This back-to-basics Bible Digest is mainly targeted at new believers, and aimed at extracting the wealth of the Scripture by approaching it in a back-to-basics fashion. This way believers will get the nub of the scriptures without going through the entire Bible at first (That can be done after the digest).

Viaro and Aletheia have been mentioned in the title, but I sincerely need other Christian teachers also to help out with this thread as questions begin to arise, because I may not have a lot of time each day on NL in the next 30 days. This thread may spawn other threads if the discussions extend beyond any day's study.

Personal recommendation: I suggest the Bible scriptures be read from the Message, KJV and the Amplified versions. You can use the http://www.biblegateway.com website if you do not have copies of the versions.

We will study 4 themes concurrently. By my discretion, I believe the wealth of the Scriptures, and the revelation of God to us, hang upon those 4 themes.

The four themes are:
A study of Jesus,
A study of God's eternal plans,
A study of the Psalms
A study of the Proverbs

We will study a couple of passages from each of those 4, and we will discuss them on that day. In like a month the new believer should have covered all bases by then. But the whole Bible may not be involved because although books like Leveticus and Deuteronomy that are important too, but not necessary right now, and not urgent because they have no direct relevance to the 4 themes, so they will be left for now.

Thanks and God bless!

P.S. For each day, the believer should study the scriptures first of all before there is an engagement of discussions.

so what happens if any one start spilling out heresies?

@noetic: I didn't think that would happen. But if it happens, it's a discussion board and the pertinent matters will be thrashed by those present. Any discussion that extends beyond one day will have to branch off to a new thread, the links will be posted. Please, I crave everyone's indulgence on that. Thanks.

Sorry o! I don't think any book of the Bible is unnecessary for any purpose. Let's be more humble to accept our little understanding of matters.

Have got a new notepad to start taking notes.

I know I am an unwanted and much despised guest on this thread, but I would like to ask some questions.

I think the subject of Christ's sacrifice and God's eternal plans is very interesting.

Some one once said to me that Christ's sacrifice is something that took place beyond time and space before anything existed (Pastor AIO). I took him to task on that: suggesting that if that were the case: and in tandem with the precept of an omnipotent God, it would be clear that God knew beforehand the fall of man and had already ameliorated it through his personal sacrifice.

I am at odds regarding the picture of the perfection of God that this presents. Surely it is inconceivable for an omnipotent and omniscient deity to proceed with a creation he already was aware would require interventionist measures as grave as the mission of Christ.

This altogether dovetails into the question of God's eternal plans. Is interventionism compatible with the notion of a perfect God who has, by dint of his perfection set out a perfect creation? If the creation were perfect, what need would there ever be for interventions. If it were not, could it be the work of a perfect deity?

I ask these questions in good faith. As the trajectory of my life proceeds i fear I may be compelled by forces beyond my control to bring up my children as Christians. How would i reconcile these seeming contradictions to them - especially in the terrible event that one of them inherits the nature of my own questioning mind?

There is ONE question you needs must answer first, DeepSight and I hope you realise it is only the deepest respect for you and your intellect that makes me address you thus! My posts will show I have no patience for vacuous minds and I am sincere when I say you are not one of such.

Do you come into this thread with your mind already made up and having nothing but the intellectual respect you needs must give us for writing "passable" english OR would you truly be willing to "listen" AND "consider"? You have put me on the spot before with "Nuclearboy dispels Deepsights misgivings" or something like that where the instant we commenced, you showed that you were in it for the fun of seeking ridicule. NL reveberates with the echoes of Viaro versus DeepSight and I know Inesqor suffered your "wrath" too only because he subscribes to our belief. 

Why then would you expect that any of us (Christian) speak honest with you expecting a tactic of attempted ridicule? I know Viaro (and myself) in our turn tried to ridicule you in return to show how it feels but lets leave all that aside. Are you willing to listen to another "adult's" beliefs and not try make such out to seem idiotic? Remember that such attempts usually turn out as "me too can call you names"

BTW, I do not think any person on this forum with brains in his head will despise your mind - such scorn is better left for such as , AND ,  AND ,  ,  AND . , AND ,  ,    AND  , 

Pls guys i have a very controversial topic i love us to discuss,should i wait till after the 30 days or start it now? Reason being that part of what the subject entails will be part of what we might likely read during the 30 days which will make us have good responses.
Last week,i heard Pastor Rod Parsley of Break through ministry colombus usa on TBN say that God doesnt control destiny but man does. He made qoutes&i will love to hear from u, on when to act. Thks

toba:

Pls guys i have a very controversial topic i love us to discuss,should i wait till after the 30 days or start it now? Reason being that part of what the subject entails will be part of what we might likely read during the 30 days which will make us have good responses.
Last week,i heard Pastor Rod Parsley of Break through ministry colombus usa on TBN say that God doesnt control destiny but man does. He made qoutes&i will love to hear from u, on when to act. Thks

please open a new thread on that with details of the pastor's comments . . . that would make a rich discourse.

noetic16:

please open a new thread on that with details of the pastor's comments . . . that would make a rich discourse.

ok

I'm sorry Day 2 is coming in a bit late. For me now, this is becoming an exercise in consistency

Image123:

Sorry o! I don't think any book of the Bible is unnecessary for any purpose. Let's be more humble to accept our little understanding of matters.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood the OP. What I meant is not that any book is unnecessary for any purpose whatsoever, but rather, that these are fundamental starting points for a new Believer. It's just like learning any other course in life: there are basic courses and there are other courses that follow after. After all these, they can proceed to read the rest. I personally believe the Bible is not meant to be studied AT FIRST from cover to cover, Genesis to Revelation, like a novel. I hope you understand my point now. I had no intentions to appear proud in any manner. Thanks.

nuclearboy:

Have got a new notepad to start taking notes.

Please bro, do not only take notes, but also answer questions as they arise. I have personally learnt a lot from Viaro and Aletheia and I see them as gifted teachers, taking note of their clear expressions and modes of presentation of their information. There are many others who can shed volumes of light too, but I mentioned those two for the reason I just stated. Thanks for joining in!

@Deep Sight:
Thanks for your question. It is, in part, in line with Day 1's discussion so I will make a response in the next post, before posting verses for Day 2.

@toba, noetic: Thanks, I would love to see more of that on the other thread! Toba, please remember to post a link to that thread here also.

@Deep Sight:

Deep Sight:

I know I am an unwanted and much despised guest on this thread, but I would like to ask some questions.

I think the subject of Christ's sacrifice and God's eternal plans is very interesting.

First off, bro, you are neither unwanted nor despised. In fact, you are very welcome here. Sincerely, you are welcome to ask questions in line with each day's discussion topic, and how it's related to the theme (like you have done here). We, like nuclearboy said, will only present our understanding of the matters without a recourse to arguments if possible.

Deep Sight:

Some one once said to me that Christ's sacrifice is something that took place beyond time and space before anything existed (Pastor AIO). I took him to task on that: suggesting that if that were the case: and in tandem with the precept of an omnipotent God, it would be clear that God knew beforehand the fall of man and had already ameliorated it through his personal sacrifice.

I agree with Pastor AIO, and the Biblical reference is Revelations 13:8. And all the inhabitants of the earth will fall down in adoration and pay him homage, everyone whose name has not been recorded in the Book of Life of the Lamb that was slain [in sacrifice] from the foundation of the world

My understanding is that in as much as the physical sacrifice of Christ had not been carried out, He had already been sacrificed as Christ beyond time and space. We can see it like an author writing a novel that has not yet been published. If he is asked about characters in the novel, he would tell exactly what happened with each one; although the novel was yet unpublished. When the book is published and everyone gets to read it, then all that the author had been saying all along becomes clear. The characters don't assume their roles the moment the published book is read, but at the moment the author defined them in his purpose. I believe this realm of existence is a replay of a complex tangle of occurrences pre-written in God, but unlike a novel, it's not fully defined yet. There are aspects where our will steers the course, and there are aspects where God's will steers the course.

Deep Sight:

I am at odds regarding the picture of the perfection of God that this presents. Surely it is inconceivable for an omnipotent and omniscient deity to proceed with a creation he already was aware would require interventionist measures as grave as the mission of Christ.

This altogether dovetails into the question of God's eternal plans. Is interventionism compatible with the notion of a perfect God who has, by dint of his perfection set out a perfect creation? If the creation were perfect, what need would there ever be for interventions. If it were not, could it be the work of a perfect deity?

I see this matter of interventionism like a many-to-one mapping, mathematically. e.g. the square root of 4 is +2 or -2. This means that if you independently square either +2 or -2 you still get 4. I would say man is on the "many" end and God is on the "one" end of a many-to-one mapping in which the results for each mapping is known from the established final result. What I mean is this: there are billions of decisions that a man can make in every minute, but for each of those alternate processes, there is a final result obtained and it is pre-known in God. True, God made a perfect creation, but he also gave him a perfect freewill that enabled traversal along diverse lines of action in life. There was a line of action in which Adam and Eve may not have sinned in the Garden of Eden, but the provision had been made for the lines of action in which they sinned, and that was the sacrifice of Christ before they were even created. There is no concern about "wastage" of the sacrifice if they did not sin originally, because this is a vast and infinite God and his predetermined resources are similarly vast. If Adam and Eve had not chosen to sin, the pre-creation sacrifice would not have been applied to them at that point. This is why the first time a reference was made to Christ as the seed of the woman in Genesis designed to crush the serpent, was AFTER their sin. God made a withdrawal from the deposits in pre-creation to suit the particular line of play that the humans had followed.

To clarify, it's like having a huge deposit of cash in the bank before you get married or even before the child is born, because you realize that you want the child to have the very best of education, health, lifestyle and all that. And then the child is born and, say, born premature with some heavy complications and you need a very expensive surgery and intensive healthcare and you make a huge withdrawal on the same account. The same account was meant to serve provision for health for the child as he/she grew, but since the child has been born premature, the resources will serve him as well. You can think of Christ's sacrifice as a backup plan that was SURE to be used sooner or later. Adam and Eve just chose to sin, and the sacrifice had to be used to cleanse them from their sin. What the initial intents of the pre-creation sacrifice was, besides the taking away of sin that it was finally applied to, is not expressly stated in the Bible, IMHO.

Deep Sight:

I ask these questions in good faith. As the trajectory of my life proceeds i fear I may be compelled by forces beyond my control to bring up my children as Christians. How would i reconcile these seeming contradictions to them - especially in the terrible event that one of them inherits the nature of my own questioning mind?

I will like to say that you have good points, but faith cannot always be explained away because it is from an entirely different realm than this one. I believe it can't be forced to fit into these patterns of logic, and the very best we can do is to draw parallels.

I sincerely hope the questions are answered.

On to day 2's scriptures.

P.S. If anyone has a better idea to make this thread work better, please volunteer it. Thanks.

what a senseless thread. another attempt by another deluded group to force their own version of christianity on ''new converts''.


This is the sad thing with these self-labeled ''Teachers'', ''enlightened ones'' etc who claim to know. when in actual fact all they have is opinions formed from what they themselves understand from the word. you then see them starting posts with, ''in my opinion'', '' from my understanding, ''. WHAT?

This is both insulting and wicked to the New convert. People want to hear the TRUTH and not your bloody opinions. And if You dont know for CERTAIN that what you have is truth then you have no business pushing people to follow the same line as you do.

For a New convert, truly seeking god, this is a matter of his ''eternal life'' and a gravely serious matter. some wicked crazy people see it as an opportunity to show-off that they went to 'bible college' , bamboozle them with crap coloured in different fonts and confuse with senseless technicalities.

In an ideal situation, this is where the holy Spirit is supposed to come in, the ultimate teacher of truth. if we already have a teacher in the holy spirit, why the hell do we need nairaland quacks who even claim to give online spiritual business MBA's?

To every new convert out there, pls stay away from crooks who'll suggest and point you to certain parts of the bible in the name of ''This way believers will get the nub of the scriptures without going through the entire Bible at first'', This is the first step to indoctrination. you are supposed to read the entire bible first before anything and not the other way round. Let no man point you anywhere, ask god to teach and guide you (maybe you'll have better luck than i did coz I got no answer) coz you are dealing with your eternal life here and you have to find your own path and not rely on the crap a drunkard typed on nairaland.

@Tudor: Thanks for your comment.

FTR, I want to let you know that there is nothing here about any "version of Christianity". It's a discussion board and if you have alternate understanding to the presented information, it would be fine to discuss. I also do not believe in taking spiritual material hook line and sinker. I believe they are signposts leading to a destination, and not the destination in themselves. When one receives such information, they can check up on it against what the Holy Spirit tells them. I do not believe in reading "alternatives" to Bible scriptures. In this thread, I do not have any plans to explain away any scriptures except in their own light. When people like Deep Sight ask questions based on the topical discussion, I intend to answer in my own understanding,

I guess in your opinion, that also means that the scriptures and letters of the apostles were a waste of time? By the same token, everyone should have just discovered their God by themselves and get all the understanding? Seen. FTR, I'm not comparing this to the scriptures, but I'm saying a discussion like this is entirely Biblical.

FTW, I don't believe in indoctrination. As Deep Sight said on another thread, everybody is responsible for the information they receive and how they handle it. You cannot repress an outflow of free expression, but you have the right to sift it and dismiss it as is necessary. I have good conversations with many non-Christians without any conflict, I simply dismiss their ideas when I don't see it as right.

And you seem to be contradicting yourself, insinuating we claim a monopoly on the topical information, and also saying that I have used "in my opinion,. . . by my understanding, etc". Those two claims of yours contravene one another, because it is for the fact that I do not know it all, that I express my understanding the way I see it. I do not know enough, but I am never too shy to say what I know, and if I find out I am wrong, I am ready to drop my beliefs and pick the truth in any case. But I need to be convinced beyond any doubt. Nobody here has claimed to enjoy a monopoly of knowledge in any form or extent.

Last I checked this is a civil discussion board allowing free expression, and there has to be a set of topics for discussion, so in the OP some topics have been outlined so that new believers can discuss, ask questions and everyone can benefit from it all. If you have a better suggestion on how this can be done, please kindly indicate. Or create it in a new thread.

Have a great week.

@All: Once again, if anyone has an idea how to conduct such a discussion as this in a better form, please suggest it.

FTW I do not believe in indoctrination, that's why I am not quoting the verses or interpreting them. I am just leaving scriptural references and leaving each reader to read for themselves, understand for themselves, and if they have questions, we may discuss them.

Cheers all.

@Tudor:   

Are you sure, Bro, that your anger is not coming from the days of Inesqor being male/female and your anger at not being answered then? 

Whist I would agree with you in ENTIRETY normally, this thread does something none else does - it refuses to intepret Scripture. All Inesqor does is say "read about the prophecy pointing to Jesus in Is 53" etc. He then allows the reader to make their personal conclusions. Thats not opinionated but factual. It is also fair to all concerned.

@Inesqor:

Child threads will surely arise as time goes on which WILL discuss personal feelings about issues here. My only suggestion would be to start off with more controversial issues so this thread does not become boring. Issues like Salvation and the 2 laws, tithes, holiness, anger in Christianity (me, I need 20 courses on THAT especially concerning reacting ) etc will bring out the best of us.

nuclearboy:

@Inesqor:

Child threads will surely arise as time goes on which WILL discuss personal feelings about issues here. My only suggestion would be to start off with more controversial issues so this thread does not become boring. Issues like Salvation and the 2 laws, tithes, holiness, anger in Christianity (me, I need 20 courses on THAT especially concerning reacting  ) etc will bring out the best of us.

@Nuclearboy:

Thanks! Hmm bros I think such a thread may tend to spin into many free-for-all arguments and derail into a wild melee.  LOL. I don't think that will work for the purpose and harmony of this thread (I'm not sure those are basic matters to be addressed at this point?)! In my opinion, if you create it on another thread I will gladly join in and make my own posts on the subject matter there

I know I asked for suggestions, so maybe let's see what two other people have to say about this suggestion?

^^ Actually, what I meant was that you could give scripture references for "Anger" much as you gave for "the prophecy pointing to Christs' showing". One like myself would likely see another side (and scriptural references to support my position). I would likely then start off a thread presenting my own perspective, not argue here. It would be on that thread that arguments/opinions would come in

Your thread, in effect, presents a motivation for discussions on multiple issues

@Nuclearboy: LOL I get you now bro! That's a very good idea. . . ok.

InesQor
Forgive me for I'm a stubborn student. I'm not here i.e this thread, to teach(at least for now). I'm here to learn but the OP is telling me some books are not in the 'syllabus' and I'm like why? I guess the purpose of the thread is share fundamental starting points/bases for new believers. So the thread has a purpose. I'll re-phrase and say no book of the Bible is unnecessary for new believers.
One of my reasons is 1Peter 1v14-16 where Peter was addressing growing believers and using Leviticus 11v44. Also, we know that new believers face temptations and need to learn how to overcome temptation. Well, our perfect example who we're told to look unto overcame temptations in Matthew 4 by quoting Bible. Surprise, suprise, all 3quotes were from Deuteronomy. I hope you see why no book or Word of God is unnecessary for new believers.
BTW, please what is indoctrination and what is wrong with it?

@Image123: No, you forgive me, for it appears I misunderstood you at first. If we are to do a study of the Bible in 30 days, then there is no way we can cover all the bases. Everything cannot be in the syllabus, but nothing is unnecessary. I hope you get my point? Those examples you mentioned,  in so much as Matthew 4 quoted Deuteronomy, the information required from Deuteronomy has been covered in that instance without wading through the entire book of Deuteronomy, given the short timeframe of 30 days. ALL Scripture is profitable, sire. Nothing is unnecessary, but given the time we have to work with (esp. the fact that I started the thread and I would want to finish it after 30 days without abandoning it), we have to start with something.

You can think of it as highlights of the scriptures. The scriptures are so deep in themselves that even with 30 years and not days, you wouldn't be done!

The fact that you turn the key in the ignition does not mean that the other parts of the car are less significant. I actually admonish readers to do cross-reference studies. These are only starting points for the topical discussions. I hope you understand me now?

Indoctrination? In the sense used in this thread, I think it would mean forcing your own private eisegesis (interpretation of the scriptures) down another believer's throat, leaving no room for true exegesis (a round and complete interpretation of the Holy Spirit). I do not think that is correct to do.

InesQor
I do understand you now. Thank you. And thanks for the definition

InesQor:

@Tudor: Thanks for your comment.

FTR, I want to let you know that there is nothing here about any "version of Christianity". It's a discussion board and if you have alternate understanding to the presented information, it would be fine to discuss. I also do not believe in taking spiritual material hook line and sinker. I believe they are signposts leading to a destination, and not the destination in themselves. When one receives such information, they can check up on it against what the Holy Spirit tells them. I do not believe in reading "alternatives" to Bible scriptures. In this thread, I do not have any plans to explain away any scriptures except in their own light. When people like Deep Sight ask questions based on the topical discussion, I intend to answer in my own understanding,

signposts indeed. . . .i like that word.

What do sign posts do? THEY LEAD AND POINT TO A SPECIFIC SCRIPTED DESTINATION.

You present ur scripted ''sign posts'' advice them to follow ur ''sign posts'' before they read the entire bible. Unto what end?

Incase you have amnesia, herez the quote from the OP Quote from Mavenbox

This back-to-basics Bible Digest is mainly targeted at new believers, and aimed at extracting the wealth of the Scripture by approaching it in a back-to-basics fashion. This way believers will get the nub of the scriptures without going through the entire Bible at first (That can be done after the digest).

firstly you clearly outlined your targets, New i.e vulnerable converts. Then went on to claim you'll be EXTRACTING WEALTH OF THE SCRIPTUREs. . .not enough, you then Guaranteed that they WILL get the nub of scriptures without reading the entire bible.

It means that whatever doodle you come up with has been defacto declared ''wealth of scripture'' and ''nub of scripture''.

And you claim not to be trying to force your own version of christianity on new converts? Do you think we are stupiid?

I guess in your opinion, that also means that the scriptures and letters of the apostles were a waste of time? By the same token, everyone should have just discovered their God by themselves and get all the understanding? Seen. FTR, I'm not comparing this to the scriptures, but I'm saying a discussion like this is entirely Biblical.

You compare the drivel you post on NL to the scriptures then in the same sentence claim not to compare them?

Are you diseased?

On what basis do you make this refrence/comparison or whatever you wanna call it?

FTW, I don't believe in indoctrination. As Deep Sight said on another thread, everybody is responsible for the information they receive and how they handle it. You cannot repress an outflow of free expression, but you have the right to sift it and dismiss it as is necessary. I have good conversations with many non-Christians without any conflict, I simply dismiss their ideas when I don't see it as right.

And you seem to be contradicting yourself, insinuating we claim a monopoly on the topical information, and also saying that I have used "in my opinion,. . . by my understanding, etc". Those two claims of yours contravene one another, because it is for the fact that I do not know it all, that I express my understanding the way I see it. I do not know enough, but I am never too shy to say what I know, and if I find out I am wrong, I am ready to drop my beliefs and pick the truth in any case. But I need to be convinced beyond any doubt. Nobody here has claimed to enjoy a monopoly of knowledge in any form or extent.

All this is pure BS based on what I've said above.


You mostly used the ''In my opinion'' label when discussing with deep and krayola coz you know they are smart enough to tear you to pieces when you come with your ''my view is truth'' banter.

Nowhere in the OP did you state that what will be expressed here are opinions and nothing more rather you claim to be extracting wealth and nubs.

Nowhere in the OP did you advise them to seek guidance or clarification from the holy spirit. Just presented your ''sign posts'' and yelled follow.

That was how u were claiming to know gods plan for business and human resource development. I laugh.

Last I checked this is a civil discussion board allowing free expression, and there has to be a set of topics for discussion, so in the OP some topics have been outlined so that new believers can discuss, ask questions and everyone can benefit from it all. If you have a better suggestion on how this can be done, please kindly indicate. Or create it in a new thread.

Have a great week.

how'bout stop trying to force your own fabricated version of christianity on new converts. And stop giving them alternative nuggets (poisoned with your crap) to reading the bible which should be the first thing a christian does on being converted.

Tudor, you shouldn't go on this way. I think it's bad for your health.

InesQor:

This back-to-basics Bible Digest is mainly targeted at new believers, and aimed at extracting the wealth of the Scripture by approaching it in a back-to-basics fashion.

Rather than jumping to conclusions, the questions you should have asked here are "who is doing the extraction of the wealth/nub of scriptures"? and "how"?

I think every careful and intelligent reader on the thread can see that I have not been interpreting or extracting any information on the scriptures. Just as well, I am listing Bible verses for daily discussion, over a period of 30 days.

FTR, I always refer to my discretion and my honest opinion, no matter who I am discussing with. Go figure.

The rest of your post above is plain and incongruously farcical fuzz. #thxbye

nuclearboy:

@Tudor:   

Are you sure, Bro, that your anger is not coming from the days of Inesqor being male/female and your anger at not being answered then? 

I dont know whether to feel sad or sorry for you.

You must be mistaking me for Deep Sight coz he was the one chasing Mavenbox' pants all over town.

Whist I would agree with you in ENTIRETY normally, this thread does something none else does -[b] it refuses to intepret Scripture. All Inesqor does is say "read about the prophecy pointing to Jesus in Is 53" etc. He then allows the reader to make their personal conclusions. Thats not opinionated but factual. [/b]It is also fair to all concerned.

This is funny. . . . You quote isiah bla vs bla and label it ''Prophecy concerning jesus'' and you say that isnt interpreting?

Soon you'll quote john 55 vs 44 and label it ''The trinity'' then malachi 3 : 10 and label it ''Tithing''.

Chei, this guy is THE icing on NLs cake

@Tudor: please forgive all of us! Please

Hello all. I'm surprised to be able to post again after the "**" went awry.

Anyways, this is a timely and interesting thread - more so because it does not argue to push any post(s) or discussion as THE 'truth'. Anyone who may, can benefit - if otherwise, no worries.

For one, viaro does not lay any claims to being a "teacher" by any stretch. But I'm willing to share on certain subjects. A lot of issues may arise (as already is evident), and I think it is a good thing in terms of helping us all as believers to think deeper. So, my thanks and appreciation to the OP/thread starter.

However, perhaps there should be a structure of sorts for the 'digest'. When one proposes a discussion as "a study", it leaves open the fact that there are a number of such studies one might betake on the subject. It is just like the synoptic Gospels which present the same theme (the Gospel of Jesus Christ) but each of the Gospels (^{Matthew Mark Luke and John}) seeing the central theme from a different perspective of a collective whole.

In all, I envisage that it is not only the 'new convert' that would have something helpful to take away from the digest - 'believers' as 'believers' would benefit as well. I may be mistaken, but perhaps owing to the fact that not many people find the "basics" quite stimulating, there has been a whole range of concerns in many places about what we hear from many pulpits. As already, toba has highlighted one such from Rod Parsley - how this ties back to the theme of the 30-day digest would also be interesting food for thought.

I hope to throw in my bit here and there as time allows. Cheers.

Thanks and welcome, viaro!!!

Viaro, please your understanding of a more effective study structure will be highly appreciated. Thanks again for joining!