₦airaland Forum

@ No2Atheism

I changed my pic. Happy looking.

You said this - Stop confusing USED in worship and BEING worshipped. They are two different things.

That makes absolutely no sense . . . its just like saying there is a difference between eating rice and using rice to eat.

Can you then enlighten me how USED in worship equates to BEING worshipped.

And your example makes no sense. A proper one would be a spoon used to eat rice, but the spoon itself not being eaten.

A spoon can be USED to eat rice, but the spoon cannot be eaten.

The Spoon is being USED, the rice is BEING eaten.

There is a difference between USED and BEING.

The definitions
USED
–verb (used with object) 1. to employ for some purpose; put into service; make use of: to use a knife.

BEING
–verb (used without object) 1. to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question.
2. to take place; happen; occur

USED is in support of a noun.
BEING is the noun itself.
Big difference

As stated above
One is used with an object, the other is without an object. They are opposites.

How were they used in worship? Were they made for worship, or were they made to represent the heavenly sanctuary, and what is carried out in the heavenly sanctuary above? Were you aware that Moses was instructed to build the tabernacle according to what was shown to him on the mount? Moses was shown a copy of the heavenly tabernacle above, and the object of the earthly sanctuary was to provide for the children of Israel a proper understanding of the plan of salvation. You're mistaken about the things of the ark of the covenant being used in worship. If that were the case, then why weren't they displayed outside for the people to see them? Why were they compartmentalized?

They were not made for worship and neither are the statues you see. Those statues are not being worshipped.
They were made to represent the heavenly sanctuary, and if you've been paying attention you will see that that's the purpose of the statues.
And that is what being used in worship means.

The ark of the covenant was revered, and by it being kept in holy of holies it is the perfect act of reverence that could be given to the ark of the covenant

How do you explain the photos above? Why is it necessary for persons to be bowing down before a so-called statue of Mary?

The photos above are very fine. Those statues are not being worshipped, they are used in the same way that the ark of the covenant, the bronze serpent and other images in the temple were being used.
It is also not necessary for persons to bow before the statue, it is completely voluntary. There is not a teaching that says one must bow.
Also bowing does not equate to worship. You will have to explain how bowing equates to worship. Also don't forget we are Africans and remember that bowing is a way of showing reverence to people and does not necessarily mean worship.
If you think bowing equates to worship, then the yorubas and Edos are guilty of worshipping people.

In what way you are yet to prove. If worship was an everyday experience, and the ark of the covenant came into play only once per year, in what way did the children of Israel utilize it for the purpose of worship?

Ok I'm trying to understand your logic here. So the ark of the covenant being utilized once a year means that they didn't use it in worship? How about that one day a year? What happened then? How does the time frame of its utilization take away from it being used in worship?
And apparently you are unaware that the Isrealites went to the temple very often and the ark was not utilized only once a year. The ark was always present in the temple in the holy of holies, and before the temple was built it was in the tent and it was utilized everyday by the Israelites. They bowed down in front of the tent that contained the ark, infact according to you bowing down in front of that tent is worshipping the tent

Your argument is so foolish. You're confusing the real issue here Lady. You're confusing God's motives for having commanded Moses to build the furniture of the ark of the covenant, and the purpose behind such objects, with man's motives for building an image for worship purposes. Besides, the furniture of the ark were hidden away from the worshipers view. During worship God was on the people's mind, not the furniture. No one was seeing bowing down to them anyway, so what is the big deal of your argument?

No sir I am not confusing the real issue. It is because I understand God's motives and purpose for commanding the building of the images that I actually understand the first commandment.
I am glad you saw it as foolish because all I did was used your logic, maybe now you will see that it is not the use of these images in the sanctuary that is the problem it is the actual worshipping of it that is. And that as those images were to set the people's mind to God, so do the statues set our mind to God.
I am glad you see that it is God that was on the people's minds and not the furniture, same thing with the images. They are to set our minds to God and to things of heaven. Our focus is not on the statues themselves but on God and heaven.
So you see just because you see pictures of people bowing to a statue does not mean they are worshipping it, otherwise you would be guilty of it too, for praying in a room that has the image of anything, infact praying in a room would be worshipping it according to you.
The making of the images aren't wrong, having it in the sanctuary isn't wrong because during worship our eyes are set on God.

And no the images were not always hidden. Remember the ark went before the people when they moved and they worshipped at that time. And if you know anything about Jewish worship, they bow a lot. So yes they bowed in front of the ark.

Exactly! So how would that have enhanced anyone's worship, if they were afraid? Based on your argument no one would feel comfortable being around it. Besides, the only reason it was even seen was because it was being transported to another location when the tent was being removed.

Because of what the word worship means. By not touching it, they have a great reverence for it the same reverence as for God. Why would they have such a reverence for an image if the use of images are wrong, why would God make them have reverence for something that is wrong?

It makes no sense to you because you have misconstrued the significance of the objects of furniture in the ark of the covenant. They were designed to illustrate the plan of salvation in a miniature sense. They were never intended to be the objects of focus.

Good, now you're making my point. Just because an image is seen doesn't mean the image itself is the object of focus. For one to think so, one is only assuming things

How would you know the motives for the introduction of icons? Why not simply teach people to read the bible!

The same way we know everything else, HISTORY!!!
Because has not always been available.
The Church was left without scripture for 400 years. What happens to the people before then? They weren't going to heaven because they didn't read the Bible?
Also there was no priniting press, you guys assume the Bible was available as it is today.
The Bible was copied by hand by monks for years. It took at least 1 year to copy 1 complete Bible, so tell me for a Church that was always on the move and vastly growing, how many years would they have gotten copies of the Bible to the people?
Also the Bible was not always in the same language. You'd have to teach the people, hebrew, greek and aramaic at the same time. When the Bible was translated into one language for the first time into Latin by St. Jerome not everyone spoke latin it was mostly the educated that did, and even they couldn't afford the Bible, it was mostly owned by Kings and Queens and it too years for them to even get it.

Yet we are told whose image we were made in. Wasn't it Moses who wrote the creation story? God's people already knew that, so your argument doesn't make sense.

So what are you saying? God has breasts, a vagina, and a penis at the same time?

A dove? When was that?

Um the Holy Spirit or have you forgotten that He's the 3rd person of the Trinity?

Go re-read the 2nd commandment? It said nothing of the sort. Simply put God didn't want to be worshiped using images of anything above, beneath, or on the earth. God knew what was likely to take place, and njpped it in the bud. God also knew that it was the manner of the surrounding heathens to utilize images, and that His own people had grown accustomed to the ways of the Egyptians.

Isn't this exactly what was said above? You need to start remembering things.

I already did above. Are angels worshiped? If not explain why God allowed Moses to carve them, and hide them in the sanctuary?

1) Start asking questions pertaining to what I am talking about
2) Can you explain how USED in worship equates to BEING worshipped
3) Angels were used in worship
4) In Daniel 8:17 Daniel bows down in front of angel gabriel. Will you equate that to worshipping Gabriel?

Yes I do. Show us the posts from any thread where you asked a question and I didn't answer. The onus is on you to prove your case.

You really think I am like you who doesn't have a life, that I'd take my time to go dig up convos we had a very long time ago?
But the immediate one is the one below. You didn't provide me with an answer, instead you asked me a question.

"Did he use the Priests in the OT and didn't he use prophets to speak to the people?
Why didn't he speak to each individual?"

To you it is, but to others it is otherwise.

No honey not just to me, that's why there have been people who are not Catholics that have come to this particular thread and asked you to stop being judgmental.
But they're irrelevant because they disagree with you right?.

Take for example. You have not yet responded to the very photos obviously displaying open idolatry among Catholics members and leaders alike. Instead you and that Chukwudi of yours, the one among you with the least amount of sense, are on the defensive. Good! That is exactly where I want the whole lot of you. Defend with lies and vain arguments, if you choose.

I have addressed them, go back to page one and two. Because I don't copy the pictures does not mean I am not talking about the pictures.

The bible makes this an important issue, and since you are taught to ignore the bible and to follow Catholic tradition instead, hence your response.

This is rather big assumption. Can you provide me with Catholic teaching that says we should ignore the Bible, and in case you didn't know the Bible is a Catholic tradition.

Rants? Listen to yourself, you who find it so easy calling people all sorts of names?

Calling who names?
Isn't Bobby your name?
Didn't I call you Bobby?

If it were nonsense then why are Catholics leaving the church?

For the same reason why some people are leaving the Christian faith and joining Islam or becoming atheist. Lack of understanding of the Christian faith.
Also you are aware that there are more people joining the Church than there are leaving right?

They became Catholics, but are they born-again Christians? Do they know Christ as their Mediator, rather than Mary or dead saints?

They understand the fullness of truth better than they ever did. By the way the fastest converters to the Catholic faith are evangelical pastors who set out to rescue the Catholics. When they finally see the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and interpret it properly they become Catholic. Do a search on the evangelicals that have become Catholic, they are one of the best defenders of the Catholic faith right now.

You also do not know what born-again means apparently.

No amount of feigning can help you lady. Deep down you know you have no case against the truth. As long as you remain a catholic you dare not use the bible to defend your teachings. You know it and we know it. So quit the crap about not responding to the issues you have brought up, as if they are really relevant.

Lol oh honey I once was blind but now I can see. I was a protestant who believed Catholics were idol worshippers and I was always told they weren't. So I said ok fine I will stop being afraid and learn what Catholics really believe. When I did and started reading the Bible, and researched history I became Catholic. It wasn't easy and when I finally stepped into the Catholic Church for Mass, I knew I was home. I knew God was physically present. And then I paid attention to the words used at Mass and I realised the words used at Mass are actually Biblical words, word for word. Wow!! I was amazed and ashamed for the many times that I spent away from God and His Church.

So rather than going off of what someone told me that they heard from someone that heard from someone, I do my own research and find the truth and for the first time, I started becoming honest with myself. Rather than making Christianity what I wanted it to be just to make myself feel better.

Lol I dare not use the Bible to defend my beliefs? So all those Bible passages that I've been posting they've been from gbalalalala land Bible?
My issues are irrelevant? And yet you were trying to say that you address them?
You're contradicting yourself Bobby, get your story straight.
It's either my issues have been relevant enough for you to address them, or they've been irrelevant that you haven't addressed them.

The only person that would consider another person's point of view irrelevant is the person that is insecure in his own belief.
What are you too scared to address the issues?

Do a google on the inquisition and come back to the forum. Catholics die when they delve in politics, as your leaders are known for doing. Its usually their own doing.

Honey do you really want me to educate you on the history of the inquisition because I will.

Deny not betray! Get your facts straight please.

So Judas didn't betray Jesus?

Don't confuse the issue here lady. God's Holy Spirit can only enter a person when they are truly ready. Peter and the rest of the disciples were not ready even when Jesus called them for ministry. The convicting work of the Holy Spirit had to take place first before the anointing. However, whenever such a person is born again then the change becomes obvious. "Old things are passed away, behold all things become new"

Well then you need to consult your Bible again mister, because even before the birth of Jesus and before his ministry the Holy Spirit had already filled others. One in particular is Mary. Don't forget Simeon also.
And to look at the Holy Spirit with your eyes is to say that the Holy Spirit didn't exist before the coming of Christ. The Holy Spirit was present in the OT, they just were not aware of him as the Holy Spirit, but they knew of the Spirit of God. And several men in the OT were filled with the Spirit of God.
Now when Jesus sent out his apostles to heal and cast out demons, they did so on the power of the Holy Spirit.

That was never my line of argument. Notice you're the one introducing it, not me.

It is your line of argument. I am just presenting it to you from a different angle. See you're quick to say that God's Church could never do this or never do that. Well I'm trying to get you to see how flawed your argument is by showing you that even with God in their midst God's Church couldn't always get their acts straight. So because the apostles were sinners does not mean that they were never a part of God's true Church. Because they abandoned him does not mean that they are not God's Church.

Impeccability does not mean infallibility (I am assuming you know the meaning of impeccability and infallibility, if you do not, please look it up in Oxford's dictionary)

Because Jesus said otherwise. God says "vengeance belongs to me" God's church was never called to defend itself using the inquisition that killed people who simply accepted the bible as their standard of truth. Stop trying to justify evil. Open your eyes.

1) I never justify evil, I correct people's knowledge of what they deem evil, if it was not evil
2) I suppose you're referring to the Spanish Inquisiton, it wasn't started by the Catholic Church, it was started by Monarchs who happened to be Catholic.
3) No where in the Bible does it say that we cannot defend ourselves from heretical teachings and from invaders.
4) If anything it is evident in the Bible by St. Paul that speaking against heresies is good, now the method of doing so was wrong by the Church, but nonetheless it wasn't wrong to fight heresies.
5) My point was that even if the members of the Church or the Pope were to engage in an evil act does not in anyway take away from the Church being the Church founded by Christ.

No where did Christ say that the members of the Church will be perfect, but that the Church will never teach heresy. So when it comes to the teaching on faith and morals, the Church isn't wrong and never has been wrong.
However when it comes to the actions of the members, the Church can and has been wrong.

The apostles taught the truth, but they were not perfect people. They were still sinners.

Because I use the bible as my guide, and not the catechism.

So you're claiming to be the infallible interpreter of the Bible?

1. Because Ignatius Loyola started the jesuits who are know for committing atrocities on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church.

No the Jesuits are known for defending the Church and for their contribution to the Unversity system, they're actually considered the "intellectual brotherhood". It was actually found for the conversion of the mohammedeans (the muslims) it wasn't until after Henry VIII started his massacre of Catholics that the Jesuits stood up for the Church and fought on behalf of those whose families were being massacred by Henry.

2. I know the bible is the final authority because it is being fufilled and attested to even by the Messiah Himself. Even the Messiah Himself shows us the scriptures are the final authority by his usage of the phrase: "It is written , " to show us that "the Creator's opinion is final "

Um I don't think you know what the Bible is then.
Also when Jesus said it is written was he referring to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Hebrews, Romans, and so on?
Where did Jesus say the scripture is final?
Also when did God actually write the scripture?
How do you know the books in the Bible are actually scripture?
Also did you know that Jesus and the apostles spoke of the stories in the books that are missing from your Bible (protestant bible)? If it was good enough for them, why isn't good enough for you?
Where did Jesus give the Bible authority?
Lastly where in scripture does it allude to scripture being the final authority?

And besides 'it is written' does not in anyway allude to God's opinion. Unless you've forgotten that in the OT divorces were permitted and that is scriptures, but in the NT Jesus states that divorces are not permitted and that is also the scriptures. Scripture does not equal God's opinion. God's opinion cannot negate itself.

5. The bible is the final authority because it says so itself:

Ok I don't see anywhere in those scriptures it says that the scripture is the final authority. God's Word is a Person not a book.

And by the way, why do you believe the Bible to be the word of God? WHy not the quran? The quran also claims to be the word of God.

It is not only St. Paul that tells women not to preach. St. Peter does the same and it is also the same in the OT.

I know most of you don't believe in the Priesthood but it may better help you understand why it is women are not to preach in the pulpit.

Gen. 3:15; Luke 1:26-55; John 19:26; Rev. 12:1- Mary is God's greatest creation, was the closest person to Jesus, and yet Jesus did not choose her to become a priest. God chose only men to be priests to reflect the complimentarity of the sexes. Just as the man (the royal priest) gives natural life to the woman in the marital covenant, the ministerial priest gives supernatural life in the New Covenant sacraments.

Judges 17:10; 18:19 – fatherhood and priesthood are synonymous terms. Micah says, “Stay with me, and be to me a father and a priest.” Fathers/priests give life, and mothers receive and nurture life. This reflects God our Father who gives the life of grace through the Priesthood of His Divine Son, and Mother Church who receives the life of grace and nourishes her children. In summary, women cannot be priests because women cannot be fathers.

Mark 16:9; Luke 7: 37-50; John 8:3-11 - Jesus allowed women to uniquely join in His mission, exalting them above cultural norms. His decision not to ordain women had nothing to do with culture. The Gospel writers are also clear that women participated in Jesus' ministry and, unlike men, never betrayed Jesus. Women have always been held with the highest regard in the Church (e.g., the Church's greatest saint and model of faith is a woman; the Church's constant teaching on the dignity of motherhood; the Church's understanding of humanity as being the Bride united to Christ, etc.).

Mark 14:17,20; Luke 22:14 - the language "the twelve" and "apostles" shows Jesus commissioned the Eucharistic priesthood by giving holy orders only to men.

Gen. 14:10; Heb. 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:15,17 - Jesus, the Son of God, is both priest and King after the priest-king Melchizedek. Jesus' priesthood embodies both Kingship and Sonship.

Gen. 22:9-13 - as foreshadowed, God chose our redemption to be secured by the sacrificial love that the Son gives to the Father.

Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19 - because the priest acts in persona Christi in the offering to the Father, the priest cannot be a woman.

Mark 3:13 - Jesus selected the apostles "as He desired," according to His will, and not according to the demands of His culture. Because Jesus acted according to His will which was perfectly united to that of the Father, one cannot criticize Jesus' selection of men to be His priests without criticizing God.

John 20:22 - Jesus only breathed on the male apostles, the first bishops, giving them the authority to forgive and retain sins. In fact, the male priesthood of Christianity was a distinction from the priestesses of paganism that existed during these times. A female priesthood would be a reversion to non-Christian practices. The sacred tradition of a male priesthood has existed uncompromised in the Church for 2,000 years.

1 Cor. 14:34-35 - Paul says a woman is not permitted to preach the word of God in the Church. It has always been the tradition of the Church for the priest or deacon alone (an ordained male) to read and preach the Gospel.

1 Tim. 2:12 - Paul also says that a woman is not permitted to hold teaching authority in the Church. Can you imagine how much Mary, the Mother of God, would have been able to teach Christians about Jesus her Son in the Church? Yet, she was not permitted to hold such teaching authority in the Church.

Rom. 16:1-2 - while many Protestants point to this verse denounce the Church's tradition of a male priesthood, deaconesses, like Phoebe, were helpers to the priests (for example, preparing women for naked baptism so as to prevent scandal). But these helpers were never ordained.

Luke 2:36-37 - prophetesses, like Anna, were women who consecrated themselves to religious life, but were not ordained.

Isaiah 3:12 – Isaiah complains that the priests of ancient Israel were having their authority usurped by women, and this was at the height of Israel’s covenant apostasy.

topeokunol:
Lady,i do not agree with you. giving cousel to children is different from doing same to married couples.

How is it different?

segyemaro:
A week ago i learnt that a couple dragged themselves before Rev Fatger, the man said his wife is too dull on bed that she was packaged to him from the village,that he is getting married to another woman that can fully satisfy him. While the woman is saying that her husband is also dull that he doesnt touch the vital part of her body to make her reach her orgasm on time. So the Rev Father was to settle and counsel this couple. And we are made to believe that Rev Fathers are pure virgins,and dont know anything about sex,so how do you thik he can handle it because you must be a master of a game before you can coach it.

Who leads you to believe?
Popular knowledge doesn't make it true. It is usually assumed that because Rev. Fathers cannot marry that they must be virgins.
There are some Rev. Fathers that were married before becoming Priests, their wives died and so they decided not to marry again and felt called to the Priesthood.
Also most of them have been through college and were put in tempting situations.
One I know was an Ob/Gyn before he became a Priest.
Another one that was highlighted in a magazine was a financier and was very successful, he made well into the upper 6 figures on wall street and was not satisfied with his life. He left all that to become a Priest and is much happier.
A woman who also worked on wall street was disatisfied with her life and left wall street to become a cloistered nun.

If more and more people were to sit and talk to Priests they will be very surprised.

Also a big shocker for people is that there are married Priests. People just don't know this.
When Anglican Priests convert to the Catholic faith they are usually married and wish to continue as Priests, so they are allowed to do so.
In the Eastern Church the Priests are allowed to marry but they must be married before they can become Priests and they cannot be Bishops.

People need to get over the stereotype and actually find things out.

I challenge you on that diabolic lie. Go through all of my posts where I have addressed all your issues, including those with whatever questions you alluded to that I have refused to answer.

Seriously Bobby, you really want to go there?
How does Z answer A?
How many times have I asked you questions about the Bible and then when you're not able to sensibly answer, you jump to "You should see the Roman paganism in the Catholic Church"

Honey you're a broken record and everyone knows it.

I do not attack people. I attack deceitful institutions like the leaders who lead innocent people astray. Don't confuse the issues, and certainly do not confuse the readers of the thread.

I don't think you know what the definition of confusion is.
No one is leading anyone astray, except for you who cannot have a life without attacking the Catholic Church.
If truly you had good intentions you would have addressed the many issues and questions that have been posted to you.

You never make any sense of anything Bobby, and that's why when questions are asked of you, you immediately jump to your rants. Because you have nothing new.
It amazes me to see people who think they have the fresh new idea of delivering people from the Catholic Church. Do you think you're the first one? Do you think these issues haven't been addressed before?
Bobby you go around in circles spewing the same nonsense and in the process you confuse yourself.
You really think all these crap your raising we haven't seen it and refuted it before?
Been there done that. Stop coming with these "golden" ideas that will convert people. If a Catholic knows his or her faith they won't convert if anything you make others believe more in the Catholic faith.
I certainly know that when I've had discussions with intelligent people and I've answered their questions and they've answered my questions, one of us ends up converting. Guess what this past Easter, some of my friends became Catholic, because their eyes were finally opened and they no longer had to be slaves to hatred for the unknown.

If you were truly honest, you would've addressed the issues I brought up earlier in this thread and you would've logically held a discussion.
But you didn't do that Bobby, instead you talked about something else that had nothing to do with the topic.

Your so-called "God's church" killed millions of innocent Christians whose only crime was to follow bible truth rather than the RCC's dogmas. Your so-called "God's church" at one point had 3 popes vying for power. That is not what Christ established and bequeathed to His disciples

Really Bible truth? Bible truth that contradicts the Bible? Really Bobby? Bible truths that they all disagree on? Which one is right Bobby? Can you tell me that?
Killed millions of what innocent christians. You mean the christians that massacred Catholic Christians for holding their beliefs or do you mean the Christians that kill and humiliate and are bigots towards Catholic Christians. Or are you not aware that the only accepted form of prejudice permitted today is that of anti-catholicism.

And have you forgotten that God himself chose and gave the power to cast out demons to a man that betrayed him? Yes the same man who had the Holy Spirit working through him betrayed Christ.
Or is it that you are not aware that even those whose writings you consider infallible abandoned God and denied him when he needed them the most.
The same people he gave the power to cast out demons and to heal people and to forgive are the same people who abandoned and betrayed him.
So are you going to make the claim that because they abandoned God and betrayed him they couldn't possibly have been the real disciples and apostles or God's Church? Or what did they do the same consipiray theory and gotten rid of the real apostles and portrayed themselves as the real apostles?

How does the actions of a few people lead to Catholic Church not being God's Church?
Or better yet, where in the Bible does it say that God's Church will not defend herself against heresies or she will be perfect in actions?

Its funny how you and your catholic sympathizers keep coming back.

I keep asking myself why, and then I realise that Christ would come back too. He would even still love those who betray him and abandon him and speak negatively of him.

The Pharisees plotted his death but he did not have an ounce of hatred for them instead he forgave them. Therefore I cannot have an ounce of hatred for you.

A quick question: What makes you think you're not wrong? Are you the infallible interpreter of the Bible?

@rite2salas

~Lady~

lol where u at

I no see this post sef.

At that time I was in undergrad at FAMU in Tallahassee, FL USA.

Those who say life is better abroad are either lying or trying to deceive others or don't live abroad.

It is not better abroad. There's a reason they have a higher suicide rate than in Nigeria.

Life is not about material things.

Two Nigerian nurses in Atlanta just died in their car. One a woman the other a man.
They both worked around the clock because that's what it takes to survive here.
The woman was leaving work she stepped into her car and closed her eyes and never woke up.
The man was tired so he decided to take a break, he went to his car to rest. His friends kept calling him to come back to work, after no response from him they went to his car, they found him dead.

SO while it may seem that you get the amenities abroad, how much do u have to work for those amenities.
When you word 16-20 hours a day when will you sit down and enjoy the amenities.

My uncle and his family just got to the U.S., and already they're contemplating using their return ticket to Nigeria. They now see how hard my mum works and how hard it is to make ends meet here, and are very surprised and finally understand the times she couldn't send money home.

It's a real eye opener to come to the U.S. I don't discourage people, because I know that within years they're planning their return home to Nigeria.

Lady, it's not so nice to write with such temper. We're all christians. Remember proverbs 26:5 says Do not talk to a fool lest he thinks you be like him, yet verse 6 tells you to talk to a fool lest he thinks he's wise. We must act according to wits. This sabbath people all think this way, so It's your job to show them love by answering their questions and revealing to them their wrongs. That's why I told him to tell me about their doctrine so that I pin point their fallacies on-the-fly.

I didn't write with a temper. I just wanted to point something. I've discussed with Bobbyaf several times. Believe me he will not answer any questions you pose to him. He beats around the bush and changes the subject. You can always tell the devil's work. He never faces truth, he never answers questions, he always avoids giving a direct answer, he is so cunnying he will twist the truth to his advantage.

Bobbyaf has attacked the Catholic Church, and he doesn't care to listen to what you or I have to say. He has an agenda, unfortunately he doesn't know that he's actually fighting against God's Church.

He likes that we're paying him too much attention and that's why I ask everyone to leave him and the others alone. Let them wallow in their foolishness, when they face God they will have to explain why they stand against his Church.

I just have this to say to everyone that has posted here, including myself.

Learn to ignore people not worthy of any attention. This forum is for adults unfortunately those with adolescent minds have shown themselves here.

There is a saying:

Never wrestle with a pig, you will only get dirty and the pig will only like it.

Ignorance certainly is the best answer for a fool.

Apparently Bobbyaf has shown that he doesn't know what reason is.

God Bless.

18. We may say, then, that Israel, with her reflection, was able to open to reason the path that leads to the mystery. With the Revelation of God Israel could plumb the depths of all that she sought in vain to reach by way of reason. On the basis of this deeper form of knowledge, the Chosen People understood that, if reason were to be fully true to itself, then it must respect certain basic rules. The first of these is that reason must realize that human knowledge is a journey which allows no rest; the second stems from the awareness that such a path is not for the proud who think that everything is the fruit of personal conquest; a third rule is grounded in the “fear of God” whose transcendent sovereignty and provident love in the governance of the world reason must recognize.
In abandoning these rules, the human being runs the risk of failure and ends up in the condition of “the fool”. For the Bible, in this foolishness there lies a threat to life. The fool thinks that he knows many things, but really he is incapable of fixing his gaze on the things that truly matter. Therefore he can neither order his mind (Prov 1:7) nor assume a correct attitude to himself or to the world around him. And so when he claims that “God does not exist” (cf. Ps 14:1), he shows with absolute clarity just how deficient his knowledge is and just how far he is from the full truth of things, their origin and their destiny.

@ OP

There are several things you can do and it takes discipline to do it.

You first have to make sure that you drink plenty water and eat enough fruits (assorted). Also exercise as that helps a lot.
Always stay clean and keep your environment clean. Bacteria is usually the cause of it.

I will advice you use black soap and shea butter or cocoa butter to moisturize. Wash your face morning and night with black soap and moisturize with shea butter.

I don't naturally have the same problem as you do, but my family does (I'm the very lucky one) my sisters and mother use it, and it's working for them. Their skins are much clearer, so if u decide to try it, I hope it works for u.

There are several home remedies for it so you don't have to start buying expensive chemical creams.
Here are a few suggestions for you:

Sandalwood
Tomatoes (cut and rub on face, the natural acid does wonders)
Apply Vitamin E.

@ OP

Have you had a serious discussion with your girl to know where she stands on the details of a marriage. Both of you should sit down and talk about it and be completely honest with each other.
I would advise that you wait because you're still in school and she's heading for her NYSC.
But it really is up to you and how mature you two are.

I will give you a story of a couple I knew during undergrad.
They were both sophomores (2nd year students) and strong christians. They knew they wanted to get married but decided to wait to have sex until their wedding night.
They decided they wanted to have sex and therefore were contemplating marriage.
They spoke to each other honestly about what they want in a marriage and what their expectations and goals are in life. Then they saw our psychology professor. The Professor told them to go for it.
They got married and have been married for 4 years now. They both graduated and are doing well. They respect each other and understand that their obligation is to each other first.
They set reasonable goals and stayed disciplined and so far their marriage has worked.

So if you and your girl have reasonable goals and expectations for your marriage, and you're both not looking at the end and day dreaming at what you expect to be, then you will be fine getting married. But if you are not then don't get married.

As for the wedding, a huge wedding is not necessary, you will be married with or without a big wedding. At the end of the day, you're married and that's the goal.

Hi all.
I am currently working on my Masters in Accounting in the U.S. and I am contemplating getting a certificate in Information Security.
I intend to move to Nigeria after my education and I would like to know if it will be a good investment for me to get certified in Information Security.
What are the prospects of my getting a decent job in Nigeria with a B.S. in Accounting, Masters in Accounting and Certificate in Information Security?
Would it even matter at all if I get the certificate in Info Security?

All help will be appreciated.

Thanks.

Just for your information i started paying my house rent 6 years ago. I'm married with 2 kid so please don't insult me.
If i work for a big company and you don't thats none of my business.
Monthly rent can't work in Nigeria and thats just my own opinion.
How many months quit notice do you give a tenant that pays monthly. Think again before you write, i know Nigerians would definetly abuse this.
Nigeria is good at solving problems from the top and never getting to the root of it. Solutions that would last for months and before you know it we are either back to where we are or even worse
For me, just a silly idea

I agree. There isn't a credit system to determine if the renter can make payments or is a responsible citizen.

I reside in the U.S. and in order to rent I had to undergo a credit check to prove that I am willing to make payments and not just abandon my responsibilities.

Its funny that the government is trying to promulgate a law that would apply to and be binding on the citizens, on "property" that the government does not own, yet the owners of such property and the citizenry in general are not aware of the contents of such a Bill, not to mention that they would and should have a public reading/debate/contribution to such Bill!

What nation holds public debate on the bills passed in their senate and house?

17. There is thus no reason for competition of any kind between reason and faith: each contains the other, and each has its own scope for action. Again the Book of Proverbs points in this direction when it exclaims: “It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out” (Prov 25:2). In their respective worlds, God and the human being are set within a unique relationship. In God there lies the origin of all things, in him is found the fullness of the mystery, and in this his glory consists; to men and women there falls the task of exploring truth with their reason, and in this their nobility consists. The Psalmist adds one final piece to this mosaic when he says in prayer: “How deep to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! If I try to count them, they are more than the sand. If I come to the end, I am still with you” (139:17-18). The desire for knowledge is so great and it works in such a way that the human heart, despite its experience of insurmountable limitation, yearns for the infinite riches which lie beyond, knowing that there is to be found the satisfying answer to every question as yet unanswered.

@ Topic.

Sure freehealth care for all SOUNDS good.
But here are the questions. How do we pay for it?
Are you willing to fork over the funds for it from your taxes?
What illnesses should be free?

[size=14pt]CHAPTER II
CREDO UT INTELLEGAM[/size]
“Wisdom knows all and understands all” (Wis 9:11)

16. Sacred Scripture indicates with remarkably clear cues how deeply related are the knowledge conferred by faith and the knowledge conferred by reason; and it is in the Wisdom literature that this relationship is addressed most explicitly. What is striking about these biblical texts, if they are read without prejudice, is that they embody not only the faith of Israel, but also the treasury of cultures and civilizations which have long vanished. As if by special design, the voices of Egypt and Mesopotamia sound again and certain features common to the cultures of the ancient Near East come to life in these pages which are so singularly rich in deep intuition.
It is no accident that, when the sacred author comes to describe the wise man, he portrays him as one who loves and seeks the truth: “Happy the man who meditates on wisdom and reasons intelligently, who reflects in his heart on her ways and ponders her secrets. He pursues her like a hunter and lies in wait on her paths. He peers through her windows and listens at her doors. He camps near her house and fastens his tent-peg to her walls; he pitches his tent near her and so finds an excellent resting-place; he places his children under her protection and lodges under her boughs; by her he is sheltered from the heat and he dwells in the shade of her glory” (Sir 14:20-27).
For the inspired writer, as we see, the desire for knowledge is characteristic of all people. Intelligence enables everyone, believer and non-believer, to reach “the deep waters” of knowledge (cf. Prov 20:5). It is true that ancient Israel did not come to knowledge of the world and its phenomena by way of abstraction, as did the Greek philosopher or the Egyptian sage. Still less did the good Israelite understand knowledge in the way of the modern world which tends more to distinguish different kinds of knowing. Nonetheless, the biblical world has made its own distinctive contribution to the theory of knowledge.
What is distinctive in the biblical text is the conviction that there is a profound and indissoluble unity between the knowledge of reason and the knowledge of faith. The world and all that happens within it, including history and the fate of peoples, are realities to be observed, analysed and assessed with all the resources of reason, but without faith ever being foreign to the process. Faith intervenes not to abolish reason's autonomy nor to reduce its scope for action, but solely to bring the human being to understand that in these events it is the God of Israel who acts. Thus the world and the events of history cannot be understood in depth without professing faith in the God who is at work in them. Faith sharpens the inner eye, opening the mind to discover in the flux of events the workings of Providence. Here the words of the Book of Proverbs are pertinent: “The human mind plans the way, but the Lord directs the steps” (16:9). This is to say that with the light of reason human beings can know which path to take, but they can follow that path to its end, quickly and unhindered, only if with a rightly tuned spirit they search for it within the horizon of faith. Therefore, reason and faith cannot be separated without diminishing the capacity of men and women to know themselves, the world and God in an appropriate way.

ahonohai:
@ Lady

Quoting Hebrews 10:26
For if we sin wilfully after that we have recieved the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.

Which other sacrifice are you referring to?

What Jesus asked us to do in remembrance of him was to keep the Breaking of Bread i.e the Communion. . . want me to clarify?

2Corinthians 5:7
"For we walk by faith and not by sight" this can also be rendered as "Sensory Perception"

Worship is not about what you feel but is borne out of faith and your love for God

I am referring to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, the one that was prophecied to in Psalm 110:4 telling us that Christ is the eternal High Priest like melchizedek. Remember Melchizedek offered bread and wine as a sacrifice to God, if Christ is eternal then so must his sacrifice be. Hence eternal meaning it is never ending.
I am referring to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross that was propheied by Malachi 1:11 telling us that gentiles will offer one sacrifice to God in Many places. That sacrifice takes place in the Catholic Church alone
I am referring to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross that is foreshadowed by the passover sacrifice of the Jews, a sacrifice that was to be perpetual, meaning never ending. God cannot command a perpetual sacrifice only to say that he changed his mind. God is not inconsistent and neither is he a liar. Therefore the sacrifice of Christ on the cross that is a fulfillment of the passover sacrifice that is perpetual as in never ending.

So you see ahonohai the Bible does not revolve around the few passages that you direct your attention to, there's much more to the Bible than you look at.
To understand it fully, you WILL have to understand the other passages too. Instead of picking which one you want to believe.

So in essence you are right but you fail to comprehend is that the sacrifice that is offered in Catholic Churches is the same sacrifice of Christ on the cross. It is not a new or different sacrifice. It is offered because Christ is God and is eternal and is never ending. To say that Christ's sacrifice ended means he is not eternal or that he is not atoning for the sins of the generations that came after the biblical times, meaning you and me. I don't know about you, but Christ is certainly atoning for my sins right now.

And besides when Christ holds the chalice and says this is my blood he actually talks about the blood being shed on the cross, so if that blood is shed on the cross it is a sacrifice. So that's where I get the sacrifice from?

How about I clarify for you what Holy Communion is?
You see when Jesus said "THIS IS MY BODY, THIS IS MY BLOOD" he actually meant his body and blood. He didn't mean bread and wine. He didn't mean a symbol of his bread and blood, if he meant a symbol he could've simply said "This is a SYMBOL of my body, this is a SYMBOL of my blood" but he didn't say that did he?
Also we have to look at the other parts where he talks about his body and blood.
Read John 6:23-58
Jesus tells us that we will only have life within us if we eat his FLESH and drink his BLOOD. He didn't say that symbolically otherwise when the Bible was translated it could've said Symbolically eat my flesh and symbolically drink my blood. But that is no where to be found in the Bible, if it is show me cause I clearly do not see it.
Also notice that the Jews completely understood that he wanted them to literally eat his flesh and drink his blood that's why several of them turned their baks on him because they asked how Christ would ask them to eat his flesh and drink his blood. They didn't understand so they walked away. Jesus continues to say the same thing over and over again and he didn't stop them because he knew they understood him and they just didn't accept his teaching so he let them be. If they misunderstood he would've stopped them to explain what he meant.

Does that clarify things for you?

I will leave you with this Ahonohai
Catholics understand the Bible as each passage relates to the other passages hence the Bible would not contradict itself as it truly doesn't. We look at all passages from Genesis to Revelation to truly understand what God is conveying to us. We just happen to believe that God is very consistent and never changing therefore his word in the OT is not irrelevant or better than the NT neither do they cancel each other or contradict each other.
To believe so is to believe that God cancels himself and contradicts himself. Those are not characteristics of the one true God.

So instead of just looking at one or 2 verses how about you look at all the verses and then it will truly make sense without any contradiction.

Pastor AIO:
Lamb in the form of bread!! That's fascinating.

Almost unbelieavble. I guess that's why some disciples questioned Christ and turned away from him when he said they had to eat his flesh.
They too thought it was fascinating.

davidylan:
Lady, lets make things simple.

how do you use a graven image in worship?

thanks

David I made it simple. If you can't understand english sue your schools for bad education.

I don't even need to know your heart for that do I? If you hail a dead woman that is Idolatry enough,

Yes darling you do need to know my heart, you cannot at one moment state that we don't know the heart of man and then all of a sudden change your stance, it only shows your insecurity and fear of Catholicism being right.
Hail a dead woman, God himself hailed her. If it was good enough for God, it is good enough for me.

Because He commanded Moses to teach His people not to make any images nor to bow down to them. How would you know of such a command when your organization has removed it from the original 10.

So which commandment says that God cannot have a representative on earth? Maybe you should learn to address the issue rather than ring around the rosy.
And could you please list the commandments of the Catholic church and the ten commandments according to you and show me which one Catholics remove?

You don't know why?   Listen Lady, and listen well. God desires us to come to him directly, meaning when we are worshiping God its a one and one experience, regardless if He ordains priests and prophets. Priests and prophets all serve a purpose as it was then. Today Jesus bids us pray to His Father directly. Neither Jesus nor His disciples taught that we need saints or Mary to intercede for us. As regards the heavenly atonement, Jesus our Hign Priest receives our sins after confession, as the only Mediator between His Father and us.

I can only laugh at this.
So what you make an assertion and can't be back it up, and then you flip flop?
All of a sudden God can have representatives on earth and he doesn't have to speak directly to people he can use prophets and priests?
Dude stop contradicting yourself.
Can you prove that the disciples didn't teach that we need saints or Mary to interceed for us?
Just to educate you and try to help you get rid of your ignorance, the Catholic Church doesn't teach that we need the intercession of the saints. She teaches that the intercession of the Saints are good, just as we see in the Bible.

He wasn't being inconsistent lady. You should know that under such circumstances no sinner can literally see God and live. Worshiping and praying to God directly is quite a different matter. One doesn't have to see God literally in order to pray to Him or worship Him.

Oh I know he wasn't being inconsistent, but you think he is. From your line of thinking you do think he is inconsistent.
Really are you sure no one can literally see God and live?
I am under the impression that the 12 disciples, Mary, and several others did literally see God and they lived. Or did they symbolically see God? Infact one of them contained God in her womb and gave birth to him, nursed him, and raised him.

Because He knew they were never meant to be used as intermediaries. Besides, no one except the high priest had access to the arc of the covenant.

But why then would he command that they not be made and them command that they be made?
Or are yo finally admitting that just because an image is made and used in worship doesn't mean that the image itself is being worshipped?
And who said that images are used as intermediaries. Could it be that because of your hatred of the Church you wish to accuse us of that which we do not do?
And the High Priest being the only one to have access to an image shows the high elevation God had for an image that he commanded shouldn't be made and then commanded to be made.

Seriously do u not see the inconsistency in your line of thinking.

verse 7 of 2 Kings 18 indicates that it was never God's intention that the serpent be worshipped.

And no where did I state that the serpent was being worshipped.
I said it was being USED in Jewish worship, just as the ark of the covenant was being USED in Jewish worship, and just as the other images in the temple were being USED in Jewish worship.
Stop confusing USED in worship and BEING worshipped. They are two different things.

that's simply because your own posts were downright and deliberately confusing. If you werent talking about the bronze serpent then exactly what were you talking about? what other graven image where you implying that God told the Israelites to build to be used for worship? (your own words).

My posts are not confusing for those who can read and understand the terms being used in the english language.
And not just that, if you had gone through the thread and see what I was replying to you would see that you were completely offbase.
Seriously it wouldn't hurt to be humble and realise that you've done something wrong.
No one else misunderstood but you. That says something David.

As stated above the ark of the covenant which includes the images of the cherubim was used in worship. Infact it was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Imagine a graven image is being overshadowed by God, a graven image he commanded to never be made and then according to your reasoning contradicts himself by commanding graven images to be made.
The Ark was used in the Holy of Holies and couldn't be touched by unordained men. Infact a man was killed for touching it. Why would God treat a graven image in a holy manner? WHy would God command that a graven image be treated with holiness?
It makes no sense.

Also the other images that were used in the temple are as follows.

Read 1 Kings chapter 6-8. Solomon builds God's temple and His Palace and carved images of the cherubim, oxen, and lion and the Lord did not condemn these images used in worship.

what is the difference between using a graven image in worship and worshipping the image? How do you use a graven image to worship?

A graven image used in worship helps one put the focus on God. We are humans with different senses and in worship we use these senses. We use our hearing and our sight and our sense of smell and touch and all that. God gave us our senses I don't see why there'd be a problem with using it to worhsip Him.
Also during early christianity drawings, images, smells and such were the only way to express the Gospel to people. Most of the christians were illiterates and poor. The education isn't what it is today. So they relied on images to portray the message to converts. Even today it is a very effective way of evangelizing.

David the confusion comes in when people do not take into account the entire Bible to understand the meaning of a passage.
of course, in early history Israel was forbidden to make images of God because God didn't yet reveal himself visibly "in the form of any figure."
hence, had the Israelites depicted God not yet revealed, they might be tempted to worship Him in the form of a beast, bird, reptile or fish, which was a common error of the times. later on, however, we see that God did reveal himself in visible form (as a dove, fire, etc). God's commandment "thou shall not make a graven image" is entirely connected to the worship of false gods. God does not prohibit images to be used in worship, but He prohibits the images themselves to be worshiped. If he prohibited the use of images during worship he wouldn't have commanded certain images to be used in worship perfect example is the ark of the covenant. You cannot deny that the ark was used in worship, you also canot deny that it is an image itself and that it included the image of things above in heaven, the cherubim.
Why would God prohibit the making of images and then command them to be made? It makes no sense.
Because God is perfect we can only conclude that it is our interpretation of this particular verse that is wrong.
So what was the purpose of God allowing the use of the ark in worship because the image disposed the minds of the Israelites to the supernatural and draws them closer to God.

The images are used to draw our attention to the supernatural and makes us focus on God. But the object itself should not be worshipped.

If Catholics are guilty of worshipping any image it is the image of God, Jesus Christ. He is the image of the invisible God. Col 1:15

God himself became an image. So images aren't wrong, it is the worship of images that are wrong. And no matter how much hatred you have for Catholics and how many times you want to twist the truth David, it remains that Catholics use images in worship and this is not wrong as evidenced in the Bible and that Catholics do not worship those images themselves.

davidylan:
bobbyaf made no mention of the serpent until you introduced it. The way you worded it you were simply implies that God Himself also asked the israelites to make a serpent to be used in worship (your own words).

Ok I think you're a bit confused, I made this statement before I started tackling Bobby and started using the bronze serpent as an example. I wasn't even talking about the bronze serpent when I made that statement. That was the first statement I made in this thread and it was directed at Chukwudi and it was to get chukwuddi to ignore Bobbyaf.

You introduced something else into that post.

And since when does being USED in worship equate to BEING worshipped?

Why was this serpent NEVER mentioned again after verse 9 except to use it as a symbol of Christ's own crucifiction on the cross?

Actually the bronze serpent is mentioned in 2 Kings 18:4, and in those times we see it being USED in Jewish worship.
Please note that being USED in worship is not the same as being worshipped.

The Israelites used it in worship, and then started worshipping it. Before then it was ok in the temple, but when they started worshipping it it became wrong.

Read here:

One more time where did I say the serpent IS worshipped?
David read my post very well, and show me which one says the Serpent IS worshipped?


It is always good to conveniently miss things in others posts.

You forgot the part about [size=16pt]ACCORDING TO BOBBYAF[/size]

[size=17pt]According to Bobby[/size], God himself promotes idolatry when he commanded the Israelites to make graven images to be used in worship.

Seriously it wouldn't hurt to actually read before you pop a blood vessel.

Bobbyaf:
And since you don't know the heart of man as God does, its best to simply obey rather than conjure up excuses for plain idolatry. In other words God doesn't want a representation when it comes to worship. He prefers a direct approach. He desires that all of His children come to Him directly. Jesus didn't teach us to pray through saints. He simply said to pray to our father which is in heaven. So we don't need Mary, or dead saints through whom to pray since they are dead and gone.

The RCC removed the 2nd commandment which forbids image carving and worship. It plainly says "thou shall not make unto thee any graven images", of anything, be it Mary, Jesus, or anyone else. What is it about that plain commandment you are failing to comprehend?

And I guess you're the one that knows the heart of man because you're the one that's telling people that Catholics worship Mary. Do you know my heart and the heart of every Catholic?

How do you know God's heart? How do you know he doesn't want representatives? How do you know he wants a direct approach?
Did he use the Priests in the OT and didn't he use prophets to speak to the people?
Why didn't he speak to each individual?
I specifically remember the Israelites rising up against Moses and they said they too wanted to see and hear God, and when they heard the thunder claps they became afraid and begged Moses to speak to God on their behalf.
Why would God be inconsistent in what he wants?

If the 2nd commandment forbids image carving why did God command the carving of images in the ark of the covenant and the bronze serpent and the specific things he requested to be used to build his temple from Solomon.

davidylan:
this is the usual subtle twisting of the scripture to justify catholic nonsense. Read that portion of the bible again -

Num 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

Where was the serpent WORSHIPPED like you dishonestly claimed? Why was this serpent NEVER mentioned again after verse 9 except to use it as a symbol of Christ's own crucifiction on the cross? If this was indeed a graven image that God meant for worship then why didnt the jews take it along with them and even install it in the temple when solomon finally built one?

Where did I say that the serpent is worshipped?
Read my post well again before you give yourself hypertension.

15. The truth of Christian Revelation, found in Jesus of Nazareth, enables all men and women to embrace the “mystery” of their own life. As absolute truth, it summons human beings to be open to the transcendent, whilst respecting both their autonomy as creatures and their freedom. At this point the relationship between freedom and truth is complete, and we understand the full meaning of the Lord's words: “You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free” (Jn 8:32).
Christian Revelation is the true lodestar of men and women as they strive to make their way amid the pressures of an immanentist habit of mind and the constrictions of a technocratic logic. It is the ultimate possibility offered by God for the human being to know in all its fullness the seminal plan of love which began with creation. To those wishing to know the truth, if they can look beyond themselves and their own concerns, there is given the possibility of taking full and harmonious possession of their lives, precisely by following the path of truth. Here the words of the Book of Deuteronomy are pertinent: “This commandment which I command you is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven that you should say, 'Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, that we may hear and do it?' But the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, that you can do it” (30:11-14). This text finds an echo in the famous dictum of the holy philosopher and theologian Augustine: “Do not wander far and wide but return into yourself. Deep within man there dwells the truth” (Noli foras ire, in te ipsum redi. In interiore homine habitat veritas).(21)
These considerations prompt a first conclusion: the truth made known to us by Revelation is neither the product nor the consummation of an argument devised by human reason. It appears instead as something gratuitous, which itself stirs thought and seeks acceptance as an expression of love. This revealed truth is set within our history as an anticipation of that ultimate and definitive vision of God which is reserved for those who believe in him and seek him with a sincere heart. The ultimate purpose of personal existence, then, is the theme of philosophy and theology alike. For all their difference of method and content, both disciplines point to that “path of life” (Ps 16:11) which, as faith tells us, leads in the end to the full and lasting joy of the contemplation of the Triune God.