# Are you Peculiar?



## hummerpoo (Nov 10, 2016)

Titus 2:14 KJV
Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Strong’s defines the Greek for peculiar:
περιούσιος
periousios
per-ee-oo'-see-os
From the present participle feminine of a compound of G4012 and G1510; being beyond usual, that is, special (one’s own): - peculiar.

Most modern translations use something similar to “a people for His own possession”.

This is one of those cases when Paul makes a compound word when there is not one word that fits his need.  Looking at the two words that he used for this compound, it seems that a people that “exists completely and totally for Him” might be better; as “for His own possession” is just too flat for the strength of the Greek.  “Peculiar” may well work better today than it did 500 years ago when it was chosen.


The question “Are you peculiar?” is prompted by this post:
http://forum.gon.com/showpost.php?p=10450495&postcount=122

If those who follow Christ always speak the same, act the same, relate to others the same, conduct their affairs the same, etc. as everyone else, they are not peculiar, or different, or unique.

When Paul used that word (peculiar) he was writing to Titus.  So are Titus and others in the same office as Titus, the only ones that are instructed to be peculiar?  Read all of Titus 2 to see that the instruction is more like, “Jesus put you in your office so that you can help His People become peculiar.”  So if you are in Christ, you are to be peculiar.

But isn’t that why people are called to an position among God's People; to tell the world; to speak His word; to bring His chosen to Christ; to edify His People?

Eph. 4:
11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

That’s what it says; or does it?  Sure those appointees are to do those things; and it’s easy to quite reading there … if you want to cheat God by half.

Eph. 4:
12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.


We often hear, and we probably quote:

1 Pet. 3:
“15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;”

as our reason for studying God’s word, or to encourage others to study.  But how often have we looked at the words “everyone who asks you” and asked, “Why would they ask?”  Chapter 2 and 3 of 1 Peter tell us why they would ask; they instruct us to be peculiar.  If we were peculiar some would get curious.

Titus 2 tells us how to be peculiar; Ephesians 4:11,12 tells us who is appointed to help us be peculiar; and 1 Peter 2 and 3, like Titus 2 and others, tells us why Peter told us to “be ready”.  If we follow these teachings, we will be peculiar and God will place people around us who are curious about His peculiar people.

Nothing in the three chapters (Titus 2, 1 Peter 1,2) told us to search out someone who will listen to us speak from our extensive knowledge of Biblical principles, or to learn a planned program for the systematic  presentation of the Gospel.  It just tells us how to live every day of our lives and be ready for what God does.


Then, there is the compact version:

Mat. 5:
14 You are the light of the world. A city set on a [f]hill cannot be hidden; 15 nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16 Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

Whichever version is used for guidance (Jesus’s or His Apostle’s), God and His People will be unmistakably unique.  We know that because that’s what He has told us.


----------



## Israel (Nov 11, 2016)

Thanks, brother.


----------



## gordon 2 (Nov 11, 2016)

I think Paul meant what we call Christians today or people of faith through Christ, Or people of the more orthodox or ancient ways of Christians, by the word "particular" when addressing Titus .

  What made them particular is that a new sect had faith from a new religious tradition which members had an upright comportment and did works for selfless reasons from principle. 

From  the orthodox christian  perspective this is perhaps the fundamental of all fundamentals and the purity of all who seek it.

From the perspective of the world one can suspect this "particular" as the seam pattern of a spirituality being work driven,  and scheming.

Scheming: 	cunning, crafty, calculating, devious, designing, conniving, wily, sly, tricky, artful, guileful, slippery, slick, manipulative, Machiavellian, unscrupulous, disingenuous;

 or particular in a suspicious way...

To the saint the light on the hill may well be his person, but that person is humbled, meek and not boastful of himself/herself. Simply the light does not shine on self, is shines to reveal Christ into the ignorance of the world.


I often wonder what Paul would have to say to the "churches" today as to the particular people they raise up into the world.

PS. Hammer, I'm bookmarking your post and am thinking of offering it to some of my  " must be in the bible" believer friends who have the itch to church hop one more time. GBU.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 11, 2016)

I am a stranger and pilgrim in this world. It's not my home.
A square peg in a world of round holes...

but I wouldn't want it any other way.


----------



## gordon 2 (Nov 11, 2016)

welderguy said:


> I am a stranger and pilgrim in this world. It's not my home.
> A square peg in a world of round holes...
> 
> but I wouldn't want it any other way.



Your use of word pilgrim is ... ah... every-day perhaps but although I might be wrong on this for the early pilgrims to  North America (  Mayflower-New England) our biblical city on the hill here discussed had an interesting significance which went on to have societal dimensions ( worldly politics) other than only the spirituality of  the individuals in our kingdom,  but mostly for the project of a nation also? In other words with time and with seeking justification for the many  new enterprises to the New World, was the squared peg ( the city lights)  whittled down by the New World enterprise to fit it's round holes?


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> I think Paul meant what we call Christians today or people of faith through Christ, Or people of the more orthodox or ancient ways of Christians, by the word "particular" when addressing Titus .
> 
> What made them particular is that a new sect had faith from a new religious tradition which members had an upright comportment and did works for selfless reasons from principle.
> 
> ...



My observation has been that there are two factors at work in the perception of the charitable works of God’s People.  First is the motivation of the worker.  Second is the sensitivity of the recipient or observer.

The motivation can be either selfless (your excellent word) or selfish; and the sensitivity can be either innate or enhanced.  As to motivation, the distinctive factor which underlies the two possibilities is the object of the love shown.  The natural being cannot love another natural being above itself (that would be suicide, which is not natural); however, the Supernatural Being can impart His love to the natural being thereby sustaining both Himself and the recipient.  As to sensitivity, the natural being, having only natural senses, cannot perceive the Supernatural (which truly charitable acts can only be); however, those natural senses can be enhanced by the Supernatural, thereby enabling the natural being to perceive the Supernatural motivation present in the charitable works of which he is either the recipient or the observer. 




> To the saint the light on the hill may well be his person, but that person is humbled, meek and not boastful of himself/herself. Simply the light does not shine on self, is shines to reveal Christ into the ignorance of the world.



Very well stated.  Although I’m not sure I could satisfactorily justify it, my visualization of ‘the city on a hill” has long been of 12 to 20 nomadic structures on a far off hill, which are so strongly lighted internally, that the light penetrates to walls, and beams out through every crack, so as to share its light for miles around.




> I often wonder what Paul would have to say to the "churches" today as to the particular people they raise up into the world.



Me too.  On Tuesday, I expressed that wonderment, with a decidedly negative bias, to the man who may well become my pastor.




PS. Hammer, I'm bookmarking your post and am thinking of offering it to some of my  " must be in the bible" believer friends who have the itch to church hop one more time. GBU.


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 11, 2016)

Yes.


----------



## gordon 2 (Nov 11, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> Yes.



Yes. What? Come-on usually u got more to say... Than just "Yes". 

I dare you to say a whole sentence with a capital, a subject, a verb and the guts that go with it-- you know what follows the verb stuff...

Hey you know I found myself humbled today. I think  I understand Germans and Italian more than ever.

 But that is perhaps off topic.  So your Yes?


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes. What? Come-on usually u got more to say... Than just "Yes".
> 
> I dare you to say a whole sentence with a capital, a subject, a verb and the guts that go with it-- you know what follows the verb stuff...
> 
> ...



Yes..I am peculiar. I asked my wife and it is confirmed. Peculiar, somewhat strange, Individualist, introvert, to be exact.


----------



## Israel (Nov 12, 2016)

It's a peculiar place...isn't it? Two songs come to mind, strangely, that are actually antithetical (I believe) to God's perspective of peculiar "I Gotta Be Me" and "My Way". I say antithetical, because to the world, they are anthems of sorts (though today probably hokey and corny) and as declarations "I am me...and don't you dare mistake me for someone else".
But, maybe that's why (at the time) they were so popular in general acclaim, because their appeal is founded upon a commonness; each man to himself is completely unique to himself. Each man finds a border and seeks to feel content in it (his own skin) of his own experiences, thoughts preferences, dispositions, judgments, and the like. To him, these are what "make him...him", and he either settles there...or hears a cry from that border to "come out of himself". I speak in man's terms. 

Am I wrong in my understanding that to a man, any man and every man, he only knows two things fundamentally; there is "himself"...and there is the "all else"? I know I have banged this drum elsewhere, and I know I can be found tedious. But, is it not so? 

We reach out into the "all else" that we cannot really seem to do without, for it is as necessary to our definition of ourselves (a circle exists on paper only defined in what is _not circle_ all around it) and extend ourselves into the all else by mind, or emotion, or whatever means to apprehend...to bring it in so to speak (marriage in one signal example) and to that extent...make (other/all else...) or at least a part of that all else, our own. But, of course we had been doing that long before, and always..."they are people..but they are "my parents"...they are people...but they are "my friends"...they are people...but they are "my enemies". But we can use this in other untold matters also, there is knowledge...but this is "my knowledge", experiences but "my experiences"...etc. In that sense...what we "include"...is us. Even by our definition of our exclusions...we define ourselves. 
But, I believe...this is men being merely...mere men. (And who of us does not know the awe in which we once held men that have gathered much to themselves, at least according to our own metrics..."of us"?) 

If we measure by worldly wealth..."wow! look at him!" or intelligence and intellect "wow, look at him!" or even ascribe to some more noble intent as/or of selflessness "wow, look at him/her". Artists have pedestals for other artists, writers for writers, scientists for scientists, philosophers...etc. In that sense...we elevate in "our own esteem". 

"Our own"...again. We make "them"...ours. Our heroes...or our villains (for we define ourselves to ourselves, and others, as much in what we say we despise...as in what we say we adore)
That's why "hating" Hitler, as the embodiment of all evil is so popular...few gather to us at parties when we wear our "I'm with Adolf" t shirts. And why he is now made so conveniently a political tool...if you want an (but is seems now to be overused) effective means of disparaging an opponent, juxtapose their image with his.

But is it not altogether now, different for us?

This Jesus. Oh, this Jesus.

He comes crashing in (maybe to some...tip toeing in?) I don't know. But the fact is, to me, he makes it plain (to me) he knows the very most "all" of me. I mean...I don't even know all that! Oh, I was quite secure in judging the "all else"...I knew and know why "the world is the way it is" (and everything and everyone else)...that's the "them"....the "they"...the "you all". He shows me, even (perhaps especially) those places where I have believed the "noblest" of myself...my (queue up the violins) "love" isn't what I declare of it to myself...and, most notably, others. (Ask my wife, though I doubt she would betray me...or my children...you might have better success there...or my coworkers, I'm quite sure that would be "easy") But some of them might say "I don't expect him to love me"...but you and I know something (do we not?) of a love shown to us (do we not?) that is not betrayed without consequence (do we not?). Even if that consequence be the manifest acknowledgement of falling short...of it.

And this may be where I consider that "peculiar" place...or at least seek to apprehend it in some measure, from the Spirit's vantage. It is, and only has been measured out when I am brought to that place of being "just a man" of such commonness I could never have acknowledged or believed myself to be. Not good, surely, not even special in any sense (my borders cry out...NOOOOO!)...not even (queue the violins to a mournful dirge)...a "loving" man. How can such exist in the palpable knowing of how much love it has been shown...and yet, of itself...appear so bereft? And here I wonder if that is it. This thing, made, a creature, formed...so weak, so nothing of itself, so aware of shortcomings...yet lives...in the sight of God?

Because it, by the work of another, and only by the work of another...so_ solely_ by the work of another is being made to fit where _mere _man could never be. And somehow, in some way, it is inextricably linked to the understanding "I am just a mere man". Everything "else" rebels against this knowledge...but the One who has come. For that is whom, and for whom He is salvation. Man. To see it, all notions of the exceptional I have reserved to myself, must be conquered, lest I except myself from being found in Him. Who comes to mere man.


And perhaps, that is the peculiar, in some sense, of which the Spirit speaks?


Even among men there is this aphorism of some limited insight.

"The problem with the average man...is that he doesn't believe he is".

One fell for a lie..."you will not die, but become like God..."

One man lived in the truth, not found grasping at it. And submitted to death. And there allowed mere men to tear down every bit of border, surrendering himself by this (in the will of God) to the release of what was truly "inside". And this man...rose! And now men have it all over themselves, even if they deny it.
But we are those to have "it" in ourselves, and not exclude it by denial.
The "all else". It does something to our borders, too. And that, is peculiar in "its" work.
And peculiarly precious, in the sight of Another.

That One who, was _once_ most _else _to us...of the _all else_.


----------



## gordon 2 (Nov 12, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> Yes..I am peculiar. I asked my wife and it is confirmed. Peculiar, somewhat strange, Individualist, introvert, to be exact.



Introvert?


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 13, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Introvert?



Yes.


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 14, 2016)

Israel said:


> It's a peculiar place...isn't it? Two songs come to mind, strangely, that are actually antithetical (I believe) to God's perspective of peculiar "I Gotta Be Me" and "My Way". I say antithetical, because to the world, they are anthems of sorts (though today probably hokey and corny) and as declarations "I am me...and don't you dare mistake me for someone else".
> But, maybe that's why (at the time) they were so popular in general acclaim, because their appeal is founded upon a commonness; each man to himself is completely unique to himself. Each man finds a border and seeks to feel content in it (his own skin) of his own experiences, thoughts preferences, dispositions, judgments, and the like. To him, these are what "make him...him", and he either settles there...or hears a cry from that border to "come out of himself". I speak in man's terms.
> 
> Am I wrong in my understanding that to a man, any man and every man, he only knows two things fundamentally; there is "himself"...and there is the "all else"? I know I have banged this drum elsewhere, and I know I can be found tedious. But, is it not so?
> ...



One is certainly peculiar, in this world, who has in "himself" received everything that has value, and seeks to bring to himself, from the "all else", only those things which will enhance the giving of that which he has received.


----------



## Israel (Nov 14, 2016)

hummerpoo said:


> One is certainly peculiar, in this world, who has in "himself" received everything that has value, and seeks to bring to himself, from the "all else", only those things which will enhance the giving of that which he has received.



yeah...that's it!

The fit expression of the impression.


----------



## gemcgrew (Nov 24, 2016)

hummerpoo said:


> One is certainly peculiar, in this world, who has in "himself" received everything that has value, and seeks to bring to himself, from the "all else", only those things which will enhance the giving of that which he has received.


If one is in possession of everything that has value, can there be anything of value in the "all else"?


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 24, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> If one is in possession of everything that has value, can there be anything of value in the "all else"?



Thank you Brother.

Yours is not a merely semantic point.
Temporally, the receiving continues.
Eternally, the receiving is complete.
Therefore, perhaps the most peculiar characteristic of all is that there is no grasping, but a resting.


----------



## Israel (Nov 24, 2016)

hummerpoo said:


> Thank you Brother.
> 
> Yours is not a merely semantic point.
> Temporally, the receiving continues.
> ...



Yes.
Where the untenable is true.
To be had...to have. 
That even "the" more might be seen.


That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 24, 2016)

Israel said:


> Yes.
> Where the untenable is true.
> To be had...to have.
> That even "the" more might be seen.
> ...



And yes again.

In the beginning was the mystery of grace.
It was revealed, and revealed, and revealed again.
Yet, the mystery is still.
"Come Lord Jesus!
The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you all!"


----------

