Hi Uyi Iredia,

Thanks for your well-reasoned response to my post. My posts was addressed to people whose beliefs are quite similar to DeepSight. Thus, for you to see what I am trying to convey in that post, you have to take it in that context. Therefore what is written will definitely not apply to others whose convictions are not similar or close to what DeepSight convictions. With that in mind, let me address some of the points you raised.

It is this comment that garnered my response to you (mr nwankwo), however, on reading it again I noted the bolded, and decided that your prescribed action will be desirable. However, if the child decides he doesn't want to go to church because he has concluded God doesn't exist or it is pointless, I believe it's best not to force such a child to go to church. I have read stories of atheists who despise church partly because of the treatment they got from their parents when they voiced their disbelief as kids. Read the book 50 Voices of Disbelief for an example.

It will be strange for a child of 3-6 years to conclude that God does not exist. In the context of a child not going to church because the father does not agree with some of the things going on in the church, the child who have not yet reached adolescence should be forced to attend the church with his mum. There are many things that happen in the church which are of benefit to the child and which even the non-religious but theistic father agrees with. If you put all of them in a scale, the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages. A child must learn from the cradle that he is not yet an adult and thus in many issues, the parents will overrule him or her. When he becomes an adult, he may see the wisdom in many of the things he was forced to do. Most kids of that tender age will not like to take an injection when they are sick. But no responsible parent will allow his kid to die of an infection just because the kids does not like syringes and needles.

The implication of this statement is what I don't agree with and your next statement contradicts this. Note that you have said that children are perceptive, trust me, a child will quickly perceive the differences in the views of their parents unless their parents exert much effort in covering it up, something you have agreed as improper above (when you talked of '. . . a pretense at uniformity'). What's critical is that it is inevitable that a parent's worldview will influence their kids. Your statement implies that this is wrong. I disagree, as a matter of fact society depends on the fact that views are forced and reinforced. It's pretense to say that one should avoid 'forcing' one's views on one's kids when your views are synonymous with personality, behavior, and moral outlook which will be observed by such kids.

I see no pretense because to force your views is not the same thing if your kids willingly decide to share your views not because it is your view but because they agree with it.  As they grow up, they should learn that it is extremely important that they do not just imitate things but develop the critical capacity to state the basis for their actions. A normal 3-5 year old that was brought up very well will already like to know the "why" of many a thing that happens in the home. Such inquisitiveness should be encouraged and not suppressed. Not just kids but even adults are also influenced but the fundamental thing is that such influence should not be brought about by cohesion or force and if kids, friends or family sheepishly follow ones footsteps, it is ones responsibility to ruthlessly discourage it. Herd mentality is both spiritually and intellectually dangerous and must be discouraged.

This in fact is where your mistake becomes blatant. How can you say this when you previously stated that a pretense at uniformity is not the right way. One thing is for sure, any talk of a 'necessary lie' here is a pathetic cop-out. There are two options here for a well-meaning parent: Answer honestly or refuse to answer telling the child you'll give him you answer when he's mature.

I am not sure how you arrived that the example I gave with respect to the question of the child is a "necessary lie". Did DeepSight not believe that Jesus came from the Father? Did he not believe in the sermon on the mount? Any person who gives a child a cosmological lecture on Trinity at 3-6 years in my view does not understand the concept. There is evolution in learning both in material and spiritual things. That is why in our school system, you have pre-primary school, primary, high school, undergraduate, and graduate school. A teacher who starts to discuss the cellular and molecular basis of embryo-genesis and reproductive biology when a five year old child asks how he came to this world is either incompetent or has no knowledge of embryo-genesis or reproductive biology. Why will I teach primary school students the same lecture that I give to graduate students. Is a man who tells a four year old child that an empty cup of tea is empty lying when he tells the same child at 16 years that nature abhors vacuum and that indeed an empty cup of tea is not really empty but contains various gases and microorganisms? Any person who passes spiritual or intellectual information that is far beyond the capacity of the recipient is the person that is causing harm. Try teach calculus to normal 3-6 year old and report your findings.

Nonsense ! When such an irreligious parent disbelieves in the Bible. A 'hardcore' atheist for example will not (and is not) obligated to do such.

Look at my opening paragraph to this post. People with similar convictions to DeepSight are of course not hardcare atheists and they do agree with certain sections of the bible. If atheists are in similar situations and are interested in my views, I will gladly offer them my perceptions.

Aha ! The action here conflicts with the previous one. My question on reading the statement was this: Why will one stop one's children form exorcisms (which one disbelieves) and pretend to believe in Jesus (which one also disbelieves) ?

My view on Jesus Christ is documented on several of my posts and so are also the view of Deepsight. You can look them up if you are interested. As for exorcism, I will offer my perceptions when I sense that you are willing to examine it. Stay blessed.

Hi DeepSight. Thank you for your well reasoned posts. I comment as follows:

You may know that children are very perceptive. A child easily senses which parent is more permissive and which parent is more strict. Thus as children when we wanted a sugary treat, or permission to play outdoors, we always knew which parent would be more inclined to grant our request. Children therefore are very adept at playing either parent against each other: a child psychologist will tell you that children in this regard can be very manipulative indeed.

Because of this, it is critical that the parents tend to speak with a united voice when they direct their children.

Once a child can detect a splintered view between the parents he will most likely exploit it or in many cases simply become either confused or misdirected: lacking a conviction or grounding in the views advanced by either parent. This is the very simple reason that conventional wisdom dictates that parents should not disagree with one another in the presence of the child. For this reason, traditional parenting methods recognise that if the child is being disciplined by one parent - in the event that the other parent does not approve of the discipline, he or she should not reproach his/ her partner at that point (save of course in the case of physical abuse) - but should take the issue up with his or her partner privately and away from the child. This serves to maintain the authourity that both parents have over the child - for if the reproach is done before the child, such a child will cease to accept or recognise discipline from that parent, and hold a belief that he can always run to the other parent for succour.

Yes, children are very perceptive and imitative. However there is a context. A child that every second and hour sees his father love the mother, adores the mother, treats the mother as his queen will not see different opinions of the the father and mother on some matters as undermining the authority of one or the other. When true love pervades the home, every differences in opinion is conveyed with much love. In such a context, a child will not see this disagreement as undermining the authority of either of the parents. In addition, the child will also witness on several other issues that the father and mother agree. As the child grows he is learning from the cradle that it is ok to agree on some issues and disagree on others. But assuming that such disagreement leads to undermining the authority of the mother (or father), it is the responsibility of the other spouse to put a stop to it. For instance if the child refuses to go to church with the mother just because he heard the father express reservation on some religious matters, then the father must force the child to go to church. In this way the child will gradually learn to discriminate and not use just one thing as a blanket for every other decision. The child will then see that daddy does not agree with mama some few issues but agrees with many other things done in the church. My view is that healthy development is fostered when children imbibe from a very young age that people can agree on one issue and yet disagree on others. My perception is that uniformity or rather a pretense at uniformity by parents when they relate to their children is not the right way.

Now how is this relevant to  the issue of religious/ spiritual upbringing? If I am to unreservedly apply that which M_Nwakwo suggests, there could be dire consequences for the harmony of my home and the mindset of my child.

Let's use a simple example.
The child goes to church with the mother. The child is taught that Jesus is the son of God and that he died for his sins. This is a basic teaching in church. The child returns from church and asks me, his father about this teaching.

It will be very dangerous at that very early stage in the child’s development for me to begin to unreservedly tell the child that which i believe. Because if I do, I will tell him that I do not believe that Jesus is the son of God or that Jesus is God. I will tell the child that I do not believe that Jesus died for his sins. This will create a schism in the mind of the child which I am not sure that children of such tender age can cope with.

When next the child proceeds to church he will do so believing that everything that the church and his mother teaches him are lies. The mother will lose her spiritual authourity over the child, and the child will begin to doubt anything that she teaches him. After all, she teaches him that Jesus is God and that Jesus died for his sins and yet daddy very clearly says that these things are not true.

When the child is called upon to go to church the child may even become resistant. Because he can sense the body language of his father. He can see that his father who he respects so much places no importance on church whatsoever. As the child proceeds along this line it is eminently likely that such a child will become terribly confused about much doctrine and dogma at a very early stage - at a stage in his development where he needn't and shouldn't be concerned with such things but should be singing happy carols and putting together lego games.

Such an approach will serve to evaporate the authourity and cohesion of the parents and create a possibly dysfunctional home at a stage so early in the child’s life that such could become destructive in later years.

If any of these dire predictions were to happen, then the Father is either consciously or unconsciously forcing his on views on the child and his wife. That is not the same as expressing what you think and in such a way that corresponds to the maturity and capacity of a particular child. Let us take the example that you gave. It will be irresponsible of the father to start a cosmological lecture on the question the child raised. Assuming a child of 3-6 years ask the non-religious father if Jesus is the son of God and whether he died for our sins. The father can answer as follows " Yes darling, Jesus came from the Father and taught us to love one another as we love ourselves". "Darling please go and get your children bible from your room and let us read the wonderful message that Jesus taught us". You can pick for instance sermon on the mount and invite the mother (your sweetheart) to join both of you to read the wonderful message of Jesus. Where there is genuine love and sympathetic understanding, how to handle these issues is not as complicated as it may seem. I am married to a born again pentecostal christian and I do have a torrent of practical experience on handling these type of issues. My own experience may however be different from others especially as I am blessed with a wife that is highly intuitive.

Now, assuming that your son of 3-6 years came back from church and start narrating events which proves that he has just witnessed exorcism where a pastor was casting away demons from a child. And you wife confirms that stating that there was deliverance in the church today. You have a duty to put a stop to exposing your children to such activities. There are ways of rehabilitating a child who have been traumatized by such events but I do not think it is necessary to go into that here. It is for this reason that I said that the non religious father must ab initio know the mode of worship and instruction that goes on   in children services where his kids attend fellowship. The limits of what is acceptable or not must be agreed between the parents and the church prior to the child first day at the church.

I am firmly of the view that all of this is unnecessary. As I have set out in my earlier posts, i believe it would make greater sense to support my partner in the path that we will bring up the child - and gently infuse moderation as the child grows. I do not believe that this will be problematic, for as I said, children are brought up to believe a great many myths - such as Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, etc. None of these myths are necessarily harmful but the child will outgrow them. It will be a very cruel parent who is asked about Santa Claus by his 3 - 4 year old and begins to lecture such a child on the fact that Santa is a myth etc etc. Such a parent will deprive the child of his childhood. When the time comes, the child will not need to be told that Santa is a myth.

In much the same way, the basic teachings of the church about God creating man, goodness, salvation and all that will not be harmful to a child. As the child grows, an attentive parent can carefully and subtly direct his mind to greater vistas. A well educated child will grow at all events to ask his own questions on all of these matters. My parents were both firmly christian and this did not stop me from asking my questions when the time was ripe. There is a proper time to begin to address such advanced doctrines with one's off spring. In my view, that time is certainly not in early childhood. I can just imagine the spectre of a child that loses the magic of christmas simply because one of his parents has told him that Jesus was a man like any other, and that he was not even born on Christmas day. What a sad sad child that will be.

See my earlier paragraphs.

The most important thing that remains - and which M_Nwankwo also asserts - is that the child should see living examples of virtue, honesty, charity and love within his parents. These living examples will guide him aright beyond any particular religious affiliation. My father never lectured me on such things, but he was such a shining example of humility and love that it made a huge impact on myself and all my siblings.

I agree. Stay blessed.

Ok. I have got it. I will email you shortly.

emöfine:

^^ Can we continue our dialogue outside the realm of Nairaland? I have some personal questions to ask, can I contact you via email etc?

Yes we can. When both of us are online, drop your email and I will send you a mail. You can then delete your email from these pages. Stay blessed.

emöfine:

@m_nwankwo

I have so much more to say to you but I fear our conversation here may never expire.
I've really enjoyed our dialogue and hope we share more in future.
Thank you for your patience and insight.You too

Thank you too Emofine. It was a pleasure discussing with you. Stay blessed and may your path be sunny and beautiful.

Deep Sight:

^^^

1. If extreme ideas are avoided, is it harmful to raise your child a christian or muslim?

2. If you had a spouse who insisted on raising the kids in line with her religious affiliation - say, christian, for example, what would you do?

There is nothing wrong in allowing your child to follow the religious affiliation of her mother until such a time he can fashion his own path. But it is your responsibility to offer to the child your honest answers on religious matters. There is also nothing wrong for the child to see that in certain religious matters you do not share the same view as your wife. You should know who instructs your child and what they learn in the church. If you have reservations, it is your duty to express those reservations to both your wife and the instructor. You should also develop your own classes for your child but never indoctrinate him with your views. A more practical suggestion can be made in real case scenarios. Stay blessed.

Hi Emofine,

I respond to your posts as follows:

Ok, so how do you communicate/ engage with God?

I open my spirit in prayer and perceive the power of God as well as his Will. I allow the power received to permeate through my entire being such that my actions, words, thoughts, motives, imagination and intuition will  be in the sense of the laws of God. I have previously mentioned that their is a spiritual faculty which I call Intuition that has the ability to perceive the will of God.  We are spirits and we communicate with our creator via the faculty of the spirit. Nothing else is required.

I believe there's a difference between faith and religion. I've often questioned if one needs religion in order to exercise faith in God.
So I've wondered in the absence of religion can one still forge a relationship with God  - as religions have set out guidelines to steer a believer.
If a person has faith is religion still mandatory in such a person's life? Or does religion carve out faith?
Does religion help maintain one's relationship with God whilst faith propels us nearer to Him?

You cannot have faith without experiencing the power of God. It is such personal experience of the power of God that gives the spirit an absolute conviction that God is! When a spirit senses the power of God, it is so consuming that the spirit inwardly perceives to some extent the omnipotence and omniscience of God as well as the indescribable feeling of having the grace to be under the wings of Gods omnipotence. Once you have tasted it even for a second, you will never be the same person again. Your are spiritually born again for you are now linked for all eternity with the power of God.  All world religion developed from the faith of a messenger of God or in rare cases a son of God. I do not share the view that religions set out guidelines rather religions drew their guidelines from the faith of messengers of God. It is the messengers of God that had the spiritual experiences that I call faith, not there followers or the religion that was developed in the name of a prophet or messenger of God.

For people who have faith as I explained above, religion is irrelevant. Besides, once you have faith, you will be prosecuted by priests and religious readers of the prevailing religions for your faith no longer confines itself to the rigid dogma that is prevalent in existing religions. But for those who do not have Faith as I explained above, religion may help to create an environment that will enable their spirit to experience Faith.

I'm sure many people will grumble at the idea of drinking such liquid unless their condition was desperate i.e dehydration. In an emergency we don't become picky any longer - well for a vast sum of people anyway.
So will you  pray to God to give you clean water if you are dying of thirst? Couldn't you request before drinking the water that those particular additives will not harm your system? Isn't that a mark of faith?

In spiritual matters which the analogy is all about I will not drink a cup that has 99.9% truth and 0.01% untrue. I will pray that God show me a cup that contains 100% truth and I am willing to thirst for eternity until I get the whole truth devoid of any untruth. Believing that God can change untruth to truth is delusion not faith. It is akin to a man who pray to God to turn stones into bread or change tomatoes to orange. To pray to God to change what he in his omniscience has programmed to be impossible to become possible is blind faith, not true faith. The outcome of such a prayer is that such prayers will go unanswered  and stone will remain stone, and tomatoes will remain tomatoes.

Besides I think you may have slightly missed my illustration. If the cup of water represents the truth vitamins/knowledge of God and you had not drunk from that cup. . .which God are you therefore praying to?
My illustration was meant to show that if there's inconsistencies present in what is regarded as truth should one still drink from the cup knowing that a relationship/understanding of God cannot exist without drinking the water - no matter how unattractive the liquid is, or lies embedded.
It may not be palatable with grains of sands swimming inside but when one is stranded in a desert - that marred water can be a source of help even so far as preventing death. In a life and death situation I am sure many will sip the water.

See my comments above. I do not share the view that God, the creator gives men truth mixed with some minute untruth. God is the Truth and he reveals to his creations the Truth. Thus if you find anything untrue in a message purported to come from God, then that message is either not from God or it was originally from God but have been distorted by the human mind. Stay blessed.

@DeepSight. I have some few comments to make on your post.

I have often debated extensively with myself as to what spiritual/ religious world-view I would bring my children up in. This question disturbed me for many years. It was a particularly tricky question because the non-religious man in these climes will be very challenged to find a spouse that agrees with his views. They are as rare as the unicorn. Virtually all "wife-material" women in this society are deeply religious.

Will the non-religious man therefore not marry. . . or die waiting for that elusive woman who agrees with his views? What if he genuinely loves a religious woman. Which happens to be the case in my instance.

Why worry about the religious or spiritual view that you will bring up your children? Your duty as a parent is to demonstrate through your actions, words, thoughts, motives, imagination and intuition that you live in the sense of the laws of God. Humility, Love, compassion, honesty and similar things provides the greatest enlightenment to a child more than any treatise on spiritual or religious matters. Children are independent souls and in some cases come with a truck load of spiritual experiences far beyond what the parents are capable. When they come of age, they will follow there own path. A parents duty is to provide the conducive environment that will empower there kids to chose there own spiritual path.

The foundation of marriage is genuine love which manifests in spiritual and psychic compatibility and not homogeneity in religious views. Humility, Love, creativity, compassion, purity, honesty, faithfulness, caring, etc are the fundamentals of a genuine marriage and these fundamentals have no religious cloak. If these fundamentals are present, then a spiritual attraction exists between the souls, an attraction holding the souls like two poles of a magnet, thus the permanence of the marriage is ensured from the very beginning. As long as we  listen to the inner promptings of our spirit each one will definetely find a spouse destined for him or her.

I believe that wisdom lies in walking hand in hand with that person whom one loves. Even people of the same religion cannot always agree on every aspect of their faith. The critical aspect i believe, is sharing the philosophy and faith of love and goodwill to all men. I share this with the woman that I love: addittionaly we place trust in the will of God for our lives. I believe that this is more than enough for us to walk spiritually together. I have also concluded that so long as I perfectly understand my personal views and reservations, it also does not hurt to walk and grow together even in the context of a church. There is much that I do not agree with, but I see nothing to be gained from obstinate disputations therefrom. That will only lead  to a splintered family. I see far greater wisdom and equanimity in not only walking together spiritually with my family, but also lending every support therein.

If you inwardly sense that going to church with your wife is the right thing, then you are doing the right thing but it will be wrong in my view if you are doing that just to please her and allow "peace" to reign. Compromises no matter how comfortable does not solve problems but only covers it and such problems will continually rear its head. If religion is very strongly anchored in an individual that nothing else matters except the religion such that the person is ready to give up the marriage to the person he or she genuinely loves, then it will be better that each should go their separate ways. For most people outward religion is not just their "life" but they also want it to be the "life" of their spouses and their children. I sense that there is a certain unhealthiness with expecting or even demanding that husband, wife and children should have the same outward religious inclinations.

Now, coming to children. As i said, i have contemplated this extensively. I have concluded that there is nothing to be gained by initiating little minds into possible confusion. They will have the benefit of the same upbringing that i did - they will attend a small family church and be raised in a christian context. This is not only in deferrence to my partner but also for two other reasons. One, the earliest spiritual questions that a child asks are best answered in the simple fashion that the religions lay out (God created man. . . etc) - and these answers in many cases are actually the truth in my view. Secondly the exploration of cosmological and more advanced spiritual truths is best left, in my view, to a more mature stage in the Child's life. A foundation in the church will make for simple stability, and i see little harm in it, if any - so long as the child is guided aright.

Again, do not worry about the kids. They will follow their own path. All you need do is to guide them as I explained in the first paragraph. If their mother want to take them to church, be supportive of that but be honest with your answers when they come back with questions on things they learned in Sunday classes. But above all, be there friend! Stay blessed.

Note to self: Sweetnecta is concluding prematurely 

Yes I will admit I find m_nwankwo's thoughts and reasoning fascinating and attractive but as an individual on a personal journey I don't believe there is partnership in such a spiritual walk. Obviously one may come across like minded individuals or others can offer guidance but this isn't a three-legged race. If I follow someone and that person falls, subsequently I will fall.

m_nwankwo himself has encouraged me not to adopt his pattern (again a type of thinking that enchants me as opposed to being pressured or forced) - notwithstanding I appreciate the concern and compassion of genuine believers who only seek to guide me on a path they believe to be true.

As beautiful as his delivery was I'm still sceptical as to whether all m_nwankwo had said is indeed accurate. His spirituality is individual and subjective - it quite possibly might not even be compatible with my being. so I cannot suddenly conform to his way of thinking without much personal experience no matter how attractive it sounds. I liked his words but more than that I liked his individuality, his decision to embark on such a unique trajectory and the fact he didn't feel complaisant in his religious upbringing but instead sought to seek out the truth for himself. All these things I can identify with.

This is beautiful! There is nothing more to add. You already have the foundation for gaining a personal conviction about God and his will. I repeat, what you read or hear from others are their experiences and no person will come to an absolute conviction of God and his Will by using the experiences of others. Each person must find the Truth about God by himself. Why hump on clutches consisting of the experiences of others while God has given us healthy legs that are capable of galloping like a Zebra. He who seeks shall find! Stay blessed.

Hi again Emofine. Thanks for comments. I briefly address you comments as follows:

@m_nwankwo

It appears that you have consolidated all the religious bodies, perhaps even mixed and matched or maybe you don't pertain to the borders. Do you believe spirituality should be without perimeters?

It may appear so on the surface but the reality is that I do not need books or religion to communicate with God.  A christain who sows yam on a fertile soil will reap yam and if an atheist, a Buddhist or a moslem sow yam, they too will reap yam. The laws of God lies in the genetic program that compels yam to yield yam. The ceremonies which a christian, an atheist , a Buddhist or a moslem conducts before sowing the yam has no bearing to the fact that yam gives yam. As it is in this crude analogy so it is in all in both the small and mighty manifestations of the laws of God.

Spirituality should all be about recognizing the will of God and living accordingly. He who loves God with all his soul and love his neighbor as himself have found the way to spiritual salvation. On his journey in this path of love, he will gain all the recognition and knowledge that he needs. God did not create any religion and in the kingdom of God, there is no religion. Obedience to the laws or will of God gives the spirit the buoyancy and purity that will permit it to be admitted into the spiritual kingdom of God.

You're analogy depicting the grains of rice as seeds of truth reminds me of a conversation I had with my Christian father.
I had an interesting conversation with him regarding the accuracy of his beliefs however I was taught an important lesson in our dialogue.
Just as I have done here, I questioned the authenticity of the Book he adheres to and used an analogy to illustrate my point.
I likened the "truth" locked in the Book to pure water and slight inaccuracies to grains of sand.
I asked him if he would be willing to drink the cup of water if it had grains of sands laying inside its contents. I asked if he would even consider the water palatable.

And to my amazement he replied me and said, when a man is thirsty he would drink anything just to quench that thirst. Of course he has a point. After all despite the alterations in the liquid, it still remains the only substance that can cure a thirst despite how sweet or bitter it may be.

Unlike your Father, I will not drink water even if a minute grain of sand is in it. I will remove that minute grain and if it is impossible to remove, I will pray to God to provide me a pure cup of water without any grain of sand. I will only drink a cup of water mixed with sand if I didnot know that it contains sand.

even if key concepts differ in various religions?

I do not share the views that key concepts of the pure teachings of prophets of God differ. Key concepts in the religions that were developed after them do differ but I have previously made it clear that a record of the life of the teachings of these prophets is a bag of sand containing a cup of rice. A seeker who perseveres will one day have spiritual access to the original teachings of these prophets.

What is real life?

Real Life is an innate attribute of God. Real Life is only in God. All else is simply the effect that God is. Stay blessed.

frosbel:


Wrong !!

God sent the prophets ( ALL Jews ) first to :

1. The wayward sheep of Israel
2. To specifically warn other nations of their gross wickedness

As we speak Jesus Christ is the ONLY Way to salvation. Any other way is FALSE and will surely lead to destruction.

God is not in the business of confusion !!!!

Hi Frosbel. Thanks for your comments. Jesus is indeed "The way, the truth and life". Any body in what ever religion who practices genuine love is in tandem with the teaching of Jesus and is spiritually linked with Jesus even when he is unconscious of it. As he progresses in his spiritual journey, he will one day either here on this earth or after he has departed this earth recognize Jesus who will lead him to the Father. Spiritual recognition of Jesus is not the same thing as a religious or intellectual understanding. A spiritual recognition is stored in the spirit and is truly alive in that spirit. A religious or intellectual understanding is only stored in the brain cells and perish at earthly death.  Look at the fruits of anybody who claims that he has recognized Jesus Christ as the Savior and you may see who truly is of Jesus and those who are not. A high school student with straight A grades have the potential of being a good scientist  and will one day have a PhD if he continues on the path of academic excellence. A brother of a Professor who never completed High School but because he lives with a Professor  do hear some of the scientific jargon and may imagine himself already a Professor and smile at the exuberance of the gifted high school graduate.15 to 20 years later, the High School graduate have fulfilled his potential and is now a Professor while the brother of a Professor still have no High School certificate, much less being a Professor. Our spiritual journey is a marathon and not a 9 hours flight from Frankfurt to Newyork where you can buy a ticket at the last moment. Christ is the Truth and the pure teachings of all religions are like a flight of steps that leads to the ultimate Truth. He who thinks that these flight of steps are not in existence or that the steps are irrelevant or even wrong will be convinced by his own experiences. Stay blessed.

Flashaldrin:

Thank you sir for taking the time to explain but their are some points I'm finding hard to agree with
1. I dont believe in re-incarnation because it was never mentioned in the bible, and the bible said its appointed unto men once to die,  And how could abraham have been in heaven to recieve lazarus in his bosom if he was busy re-incarnating. Jesus says he goes to build a mansion for us so that were he is we would be also, so why build a mansion if you would send the people back to earth??
2. Even if there was re-incarnation, is it fair to make somebody suffer for something he cant even remember doing, how is he supposed to learn from that, how can a small boy of 5yrs old understand that he is being violated because of something he did in a life before, what kind of God will do that?? How will you know what you did and what to avoid doing so as not to be violated again?
3. Even if all the above was correct, i still refuse to believe that God who confesses to loving human beings so much will then directly bring unimaginable and terrifying evil upon the people he loves so much. now you do realize i'm not talking about bad people on earth, am talking of the good ones, the religious ones, the ones who have been pious and faithful from birth, who has worshipped and defended their God in the face of untold hardships, yet this God would then condemn them to suffer. Even if they did something in their past life, where is the forgiving spirit that christianity preaches so much about, if the God of christianity himself cannot forgive his faithful ones!

Hi again Flashaldrin. Thank you for your well reasoned comments. I briefly address them as follows:
1. It is ok if you do not believe in re-incarnation and it is not my intention to persuade you otherwise.

2. Your brain cannot remember but your spirit remembers. Threads of fate from past lives are reflected in what we call personality traits. I clearly stated that we may suffer because of our deeds but we may also suffer because of the misdeeds of others. By accepting to incarnate on earth where good and evil dwell side by side, we have accepted that we can become victims of the misapplication of free will by other human beings. To protect us from such, God equipped us with intuition which is capable of seeing events and circumstances hours, years or even decades before they physically manifest. In that way, we can be spared many a suffering because by being spiritually alert, such evil volition of fellow human beings can be prevented even before it become a physical deed. The five year old child you mentioned may indeed be innocent but because some adults whose duty it is to protect the child were not alert to their spiritual responsibilities. If adults are spiritually alert, especially mothers no harm can come close to the vicinity of an innocent child. Just for the sake of creating a picture, imagine that the evil pedophile in 200 years time get reincarnated as child somewhere in Indonesia and the child he molested when he was a Nigerian was now the head of an elite police force that tracks and arrests child traffickers. In one of there mission, he lead an operation that rescued his molester from the arms of child traffickers. Imagine that the bandage covering the eyes of these two fellows are opened so that they can go back to Nigeria 200 years and back to the present in Indonesia. Do you think that the once pedophile will ever contemplate of such an evil deed in the future especially when he witnessed that the same man he molested 200 years ago is the same that now saved him from molesters.  The concept of God that repays humans with blessings for every evil they do is wrong. Such a concept may be comforting but it is not the reality. I have said that God does not punish anyone but have created laws that nurtures the seeds we sow and return its fruits to the originators with mathematical exactitude. If you sow corn, you reap corn and God will not suddenly change corn into yam just because you went to the market and saw that yam is selling like hot cake. As men steer their ship of life, so will it glide through the waters of life.

3. The fact that all of us are witnessing that terrible things happen even to those that love God should be enough evidence that the way of God is not exactly as we humans have made it to be. If you read my previous posts I clearly stated that God doesn't bring evil on any one. The essential point I am trying to make is that we experience the fruits of the seeds we sow. It is not God that sowed the seeds but us and our fellow human beings. Why will God be responsible for the fruits of the seeds that we sowed.

4. Many of us judge by appearances and thus err. If the veil covering our spiritual eyes are opened,  you will be shocked to see that many a man considered good is rotten inside while brilliant purity emanates from the heart of many considered as unbelievers or evil people. Stay blessed.

davidylan:

thank you and remain blessed as well.

considering the serious differences in the words of the above, exactly what "god" do you claim sent them?

Hi Davidylan. God, the creator of all the worlds whose son is Jesus Christ sent all the aforementioned prophets to different peoples and cultures. My perception is that there is no essential difference in their teachings provided one is able to spiritually look at the teachings of these servants of God. Stay blessed.

davidylan:


You have a truly beautiful way of weaving words together. But the above is the sweeping apostasy that the bible strongly warned us about. It would be quite tedious pointing out the serious flaws in this post.

Hi Davidylan. How bodi? Thanks for your comments. I offered my perception on the issues in discuss. If you find flaws in what I said, you are encouraged to point them out. In that way readers and discussants will have broader view of the issues in discuss. Stay blessed.

I spend most of time in the hospital, and believe me, i've seen so much pain.
people are suffering going through extreme pain, even outside the hospital, we hear of untold hardships, violence, discrimination, abuse, subjugation etc
what pains me most is that majority of this people are the good ones, the religious ones, those that cling onto the faith they have in their God, no matter their condition, yet this things and worse happen to them.
I just i came back from the ward now after seeing the mother of a friend of mine, she was suffering from bosom cancer that has already metastasized, she was in so much pain you could feel it, and she has been like that for the past one year now. this woman before her illness was a very very dedicated worker in her church, so deeply committed to serving her God, including her husband and ALL her children. when the sickness started am sure they must have read of the promises of God in the bible and started praying based on it, but yet the pain and suffering just increases, now she is all dry and shrunken, and money is being wasted but yet God is there, watching. . .
there was this other small girl, about 5 yrs old, that just got her two legs amputated, you need to hear her screaming, and the tears pouring from her eyes, so innocent and young yet passing through all this now.
I've also heard countless stories of innocent children barely 6 years old being violated, this helpless and defenseless ones are as we learn in the bible, the closest to God's heart.
Sometimes am just confused, and nothing makes sense anymore, I'm a christian, and i know we have a compassionate and loving God, that loves even sinners, so i cant help but ask, WHERE IS GOD WHEN BAD THINGS HAPPEN TO GOOD PEOPLE

Hi Flashaldrin. Your questions are legitimate in my view. You are not alone with such questions. Almost all of us when confronted with very painful experiences similar to the ones you mentioned will us ask "Where is God when bad things happen to good people". In the midst of such painful human suffering, it is difficult to offer an answer. How do one begin to explain to a mother that have just lost his only child or a father that have lost his wife and children in a ghastly motor accident that there is God who loves them. There are certainly answers but it is very difficult to convey them under such circumstances. Inspite of the difficulty, I will try to convey in brief my perception of the issues you raised.

Firstly, it is not the will of God that men should suffer illnesses or diseases and similar things. Suffering including diseases is because of our disobedience to the laws of God. By laws of God I mean the intrinsic characteristic of all that is in existence, these innate characteristics are a reflection of the will of God. In man, these characteristics are just talents which can only develop into abilities if the talents are used in the sense and purpose for which the creator gave it. To enable man transform these talents into abilities, God gave men free will. This free will like other talents is an integral part of the spirit. With free will, man can develop himself to that which the creator destined him to be but it is also possible that he can dig his own grave if he misuses his free will by ignoring the promptings of the talents that God implanted in him and following a path not in accord with the will of God. Thus rightly understood, there is no difference between a lair or murderer with the person who abuses his earthly bodies by smoking, drunkenness, gluttony or by lack of exercise. Each disobey the laws of God.

The threads of our fate are formed by the billions of decisions we take everyday through our actions, words, thoughts, motives, imagination and intuition. Like a seed sown in a fertile soil, our activities germinate and will one day return the fruits of the seeds we sowed in multiples. The problem though is that by the time the fruits of the seeds return to us, we are not conscious in the earthly sense that we sowed the seeds. Thus if they bring blessing, we say it is providence but if the bring sorrow, we say where is God when these bad things are happening to us. The laws of God brings neither blessing nor punishment to anyone but returns to each one the seeds of his fruits with clinical precision. In this lies the justice and love of God.

Even the genes you are to inherit, the families into which you will be born are a manifestation of the seeds you have sown or is sowing. Thus what happens to us is because we are ripening the fruits of our seeds or we accepted prenatally to experience them to gain maturity or that we became victims of the misapplication of freewill by our fellow travelers. On earth there are both good and evil people and it is quite possible that in some cases, a good person can become the victim of the evil volition of his fellow men. In this later case, the good person must have spared himself many of those evil if he remained spiritually alert. Consider, how will a child learn how to walk if the parents prevent him from walking for fear that he may fall. In a similar way God does not remove the consequences of our evil deeds once we have repented, rather these evil deeds are placed on our part for only in experiencing them will we learn never to make the same mistakes. How will you know that bitter leaf is really bitter except by tasting it.

All human beings have been on earth in several incarnations. Even a new born child is simply an old soul in a new body. The laws of God do not take into account only this present existence but the entire existence both on this earth (many reincarnations) and other invincible planes where souls go when the depart this earth life. If the human spirit has been in existence for billions of years, is it not illogical to expect all the actions and reactions of the entire existence to be fulfilled in a short earth life of about 80 years on the average. Many genuinely good people today were once very evil and some evil people today were once good. This in part may explain why bad things happen to some good people while good things happen to some evil people.

It is also wrong to declare that a man is suffering because of his sins. To say such require a knowledge of the entire existence of the person and since most human beings are incapable of such a knowledge, there pronouncement on these matters are wrong. Indeed, a person may suffer because of his sins but he may also suffer not because of his sins. At the moment I will not expand on this as a lot of pre-explanations are required before I expand on it.

As long as we are on earth, painful experiences will still strike us. Even an awakened spirit is not immune from earthly suffering. An awakened spirit accepts with equanimity what he is experiencing. Thus whether healthy or ill, rich or poor, he bears peace within himself because he understands the basis of his experiences. God loves us and in the end suffering and painful experiences will depart from us provided we persevere in living in the sense of the laws of God and not weaken too soon because we are suffering. Our bodies are simply dresses, we should use it but never get attached to it. We are spirit beings and a spirit is not subject to disease or illness or suffering. A time will also come when our spirits are purified and God will then allow his power to descend not only to invigorate our spirits but also our bodies such that diseases and illness will cease to exist. But before then, man must be compelled to learn the laws of God and live accordingly. At the present time we sin against all the laws of God, by abusing our material and soul bodies.

God is and his Love is whether in times of blessing or sadness. A man suffering from a disease of the body or soul may not see the love of God at the moment of intense pain but if he is of a humble heart he will someday see the omnipotence that surrounds and guides him even during his darkest nights. I wish you  strength and may the power of God be with you. Amen. Stay blessed.

Hi Emofine. Thank you for your comments and kind words. I reply to your comments as follows:

You are the first person on this site that I can finally identify with. I actually believe there is elements of truth in all the Holy Books but I struggle to accept if the whole articles in their entirety is wholly true. Even though I am intrigued by the symbols embedded in the Holy text, literary work and at times draw my inspiration from some of the passages of these books I cannot see myself nor would I like to be confined in the perimeters of a religion - after all we all have our own interpretation Undecided

The sacred books of religions contain some truth. Those grains of Truth are the the teachings of the the prophets of God and in (case of the bible, the son of God) that have not been distorted by the human mind. Budhha, Krishina, LaoTse, Mohammed, Moses, and many others besides are messengers of God sent to different cultures and traditions. The proclaimed the same eternal Truth adapted to the culture and spiritual maturity of their people. But like everything that we humans have torched upon, a cup of rice (grains of Truth) was mixed with a bag of sand. It thus appear difficult for many a man to still find the grains of rice within the bag of sand. A genuine seeker will be guided to be able to clearly distinguish the grains of rice from the sand. There is no essential difference between the grain of rice that came through the mouth of any of the prophets of God. Besides every human being living on earth and in the beyond has at least once in one of his incarnations had directly from the mouth of a prophet of God and even from Jesus, the son of God. These pure and unadulterated teachings slumber deep in the spirit of any man and all that man needs is to tear away the dross that covers his spiritual intuition. Then he will be able to re-awaken the knowledge that slumbers within himself. Thus on earth a man who sat at the feet of Jesus, the son of God 2000 years ago is here again as a Nigerian completely oblivious that the teachings and events in the life of the son of God is slumbering deep in his spirit and just need a spiritual awakening to call it to life. Thus the infinite Love of God grants us several opportunities to recognize God and his Will. I wish you strength in you search. My only advice is not to believe what anybody (including me) tell you about God but to only accept that which is in accord with the innermost yearning of your spirit. 

My own journey is similar to yours except that I'm only in the beginning. It sounds like it would be an exciting and worthwhile one now after communicating with you. I gather that you live in Norway, did your environment have an effect in which trajectory you later took? Shape your thinking?

What is important is that you have awakened the yearning to find God. Keep on seeking and you will find all that you need for your spiritual development and salvation. No person who genuinely seeks God will go empty hand for it is the will of God that men should come to recognition. Yes I live in Norway. I came to Norway 12 years ago but I have already found the Truth before coming to Norway. Truth is constant and immutable and thus it is not subject to the earthly fluctuations like geographical location, sex, religious inclination, social status, race, etc.

Do you have a relationship with God (the Creator)?
Was you brought up in a religious home?

Yes, I am granted the grace of having a relationship with God, the creator. Yes I was brought up in a deeply religious catholic home. But I was born with the ability to see physically invincible things and thus it was easy for me to see the contradiction between what I am told or read with my own experiences.

Do you subscribe to the thought that the things we do not see are by far more real than the things we do see

I know that the entire creation is a reflection or an image of the will of God. The material physically visible creation with all its billions of galaxies and sun systems is the last copy and only faintly reflects the original copy (Primordial spiritual creation). Thus material creation is the least approximation to real Life. Primordial Spiritual Creation is the closest reflection of Real Life. Life and Power only resides in God and everything that is not God (Creations and much more) is a reflection or an image of the Life that is in God. Stay blessed.

emöfine:

Wow. Intriguing.

If you don't mind me asking, what religion (if any) do you adhere to? What books have you read or currently reading? What informed your current way of thinking?
The way you write is like painting a picture. Very vivid.

Hi Emofine. Thank you for your kind words. I do not adhere to any religion. In my teen years to about the age of 22, I examined sacred books of major religions, sacred books of many mystical movements as well as the works of great philosophers including Plato and Immanuel Kant. In all these works I found many things that were spiritually beneficial but they were insufficient to quench my thirst for the Truth. A personal spiritual experience that happened more than 20 years ago lead me to the work "In The Light of Truth-The Grail Message". I am an adherent of the Grail Message. What I write is drawn from the Grail Message as well as my own personal experiences of both the visible and invincible creations of God. I can see and perceive the living language of God and for this reason, I rarely do read spiritual works since I was 23. Stay blessed.

emöfine:

@m_nwankwo
Excuse me for my late response but I had only now taken the time to read your beautiful post in it's entirety. It was pretty dense so I had to digest it in parts. Quite intelligent and educational delivered in a poetic style.
I appreciate your reply and it's as if it was tailored specifically to someone like me (despite the fact that I am the author of this thread).

I believe you are right when you say in order for a word to become alive it requires much action.

Reading your post I instantly thought of John Muir's metaphor he used to describe nature . . ."The Book of Nature" - an animated extension of the written Bible. He perceived nature as a testament to God and even though I understand he was a christian and one that memorized the Bible well he used the creations as a means of understanding God.

There was a person who had found her faith without the encouragement of eager Evangelists which I found pretty remarkable - is that "intuition" at work?. She confessed that she did not read the Bible and other such Holy Scriptures but what she saw was the reflection of the "word of God" in a particular believer. She was reading that believer as one would read the pages of a book. She saw in that one believer the embodiment of the "word" and so was stirred. I found that quite astonishing that she witnessed instead what she later would regard as the truth as opposed to being informed about it.

Yet These Books or "signposts" meet at a crossroad. So which road would a seeker thus follow?
You mentioned  "intuition" and I found that quite intriguing. Intuition surely differs from person to person . . .so is spirituality subjective or objective?
Is it also intuition that guides believers and not solely a book?
If we have intuition to rely on what use is a Book?

Hi Emofine. Thanks for your kind words and your reasoned reply. The laws of God are indelibly written in all creations of God. What men call Nature is just a small part of Gods creations. The sacred scriptures of religions in its pure form are simply a physical condensation of the language of God that vibrates in creations. Thus a prophet or servant of God due to an ability granted to him or her by God gives physical form to this living language of God by cloaking them into earthly words and sentences. A genuine seeker will absorb the words and sentences in such a way that the words and the sentences opens the door to the living laws of God. In other words, the genuine seeker should be able to experience the same living language of God which the prophet or servant of God have condensed into words and sentences. The words and the sentences are only forms or shells but a genuine seeker must uncover or unclothe the shells or the coverings so that he will experience the seed (the living language of God). This living language of God cannot be accurately depicted in human words and language. It is not possible to reproduce in human language that which is Living and "Infinite".

Thus it is possible to know of GOD without coming into physical contact with any of the sacred books. Buried deep and as an integral part of our spirit is a spiritual receiver and transmitter which is called intuition. This intuition can easily recognize the living language of God. Unfortunately, like a diamond buried in mud, the purity of spiritual intuition is crowded or enveloped by the propensities of our material bodies. It is for this reason that many cannot hear the voice of the spirit. God in his infinite Love sends his messengers to awaken man from the slumber, that is, to help humankind tear away the dross that covers the intuition. Once the intuition is free, it cannot but recognize God and his Will for the ultimate recognition of God is hardwired in the spirit. Because each individual is different, what will awaken them varies. Some may find the trigger in very painful experiences, others in the Bible, Koran, Vedic scriptures, etc while some others may find the opening of the voice of their spirit on the mountain top, gazing in a Night sky or even by looking at the complexity of biological systems. Whatever is the trigger, one thin is certain, once the gate of the spirit opens to perceive the will of God, that spirit can only live and breathe LOVE. LOVE, GENUINE LOVE is the fundamental characteristic of an awakened spirit. Such an awakened spirit only lives and breathes love for he is now linked for all times with GOD who is the source and origin of LOVE.

Gems of Truth in all sacred books do not contradict each other for the Truth cannot contradict itself. A genuine seeker will be able to pick any sacred book and be able to absorb the truths that is in them, while discarding the untruths. Each human being who has humility and is seeking for God will find God irrespective of what his earthly religion is. Like I said above when they have found the living language of God, they will only live one supreme law of God, that is to love God and to love all creations of God. Stay blessed.

1Godfather:

If I may reflect on this Sun-Sunbeam analogy that has been presented by adherents of the Grail Message to explain the nature of God, I’ll have to say that I am not convinced that the sunbeams or the sunrays are essentially different from the sun. There is no sensible way to talk of the sun (crudely put, a hot burning radiating ball of fire) existing without its sunbeams or rays. I contend that the sun’s rays have always existed together with the sun. In other words, there was never a time a pre-existing sun suddenly decided (as it were) to produce emanations.

When the star called the sun was born, that same instant did it begin to radiate away its beams. The nature of the sun is such that it produces emanations; it is incandescent. The sunbeam essentially flows out of the sun containing the very essence of the sun. To put it differently:  it would be a strange star, indeed a star not worthy of its name, if it could be demonstrated that the Sun did not have its rays or beams co-existing with it at all times. If we then cannot properly speak of the sun without the sunbeams, I think the analogy that portrays God as the Sun and Creation as the Sun’s beams (sun’s radiations or emanations) is altogether faulty.

2) I also have a philosophical disagreement with any view that essentially reduces God to energy. The word energy has a rich physical meaning which can be brought to bear in these discussions as they provide an illustrative framework upon which to anchor concepts. God is not to be conceived of as merely some inanimate, unconscious, driving force or energy or motivating principle. He is not to be thought of as some primordial energy that somehow dissipates into Creation. To be fair, the human language can prove to be inadequate to convey our deeper thoughts on the subject, nonetheless we should really try and simplify our definitions as much as we can, taking care not to conflate ideas. The view of God as “primordial energy”, or “primordial light” or “primordial time” may sound very poetic and numinous but they are altogether mistaken in that these qualifiers essentially depersonalize or de-animate God. The only way to redeem this view or to imbue it with any merit is to say that these descriptors are to be regarded as God’s attribute in some poetic or metaphorical manner of speech. Ontologically speaking, these descriptors fail hopelessly in establishing the nature of the being we are talking about because on that view God is some nebulous inanimate or non-sentient entity.

3) God is first and properly speaking, a mind or a sentient (conscious) being. You can also call him the Primordial Consciousness or Primordial Life. He is personal—which is to say that he has self-will, free will, rationality, and consciousness.  I must point out rather quickly that when I say that God is personal, you shouldn’t take that to mean that he is a human being or a human person. Personhood is not limited to Homo sapiens or for that matter, any other physically instantiated particulars. Philosophically speaking, personhood involves a self-conscious and rational being, or a unit of self-consciousness; and thus the concept of personhood cannot be straitjacketed and appropriated solely to evince some naturalistic presuppositions. Once you have established this, you can then go ahead to speak of other divine attributes that he properly possesses. Some of these attributes are that God is metaphysically or logically necessary, immaterial or incorporeal, eternal, non-spatial, immortal, all-knowing or omniscient, morally perfect, omnipresent or ubiquitous, and maximally powerful. So please let us stop borrowing excessively from the rich language of physics here in analogizing God to some Primordial force, energy, pressure, light, magnetism, singularity, electricity, gravity, momentum, or other quaint physical phenomena that strike our fancy. In my opinion these analogies to physical phenomena can be altogether counterproductive and belittling.

4) God’s infinite attributes are qualitative rather than quantitative. I find that often when people talk about divine infinity, they picture a God that has parts or components, and/or is spatially extended. Thus, they imagine that while speaking of God’s infinity, you are talking about some mathematical concept of infinity. For example, the set of all numbers (if you successively count upwards from 1) is infinite. God is not said to be infinite in that quantitative sense. He is not proposed to be made up of an infinite array of discrete or finite particulars; his infinite power is not to be understood as saying that he possesses an infinite amount of quantized energy; his omnipresence is not to be understood as saying that God literally physically occupies every inch of space-time. Infinity as it applies to God is merely qualitative as it seeks to express the total, undifferentiated and maximal nature of God. Indeed, as some have already pointed out, one can readily see vestiges of God’s superlative or infinite divine attributes in human beings and in the created order.

Hi 1Godfather. Thanks for your comments. I find it difficult to see what you disagree with in my descriptions. The issues that apparently you seem not to agree with are already addressed in my posts on this thread. The conclusions that you seem to draw from my description cannot be found in my descriptions. Take for instance your suggestion that my descriptions imply "God is some nebulous inanimate or non-sentient being". Reproduced below are some of my quotes on this thread.

God is the creator of all all existence. One can also say that God is the living source of all that is. God is the living source of all energies. Thus there is God and the emanations (radiations) of God. All that was, is and will ever be has its origin in the emanations of God. Thus, God brought and will continue to bring creations into existence from his radiations because the radiations of God contain all the primordial elements which either instantaneously or by development result in the in the birth of creations. Life, Infinity, Immutability, Love, Truth, Time, Perfection, Omniscience, etc, are living attributes that resides in God. It is for this reason that these aforementioned attributes are unattainable by the radiations of God (creations and creatures that inhabit them). The radiations of God although containing all the primordial elements have to be pressed into union so that what floats in infinity as oceans of flame can cool off, precipitate into seeds, germinates by cosmic explosions resulting in myriads of material and non-material universes. This pressing into union, cooling off, amalgamation into cosmic seeds and explosion of these seeds results from an act of Gods Will. Thus rightly understood, all creations are simply a direct or indirect consequence of the act of will of God. Without a conscious act of Gods will, there will be no creations.

Yes, creations can be described as an expression or the work of God but a work or an expression of God is not God. Yes, the radiations are the natural emanations from God but the radiations of God from which existence springs forth is not God.  Yes in the work of God, one will find reflections of the attributes that are in God. But these reflections like images are limited, the limitation imposed by the fact that they lack the unsubstantiated divine substance that is only in God. I oppose the view that God or a part of God is within his creations. What we find in all creations are simply radiations of God that have either taken form or are formless. An author is not the same as his books or inventions even though the mind of the author can be found in his books. Although it is a crude analogy, it faintly reflects the relationship between God and his creations. Even man is a coarse reproduction of the actual images or reflections of God.

God in my crude definition is the primordial Life or primordial Light or primordial Energy. Naturally, God who is the primordial Light radiates. The radiations are a natural consequence that God is. These divine emanations of God contain among others the breath of life that is the human spirit. Thus the direct origin of everything that is not the Almighty God is the radiations of God. You think that that since God is life, then everything that has life must have derived the life from the life that is in God. The divine emanations of God has life too but it is a reflection or a lower gradation of the living Life (GOD). The Life in the divine emanations of God contain all that is necessary for creation and creatures to emerge. God wills creation into existence by permitting his radiations to cool off, precipitate into cosmic seeds, explosion of these seeds and the subsequent emergence of subsequent creation. The primordial creation just came into existence once the almighty GOD willed it because the cool off from the divine emanations still retain enough "life" in them to form instantaneously. Now I do not think that it is difficult to imagine that there are various gradations of the life that is in the radiations of God. The human spirit is a radiation of God, so are animal souls and so are angels, etc, and yet these are different species or gradation of the radiation of God. But the radiation of God is not God and herein lies the point I am making. Every radiation of God even the divine radiations are substantiate, that is they have a form and and an image of them can be made. But God alone is unsubstantiate. It is not possible in my experiencing of creation to find the unsubstantiate essence that is God in substantiate beings. All substantiate beings have substantiate essence but never an unsubstantiate essence. Thus, the Almighty God, the primordial LIFE is not in man or any other substantiate beings even if they are divine beings. Thus, the quest to find God within man is a waste of spiritual energy. Man is not God, nor part of God. Part of the reasons for spiritual poverty is that many a man harbors the desire to be God or a part of God, thus he waste his energy trying to be what he can never be and then fail to be what he can be, a purified human spirit that consciously stands in the power of God

The analogy of the sun and its rays is a crude analogy meant to convey a concept of God, and the effect that God is. Just like sunbeams are a natural effect that the sun is, so are divine radiations a natural effect of God. The lesson in the analogy is that effect is not the same thing as the cause of the effect. If you imagine for instance the photosynthesis that results in several different species of plant are dependent on the sun rays. In an orange, a bunch of banana or a tuber of yam, you will not see elements in the sun rays in these food stuffs. The "energy" in the sun rays have been transformed to these different foodstuffs. To get a concept I am trying to convey in the crude analogy, then imagine God as the sun, the divine radiations as the sun rays and the various plant foods I have mentioned as different creations. In this analogy the sun beams have always existed with the sun because it is a direct natural effect of the sun but the various plant foods have not always existed with the sun and its rays because they are an after effect of the effect of the sun. Thus God and his divine radiations are eternal but the creations of God that arose when God willed some of his divine radiations to cool off and precipitate into various creations (both spiritual and material) are not abinitio eternal since they have a beginning. God can borrow or loan them "eternity" if the follow the will of God, the creator.


I have previously stated that reflections, effects, images, or vestiges of the divine radiations of God are found in creation and the human spirit is one of the innumerable beings that are these reflections. However these reflections or vestiges have no iota of the unsustantiate divine substance that is in God for the simple reason that infinity(God) cannot be found in what is finite (creations). Neither can that which is finite be found in what is infinite. Stay blessed.

Deep Sight:


The analogy of the sun failed because we could see that the sun contains some of the elements that it emanates.

I do not see how you conclude that the analogy of the sun failed. What exactly are the elements in the rays of the sun that are found in the sun? How exactly are super energy photons the same as low energy photons? Stay blessed

@DeepSight,

I sense that your spirit understands what I have been trying to convey. As long as you conceive that what proceeds from God are images or reflections of the life that is in God, then you get the point I am making. It is impossible for what is finite (radiations of God) to be part of or contain an essence of Infinity (God). Infinity, Eternity, Perfection are intrinsic abilities in God. What proceeds from God, that is, the radiations of God are finite and thus has nothing of God in them. Infinity cannot become finite and what is finite cannot become Infinity. I think it is simple. God has no form because he is primordial Infinity and Unsubstantiality. How then will that which has form or is substantiate contain even a miniscule particle of Infinity or Unsubstantiality. Stay blessed.

thehomer:

Thank you for your response. I doubt that we'll be able to communicate effectively because we're not using words in a similar manner and the methods that we agree on as being appropriate in acquiring information are simply too different. e.g what is the difference between primordial life and primordial energy? Simply sticking the word primordial before a noun isn't a satisfactory solution.
Then the idea that rocks and water are alive is questionable to me.
Also, "knowing" through personal spiritual guides is questionable given what we know about humans and the rest of the natural world.
Finally, the idea of evolution you presented is quite incomprehensible to me.

Thanks again.

Hi Thehomer. Thanks for your comments. Best Wishes.

thehomer:

Okay.

Energy and life are two different concepts. Why are you conflating them? Which one comes first, energy or life?

Only God is alive? Are bacteria and plants alive? It seems the concept of life you're using here is one quite different from what is understood so what idea of life are you using? Also, what do you mean by "radiations of God"?

How do you know these things about these primordial beings e.g their size? Also, do you agree with the theory of evolution?

Hi Thehomer. Thanks for your comments. I respond as follows

In the sense that I am using them, energy and life are not two different things. Remember that I used them to give a faint conception of the abilities or attributes that are in God. It is for that reason that I did not just call it energy or life but called it primordial energy or primordial life. Primordial Energy, Primordial Life, Primordial Time, Primordial Light, Primordial Will, Primordial Consciousness, Primordial Power, etc are abilities that are in God. Thus, they are eternal, that is they have always existed, that is, they have no beginning and no end. Thus, since these abilities of God are eternal, it is not relevant in my view to ask which of the abilities or attributes of God that come first. All abilities in God have no beginning and no end.

Yes, only God is truly alive. All else including humans, angels, viruses, bacteria, plants, rocks, water,  universes, creations etc, are alive because God loaned them reflections or images of LIFE. In other words, everything that is not God derive their life or existence from God either instantaneously or through development and are absolutely dependent on God for its existence. God however is absolutely independent of everything else. This again is a faint reflection of reality because there is no concept in and outside of creation that can capture the reality of God. Even if God revels the reality, it is beyond the ability of anything within creation or outside of creation to understand. Thus God cloaks the reality so that it can become comprehensible to creatures within and outside of creation. Such clocking of the reality also goes hand in hand with a narrowing down. It is for this reason that I insist that concepts are a faint reflection of reality.

Radiations of God are the emanations that comes from God. All that exist(counsciously or uncounsciously) originated from the radiations of God. Thus various  creations (material and non-material), the divine worlds before creation and all the creatures that inhabit them as well as the works of those creatures are various gradations of the radiation of God. Simply put, everything that is not God is the radiation of God. 

I came to the "knowledge" of Primordial beings and Primordial creation when I was permitted to experience the work "In The Light of Truth-The Grail Message". In my spiritual journey, spiritual guides do show me radiated pictures of primordial beings and its from these spiritual experiences that I gave a literal conception of their size. There are also a lot of teaching by my guides but I will not dwell on them.


Yes, I do believe in evolution but not exactly in the same as many of my fellow biologists do. I have in many discussions on his forum given my view on biological evolution. I do not remember which threads now but if you search my posts of 2-4 years ago you will find my views. In brief, I believe that our present human body did not just emerge from the air but is a result of millions of years of evolution. Unlike fellow biologists, my conviction is that this biological evolution is an expression of the will of God. That is, God created the process of evolution and programmed it to result in the emergence of several species including the human physical body. When the evolutionary program written by God for the emergence of the human body have attained its goal, then God animated this human body by giving it a breath of life, that is is the spirit. Thus when the spirit that has its origin in the spiritual kingdom of God incarnated in a human-like body that looks almost exactly like the ones we have today, that human-like body got transformed to the human body that we know today and resulted in the birth of man. Thus the creation of man has two main processes, biological evolution that in the course of millions of years resulted in the emergence of human like animals. These animals which become extinct served as bridge for the birth of man. Thus when these noble human like animal copulated, instead of an animal soul incarnating, the human spirit incarnated. The incarnation of the spirit then transformed the animal bodies into the present human bodies. For several generations, these human like animals lived but did not sexually mix with the new humans and over the course of time the noble animals become extinct having fulfilled their purpose according to divine will, that is, to provide the biological bodies for the incarnation of the spirit and thus the birth of man. While scientists are correct with the principle of evolution, they do not know the details of how it happened. But most importantly, biological evolution is a manifestation of the will of God, natural selection is just one of the several physical manifestation of the divine intelligence that initiates, maintains and determines the tree of life. Thus the emergence and diversity of biological species abinitio was programmed by God. Thus a dog did not become a dog just because of natural selection but the tree of life for a dog was set in motion by God. Even the natural environments that interact with the gene pool are all manifestation of the program that God has written in the germs that develop to various species via evolution. Best Wishes.

Deep Sight:

^ Do you not feel that the situation is radically different when we are speaking of a living entity bequeathing life - and not the sun or an artist and his painting. If the painting were a living thing, would it not have to derive its life from the artist's substance. . . . ?

In the case of God we are talking about LIFE itself giving life to other things. . . is it not logical to suppose that the life given to new creatures derives from the life of God. That "breath of life" which is the living spirit . . . .where does it come from - ? The only conceivable answer is that the life comes from God. If it comes from God (as surely, everything does), surely, it is in some aspect or the other part of the life of God . . . .  .?

The OP is about creation ex nihilo. . . . if the creation is NOT from "nothing" then it is from "something" - what "something" exists in the beginning, except God alone . . . .  .?

Hi Deepsight. Thank you for your comment. I clearly stated that my analogy is a crude one that can only give a faint reflection of the reality. But even this faint reflection is enough to form the right kind of conception if a soul tries to experience what is said. Now human beings also creates or rather form things that have "life" and yet these things have not a particle of the human spirit in them. Thought forms and intuitive forms of people are works of man but they have no essence in them that is of the human spirit.

God in my crude definition is the primordial Life or primordial Light or primordial Energy. Naturally, God who is the primordial Light radiates. The radiations are a natural consequence that God is. These divine emanations of God contain among others the breath of life that is the human spirit. Thus the direct origin of everything that is not the Almighty God is the radiations of God. You think that that since God is life, then everything that has life must have derived the life from the life that is in God. The divine emanations of God has life too but it is a reflection or a lower gradation of the living Life (GOD). The Life in the divine emanations of God contain all that is necessary for creation and creatures to emerge. God wills creation into existence by permitting his radiations to cool off, precipitate into cosmic seeds, explosion of these seeds and the subsequent emergence of subsequent creation. The primordial creation just came into existence once the almighty GOD willed it because the cool off from the divine emanations still retain enough "life" in them to form instantaneously. Now I do not think that it is difficult to imagine that there are various gradations of the life that is in the radiations of God. The human spirit is a radiation of God, so are animal souls and so are angels, etc, and yet these are different species or gradation of the radiation of God. But the radiation of God is not God and herein lies the point I am making. Every radiation of God even the divine radiations are substantiate, that is they have a form and and an image of them can be made. But God alone is unsubstantiate. It is not possible in my experiencing of creation to find the unsubstantiate essence that is God in substantiate beings. All substantiate beings have substantiate essence but never an unsubstantiate essence. Thus, the Almighty God, the primordial LIFE is not in man or any other substantiate beings even if they are divine beings. Thus, the quest to find God within man is a waste of spiritual energy. Man is not God, nor part of God. Part of the reasons for spiritual poverty is that many a man harbors the desire to be God or a part of God, thus he waste his energy trying to be what he can never be and then fail to be what he can be, a purified human spirit that consciously stands in the power of God.

Creation is not from nothing. God created from his mantle, that is God willed some of his emanations to cool off and take own form. "Both" God and his divine emanations are eternal for the divine emanations are a consequence that God is. My perception is that the Eternal Light that is God have radiated for all eternity. Creation is simply an extension of Gods radiations to what I have previously depicted as a cosmic void. Stay blessed.

Kay 17:

From your analogy, i could conclude that my arm is not me?!

Sun rays are not wholly the Sun, but are part of the Sun. An artist shares a piece of his mind in an artwork. your kind of Radiations can be likened to sun rays, they are composed of the same materials as the sun, they are more or less copies of Sun.

Hi Kay17. From my crude analogy, you cannot conclude that your arm is not you. Rather your arm is a part of your body. If however you use your arm to write, or invent a piece of work. Then that invention, books or painting is not part of your body.
No, the sun rays are stellar radiations. Yes, they are emitted from the sun but they are not the sun or part of it. Stellar radiations consist of X-rays, UV, visible light, radio waves. The sun mostly contain hydrogen and then helium plus other heavy gases in smaller amount. But more importantly, the stellar radiations are a consequence of nuclear fusion. I am not aware of any scientific paper that have demonstrated that stellar radiations emitted from the sun naturally undergo nuclear fusion. If you are aware of such a paper, I will be pleased to have the citation. Besides, will you argue that a photograph of Kay 17 is Kay 17 or part of Kay 17?

I have already stated that a painting or sculptor is an expression of the volition of the artist. The artist is the creator while the painting is his work. He stands outside his work and not inside his work. He can destroy his work and yet leave on to produce other works. The patterns of his work of art can lead others to understand some aspects of his artistic talent. This crude analogy faintly reflects the relationship between God and his creations. Thus creatures in all creations of God will come to an understanding of the the "mind" of God by experiencing his creations. In this way they will gradually learn the laws of God. Indeed the laws of God are the inherent properties in all creatures and creations. Science with all its disciplines are actually studying the laws of God in the physical universe. However these laws are also present outside and above the physical universes. I am certain that a time will come when science will go beyond the physical universes and study the laws of God in other creations that are not physical including the spiritual. Just like we have teachers and mentors in our school system, God in his love send out teachers to help humanity to recognize and live according to his laws. These spiritual teachers are incarnated on earth and they reveal some aspects of the laws of God to their people. They adapt their teachings to the spiritual maturity and culture of there people. Even amid the distortion of the teachings of these prophets by their followers, a genuine student of creation will still find the grains of Truth in the various traditions. If he orders his life according to the grains of Truth that he has found, he will be liberated and find his way to God, his maker,  irrespective of his earthly religious affiliation. Best Wishes.

Definitions and concepts cannot accurately capture what God is. In spite of this I will make an attempt in the knowledge that this definition is a very faint reflection of reality. God is the primordial source of all energy. One can also say that God is the primordial source of Life or that God is primordial Life or primordial Energy. Anything else that exists or will exist derive its life or energy from GOD. In other words, only GOD is alive, everything else derives there life from God. What scientists are conversant with are various forms of energy with material universe. There are energies in all creations, not just in material universe. These energies originated from the radiations of God. In material universe energies are secondly radiations of primordial spiritual beings created by God and these primordial spiritual beings are the actual image of God. The human spirit that is man is simply an image or a reflection of these primordial spiritual beings. The primordial beings are of unimaginable size that one of them can hold our entire material universe in the palm of its hands. And yet even these primordial beings are creatures of God.  Best Wishes.

Kay 17:

^^ all radiations derive their source from God but not part of him? Dont u see that as a contradiction? Is there any effort made (creative wise) in developing these radiations?

Hi Kay. I do not see a contradiction. Consider the sun and its rays. Although it is again a crude analogy, the rays of the sun came from the sun but the rays of the sun are not the sun. Again, work of art is an expression of the "mind" of an artist but the artist is not the same as the art. In these examples, you will not see even a particle of the artist in his art nor will you see a particle of the sun in a ray from the sun. When you express your volition via your actions, thoughts or imagination, you will not find a single particle of Kay in your words, thoughts and actions. In my perception it is erroneous to surmise that the same consciousness  in Kay can be found in Kay`s actions, words and thoughts. Kay is the creator of his actions, thoughts and words but his words, thoughts or actions are neither Kay nor the creator of Kay.

I think I have already addressed the issue when I said that an act of Gods will is what presses these radiations into cooling off, encapsulation as cosmic seeds, explosion of these seeds and the birth of universes (physical and non-physical). The birth, development and decay of the forms of these radiations are also "programmed" by the creative will of God. Best Wishes.

God is the creator of all all existence. One can also say that God is the living source of all that is. God is the living source of all energies. Thus there is God and the emanations (radiations) of God. All that was, is and will ever be has its origin in the emanations of God. Thus, God brought and will continue to bring creations into existence from his radiations because the radiations of God contain all the primordial elements which either instantaneously or by development result in the in the birth of creations. Life, Infinity, Immutability, Love, Truth, Time, Perfection, Omniscience, etc, are living attributes that resides in God. It is for this reason that these aforementioned attributes are unattainable by the radiations of God (creations and creatures that inhabit them). The radiations of God although containing all the primordial elements have to be pressed into union so that what floats in infinity as oceans of flame can cool off, precipitate into seeds, germinates by cosmic explosions resulting in myriads of material and non-material universes. This pressing into union, cooling off, amalgamation into cosmic seeds and explosion of these seeds results from an act of Gods Will. Thus rightly understood, all creations are simply a direct or indirect consequence of the act of will of God. Without a conscious act of Gods will, there will be no creations.

Yes, creations can be described as an expression or the work of God but a work or an expression of God is not God. Yes, the radiations are the natural emanations from God but the radiations of God from which existence springs forth is not God. Yes in the work of God, one will find reflections of the attributes that are in God. But these reflections like images are limited, the limitation imposed by the fact that they lack the unsubstantiated divine substance that is only in God. I oppose the view that God or a part of God is within his creations. What we find in all creations are simply radiations of God that have either taken form or are formless. An author is not the same as his books or inventions even though the mind of the author can be found in his books. Although it is a crude analogy, it faintly reflects the relationship between God and his creations. Even man is a coarse reproduction of the actual images or reflections of God.

All energies, in whatever form are simply derived from a definite specie of Gods radiations. To be more specific, the energies that propel material creations into motion and union are spiritual particles or radiations emanating from the the volition of the the actual images of God. Thus energy is spirit but a different specie of spirit to that that is Man. The spirit particles hold all the secrets of the origin of our universe and other universes. Matter is simply enveloped spirit particles. One can also say that matter is energy covered with the clock of material substances. When man is willing to receive in humility, then the secrets on how to strip matter of all material envelopes, laying bare the spirit particles will become know to some people. But such knowledge will be for the future. Now it will be laughed off or ridiculed.

God brought creations into existence and can also cause creation to cease to exist. God does not need or depend on his creations but his creations are absolutely dependent on God. God brought creations into existence as a living expressions of his love. Before creation, only God and his divine emanations were in existence. The emission and simultaneous attraction of the divine radiations of God back to the Godhead resulted in a void. It is into this cosmic void that creation was born into and continue to expand. Viewed from outside of creation this cosmic void is limited but the limit can never be reached even if all creations are to expand eternally. But viewed from within creation, the void is limitless and infinite. Best Wishes.

The gems of Truth "contained" in the sacred books of different religions are simply a signpost to guide seekers to the Truth. In their pure form, the words and sentences are just a physical expression of the the language of God. The living language of God cannot be contained in any book. A genuine seeker must bestir himself inwardly. Thus, his spirit must become mobile. The mobility then permits the spirit not just to perceive the physical expression of the language of God but to sense in real time the living language of God which a messenger of God tried to clock with the sentences and words in various sacred books. In this way the genuine seeker will not get fixated at the various signposts but will be able to follow the road indicated by the signpost. In wandering through the road, he will then come across multifarious experiences that allows him a direct interaction with the the will of God that vibrates, resonates or are active in all creations. Thus the language of God is branded in all creations and only by experiencing creation in real time will our spirit slowly but surely imbibe the living language of God. Once this living language of God is experienced and becomes an integral part of the spirit, then that spirit have recognized God and his will. He is born again and consciously stands in the will of God.

Thus all genuine spirituality must be experiential in the way I tried to explain above. In this way you get seekers whose activities (action, words, thought, motive, imagination and intuition) are in tandem with the will of God. Had we had seekers in this way, our earth and other physically invincible parts of creation will be a reflection of the spiritual kingdom of God where there is only joy and supreme happiness. Unfortunately, many a seeker got fixated to the signposts and even misplaced some of the signposts. The consequence is the emergence of rigid dogma that lacks life and the emergence of believers whose activities contradict and disobey the will of God. It is not difficult to to discern who stands in the will of God and those that disobey it. Calmly look at our works (actions, words, thoughts, motive, imagination and intuition) and it will become clear those who are doing the will of God and those who disobey it. Even an earthly atheist may stand in the will of God while a pope, an apostle, a priest or a monk stand in opposition to it.

It doesn't matter to the laws of God what your religion, beliefs, sex, nationality, social status, etc are. These ephemeral to which many a man spends energy and quarrel about counts for nothing. What matters is how do you stand, for or against the will of God? Best Wishes

lastpage:

@m-nwankwo
I cant help but quote this again, even though it is lengthy!
God bless you real mighty for the above.
I am sure you're NOT A PASTOR but your post reminds me of the Biblical saying that "Wisdom would be (is) found IN THE MOUTH OD BABIES! (No Offense to your person).

I recall growing up, when l was told and read in the Bible that "a man cannot wear a woman's cloth".
So, in my naivety, l asked: WHAT EXACTLY IS A MAN"S CLOTH, knowing that my Mum's wrapper is a Ghananian man's cloth and her Skirt is a Scottish man's traditional apparel!
Well, l was given a long list of Buba and Sokoto!  
Curiously, l reasoned that God's Law are UNIVERSAL and ETERNAL without boundaries and as such,
the observed discrepancy in the interpretation given by our "men of God" is completely obtuse and inadequate!

Reading the post above and how it "broke things down into simple A-B-C", is marvelous.

How l wish Pastors can preach and reason like this?
I really appreciate you for that post.

Cheers.

Lastpage

BTW: Can you please elucidate on the Term "MIRACLE" as connoted in Christian worship. Thank you.

Hi Lastpage. Thank you very much for your kind words and prayers. I address your question as follows. Worship of God involves the recognition and obedience to the will of God. He or she who lives according to the will of God practices genuine worship of God. Obedience to the will of God links such a person to God or to be more specific to the power of God. Such a link permits the spirit to sense in real time the "presence" of God. Such a living connection to God allows the spirit to sense to a minute degree, the omnipotence and omniscience of God. In the living experience of the "presence" of God, the spirit unfolds with the purest gratitude to God, the creator of all the worlds. Such is worship and if a spirit is permitted to experience this true worship, such a spirit is filled with indescribable inner joy that no earthly words can be able to convey. In addition, a spirit who practices true worship as I tried to describe above also receives invigoration from the power of God that gives the spirit the strength as well as the power to live only in the sense of the laws of God.

If we practice true worship of God, then all our intuition, motive, thought, imagination, words and action will be a reflection of the laws of God. In other-words all our activities will vibrate with love and purity. Worship is a living happening that should be an integral part of the spirit of a genuine believer in God. It is not something that should be separate from our inner being. Thus the notion that we worship God on special days of the week is erroneous in my view. For a spiritually free human being, every single second of our lives should be a manifestation of the worship of God. In our earthly work or profession, family life, leisure and in all things we should stand in worship. That simply means that whatever we do, we must act according to the will of God.

Now human beings can dedicate some time with other human beings to have a joint hour of worship. Such joint hours of worship is meant for a joint genuine worship of God. All things apart from God and communion with God must be eliminated. The focus of all participants in such solemn moments must be to gain connection with God and absorb of his power. Preaching, lectures, raising money for religious activities, etc are important but they have nothing to do with worship of God. Believers can do these other things at other times but it should not be merged with worship of God. He or she who desire to approach God in these joint hours of worship should free his spirit of all external consideration, then the spirit will have the mobility to draw of the power of God and truly partake in the joint worship of God.

Miracles are manifestations of the the laws of God or the will of God which men think are impossible but they observation that it happened is a proof that it is possible, and men only think it was impossible because of deficiency in understanding. All genuine miracles are manifestations of the laws of God. No miracle can happen outside the laws of God, thus it is impossible to annual the laws of God. Indeed miracles are fulfillment of the laws of God. It is ignorance of these laws of God that make people think that somethings are impossible yet they are possible. The same ignorance of the laws of God also make people mistakenly think that impossible things are possible. Anything that is impossible according to the laws of God remain impossible. Even God cannot annul his own laws because these laws came out of the omnipotence and omniscience of God and thus cannot be improved upon, changed or annulled. Maybe someday, I may deal in detail the mechanism that governs miraculous happenings. However one thing is clear, any genuine miracle has impeccable, verifiable evidence that it occurred. Thus a miracle that happened in the physical world must have physical evidence. A miracle that occurred in the non-physical planes must have a non-physical evidence. It is erroneous to claim non-material evidence for a material miracle or look for material evidence for an event that occurred in non-material planes. Thus for instance a material miracle like cure of cancer must leave verifiable material evidence. At the same time, if a claim that an angel visited Mr. X, it will be wrong to be asking for the physical picture or finger print of the angel. There are many other non-physical ways to investigate a non-physical event. I got to stop here. Stay blessed.

Deep Sight:

@ nwankwo, Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! I Disagree, but, I have too much respect for you to debate this sonship thing any further. How you dey? Great, i hope!

Hi Deep Sight. I am fine. What of you? Great to see you back. Stay blessed.

jidewin:

write sursum vestri mirabilius est certus
But I need ask you, who do you say Jesus is?

Hi Jidewin. My conviction is that Jesus is the son of God. It can also be said that Jesus is God the son. Stay blessed.