well, actually, we seem to understand that, but he doesn't apply it to this. I hate to beat up the poor guy. He's not even around to defend himself. And I value what he's done.

Isn't 1 John the whole book has to do with fellowship? Exactly. Exactly. I agree with you. Not saved or unsaved. It's not a salvation book. Book at all. Yeah, that's right. No, I don't know. No, absolutely. Salvation is not in view. And then when people come along and say, well, that could be an unsaved person. I mean, it could be, but that's not that's not First John's main point.

I think we've come to a good point. Can we stack hands? I completely agree with what's been said. Everyone, is it clear? I think so. Put up so they can hear you. Oh, OK. Actually, this is why I wanted to sit round styles, because this is a part of it. We're so young. You have so much more to teach me than I do to you. It's really just an exercise for me to stand here, sit here. So Ben, thank you for pointing that out. Absolutely. This needs to be clear.

Just because a person likes his car, enjoys the luxury of driving, in other words, as we've said, is living in their condition, does not mean that the love of the Father is not in him or her. It is an attitude that is in the heart that goes way beyond simply enjoying something that is value placed on it, as we'll discuss later. Or as we just discussed now. Even better. So we have, let's see, the love of the Father.

Here, love reassumes its expanded New Testament definition. Contextually, the last two times he used the word love, it was used in a way that excluded God as the source. In other words, in a way that was talking about the worldly love. But now we're right back into talking about God as the source. It's almost a bit obvious, given the fact that it says it's the love of the Father. This is quite a different love, by definition, than the two that we were talking about before.

All right, so verse 16. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. Okay, so all that is in the world. Let's translate all here as pan. We have the same English prefix, pan, so we talk about pandemic, which is a word we're hearing a lot of lately, isn't it? From the same Greek root.

This is an important word to understand because it doesn't mean some, nor does it mean most, and it doesn't mean all. As believers, we should be watchful of these things, because John is saying here, all that is of this anti-God worldly system, set values, is not of the Father. If we pursue the Lord, we must be discriminating in what we take in and what we agree with from this worldly system, not for the sake of our salvation, but because it is inconsistent with our position in Christ. for us to then attempt to live by the values and judgments and ideals of the cultures we live in. So it's, once again, not about salvation. It's about fellowship. It's about how we should be living as a church in the world. rejecting these things, especially if we have kids in school or children out in the world.

I mean, I have friends with kids and they just learn the most horrible, awful, wrong things at school. I mean, if their teacher in 7th grade science is an evolutionist or whatever, then they're going to learn that evolution is a fact. They're not going to teach it as a theory. I was taught to me as a fact in both middle school, high school, and even in college. It's just taken as a, regardless of all the evidence to the contrary, that you can call it a theory, and at best a decent theory, but it's not even really that. But it's taught as a fact.

And we need to be educating each other as believers. We need to be educating our children as believers. and all the other cultural things that think it slip into our thinking. So anyway, well, we'll actually I'd love to talk more about it. Great topic. How do you raise children in this environment? I think we need another elective for that. But if you teach one, I'll take it because hopefully soon. I'm not sure I would be a good example. Your daughter's on Good Morning America. That's right. That's true. I mean, yeah.

But do you teach them? Some people choose to send their kids to private school. It's so hard. Or homeschool, yeah. Or homeschool. Yeah. I just thought... I've had our kids in all of them. In private, public, and homeschool. Try them all. Well, you know, it comes down basically, you have to realize that they're, you guys are all raised kids, so I'm talking to them. I'm preaching to the choir here, but I mean, each kid is an individual, as we know, and it's amazing among our kids.

Spiritually speaking, you know, some are seeking the Lord, some are not. But they all were raised the same. So you say, and what happens is you put that guilt trip back and you say, well, if I spent a little more time with that one who's not walking with the Lord now, they'd be walking with the Lord. Well, I'm not sure that's really true.

I mean, you love your kids. I mean, you attempt to love them equally, and you attempt to teach them equally from the time they're the youngest. You know, I read to all my kids the Bible every For bedtime reading, I was almost law-like because I wasn't that mature at that time. So I would just read to them constantly from things of God. Several of them really walk with the Lord, have walked with the Lord now. But, you know, others are not. So and that's not that that's right.

But maybe I shouldn't have put it on top of your kids. How do you teach these people? It's a similar problem. I think what I see today, the young people, different. to a degree that when our children were in school, it's moving more and more secular all the time. Well, it isn't. I mean, we have one right in the front lines right here, right now, right in the public schools. So it's not as kids are all that different.

It's still, you know, when it comes to choosing the Lord and it's still an individual thing. I don't know. You're closer to it than we are here. You're right in the middle of it. After lunch, the teacher would read the Bible. Yeah, that was what you're saying. Well, the thing is, you can do that and they still don't. They still don't come to the Lord. I mean, you can have the Bible right there.

Right. And read to them. But we know that's true because our kids. Testify to that. And you don't want non-Christians reading the Bible and teaching it. Amen. That's what they did in England. They just read some verses. That's true. The public schools are religious schools. They're Church of England schools. And they require us to read the Bible. But I don't know if you want them doing that. They're not believers. If they read the Bible, that's one thing. If they try to teach you. Absolutely. I set you up. I didn't really intend to.

What I'm really getting at is our culture defines us. And I don't care whether I'm talking to Floyd or one of your kids. Our culture really defines us and what John is recognizing is that our culture defined them, their culture defined them as well. So people haven't changed in the 2,000 years between us. But I think we have to learn what the difference is. What is the difference? What is John teaching?

Most people don't realize how subtly they're influenced by the environment around them and things that we wouldn't have put up with our parent. Our parents wouldn't have put up with all those years ago. Now, our second nature to us, we don't even think anything about it. We see things on TV that would shock our parents to death. But to us it just went over our heads and we accept it.

I'm sure everyone remembers, I don't know if you watched, but when The Simpsons first came out there was a huge ruckus about it because they used language and they used phrases and they had put in situations that people didn't think were appropriate. And that kind of stayed for three years. Well now all of a sudden it's one of the most watched television shows in the world. Which one is that? The Simpsons. It's a cartoon. It's a cartoon show. Adult cartoon.

Even in Korea. I mean, you know, they've started, oh yeah, even in Korea. It's amazing. They import a lot of American culture. And, you know, they see pictures, like I'll draw a picture of, you know, the Simpsons, someone from the Simpsons, or just make it look like it on the board, and even Korean children will recognize it. But anyway, I guess what I was getting at, though, is that they haven't changed the language they use on the show. They haven't changed the situations that they put the characters in on the show.

We've just been... I just think what Ben said is absolutely right. In the interest of time, I think we should probably... Put our heads down and go. But we're up to the lust of the flesh. The word translated lust here is epithumium. Okay, it is a compound word combining... I'm not, don't take that as me. As soon as I shake my head, this means it sounds okay. Don't take that as me. Okay, so epi meaning over, above, and thumos meaning passion. So together these words have the sense of like an overpassion or an above passion. beyond passion, if you will, and as Vines says, the word is used to donate a strong desire of any kind. Vines also says this little phrase, the lust of the flesh, that it's a phrase which describes the emotions of the soul, the natural tendencies towards things evil.

Such lusts are not necessarily based on base and immoral. They may be refined in character, but are evil if inconsistent with the will of God. So this can apply to an overwhelming, insatiable desire for things such as a car or a house, but it also could apply to a desire for pleasure, creature comfort that has come to dictate our existence. It may not be something that is naturally based as a matter or is not inherently evil, however it places holdings in our lives is the issue that it's talking about.

I guess I write better than I read. But essentially, what it's saying is, actually, this word here, this epithumia, this word is not always translated as lust. In our culture, lust is a bad thing. We think of the base and immoral, the grosser sins. However, epithumia, this is even used, and I should have written down the verses, it's used in a positive context. It's an overpassion. It can be an overpassion for good things, too.

So, this word itself isn't just talking about evil things. The translation of lust is a dated translation because you can, in traditional classical English, you can use the word lust to mean lusting after power, lusting after anything. We still kind of do, but it's taken on the lower connotation in most culture, unfortunately.

But even still, so this is talking about the lust of the flesh. These are, like I said, I think that this focuses more on the desire for things and the desire for comfort and You know, gosh, I wish I could get a massage every week, or I wish I could have these, you know, ten things. To me, that's what he's talking about, lust in the flesh, and we're going to talk about the lust of the eyes next. So, that's why I wanted to draw the distinction. I think he's talking more about physical things than lust of the flesh, and, you know, comforts and desires.

However, in the lust of the eyes, it's the envious, covetous desire. that we see dictating many lives around us. It's the idea of keeping up with the Joneses. It's the idea of competition with our neighbors. It's the idea of coveting everything that everyone else has and that we think we should have, that we think we deserve.

Gosh, I notice it in my life to say, oh, we have these friends and They're making so much money and da-da-da-da-da, and they get to go out to eat three times a week. Gosh, I want to go out to eat three times a week. That's really, in some sense, the lust of my eyes. Feeling like, I want to go out to eat three times a week, but that's not where God put me. That's where God put them, that they can go do that, and that's their business. But for me to lust after what my friends have, or what other people have, Well, to me, it's the lust of the eyes.

It also, at work, for position, for power, it could even be in the church. Gosh, I want to be an elder. I want to have that position. I want to have this. So, and I think, once again, it's so important to remember the position and condition. We're Christians. We're saved. But we still have two natures. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes. If these things aren't affecting you, you're blind or you're dead. I mean, if we're not sifting through this stuff in our day-to-day life as we walk out our condition, we're probably not paying attention. So, yeah, we'll move on. Like I said, the bell's going to ring and it always startles me.

It's absolutely right. So the boastful pride of life. Another word for this is vainglory. I love that word. Absolutely. What's the other word for love? Tender love? No. The King James. Charity. Charity. The great, powerful, potent, new, old, you know, whatever it is, Older New King James, or Older King James Version. Anyway, it means originally, empty braggart talk or display or swagger. I think swagger is a good word for that too. Hence an insolent and vain assurance in one's own resources or in the stability of earthly things which issues in a contempt of divine laws.

So then, this is more than keeping up with the Joneses. This is like the next level. This is, I want to beat the Joneses. I want to have more than the person next to me. I want to look better than the person next to me. I want to have more power than everyone else.

This is the type of person who, and I'm sure we've all had bosses like this, who just live in the fact that they have authority over you. They love that they have authority over you. And of course we have millions of examples on television and in life of people who buy that new car, and you can tell they didn't buy the new car just because they liked the new car. They bought this specific car because they thought, everyone is going to look at me. So anyway, that's this boastful pride of life, or as I'm going to scratch out in all my Bibles and write, vainglory.

And then they're talking about the source of this, it's not from the Father, but it's from the world. These things did not find their source at all from the Father. Their source is entirely from the world, the corrupt, the world being the corrupt anti-God system. This being the case, they have no logical place in the life of the believer. We're no longer subject to the flesh, the world, or the devil. As we are redeemed by Christ, we are no longer obligated to hold or obey to these old ways. And now the source of our actions and attitudes is from the Father in our position.

I'll keep going, just once again in the interest of time. The world is passing away, and also its lusts, but the one who does the will of God lives forever, or, in the King James, abides forever. Passing away. The Greek word here translated passing away could be translated passing by or being led past.

Again, Weiss' image of a circus parade passing by before our very eyes is appropriate. I love this picture and I thought about it as if you're a child watching that parade pass by. And this is kind of going beyond Weiss, so if there's any mistakes with this allusion, don't blame Weiss, blame me.

If you're a child watching the circus pass by and you see all the colors and you just want to go join the circus, you want to end, you know, every child in every television show said, I'm going to go. Run away and join the circus. You want to go join the circus, but just because the lights and the colors are so attractive while we're there, and you see the animals go by and the elephants and all that, and every child is enticed by it. However, as the parade passes by and comes to an end, the abuse of the animals, the unhappy circus workers, display to the child that he would far rather be at home with his parents than fit into the cold, mean circus environment.

So the circus might look attractive to us at times, and I don't mean that circuses are bad, circuses are fine, but at the same time, just as a circus parade can be attractive to us, but we belong at home. So it is with us. We see this awful world parading by and sometimes it can even be attractive to us. Many times. Well put. Many times it will be attractive to us, yet we know where we belong and we know where our home is, if you will, or where our father is. Anyway, moving on. It's lust. Lust here is meant in its original sense, not simply in terms of the base and moral desires of any burning passion. We discussed that a little bit, so I'll move on. This is a contrast to the world which is passing away with all its lust.

While the world passes away, the one who does the will of God abides or lives forever. This is the one In the present tense, in the active voice, so it could more clearly be translated, he who is doing the will of God abides forever. Wyss translates this phrase, the one who keeps on habitually doing the will of God abides forever. And the Bible Knowledge Commentary makes this point. A person whose character and personality are shaped by obedience to God will not be affected by the passing away of this world and its vain desires.

It is a Johannine way of saying, only one life will soon be passed. Only what's done for Christ will last. Once again, I think the Wiest has a little bit of a sense of dealing with salvation. It's not, at all. But this, from the Bible Knowledge Commentary, I think says it perfectly. If we continually are seeking after God's will, when this world burns, it won't mean anything to us. But if we're in love with it, it's going to make the difference. When it came to the will of God, we've had lots of talks on the will of God, and I just got a bunch of verses that I thought could get some interesting insight, but I'll let you read it at home because we're done. Thank you so much. Would someone like to volunteer to pray? Dear Father, we thank you, Lord, for this day, Father. Thank you for your word, Lord. We thank you for the many blessings we have, Lord. We ask this in Christ's name. Amen.