https://www.nairaland.com/4397144/daddy-freeze-reacts-shina-peller


The link above leads to the thread that surfaced on the front page earlier today in which the controversial OAP, Freeze, was quoted to have made a rather unfounded assertion that Jesus drank alcohol. He was quoted thus:


When Jesus was alive he drank alcohol and was accused to be in the presence of sinners (possibly in Night Clubs) so enjoying a bottle of Champagne or Henny with coke and ice at quilox in responsibility and moderation is actually Christ like.
-
◄ Matthew 11:19 ►
NIV
The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' ----- What could he have been drinking that they labeled him a drunkard? Lucozade boost?
-
More so, another reason to patronize them lies in the fact that the club employs people who earn a living through it and it pays taxes as instructed by our first pastors, the disciples; something most pastors and churches are blatantly disobeying.


He seemed to have made this statement to advertise for the patronage of a nightclub and to call for a neglect of the church under the guise of contributing to the society.

He spoke of the nightclub to be responsible for employing people without pausing to consider that churches and institutions founded by churches (libraries, schools, housing estates,ets) provide far more employment than any nightclub.

The debate of who or who doesn't provide more employment is not the crux of this response, but to correct the rather heretic view that Jesus took alcohol.

Freeze quoted from Matthew 11:19 NIV

"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners."

and followed it up with a lame and uncritical commentary

"that could he have been drinking that they labeled him a drunkard? Lucozade boost?"


With a statement like this, he uncritically assumes the position that the accusers were right to have called Jesus a drunkard.
If this assumption is to be taken as true, that will mean they were right as well with other positions that they made in that portion of scripture. Let's check it contextually.


Matthew 11:18-19
[18]For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil.
[19]The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Jesus made the statement that he was eating and drinking in opposition to what John was known to do, fasting. Eating and drinking there was not to, by any means, refer to alcohol.


Jesus was clearly not presenting the people as truth speakers but rather haters of the truth. Hence, since they could FALSELY accuse John whom Jesus himself praised as the greatest of prophets (in verses 12-14 of the same chapter) of having a devil, their allegation against Jesus as a drunkard could NEVER have been true.

In other words, if Jesus took alcohol (as Freeze's logic leads him), then John the Baptist, the fore runner of Jesus had a devil, since the allegations came from the same source.

The tone of Jesus quote in itself is that of despair rather than passive. Why would Jesus have to say they called Him a drunkard if He really was? Its simple logic.


Where did the allegation against Jesus come from?

Matthew 9:10-13
[10]And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat (eating) in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
[11]And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
[12]But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
[13]But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.


As revealed above, Jesus once sat IN HIS HOUSE, eating (not in "Night Clubs" as Freeze suggests) and had the Sinners COME TO HIM. He didn't reject them(as the Pharisees would) but accepted them and shared HIS MEAL with them.

Note the immediate response of the Pharisees: "Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?". There was no alarm about Jesus being a drunkard. Of course, if they had seen Jesus drinking alcohol, they would have been quick to point that out.
But all they saw there is Jesus sharing His meal with them. Not drinking alcohol.

So, when Jesus said: "The Son of man came eating and drinking", any literate person can see that he wasn't, by the use of 'drinking', referring to alcohol. He was referring to eating and drinking as that which you do when you take your usual meal.


Besides, what did Jesus' Apostles teach about alcohol?

1 Corinthians 5:11
[11]But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard , or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
[9] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
[10]Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:21
[21]Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


Romans 13:13-14
[13] Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
[14]But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.


Why would such "red light signals" be given to Christians as regarding alcohol if Jesus was himself a drunkard?


Be watchful of Freeze's leaven if you are a lover of Christ.

1 Peter 5:8
[8]Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

damosky12:
https://www.nairaland.com/4397144/daddy-freeze-reacts-shina-peller


The link above leads to the thread that surfaced on the front page earlier today in which the controversial OAP, Freeze, was quoted to have made a rather unfounded assertion that Jesus drank alcohol. He was quoted thus:


When Jesus was alive he drank alcohol and was accused to be in the presence of sinners (possibly in Night Clubs) so enjoying a bottle of Champagne or Henny with coke and ice at quilox in responsibility and moderation is actually Christ like.
-
◄ Matthew 11:19 ►
NIV
The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' ----- What could he have been drinking that they labeled him a drunkard? Lucozade boost?
-
More so, another reason to patronize them lies in the fact that the club employs people who earn a living through it and it pays taxes as instructed by our first pastors, the disciples; something most pastors and churches are blatantly disobeying.


He seemed to have made this statement to advertise for the patronage of a nightclub and to call for a neglect of the church under the guise of contributing to the society.

He spoke of the nightclub to be responsible for employing people without pausing to consider that churches and institutions founded by churches (libraries, schools, housing estates,ets) provide far more employment than any nightclub.

The debate of who or who doesn't provide more employment is not the crux of this response, but to correct the rather heretic view that Jesus took alcohol.

Freeze quoted from Matthew 11:19 NIV

"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners."

and followed it up with a lame and uncritical commentary

that could he have been drinking that they labeled him a drunkard? Lucozade boost?
With a statement like this, he uncritically assumes the position that the accusers were right to have called Jesus a drunkard.
If this assumption is to be taken as true, that will mean they were right as well with other positions that they made in that portion of scripture. Let's check it contextually.


Matthew 11:18-19
[18]For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil.
[19]The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Jesus was clearly not presenting the people as truth speakers but rather haters of the truth. Hence, since they could FALSELY accuse John whom Jesus himself praised as the greatest of prophets (in verses 12-14 of the same chapter) of having a devil, their allegation against Jesus as a drunkard could NEVER have been true.

In other words, if Jesus took alcohol (as Freeze's logic leads him), then John the Baptist, the fore runner of Jesus had a devil, since the allegations came from the same source.

The tone of Jesus quote in itself is that of despair rather than passive. Why would Jesus have to say they called Him a drunkard if He really was? Its simple logic.


Where did the allegation against Jesus come from?

Matthew 9:10-13
[10]And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat (eating) in the house, [/b]behold, [b]many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
[11]And when the Pharisees saw it, [/b]they said unto his disciples, [b] Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
[12]But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
[13]But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.


As revealed above, Jesus once sat IN HIS HOUSE, eating (not in "Night Clubs" as Freeze suggests) and had the Sinners COME TO HIM. He didn't reject them(as the Pharisees would) but accepted them and shared HIS MEAL with them.

Note the immediate response of the Pharisees: "Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?". There was no alarm about Jesus being a drunkard. Of course, if they had seen Jesus drinking alcohol, they would have been quick to point that out.
But all they saw there is Jesus sharing His meal with them. Not drinking alcohol.

So, when Jesus said: "The Son of man came eating and drinking", any literate person can see that he wasn't, by the use of 'drinking', referring to alcohol. He was referring to eating and drinking as that which you do when you take your usual meal.


Besides, what did Jesus' Apostles teach about alcohol?

1 Corinthians 5:11
[11]But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard , or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
[9] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
[10]Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:21
[21]Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


Romans 13:13-14
[13] Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and [b] drunkenness, [/b]not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
[14]But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.


Why would such "red light signals" be given to Christians as regarding alcohol if Jesus was himself a drunkard?


Be watchful of Freeze's leaven if you are a lover of Christ.

1 Peter 5:8
[8]Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

I didn't need freeze to tell me that Jesus drank Alcohol. It is clear in the bible. U just went through great length to obscure the truth

Dnaz:

I didn't need freeze to tell me that Jesus drank Alcohol. It is clear in the bible. U just went through great length to obscure the truth

Really?

Show me.

Dnaz:

I didn't need freeze to tell me that Jesus drank Alcohol. It is clear in the bible. U just went through great length to obscure the truth

You are one of those like Freeze who read the Bible like it's just a note. You can never understand its content cos you lack the spirit of understanding. That's why you saw alcohol in a verse that simply spoke of drinking. Just like the Pharisees, you assumed he was drinking alcohol. Did he tell you he was drinking alcohol?

Keep getting deeived by Freeze till you get destroyed.

damosky12:
■ Really?Show me.

Stop chomping down on the lies of your gods of men. It was never a sin to drink alcohol in the Land of Canaan where Jesus Christ lived and grew up with His family. The Law of Moses pretty much specified Alcoholic drinks as being acceptable in the land. The only people commanded by God not to drink wine were those under the Nazarite vow, and this was for the duration of the vow. So wherever you got the notion that Jesus Christ didn't drink Alcoholic drinks is not Scripture but your particular brainwashing given to you by your religious overlords.

Kobojunkie:
Stop chomping down on the lies of your gods of men. It was never a sin to drink alcohol in the Land of Canaan where Jesus Christ lived and grew up with His family. The Law of Moses pretty much specified Alcoholic drinks as being acceptable in the land. The only people commander by God not to drink wine were those under a Nazarite vow and this for the duration of the vow. So wherever you got the notion that Jesus Christ didn't drink Alcoholic drinks is not Scripture but your particular brainwashing given you by your religious overlords.

Are you crazy or something? Or you are just not normal upstairs? What kind of human being is this?

You would disturb my mention for a chat that's six years old! Don't you find that weird? Are you that jobless and empty-headed? So I should jump back to streams of thought of six years ago to indulge your mental slowness?

damosky12:
■ Are you crazy or something? Or you are just not normal upstairs? What kind of human being is this? You would disturb my mention for a chat that's six years old! Don't you find that weird? Are you that jobless and empty-headed? So I should jump back to streams of thought of six years ago to indulge your mental slowness?

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

As expected typical churchian retort! Attack the messenger and not the message.

Kobojunkie:
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

As expected typical churchian retort! Attack the messenger and not the message.

My Monika should be familiar to you. I have severally indulged and engaged your theological dissonances.

But I stated why this is weird. And this isnt the first time you do it. A six year old post. So I should jump into the train of thought I left six years sgo to indulge you? Don't you use your grey matter?

damosky12:
■ My Monika should be familiar to you. I have severally indulged and engaged your theological dissonances. But I stated why this is weird. And this isnt the first time you do it. A six year old post. So I should jump into the train of thought I left six years sgo to indulge you? Don't you use your grey matter?

You are joking abi?

Anyway, you never admitted anywhere in the thread that you were wrong and that you no longer hold that train of thought — the idea that alcohol is some sort of sin —, hence the reason why I responded, informing you that you were wrong in claiming Jesus Christ never drank alcoholic drink while He was here on earth. I am not certain why the comment infuriates you.

P.S. I don't keep monikers in memory given that a lot of folks switch monikers on here often. I mostly respond to comments as I see them and move on from there.

Kobojunkie:
Stop chomping down on the lies of your gods of men. It was never a sin to drink alcohol in the Land of Canaan where Jesus Christ lived and grew up with His family. The Law of Moses pretty much specified Alcoholic drinks as being acceptable in the land. The only people commander by God not to drink wine were those under a Nazarite vow and this for the duration of the vow. So wherever you got the notion that Jesus Christ didn't drink Alcoholic drinks is not Scripture but your particular brainwashing given you by your religious overlords.

Most of these guys love to lie and do cover up
Let call a spade a spade...
Lying at this tender age when you Full become pastors nkọ...with uncontrollably lies

Expanse2020:
Most of these guys love to lie and do cover up Let call a spade a spade... Lying at this tender age when you Full become pastors nkọ...with uncontrollably lies

Well, here is the problem with religion. It is infectious. Last I checked, Muslims claim not to drink alcohol because of some belief they have of the God of Israel declaring alcoholic beverage of sin. Those in the religion of Judaism attempt to control the consumption of alcoholic beverages when nothing of the Law demands or allows such control over the freedoms of the people.

The Law of Moses instead allows people to imbibe as they choose. The entire idea that drinking alcohol amounts to sin comes strictly from men and not the God of Israel. Jesus Christ who declared that He did the Will of His Father would have imbibed freely and condemned no man who did.

Kobojunkie:
You are joking abi?

Anyway, you never admitted anywhere in the thread that you were wrong and that you no longer hold that train of thought — the idea that alcohol is some sort of sin —, hence the reason why I responded, informing you that you were wrong in claiming Jesus Christ never drank alcoholic drink while He was here on earth. I am not certain why the comment infuriates you.

P.S. I don't keep monikers in memory given that a lot of folks switch monikers on here often. I mostly respond to comments as I see them and move on from there.

Like I said, you are not alright... Your theological dissonance will not drag me six years back. Take your joblessness and idleness out of my thread.

Thats all you live for: empty, mundane squabbles online with no worthy fruit outside this space. Get the heck outta my way!

damosky12:
■ Like I said, you are not alright... You theological dissonance will not drag me six years back. Take your joblessness and idleness out of my thread. Thats all you live for: empty, mundane squabbles online with no worthy fruit outside this space. Get the heck outta my way!

Look, your religious ideas contradict the God of Israel, and His Son, Jesus Christ, whom you lot pretend you follow. It is almost as though your every idea is steeped in nothing but logical fallacies. So, as far as theological dissonance, the is what is the purview of the religion of Christianity itself - a religion built on lies that pretends an alignment with that which it contradicts.

Kobojunkie:
Look, your religious ideas contradict the God of Israel, and His Son, Jesus Christ, whom you lot pretend you follow. It is almost as though your every idea is steeped in nothing but logical fallacies. So, as far as theological dissonance, the is what is the purview of the religion of Christianity itself - a religion built on lies that pretends an alignment with that which it contradicts.

Everyone knows you're a demon!

FxMasterz:
■ Everyone knows you're a demon!

According to Jesus Christ, the children of the devil — demons — are instead the ones who take after their father the devil who happens to be a liar from his beginning - John 8 vs 31 - 44.

The God of Israel commanded His people(Israel) to drink alcohol freely, even going as far as to explicitly state that they could use their tithes to purchase and drink alcohol in His presence. Jesus made it abundantly clear in His Gospel that He did only the Will of His Father, the Old Law of Moses — His food was doing that which His Father had commanded of Him as an Israelite - John 6 vs 25 - 35. This all means that Jesus Christ would never have violated the word of His Father. Now, anyone who claims He did, however, might as well be the demon here.

Kobojunkie:
According to Jesus Christ, the children of the devil — demons — are instead the ones who take after their father the devil who happens to be a liar from his beginning - John 8 vs 31 - 44.

The God of Israel commanded His people(Israel) to drink alcohol freely, even going as far as to explicitly state that they could use their tithes to purchase and drink alcohol in His presence. Jesus made it abundantly clear in His Gospel that He did only the Will of His Father, the Old Law of Moses — His food was doing that which His Father had commanded of Him as an Israelite - John 6 vs 25 - 35. This all means that Jesus Christ would never have violated the word of His Father. Now, anyone who claims He did, however, might as well be the demon here.

Your first paragraph rightly describes your person.

FxMasterz:
■ Your first paragraph rightly describes your person.

Abeg, get away, you blind religious ninny!

Kobojunkie:
Abeg, get away, you blind religious ninny!

You're possessed. You need deliverance!

Even the Pharisees labeled Jesus Christ a glutton and a drunk, but our religious overlords would rather make a sinner of Jesus Christ, denying that which He professed true all because it does not fit in with the particular, lies they hold to. Their every theology contradicts/violates Jesus Christ yet they claim they believe and even follow the same Jesus Christ. The religion of Christianity — all 47,000 sects/denominations and counting— has its roots in logical fallacies to no end.

Kobojunkie:
Look, your religious ideas contradict the God of Israel, and His Son, Jesus Christ, whom you lot pretend you follow. It is almost as though your every idea is steeped in nothing but logical fallacies. So, as far as theological dissonance, the is what is the purview of the religion of Christianity itself - a religion built on lies that pretends an alignment with that which it contradicts.

Stop being a jobless busybody scrolling through nairaland threads to arouse fruitless arguments. Find a life! Note my monika too and stay off my mentions.

damosky12:
■ Stop being a jobless busybody scrolling through nairaland threads to arouse fruitless arguments. Find a life! Note my monika too and stay off my mentions.

Pointing out that contrary to the claims of the illogical, Jesus Christ — the same who later on told His followers that it is not what they eat that makes them unclean — ate and drank and was seen by even the Pharisees doing so, is fruitless argumentation? Yikes! I guess to you it is better to continue propagating lies against Jesus Christ instead.

Kobojunkie:
Pointing out that contrary to the claims of the illogical, Jesus Christ — the same who later on told His followers that it is not what they eat that makes them unclean — ate and drank and was seen by even the Pharisees doing so, is fruitless argumentation? Yikes! I guess to you it is better to continue propagating lies against Jesus Christ instead.

I know you're jobless. But just stay off my threads and mentions, going forward...

damosky12:
■ I know you're jobless. But just stay off my threads and mentions, going forward...

Yes, I am happily Jobless. But since when did it become a crime to be jobless or a reason to ignore the Truth of Jesus Christ to be proclaimed?

Your particular issue seems to be that your ego rejects the idea that you were wrong then and are probably even wrong now of the person of Jesus Christ. That is the only logical reason for these continuous attacks on my person instead of the message upto even this ment

Kobojunkie:
Yes, I am happily Jobless. But since when did it become a crime to be jobless or a reason to ignore the Truth of Jesus Christ to be proclaimed?

Your particular issue seems to be that your ego rejects the idea that you were wrong then and are probably even wrong now of the person of Jesus Christ. That is the only logical reason for these continuous attacks on my person instead of the message upto even this ment

Rest. Or keep mentioning if it helps you feel sane.

Ps: there's no attack on your person. You are the attack here. Anyone with some reasoning can see that you're being a silly nuisance here!

There is no need to curse each other because of a debate that has been unresolved for centuries. Even Aristotle wrote about it.

In most of the Bible verses that are subjected to debate, the word "oinos" was used. And the meaning is unfermented or femented grape. Because of this, scholars keep using ideas, assumptions, and scenarios to prove their stand. But in the real sense, no one can prove it or disprove.

Good luck!

Expanse2020:

Most of these guys love to lie and do cover up
Let call a spade a spade...
Lying at this tender age when you Full become pastors nkọ...with uncontrollably lies

Funny thing is that people like you only go about seeking validation with pointless fruitless exchanges online on religious threads.

You have no concrete positive impact anywhere in real life. No desirable lifestyle. Just online noise that amounts to nothing.

epainos:
There is no need to curse each other because of a debate that has been unresolved for centuries. Even Aristotle wrote about it.

In most of the Bible verses that are subjected to debate, the word "oinos" was used. And the meaning is unfermented or femented grape. Because of this, scholars keep using ideas, assumptions, and scenarios to prove their stand. But in the real sense, no one can prove it or disprove.

Good luck!

Thank you. Not cussing, really. I could have indulged him/them with reasonable debates. But the robotically dogmatic nuisance they constitute is mind-blowing. Not one you can engage in a sane elenchus.

Imagine abruptly mentioning a six year old thread as though it was written yesterday. With no courtesy at all. Weird and sincerely baffling!

Kobojunkie:
Well, here is the problem with religion. It is infectious. Last I checked, Muslims claim not to drink alcohol because of some belief they have of the God of Israel declaring alcoholic beverage of sin. Those in the religion of Judaism attempt to control the consumption of alcoholic beverages when nothing of the Law demands or allows such control over the freedoms of the people.

The Law of Moses instead allows people to imbibe as they choose. The entire idea that drinking alcohol amounts to sin comes strictly from men and not the God of Israel. Jesus Christ who declared that He did the Will of His Father would have imbibed freely and condemned no man who did.

When comes to law of God it's keep changing from time to time, generation with generation and from aa prophet to another prophet..
It may be allowed before and because of some conciequences it's may be abolish from another generation...

damosky12:


Funny thing is that people like you only go about seeking validation with pointless fruitless exchanges online on religious threads.

You have no concrete positive impact anywhere in real life. No desirable lifestyle. Just online noise that amounts to nothing.

Does it hurt you to hear the truth....

Expanse2020:

Does it hurt you to hear the truth....

What truth? Have you typed any here?

damosky12:


What truth? Have you typed anyw here?

What apostle Sulaman said

epainos:
■ There is no need to curse each other because of a debate that has been unresolved for centuries. Even Aristotle wrote about it.
In most of the Bible verses that are subjected to debate, the word "oinos" was used. And the meaning is unfermented or femented grape. Because of this, scholars keep using ideas, assumptions, and scenarios to prove their stand. But in the real sense, no one can prove it or disprove. Good luck!

Oh please give me a break!

..three days of storage, the levels of alcohol (ethanol) from fruit juices made with or without the addition of yeast tend to increase compared to previous days, except for red grape juice (added yeast) and local durian juice (with and without yeast).The alcohol (ethanol) content of fruit juice made without the addition of yeast, after being stored for 3 days ranges between (0.143 -0.524)% v /v. which is lower than the alcohol content (ethanol) in yeast-added fruit juices, which ranges from (0.575 -1.901)% v /v (Table 1). This happened because in the yeastadded fruit juices occurred fermentation of alcohol (ethanol), whereas in non-yeast-added fruit juices only occurred the spontaneous fermentation. ...

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-level-of-alcohol-ethanol-in-fruit-juice-with-or-without-the-addition-of-yeast-and_tbl1_335561655

These people didn't have refrigerators back then and so alcohol was bound to be found even in their grape juice after only a couple of days of storage. Unless you are attempting to tell us Jesus Christ only drank freshly pressed juice --- less than 6 hours from its making --- I suggest you stop that nonsense.

Alcohol was not a sin. God Himself boasted of making it for the pleasure of his people. So I am not certain why men think it makes sense to ascribe sin to that which God Himself made and extolled.