Hebrews 2
A free person is not afraid to think about death. It has been suggested that ultimately all your fears are related to the fear of death. In setting you free from death and the fear of death, Jesus has enabled you to be set free from all your other fears.

The writer of Hebrews says that Jesus tasted ‘death for everyone’ (v.9) so that by ‘embracing death, taking it into himself, he destroyed the devil’s hold on death and freed all who cower through life, scared to death of death’ (vv.14–15, MSG).


View on Path


One can understand the leftist-mindset over how “words can hurt”. And therefore, the use of violence by leftists like antifa is deemed as justified.

Sadly… and I really mean sadly… such a mindset can be seen as true when talking about three types of people

1.) Immature People – e.g. Children
2.) Mentally Unstable people – e.g. Clinically depressed people
3.) Health-Nature ignorant people – i.e. People who don’t know what they’ve got

Consider a politician who accuses a certain set of people and says some harsh words and makes them feel like poop. What are the reactions of children? Anger? Sadness? Crying? Does this reminds you of Antifa yet?

The people I really care for are those who are mentally unstable ranging from severe bipolar to mere clinical functional depression. These are the people with hormonal and chemical make-up that actually find “a little bit” of Therapy in crying and being angry especially if they cannot avoid listening to the condemning criticisms of harsh destructive words. Are they justified in punching the harsh-speaker in the face? Or damaging any of his/her property? This is a tough one and a tough dilemma. Now if I say “I guess it depends on the situation” … this would give stupid immature snowflakes like leftist Antifa an avenue to say, “you see, in justified.” You know what people who are mentally unstable normally do? Yes… they try to fix it!
I believe that the idea of politicising your mental illness is evil and psychopathic and immoral. Now this does not mean that you cannot make the other party understand that “YOU HAVE A MENTAL PROBLEM” … no matter how “big” or “small” your mental problem is. Hence, they should help you to help them so that you don’t punch them in the face. Now, sometimes it’s evident and harsh-speakers are just dense. So yeah … in light of your justified mental illness, punch them. But please, continue to find solutions so that next time, you do not get easily provoked to act physically violently just because someone merely said something offensive.

Lastly, there is the third group of people. The people who are ignorant and don’t know what they’ve got. And I don’t mean “ignorant” in an insulting kind of way; I mean, genuinely ignorant people. For example, did you know that if you have a chronic hate or irritation of the chewing sounds of people you may have a form of #Misophonia? Did you know that your inability to make a choice over certain options could be a sight form of #Aboulomania? Did you know that if you’ve ever hurt yourself or deliberately made yourself physically sick or forced a vomit just for the intentions of proving to someone, like skipping a day off from work or proving a point to your parent/ superior, then you may be suffering from Munchausen Syndrome/ Factitious Disorder? Amidst the hoard ensemble of mental disorders out there, there is one thing that you can do,

“Don’t trust yourself!”

Especially if you know you’ve destroyed in your mind what an #Ideal world would bring. You see, human beings have a higher order of consciousness to live-outside-themselves. So, my only solution for people who are ignorant that they may be suffering some something all-their-lives and cannot escape it,

“Continue to be a good/ great person!”

We are all in the same boat. Nobody’s perfect. Learn rational arguments such as separating “ideaologies” from “people”. Learn social intelligence, logical intelligence, emotional intelligence etc … continue to study and read books. Life may not just be perfect on the inside-mental, it may also be bad on the outside-reality. However, life is 80% how your mentality responds to it.

Stay strong my ignorant friend. You and I and everyone are in the same boat. We are all ignorant of one thing or the other. So rather than give ourselves and Antifa the license to respond with violence to mere words, let us continue to grow, become more mature and stronger to the point of matured independence where the mere words of people never break our bones.


View on Path

Fundamental forgiveness and liberalism is purely a Judeo-Christian root virtue in so much that in the west, we have bred generations upon generations of people who highly give to charity and are willing to be too compassionate and too soft as to allow an ideology that wants to destroy them.

Atheist Bertrand Russel once said that Mahatma Gandhi’s message may not have succeeded if he was not appealing to the roots/ hearts of a christian nation. If Gandhi was appealing to an Islamic nation, it would be a different story – that’s fact.

So here you see an Atheist commending a Polytheist but only thanks to the surplus atmosphere of a certain kind of theism.

Christianity is taking a new form in this new Era. We can no longer have faith without logical/ rational/ believable evidence like other religions. Let them define faith however they want. In Christianity, Faith without works (or evidence) is dead.

Hebrews 11:1
Now Faith is the substance of things not seen, the EVIDENCE of things not seen.

Let us show our faith not by stupid/ snowflake compassion and braindead forgiveness … but in this new Era, we need to show our faith by intellectual compassion (understanding the boundaries of our kindness) AND knowledgeable forgiveness (understanding that just because you forgive fire from burning your fingers, does not necessarily mean you’re stupid enough to put your fingers back in that fire).


View on Path

With the concern for American Citizens regarding Islamic terrorist activities, the unpredictability of Donald Trump is one mighty deterrent to the Islamic terrorists.

One second Donald is standing in front of congress acting gentle and reserved, the next, he sends a missile to a merely suspected Islamic terrorist site and blows them up.

Sadly, Americans have always had their own in-house terrorists who have #EVIL in their hearts ♥️. The statistics/ facts still stands in the American culture that regions with lesser #GunControl have fewer crime rates. Notice how the shooting maniac in LA was apprehended so quickly? If it was the UK and we had Islamic terrorists like that on the street, the whole street would be closed and it would take us all night to catch mere knife wielders. If we all had free right to bare arms in the UK, im afraid that our British culture couldn’t handle it. Places in London for example with high acid crime rates would become a battlefield for EVIL. British people in general tend to fundamentally value communication, capitalism and conducts of being a gentleman or lady; all as a culture far more than the commands, confusions and compromises fundamental values of the average American.

Not all this is bad. They are “just right” for both individual different cultures all in my very own personal opinions. Now I could explain all my “c’s” listed above but man’s too lazy 😜😏😇

Now lest I get accused for being an “unfeeling” human being because I Lee saying “feelings are OK and facts don’t care about your feelings”. As true as that is, my heart still goes out to the people shot in America in LA. Will I allow my “feelings” to cloud the facts/ statistics? No

Americans need to spread better moral virtues especially via religion and stop resorting to personal just-so commands which lead to the ironic confusion of disunity in a United States that compromises it founding fundamental Christian values of love and prayer.

#RestHard #MyOpinion #WhatDoYouThink?

View on Path

Socialism is the idea that we all share everything. It is the free-giving of resources in a certain social contract structure “just because” you belong.

Socialism without dictatorship (and sometimes tyranny) from either an autonomous or heteronomous leadership is #practically useless because if “everybody” owned and shared “everything” while “everyone” was the leader/ dictator, then there will be conflict of interests which leads to coup d’états or civil wars that eventually destroy socialism; hence, this should be considered if socialism should avoid destroying itself.

By this, Socialism works in places like family homes where the parents lead the children; in charitable and religious organisations and cults/ gangs/ private companies where the campaign of common (good) virtues are shared by all.

Capitalism is forced altruism to all. Capitalism says, “if I don’t do something nice for you, if I don’t take care of you, if I don’t do you a service of value… and mutually get paid for it at a quality-competitive-level… I’m not gonna eat tonight, I might die.” Capitalism puts your wellbeing on equal terms with my wellbeing irrespective of if I have (close) feelings of emotions for you or not.

When socialism is taken to a national scale … in my opinion, it’s evil. Not everyone in a whole nation has the same shared common virtues/ values. Look at Islamic countries for example ruled by the heteronomous caliphate; these countries record that over 90% of their members are Muslims/ Muhammadens. I’m like “really?” You really want me to believe that almost everyone in Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦 is muslim? Socialism means that the government can command me by force, even at the force of a gun or jail threatening or torture; to offer services to others. Also, look at the socialist ideology of free-rights to housing in South Africa 🇿🇦. Well, statistics tells us that many people practically do not have homes in South Africa. Building contractors and investors don’t want to do quality business in South Africa 🇿🇦 because it’s almost like giving free houses away for the government will force you saying that housing is a free-right, why? Because socialism, when taken to the national level has never worked. Joseph Stalin and all the people he killed even proved it all the more it is. National Socialism is a stupid idea in my opinion.

Now, I criticise Islamic ideology no different than I criticise socialistic ideology and in no way am I slandering the Islamist or the socialist. Ideas are not people. Ideas have facts and people have feelings. Feelings are OK and facts don’t care about your feelings. Also, this is why I believe that if Sweden 🇸🇪 took in refugees based on the mutual social contract of pure capitalism, then rape would not have risen to make Sweden the world’s second rape capital next to South Africa 🇿🇦.

Also, think of it like this, National Socialism is rape but National Capitalism is Consensual sex.

#SayYesToCapitalism #IAmACapitalism #NoToSocialism #RestHard

View on Path

Overnight, a decent Sweden 🇸🇪 became the world’s number 2 capital for rape (next to South Africa 🇿🇦)… why?

Facts = Muslim Immigration
Feelings = Keep silent, close your eyes and ears because you’re still a baby and not matured enough to give the Muslims the respect of calling a spade ♠️ a spade ♠️ and discussing difficult ideologies with them.

There is no logical mutual exclusivity or polarisation between “religion” and “culture – it is well logical that we CAN have logical inclusivity from BOTH “religion” AND “culture”.
This is because there are people who say “it’s a cultural problem and not a religious problem” … as if to indicate some magical exclusion of one to the other.

I personally do not see the logical dichotomy.
I rationalise with the #facts that it is possible that a religion can be influenced by culture and a culture can be influenced by religion. No different do I see the exclusivity between “science” and “music” in what influences a free will human being. It is possible that by understanding “science” you will understand “music” better e.g. Knowing the best frequencies to vibrate the strings of the guitar 🎸. And by understanding music, one can appreciate the aesthetics of science 🔬 from a new dimension. In this context of the cumulative circumstantial causal factors over the responsible freewill of human individuals, many things become mutually inclusive to why the majority immigration of Muslims (not “Asians” as this would be insulting ALL Asians round the world) to Sweden 🇸🇪 is as a result of their Islamic ideology. In my opinion, islam creates the culture because islam claims to be perfect and applicable to all facets of livelihood including, culture.

Now I respect these people because Jesus loves me and died for me while I was still a sinner. Because of my christian ideology, I respect all rapists as human beings that Jesus unconditionally loves and died for. My Heavenly Father loves them, I don’t know why… but I subscribe to HIM. But does this mean that I respect their ideology? No. Jesus didn’t died for an ideology, HE died for people.

There are many Muslims who do not rape other women, modelling and taking their examples from prophet Muhammad (FACT!) … who, in the Islamic ideology must be seen as a pinnacle of morality for raping sex slaves that his “right-hand-possessed”. Ask any muhammaden what “right-hand-possess” means? Or just use your brain and #StudyTheFacts for yourself and see that it means sex slaves acquired who are islamically legally permissible in addition to your legal wife / wives. Good for the Muhammadens that don’t #ActItOut this example from prophet Muhammad. #ThankYou. The problems are those -e.g. In Sweden – who do.

Forgive me to say that I reject the ideology of seeing women as sex objects with whom you can deem a prophet who is to be modelled/ emulated as the best-example for all mankind; who forced many slaves into sex (e.g. Safiyyah and Mariyam). And it is my own opinion, that i respect all #factual indirect rapists who subscribe to the moralness of these Islamic ideologies. I just think you’re wrong and such ideologies are extremely immoral. I think that prophet Muhammad is extremely immoral for possessing sex slaves and asking all of mankind to model his example/ pattern.

If British People cannot look at their muhammaden friends in the eyes, smile with a bit of respect, but still stay anti-fragile, emotionless and factual … and outright call this for the immorality that it is, then I’m afraid that in next 10 years or less, Great Britain will become another Sweden 🇸🇪 and evil Shariah Ław would have completely creeped into our hearts and the hearts of our children 👶🏽.

What caused World War 1? People refusing to openly discuss difficult subjects.
What caused World War 2? People refusing to openly discuss difficult subjects.
What is going to cause World War 3? People still confusing facts with feelings and refusing to discuss difficult subjects with gentleness and respect and amicably agreeing-to-disagree.

PRAYER: Lord Jesus, save us from the irrationality of conflating ideologies with people, facts with feelings and disrespectful privatisation and ignorance of opinions from respectfully discussing difficult subjects like matured individuals in Jesus’ name. Amen 🙏🏽

View on Path



Spirit out of mans body

Figure 1: Incorporeal Part of a Man

To recall the big picture, we’ve been looking at the attributes of Elohim. We’ve discussed the (1) infinite attributes of Elohim, and then we began to discuss the (2) personal attributes of Elohim. The first of those that we’ve been looking at most recently is Elohim’s incorporeality, that is to say, Elohim’s being a spiritual, immaterial being rather than a physical, extended being. We argued that Elohim is best understood as an infinite unembodied mind and that we as finite minds are created in his image even though we are embodied in this physical world.


I want to close this section by drawing out three applications from God’s incorporeality.


That which is ultimate is not material in nature. The ultimate reality is spiritual in nature, not material. That is to say, persons are the locus of value whether these be the divine persons of the Trinity or human persons created in Elohim’s image. Persons are the locus of value. Therefore, one single person is worth more than all of the material universe combined. Think of that. That means that you as an individual person are worth more than the entire material universe in Elohim’s economy. Things have value only insofar as they serve the purposes of persons; only insofar as they are useful to persons. Therefore as St. Augustine said we should love people and use things, not vice versa. Of course, the two great commandments that Jesus reiterated point to this. The first of these is to love the Lord our God with all our strength, soul, heart, and mind. Second, to love our neighbour as ourselves. These two great commandments capture what is of ultimate value in the universe – namely, persons.


We should have a spiritual focus in our lives and not a material focus. Since the greatest and most important realities in life are immaterial or spiritual, that ought to be our focus. Look at what Jesus says in Matthew 6:19-21, the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus says,

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

So many of us, I think, are preoccupied with amassing material wealth and material goods – a fine house, a big car, fancy clothes – and yet, in the end, these are trivialities compared to the spiritual concerns that we ought to have. I remember a remark by the author C. P. Snow that the most horrible thing that could happen would not be worldwide famine. He said the most horrible thing that could be happening would be worldwide famine and we in the West would sit and watch it on our televisions. It is that disproportion between the incredible wealth that we have here and the poverty of so many people in the world that I think ought to move us to be concerned about their lot. Now this is not a “Business Class” and when the time of “Business” comes, then we shall talk about it next time. The point here is, We ought to not hoarding up material things for ourselves; we ought to be thinking about how we can use our wealth and our material goods for the mutual-benefit of others and for the advancement of God’s Kingdom in this world.


Our most important needs are spiritual, not physical. Our most important needs are not the needs of our bodies but the needs of our souls. Therefore we need to attend closely to these.

Look at what Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:7b-8. Paul says,

discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness; for bodily discipline is only of little profit, but godliness is profitable for all things, since it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.

Bodily training or exercise is useful for this life, but this life is short and transitory. Godliness is valuable not only for this life but also for eternal life, everlasting life, and is therefore something that we should exercise ourselves to develop.

Similarly, over in 1 Corinthians 9:25 Paul writes,

“Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wealth, but we an imperishable.”

Paul thinks of the Olympic athletes who train so rigorously for the sports in which they compete. They do it for just a perishable crown – an olive garland in those days. But Paul says we are striving for an imperishable crown of righteousness that the Lord will give us on that day when we go to be with him. Think of how much time we lavish on our bodies. Exercising, working out, women making up their faces, getting your hair done, the clothes that we wear, how we look. And yet how much time and effort and concern do we lavish upon the care of our souls? Our bodies beautiful and pampered but our souls undernourished, flabby, and ugly. Our most important needs, I think we need to be reminded, are spiritual and not physical. Therefore we need, as Paul says, to train ourselves like an athlete in developing godliness in our lives. This will carry over for the life to come.

So I think there is an important application of this attribute of Elohim’s incorporeality because it shows us that the ultimate things in life, the most important things in life, are spiritual and not material.



The issue surrounding “personhood” is so important. For example, we see this topic resounding in the Political Abortion Debate happening. As Christians, our theological doctrines do not respect the ideology of “pro-choice”; we subscribe to being “pro-life”. What does it actually mean to be a PERSON? Someone said that “you need the breath of life” from God; which other animals and trees may or may not have.

Question: Genesis 6:17 implies that every living creatures has the breath of life in it. Are all living things, therefore “persons” just because they have the breath of life in them? What make’s their breath of life different from the breath of life of we humans?

As a spirit, as self-conscious mind, Elohim possesses all of the cumulative attributes of personhood to an infinite degree. He cumulatively possesses intellectual attributes, volitional attributes, and emotional attributes. So we want to turn now to a discussion of those. By emphasising “cumulative”, I resort to saying that possessing one of these attributes on its own is not convincing to imply personhood. For example, computers such as artificial intelligence have intellectual attributes but they are not persons. Automotive Vehicles have volition attributes but they are not persons. Lastly, animals have emotional attributes but not many of us will say that they are persons. In fact, animals could have all these attributes and we would not say they are persons. This means that some more secret ingredients are still missing. What could they be? I will continue to tease the answer out little by little until we get there.


First, Elohim’s intellectual attributes can be described under the heading of his omniscience. Omniscience, from the Latin, means literally all-knowledge. Omniscience – all-knowledge.


Let’s look at the scriptural data with respect to Elohim’s omniscience. Before looking at specific facets of it, I want to simply read Psalm 139:1-6 because this is such a wonderful summary of the omniscience of Elohim.

O Lord, You have searched me and known me.
You know when I sit down and when I rise up;
You understand my thought from afar.
You scrutinize my path and my lying down,
And are intimately acquainted with all my ways.
Even before there is a word on my tongue,
Behold, O Lord, You know it all.
You have enclosed me behind and before,
And laid Your hand upon me.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
It is too high, I cannot attain to it.

Here the psalmist extols Elohim for HIS infinite knowledge of all things and especially Elohim’s intimate knowledge of the psalmist himself. In fact, when we look more closely at what the Scripture has to teach about Elohim’s omniscience, we find that Elohim does indeed know all things. First of all, the Scriptures indicate that Elohim knows everything that happens. He knows everything that is going on in the universe. Let’s look at some Scriptures together.

Job 28:24

“For He looks to the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens.”

Here Elohim is described as looking down from heaven and seeing everything that transpires upon the face of the Earth. Wow! Thst is amazing. Similarly, two chapters later in Job 31:4, Job asks,

“Does He not see my ways and number all my steps?”

Of course, the answer is yes. This is the Answer that frightens many people especially Atheists like Dr Richard Dawkins who liken’s Elohim to a 1984 Big Brother Intellectual Bully. Elohim knows every step that Job might take. THEY numbers all his steps and knows all his ways. Then over in Job 34:21-23,

For His eyes are upon the ways of a man,
And He sees all his steps.
There is no darkness or deep shadow
Where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves.
For He does not need to consider a man further,
That he should go before God in judgment.

So Elohim knows all things as HE looks down from heaven and sees all things that transpire on the Earth.

Proverbs 15:3 emphasizes this same truth:

“The eyes of the Lord are in every place,
Watching the evil and the good.”

Question: How do you reconcile Proverbs 15:3 with Habakkuk 1:13 that says that Elohim’s eyes cannot behold iniquity?

My Answer: The word “behold” must be understood in light of the context of its original language. In Habakkuk 1:13 the Hebrew word is “raah” (pronounced: raw-aw’) which means in this context: “look upon = endure to see, with accusative of thing” is used in the perfect tense. Which means what? It means that Elohim cannot literally/ directly see evil. IN Proverbs 15:3 the Hebrew word used is “tsaphah” (pronounced: tsaw-faw’) which means in this context: look out or about, spy keep watch. This is used in the imperfect tense. This is the same word used in Genesis 31:49 that keep watch over a covenant or in Proverbs 31:27 that she keeps watch over the affairs of her household. Now, can you literally/ directly see a covenant or affairs? no. These are things you are conscious of. You cannot literally/ directly see my speech as I am speaking to you now, but you are keeping watch of my speech, my good grammatical as you read this. This is like somebody who knows that the sun is shining outside but cannot look directly at the sunlight. Where Elohim cannot see you, there is resounding loneliness there. That is why Elohim, who knew where Adam was physically, still had to ask “Where are you?” Because spiritually, Elohim cannot even tolerate to directly see the iniquity that you may be in. So, even though Elohim is omnipresent there are places that Elohim is not present in and you can hide from Elohim if you hide in iniquity. This is why Adam could “hide” from Elohim whom Adam was not ignorant of the fact of HIS Omnipresence.

Question: How can Elohim be Omnipresent and still not present in sin? The Bible describes sin as a place you know? How can Elohim be Omniscient/ all-knowledgeable and still, not knowledgeable about sin?

Answer: The Answer to this Question stems from a Christian Theology subject called “Perfect Being Theology” and we will deal with this in more depth in the future. It says that a Perfect Being cannot be perfect and imperfect in the same sense. This means that perfect beings cannot exist on a lower order perfection but must exist on a higher level of perfection where they are associated with “greater making properties (GMP)” not “lesser making properties (LMP)”. GMP lead to more and more of the same thing while LMP leads to less and less of the same thing until it becomes nothing. Elohim cannot engage with “something” and “nothing” in the same sense, that would be a logical contradiction. Elohim cannot be engaging with some-place and no-place in the same sense, that would be a logical contradiction. This means that Elohim sees “sin” as an LMP that destroys its host into nothing or no place. Therefore, Elohim cannot be something or somewhere and not be nothing or nowhere respectfully in the same sense, that would be a logical contradiction. This is why it is possible for Elohim to be Omnipresent and Omniscient and yet, still not present in sin or knowledgeable about sin because sin leads to nowhere and nothing.

In the New Testament Jesus similarly taught. Matthew 10:29-31 says,

Are not two sparrows sold for a cent? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So do not fear; you are more valuable than many sparrows.

Here Jesus says that your Father knows even the very hairs of our head and that even the little sparrow that falls to the ground does not do so without Elohim’s knowledge. So literally everything that happens in the universe is known by God.

Secondly, not only does Elohim see and know everything that happens in the world, but THEY also knows the secret thoughts of each individual. In other words, Elohim literally reads your mind. He knows what you are thinking. 1 Chronicles 28:9 speaks of this truth. This is David’s charge to Solomon. David says,

As for you, my son Solomon, know the God of your father, and serve Him with a whole heart and a willing mind; for the Lord searches all hearts, and understands every intent of the thoughts. If you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will reject you forever.

Elohim searches all hearts and understands the intent of every thought. The heart in Hebrew terminology was conceived to be the centre of the human personality – the very essence of a human person. Over and over again the Old Testament describes the hearts of men as open to God like a book to be read by him. So for example in Psalm 44:21 it says the LORD “knows the secrets of the heart.” Remember, this makes sinners like Atheists very scared but this makes saved-sinners like you and I very comforted that the one who sees all that I am, all my imperfections, still loves me unconditionally. Similarly in Jeremiah 17:9-10 the prophet says,

The heart is more deceitful than all else
And is desperately sick;
Who can understand it?
I, the Lord, search the heart,
I test the mind,
Even to give to each man according to his ways,
According to the results of his deeds.

So Elohim knows the heart of every person and reads his/her thoughts.

In the New Testament, we find this same truth reiterated in a very graphic manner in Hebrews 4:13. The writer says,

“And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.”

So there is no secret thought, no inner recess of our minds, no hidden corner of our hearts that isn’t open and transparent to Elohim. THEY not only knows what is happening in the universe but THEY knows the very secret thoughts of every individual.

Thirdly, even more startling still, the Scriptures affirm that Elohim knows the future. THEY knows what has not yet happened but will happen. Go back to Psalm 139 that we were looking at a moment ago. Psalm 139:4, 14b-16. There THEY says,

Even before there is a word on my tongue, Behold, O Lord, You know it all.
. . .
Wonderful are Your works,
And my soul knows it very well.
My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth;
Your eyes have seen my unformed substance;
And in Your book were all written
The days that were ordained for me,
When as yet there was not one of them.

Here the psalmist says even before he thinks a thought or says a word, Elohim already knows it in advance and in fact while he was still being formed in his mother’s womb as an embryo or a fetus Elohim knew and counted all of the days that the psalmist would live from his birth until his death when as yet there was none of them. Let us face the truth! Elohim knows who’s going to heaven and who’s going to hell. Many of us have asked ourselves, “how does HE know that?”. And the key to that question is “how” in “how does HE know that?”. We will come to this in the future.

Isaiah also has a more strong emphasis upon Elohim’s foreknowledge of the future. In fact, for Isaiah, the characteristic earmark of the true God in contrast to the pagan false gods of Israel’s neighbours was God’s foreknowledge of the future. Look at Isaiah 41:21-24,

“Present your case,” the Lord says.
“Bring forward your strong arguments,”
The King of Jacob says.
Let them bring forth and declare to us what is going to take place;
As for the former events, declare what they were,
That we may consider them and know their outcome.
Or announce to us what is coming;
Declare the things that are going to come afterward,
That we may know that you are gods;
Indeed, do good or evil, that we may anxiously look about us and fear together.
Behold, you are of no account,
And your work amounts to nothing;
He who chooses you is an abomination.

Here Isaiah flings in the teeth of these pagan deities the challenge to tell us what is going to happen. Tell us what the future is so that we might know that you are truly God. And he says they are nothing – these idols are an abomination, they can tell us nothing.

Also Isaiah 46:10, Isaiah says Elohim, Yahweh, the true God,

Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things which have not been done,
Saying, ‘My purpose will be established,
And I will accomplish all My good pleasure.’

So in contrast to the idols and the pagan deities of Israel’s neighbours, Yahweh the true God was known by HIS foreknowledge of the future. So Elohim knows the future.

Finally, number four, the Scripture also affirms that Elohim cannot learn anything – THEY already knows everything and therefore it is impossible for Elohim to learn anything.

Question: If Elohim cannot learn anything, then why does Hebrews 5:8 say that Jesus, who is also Elohim, learned obedience through suffering? Didn’t Elohim know obedience through suffering in principle? Why does HE have to learn it on earth?

My Answer: For a Perfect Being like Elohim, the principle of suffering and subordination must exist eternally in THEY as THEY is the cause of all reality. Whatever is in the cause, must show or be represented in at least 1 dimension in the effect. Do you understand this? From a good tree/ cause, comes a good fruit/ effect. There are many commentaries that do not answer this question or try to answer the question in a confusing way. They say that Jesus learned obedience practically or experientially. However, doesn’t the principle of practical/ experiential obedience already exist in Elohim eternally? Yes, it does. Jesus did not have to learn obedience in that way. Let us remember why Jesus suffered. 1 Peter 3:18 says that Jesus suffered for sins that one time. We have already established that a Perfect Being such as Elohim, cannot imbibe in HIS Eternal Nature, the principle of sin, if not, THEY will not exist. THEY will be the author/ source/ cause of sin. THEY is not. So Jesus has never ever been conversant to with the principle of “obedience suffering by SIN”. This is how he learned obedience according to a good exegesis of this passage.

Let’s move on. Romans 11:33-36. Here Paul proclaims,

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

So there is no one who can teach Elohim anything because now, HE perfectly knows what it means and feels like to suffer obedience ‘as if’ HE was a sinner – and no man taught HIM that, HE learnt it all by HIMSELF. There is no one who is HIS counsellor for Elohim knows all things that are things and that lead to more things – Greater Making Properties.

Similarly, in Job 21:22 we read,

“Can anyone teach God knowledge, In that He judges those on high?”

The question is merely rhetorical. No one can teach Elohim knowledge. Indeed in Job 37:16 Elohim is declared perfect in knowledge.

Psalm 147:5 sums it up.

“Great is our Lord and abundant in strength; His understanding is infinite.”

That comprises it all, that says it all. Elohim’s understanding is infinite. THEY is infinite; THEY is perfect in knowledge.


That is the scriptural data concerning divine omniscience. What we want to do now is begin a systematic summary of this attribute to try to understand this scriptural data.

Omniscience is usually understood in terms of truth. For any true statement or proposition, Elohim knows and believes that proposition. THEY does not believe any false proposition. In other words, Elohim knows only and all true propositions. By knowing only and all true propositions, Elohim thereby knows the past, the present, and the future completely. Even before the creation of the world, Elohim foreknew the motion of every single electron in the history of the universe. THEY knew your very thoughts even before you think them. And specifically, THEY even knows our free choices before we make them. So Elohim’s omniscience entails that Elohim knows only and all truths and believes no falsehoods.

This is remarkable as it is. It would already require an infinite mind to be omniscient in that way. But even omniscience does not exhaust the scope and excellence of Elohim’s knowledge. For philosophers have noted that in addition to propositional knowledge (that is to say, knowledge of true propositions), there also seems to be a sort of non-propositional knowledge. Proposition knowledge is knowledge of all true propositions. But there is a sort of non-propositional knowledge as well in addition to propositional knowledge. Let me illustrate. Suppose I am out exploring in the jungle this week and a ferocious animal chases me up and I hide from it in a tree. Suppose I yell to a friend, “Go tell my family that I’ve been treed by a ferocious animal!” Now, what does my friend go and repeat to my family? Does he run breathlessly up to my family and say, “Help, I’ve been treed by a ferocious animal?” No! He runs up and says, “Help, Ernest Adewoyin has been treed by a ferocious animal!” In other words, we use different words to express the same proposition. When I express that proposition I say “Tell my family I’ve been treed by a ferocious animal.” But when my friend says it, he says, “Ernest Adewoyin has been treed by a ferocious animal.” We have the same propositional knowledge and yet expressed in a different way. He uses different words to express the same proposition that I do. Yet the knowledge that we have is not the same. For if I believe I’ve been treed by a ferocious animal then my reaction to that knowledge will be to hang on for dear life. But my friend in response to his knowledge that Ernest Adewoyin has been treed by a ferocious animal doesn’t react in that way. He doesn’t hang on for dear life. Rather he runs for help. So although we have the same propositional knowledge here, namely that Ernest Adewoyin has been treed by a ferocious animal, we have a different sort of non-propositional or self-knowledge in this case.

This self-knowledge is essential to timely action. For example, it is not enough for me to believe that Ernest Adewoyin is hungry in order for me to be motivated to go get something to eat. For suppose that I have been in an automobile accident and lying in the hospital suffering from temporary amnesia and I don’t know who I am. If somebody came up to me and said, “Ernest Adewoyin is hungry” well that knowledge wouldn’t do anything to motivate me to eat because I don’t know that I am Ernest Adewoyin. What I need in addition to the knowledge that Ernest Adewoyin is hungry is the self-knowledge “I am hungry.” Thus, even if somebody or even something (say, some great super-computer) had all the propositional knowledge in the universe but lacked this self-knowledge it could still never decide to take any timely action. It would never know when it should act. So what that means is that Elohim, your Father, is more than omniscient. THEY not only possesses all propositional knowledge but THEY also possesses THEIR appropriate self-knowledge. THEY knows “I am the creator of the universe,” “I have sent my Son into the world,” “I am the second person of the Trinity incarnate in the flesh for the salvation of mankind,” “I am the Holy Spirit come here to help and comfort you” and so forth.

But even still, the excellence of Elohim’s knowledge is not yet exhausted. For what is also important here is not just the content of one’s knowledge even if one has all propositional knowledge and appropriate self-knowledge as well, what is also important here is the way in which one acquires one’s knowledge. Suppose that there were two beings who each had the appropriate self-knowledge as well as all of the propositional knowledge in the universe. But suppose that the second being only acquired his knowledge because the first being told him everything that the first being just knew innately. Clearly I think we would agree the second being who needed to be instructed and told everything is not as intellectually excellent or as great as the first being. So Elohim as one being, even if there was another omniscient being who knows like Elohim knows everything – and yet had to be taught everything, since Elohim doesn’t have to learn anything from anyone but simply knows all truth innately, must be maximally excellent intellectually.

1 Corinthians 13:12 – says that we shall be omniscient one day. In fact, it is Jesus prayer that Eternal life is an odyssey for us to get to know God completely (John 17:3). But because we had to be taught our omniscience does not mean that we are greater or equal to Elohim. Elohim’s greatness is without competition or rivalry.

This, I find, to be an absolutely stunning conclusion. Usually, people think of Elohim’s omniscience as one of the superlative attributes of Elohim. But what our logical analysis discloses is that Elohim’s intellectual capacities and THEIR greatness actually even outstrips omniscience. This is how great Elohim is. THEY has not only all propositional knowledge, THEY has appropriate self-knowledge, and THEY never acquires this knowledge by learning it from anyone else but simply knows innately only and all true facts about the world. This is the greatness of Elohim’s intellectual capacity. And trust me, many Atheists and sinners and some baby Christians are very afraid of this. We grown up Christians should rejoice. Why?

I think that with that we will close our lesson so far. Next time we meet together I want to timely talk about two problems which are posed by Elohim’s complete and infinite knowledge; namely, how is Elohim’s knowledge of our free choices compatible with our freedom. If Elohim knows everything that you are going to do in advance, and Elohim cannot be mistaken, THEY cannot err, then how is it that when the time arrives you are really free to do anything other than what Elohim foreknows? How is Elohim’s foreknowledge compatible with human freedom? Secondly, I want to discuss Elohim’s hypothetical knowledge. Does God know what would have happened if the Nazi won the war? Does THEY know what would have happened if you were to have married someone else instead of your spouse or if you had chosen never to marry? Does Elohim have this kind of hypothetical knowledge and if so what are the implications of that kind of knowledge for Elohim’s providence. These are some of the problems that we will look at next time. It will also open our eyes to the hidden angry logical and rational questions such as “If Elohim knew Adam and Eve would sin or that some people would be going to hell, then why doesn’t THEY do something about it to stop it?” These are tough-tough questions that we, as intellectual Christians, we are not shying away from it. We will face it boldly and truthfully.

More Grace to us as we continue to learn by the help of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ Name. Amen


A Complete Development from Dr William Lane Craig.



PRAYER: Daddy-God, we come before YOUR presence today. We just want to say thank you so much for all the lessons, knowledge and development of last academic year Sunday School, I pray that as YOU have been in the past, so shall YOU also be to us in the future in Jesus’ Name. Help us in this our meeting and let it all be glorious for us right now and forevermore in YOUR Name we pray. Amen

We want to thank the Lord Jesus for all that HE has done for us through out the last Sunday school year. Every distinguished teacher, for all your hard work and efforts to adding to Sunday school and the growth of every single person here, God bless you all in Jesus’ name.

It is time for us now to move on to the next agenda for our meeting today. I shall be taking the minute-of-meeting as well as presenting this to us to rile us into quality and intellectual discussions into improving the Sunday School Department. I shall be in all your care – thank you very much. There are 5 Reviews that I would personally like to bring to our attention so that we can talk about it and figure much better ways to improve on Sunday School in this academic year 2017/2018.

  1. Review on how to enforce the workbook
  2. Review on presentation styles and constructive criticisms
  3. Review on Attendance follow-up
  4. Review on Class Segregation between Children and Adults
  5. Review on Time Management during Sunday School

1. Review on how to enforce the workbook

Last Sunday, Mr Odeditan used his money to pay cash (via me) for his Sunday School manual for himself and his family. Mr Odeditan is representative of every other person too who would be buying Sunday School Manuals plus the workbooks in this church. But before we go on, here is an important question

Question: What do you think of buying and selling during church service? As Sunday School teachers, we are very conversant with the fact that Jesus made a whip and sent all the traders out of HIS Father’s house because Zeal for God consumed HIM. In this “modern-day church” at RCCGPAL, should we be able to sell, pens, papers, Sunday School Manuals etc … during church service? Or should we give materials on lease only to be paid-in-full for after church service? What does the Pastor have to say about this?

Think about how everyone is going to feel when they find out that the Sunday School workbook is useless; something extra-paid on top but not exploited at all. This would make them feel like we are taking advantage of their money and not really using their investment into great use. I would personally not like to be part of such a church that does that. This is why I believe that it is important that we consider enforcing the workbook. Here are some ways I have proposed that we enforce the workbook.

  • tell the church to hand in their Sunday school workbook before service
  • encourage others to buy their own workbook if they have not already
  • congratulate those who have done well and gotten high marks after marking it after service either during the announcement or at the end of Sunday school

Question: Which one do you think is better. Congratulate high marks at the end of a Sunday school session or during announcements?

  • encourage those who have not been able to do their workbook yet to do it
  • give prizes and certificates during the quarterly review


2. Review on presentation styles and constructive criticisms

Now let me bring up to presentation style and constructive criticisms. The reason I have joined up both of them is that as Sunday School teachers, this is all that we do; we present. Additionally, we require improving better and better by getting feedback as constructive criticisms whenever we present. This is to see constructive criticism, not as an African-Style disrespect to those of higher authority … but to see constructive criticism as a test from God of our innate desire to learn, to be students. If there is nobody in the Sunday School department that is not ready to learn and receive constructive criticism, we politely ask you to find one way or the other to exempt yourself from being a teacher in this church as you maybe lacking a teachable-spirit. You can also ask for help and counselling and we are here for each other to “humbly” make ourselves “humble”.

This is what I am proposing this year; it is not going to be feasible or sustainable to be writing criticisms on the WhatsApp group … I recommend that we do this informally by talking to ourselves face-to-face, its SIMPLE. We need to meet also, once a month to educate ourselves on our presentation styles. Most of the time, we engage using just speaking … and there are videos, newspapers, books etc that we can present to the class and use those times as an avenue to make the Church Library flourish. What is the point of having a (Sunday) School without a (Sunday) library?


3. Review on Attendance follow-up

We have been highly successful with how we faithfully use our Sunday School Attendance book. Does everyone know how we use it? Here is a brief explanation on how we use it:

If members are punctual to Church, they get two bars that look like this /\, which equates to 3 marks. If they arrive late at Sunday School by the time the first Outline is finished, they get one bar that looks like this /, which equates to 2 marks. They are absent for Sunday School or show up after Sunday School is over, that’s a dash that looks like this -, which equates to 0 marks. If they hand in their workbooks at any time, and by “anytime”, I mean “anytime”, then we are to trace the attendance to that date and award them one bar that looks like this |, which equates to 1 mark. So someone that is early and hands in their workbook could be getting this symbol /|\ which would be 4 marks in total. This will revolutionalise Sunday school attendance in the coming academic year.

However, this topic is not about Sunday School Attendance, but about how we ought to follow up and push our students into success as the highly effective, good and hardworking teachers that we are. This means walking to our Students and conversing with them that we want to see them early next time. An example conversation could be:

“Sir/ Miss, how are you? You look so blessed today. I noticed that you did not come in today on time” or “I noticed that you did not come last week” or “for the last few weeks” … you are a great student, let me just encourage you to continue working hard and putting in more effort to come in earlier next time”

Activity: Any comments on how this conversation can better take place?

By doing this, I believe that our Students will see that we care for them and we always want to see the best come out from them. Plus they will see that we really want to do a great, quality job, not for them… but for Jesus.


4. Review on Class Segregation between Children and Adults

We all know that if the devil wants to destroy our future, all that the devil has to do is to kill our seed. Our seeds are our Children. As teachers, we are imparters. This is what we do, we impart. More and More, we do our best to make other people like Jesus. The Children are not like the adults. They need a scoring system. We need capital to be able to start this. They need a whiteboard to write on. They need their own projector so that they can watch proper christian children’s programmes. They need a portfolio, pen, paper to draw. They need materials.

However, how are we going to convince the parents to buy and invest these materials into the children? This means that we need to be serious about our children no matter the size of the grow-ups in Church. The Children’s Department needs a very comprehensive, school-like, system that can keep them.


5. Review on Time Management during Sunday School

The bible says, not me, but the bible, in James 3:1 NLT that

“Dear Brothers and Sisters, ot many of you should become teachers in the church, for we who teach will be judged more strictly.”

So, my dear honourable fellow teachers, I do not want to be rude or disrespectful to you and we need a better method on time strictness as teachers. I am surprised that the pastor has not disciplined us. We are teachers, we are to be judged more strictly. What I personally appreciate is the continual effort that we show as we stride towards time-keeping. We know that not all the points can be said in a short time. So what can we do about that? We can tell the students that time is not on our side and that they can talk to you after church. Secondly, I am planning to create a vlog/ podcast via lovelogo-ministries where we can all meet and talk in full length about the Sunday school lesson so that in the future we can refer our students there. <—don’t say this

Lastly, I want to draw our attention to the fact that people tend to talk too much sometimes. To combat this, I want to propose that you have the right as a teacher to cut off your student and carry on with your class. No disrespect to them. This is your time they’re using, not their time. Be kind to them and say, “…thank you for that, I will have to cut you short…” In that case, someone else should hold the mic and not the person speaking so that they do not take the mic hostage etc. Nobody will do that because this is a church of love and peace but proceedures is paramount.

Thoughts on the Burka/ Hijab in light of General Western Moral Values

I have been thinking about the #BarkaBan or #HijabBan and the issues of the debate happening around that. I came to find out a story of a Muslim woman in America who sued a Policeman for stopping her on the road and asking to see her details. She went on a radio show only to slur the policeman all the more. This was a woman and a mother of 4 (I believe). She used the "racist" rhetoric tactics, "white supremacist" rhetoric tactic etc on the policeman while verbally insulting the American Policeman. How do we know this? You see, in court, she accused the policeman of trying to forcibly remove her Hijab when demanding to see her face. He didn't. We know this because of the video footage from the policeman's car showed the video footage of what actually happened. He was respectful and clam to her all the way through out her continuous perpetual angry insults.

She was sent to jail from court for telling lies and trying to send another policeman to jail. She even tried saying that she was not the one in the video when she saw she was loosing the case – trying the Double Body Stunt Tactic. The lawyer-advocate (also a Muslim – which means nothing, but I just felt like saying it – take my word for it), appealed that she be let free for the sake of her little 4 children. The reporter asked, "what about the sake of the Policeman?" and presumably his career, life and children? The lawyer-advocate replied and I paraphrase "she's a mother".

Lol … so much for gender equality of opportunities 😂😂😂 … that's not s logical answer. Wanting us to have mercy on the woman based on our heart-strings that she's female but engage our non-heart – i.e., Logical Brain Drums – for the policeman 👮🏽 just because he's a Father or man 😂😂😂 …

This news was such a heavy blow to the muslim community in America that the Fatwa was made by the general muslim leaders that if a person of authority asks you to reveal your face for security reasons, do it.

Wow! Really? All it took was for a religion to give a new fatwa for Muslim women to be compliant? So much for separation of church-and-state… out the window.

Coming over to the British Community. I agree. I listened to some of Nigel Farage's argument for the Burka/ Hijab and I agree with him. While Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan advocates like the lawyer above, to play on British People's heart-strings in the harp of British tolerance, multiculturalism and diversity of this Great-Great Nation; Nigel Farage seems to really appeal for coherent equality of treatments in our moral law commands. He asks, "Why is it that I cannot walk into a Bank with a Balaclava without being treated the same way as a Muslim woman in a Burka in the same bank?"; "Why is it that in common shopping places like Tesco, guys wearing an ordinary hood or biker's helmet are commanded to take them off, thereby treating them differently than women in Burka. I read the story of a girl in a university lecture who refused to remove her hat 🎩 unless the another girl in the same lecture room was equally told to remove her Hijab. No, I am not discriminating against Muslims. Don't be irrational. Listen, I am discriminating against an unfair double standard in the way we give moral preference to certain people when we are supposed to equal as human beings under God!

Sadiq Khan and his favour of Multiculturalism is Segway to Identity Politics or Social Politics where the laws for a certain "identity of people" or "social sects" or people or "culture" of people are treated differently.

I would hate to not just see Shariah Ław institutionalised in our Politics but to also never ever see any sympathy for Shariah Ław institutionalised in our hearts. Only the foundation of the Judeo-Christian values makes Britain 🇬🇧 Great. No other shariah-value has made any country this great. Let us go bad to equality for all under God.

Now what should happen to make equality really equality. These are my opinions and I hope to hear what you too may have to say.

1.) Either banks or shops like Tescos or other business organisations start allowing people in hoodies/ biker's helmet/ Balaclavas the way they want to equally allow the Burka


2.) these organisations ban the burkas/ Hijab said the equally same way they ban hoodies or balaclavas.

It's your choice.

Personally, I'm not an advocate of telling people what to wear. I just want the way we tell people what to wear to be equal for all – that, I believe, is the most human thing to do. Remember, I'm not Baning the use of biker's helmets on he streets, neither am I not banning the use of balaclavas in your house for your own fancy-practices … I hope you also see that this is the same way I don't want to ban the burka under a law of equality. Enjoy your Burka under the territory of your own authorities until a fair-authority comes along and tells you the policies of its own territories … when that time comes, obey the American Muslim Fatwa and take off your Burka and Show your face. Enjoy your Shariah Controlled zones in your mosques and homes … we respect that … it's the legal territory of your authority. I will always condemn any organisation that will treat the culture of the Burka differently while treating the culture of the hoodie, biker's helmet and balaclava differently.

View on Path



, , , , ,

Figure 1: Meaning of incorporeality among pigeons lol

So many people that I have talked to have no problem with the idea of ELOHIM as infinite. They could logically allow that, and then draw up heretical doctrines/ conclusions that Elohim is logically pantheistic or strongly panentheistic and then extrude from such conclusions/ assumptions into believing that on a moral realm that Elohim is evil since HE is Infinitely Omnipresent and being APC – Active, Present and Conscious at every space in time – this they do heretically because they confuse that the infinity of Elohim does not leave room for distinction between the Creator and the Creature. They fail to see that IT IS BECAUSE that God is Infinite that distinction CAN occur between the creator and the creature. We have solved all these heresies when we spoke in our last discussion how we, as Christians, can logically defend Elohim. We are not like Islamic Muhammadans who when we face are faced with distressing theological contemplations, we say like Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari “Bilakiv … meaning, “WE DON’T KNOW!” and neither do we obey a Quran that says that we should not ask distressing questions because people who tend to ask such distressing intellectual questions tend to leave the Islamic faith 🤣 (Surah 5:101-102). Such a very weak and vulnerable and insecure faith/ ideology 🤣🤣🤣

Sadly, I am grieved to see that people, especially some Atheists and some New Age Spiritualists are vehemently against the logical compatibility of personhood and infinity. For these kinds of people, God (even generalising it to the Christian God = Elohim) is more logically compatible with being some sort force or ether or “the All” or some ultimate reality but HE is not a personal being. I think that this alleged incompatibility is quite logically unjustified especially when talking about Elohim. First and foremost, according to Christian Theology, Elohim possesses all of the attributes of personhood that we do such as

  • intellect
  • emotions
  • will

[Comment Below: What other personal attributes does Elohim possess that is not listed above?]

However, I believe that Elohim has all these attributes to an infinite degree. So, in a sense, these attributes are infinite in Elohim but nevertheless, they are personal in this special sense that they are shared attributes with us human beings because we are also created by Elohim in Elohim’s Image. So you see why some atheists and some new age people cannot wrap their minds around this? They wonder and ponder how intellect, emotions and will can be infinite. For example, what does it mean to have an infinite emotion? This, by God’s Grace, I hope to answer in this lesson. We are persons/ personal. You will remember that gap on the first outline where I showed how where Elohim is personal, humans are also personal because we are created in the image of Elohim, and there is a great chasm between us and the rest of creation which is not personal because other creatures are not made in the Elohim’s image according to Christian Theology.

[Comment Below: (1) How would you define “personal” or “person”? (2) Would you agree that animals demonstrate “personhood” too or do you believe that they are not persons?

Figure 2: Christian Theological Doctrine of Defining Elohim
We believe that man is a person because Elohim is personal. This is what we logically believe enables us to relate to Elohim in a family-manner. Let’s now look at Elohim’s attributes which are HIS in virtue of HIS being essentially an infinite person.


The first of these attributes is incorporeality or another way of saying this would be HIS bodilessness. Let me present you first with some scriptural data concerning Elohim’s incorporeality.


Elohim is not corporeal – HE is incorporeal. John 4:24

“God is spirit, and those who worship HIM must worship in spirit and truth.”

Elohim is not of the order of material reality. THEY is not a physical being. HE is Spirit. HE is incorporeal; all to be seen from the perspective of HIS essence.


Elohim is Omnipresent. Here I would just simply refer you back to all of the verses that we looked at when we studied Elohim’s Omnipresence. Remember Psalm 139 talked about 

“Wherever I go, YOU are there O Lord. If I make my bed in Sheol thou art there. If I ascend to the heavens thou art there.”

Elohim is omnipresent. So rather than relook at those verses here I just refer at this point to all of those verses we looked at before that describe Elohim’s omnipresence. THEY is not located in a particular spot as a corporeal being would be. Any being that has a body must be in a specific spatial location. But Elohim isn’t. THEY is omnipresent, and that again shows HIS incorporeality – with regards to HIS Essence, THEY doesn’t have a body.


Thirdly, Elohim is indiscernible to the five senses. 1 Timothy 6:16

“who alone has immortality, and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.” 

Notice there that it says that no man has seen or can see Elohim which again would indicate THEY is not a bodily being because anything that is physical will reflect photons off of it and you could see it. But Elohim is physically invisible. HE is not perceptible by the five senses. All these by virtue of HIS essence.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 1: But Elohim can make HIMSELF visible, such as Elohim making HIMSELF visible to Moses via the burning bush?
I will soon say something about PQ1. It is good to be thinking ahead. For now, I am showing you that by virtue of Elohim’s Essence, THEY isn’t able to be (physically) seen.
Also, open your Bible to 1 Timothy 1:17:

“Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

There it says THEY is invisible. No man can see Elohim in HIS Essence. HE is invisible because THEY is incorporeal.


Fourthly, images of Elohim are forbidden. Look, for example, at Exodus 20:4-5a in the Old Testament that Jesus set us free from, which forbids making any images of Elohim:

You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them. . . .

There, images of Elohim are proscribed – you are not to make any image. Not to be conflated with “don’t only make any idol”. That would be almost self-understood. But don’t make any likeness of anything in heaven above that you should worship, (it is important to emphasise this because you will hear Muhammadans or people of other faiths interject that this is why we should never make an image of God. However, the context is all about WORSHIPPING these images) … including the real God. So not only should there be no images of false gods, there shouldn’t be any images of Yahweh either. There shouldn’t be any images of the true God.

Also turn over to Deuteronomy 4:15b-16:

Since you saw no form on the day that the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female.

Notice there HE is telling them don’t make any kind of image of Elohim. Again, that just emphasises the point that it is not just false Gods that are to be made images of, but don’t make any image of the true God as well. The reason for this probably is any sort of image of Elohim will never approximate to the full glory and majesty and greatness of God. Any finite portrayal of Elohim – a painting, a sculpture, any kind of physical portrayal of Elohim– will involve a lowering, a diminishing of the essential true nature and glory of Elohim. So it will represent an energy less than what God essentially is. Therefore there are to be no images of Elohim. THEY doesn’t have a physical form. This underlines the fact of HIS incorporeality. Elohim doesn’t have a physical form that could be depicted correctly. Also, we could see it in the historical context. You see, Jesus said in Matthew 5:22:

But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

You see, in those days, “RACA” could have been a word even much worse than say the F-Word. However, in that historical context, “Raca” means almost nothing to a native speaker nowadays in the same way that it meant in the days of Jesus. So you and I can bear in our Spirit, under this new dispensation of Grace that we are never to use the F-word, why? Because of the historical context that we find ourselves and how we are allowing the sanctification of Jesus over our lives. Likewise, in the same vein, I believe that Elohim commanded that no graven image of Elohim be made because it was the norm of idol worship in those days to artistically sculpt an image of your god. So Elohim forbade it. Not everybody looking at a picture of Jesus thinks that we should bow down to it and worship – except the Catholics (which we will discuss another time). Heck! Even the Muhammadans will tell you that the Kaaba they bow to is not Allah – they know that. So we can make that distinction. 

I think it is in Isaiah 47 where we see Elohim mocking these idol worshippers for charbroiling food with half of the tree and making a god that they fall down of with the other. This is an excellent satirical passage.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 2: Was there any images used for Elohim in Jewish Culture before Elohim spoke in Isaiah 47 or long time ago in the Jewish Culture?

I cannot find any in my research. I think that right from the time of Abraham, the Father of the Jewish Faith, that Elohim called him out of Idol worship out of Ur. I believe that Abraham left his idols behind. I do not think you will find any kind of physical image portrayed in God’s revelations to Abraham or Isaac or Jacob or anything like that.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 3: The Bible says that Abraham saw Elohim. Thinking of the culture that Abraham came from in his context and knowing that it was Elohim whom he was talking to, wouldn’t have Abraham have created any images of Elohim before Moses brought out the Old Testament?

I think that the Law of Moses (LoM) consistently and coherently fall in line with what we mostly see Abraham doing and God approving of Abraham. I believe that Abraham, even as Elohim introduced/ revealed HIMSElF to Abraham, he (Abraham) knew that Elohim is too great to be pictured by any kind of physical form; that those physical forms would be misleading rather than helpful. The Children of Israel took pride in being children of Abraham too … if this was the case, the Bible would have mentioned something about Abraham doing this (and all Christians nowadays would do the same thing too) OR Elohim would have told Moses via the LoM that it should be forbidden, to which, Elohim would have disciplined Abraham about, if Abraham did that. Remember, this is a very serious issue to Elohim.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 3: Are you saying that paintings done by Christians like Michelangelo are a sin?

Michelangelo’s Painting of God creating Adam

Not really in this New Testament dispensation. The worshipping of those paintings would be a sin. However, as beautiful as Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel Ceiling might be, I will say that they could be entirely misleading especially to the layman Christians (new Christians or old Christians) who has never taken a theological class or thought about the Christian faith logically. Elohim is made to be essentially an old man with a long white beard in the paintings if confused. That could be identified as Elohim by virtue of one of HIS many energies hypostatically. We cannot deny that Michelangelo has thwarted many laymen’s (and even elite Christians) conception of Elohim throughout history. Paintings of Elohim or any finite physical portrayal of HIM into some sort of finite human figure confuses the identity of Elohim’s Essence for HIS Energies. If we were living under the Old Testament (OT) Law of Moses (LoM), these paintings would be in direct violation of Elohim’s commandments. That is one reason that in the Protestant Reformation all of these sorts of portrayals of Elohim were removed from the churches and were excised from Christian worship. They rejected the use of images in this way.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 4: What about portrayals of Christ?

This is more controversial because what a painting of Jesus portrays is not HIS essential divine nature. It portrays HIS energised human nature hypostatically. And in HIS energised human nature, Christ was a man. HE was fully man. HE was just like you and me. So I think that one could argue that portrayals of Jesus would not violate these OT commandments because you are portraying the energised humanity of Christ rather than HIS essential divinity. But one might also say by that very fact you are forgetting about HIS essential divinity. If you only focus on HIS energised humanity then you miss out the essential divinity. So that would be something that would need to be kept in mind as well. But I think most Christians would not have a problem with images of Jesus precisely because of this – that hypostatically, he does have an energised bodily physical form. In the incarnation the word became flesh as John says, so there is a corporeal form there that could be pictured.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 5: Doesn’t the Bible say that Jesus is the express image of El the Father? So to be consistent, why do we worship Jesus, an image of El the Father rather than just worship the Father directly? 

That is very right and this logic is sound with regards to rational theological consistency. In Colossians, Paul says that Christ is the image of God the Father and we worship Jesus not necessarily because we conflate the identity of the Father and the Son, we worship the Son as the Son and Worship the Father as the Father. Now someone could point the place in the Bible in John 5:23 where it says

that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

We could play the literal linguistic game and say that “honour” is not the same as “worship” but let us take it realistically existentially. The questioner could say that not-honouring/worshipping the Son is equal with not-honouring/worshipping the Father. This way, the questioner could postulate these logically sound premises in the following syllogism

  1. It is sinful to worship an image of Elohim 
  2. El the Son is an image of El the Father
  3. Not Worshipping El the Son is equal with not worshipping El the Father (John 5:23)
  4. Therefore, Elohim sins by contradicting HIS own consistent command not to worship any image of Elohim.
How shall we respond to this questioner? We Christians do not run away from the tough questions in life. We face them and come out victoriously. The solution to this problem requires one to rise above the level of being a layman and to think about this. You see, that passage is silent over the fact if this is a “direct honour/worship” or an “indirect honour/worship”. So let us be careful of not falling into the logical Fallacy called “Argument from Silence”. You see, compare this with what Jesus said in Matthew 25:40-45
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

So one should ask, if how the way I treat you is identically equal to the way I treat Jesus? As we stay in consistency, are you, a finite human being identically Jesus according to the above bible passages? No. This is more of an indirect effect of what I do to you. Does this mean that if I worship you, then I indirectly worship Jesus? Here I would simply say that I would be conflating your identity to the identity of Jesus. You are you and Jesus is Jesus. So I treat you as you in regards to who you are and I treat Jesus as Jesus in regards to who Jesus is. There is something about treating you good as you with regards to who you are that pleases/ honours Elohim and there is something about honouring Allah as Allah with regards to who Allah is that honours the Muhammadan. All in all, identities are not confused or conflated and existential life still remains logically coherent. Likewise, the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son. I believe that these indirect responses should only be seen as indirectly or vicariously and not direct identities. So, worship Jesus not because HE is the Father (that would be a mistake of logical identities and bad Christian Theologies) but that Jesus is Jesus and the Father is the Father. Do not treat Jesus as the Father or the Father as the Son. The Father is El, The Son is El … combined together, all 3 is 1 Elohim. Worship THEM in light of that knowledge.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 6: What do you think of the sentimental affections that Christians give to crucifixes and to the Holy Communions?

I don’t think, again, portrayals of the crucifix would violate this old Testament (OT) commandment because it portrays Jesus in HIS human nature which doesn’t seem to violate this OT commandment. Now, the practice of genuflecting (means to lower one’s body by bending one knee to the ground typically in worship or as a sign or respect) is because of the doctrine of transubstantiation which we will talk about in more detail in the future – they believe that on the communion table the actual body and blood of Christ are present. The wine and the bread are literally turned into the body and blood of Christ. Therefore, this is an act of respect. So whether or not you think such an act of respect would be appropriate would depend, I think, on whether or not you think this is just bread and wine up there or whether you think this is really the body and blood of Christ. If you don’t think that that is really the blood and body of Christ, if you think that these are just symbols, then it would be completely inappropriate to bow before some bread. So I won’t be definitely answering this question now because I want to elaborate on it in the future in more detail but you have some clues and pointers here.


Look at the poetic Psalm 18:6-10. This is just one of the many places in which Elohim is described in bodily terms:

In my distress I called upon the Lord;
to my God I cried for help.
From his temple he heard my voice,
and my cry to him reached his ears.
Then the earth reeled and rocked;
the foundations also of the mountains trembled
and quaked, because he was angry.
Smoke went up from his nostrils,
and devouring fire from his mouth;
glowing coals flamed forth from him.
He bowed the heavens, and came down;
thick darkness was under his feet.
He rode on a cherub, and flew;
he came swiftly upon the wings of the wind.

What bodily terms do you see in this poetic passage that describe Elohim? You can see all these bodily terms that are used to describe Elohim here, even though we’ve seen these other passages that say that Eohim is spirit, THEY is omnipresent, in the Old Testament there aren’t supposed to be any images of ELOHIM created by man, HE is indiscernible to the five senses. Yet here you have a poetic description in Psalms in very crude bodily terms – nostrils and feet and so forth.

Also, there are non-poetic visions of Elohim in which Elohim is bodily displayed. For example Exodus 33:20-23.

“But,” he said, “you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live.” And the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand upon the rock; and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by; then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; but my face shall not be seen.”

Here Moses is going to have a vision of Elohim, and I am very inclined to believe that this is a literal vision of Elohim and not a figurative one as we saw earlier in Psalm 18:6-10; and you see the bodily parts that are described – his hand, his face, his back.

So we have here scriptural data that pulls in different directions, don’t we? On the one hand, we have scriptural data that indicates Elohim is a spiritual, incorporeal, nonphysical being. But then we have these bodily descriptions and visions of God in corporeal manner. So that requires some sorting out; some logical systematic thinking which we will come to in the future.

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 7: What is the significance in saying that “Elohim is Spirit” rather than “Elohim is A Spirit”?

can’t see that there is any significance to saying “Elohim is Spirit” rather than “Elohim is a spirit” because if we imagine that it said “Elohim is A spirit” then it wouldn’t make any difference. It would just mean Elohim is a particular spirit, and that is true according to Christian Theology. But Elohim is not the angels, he is not demons. He is a different spiritual being than those. So when we say “Spiritual” in our terminology, we are not distinguishing “what type of Spiritual”. We have the Spiritual Angels different from the spiritual demons, different from the spiritual cherubim, different from the spiritual tools. We simply mean “spiritual” in this case as in “non-physical”. Moreover, In the Greek, there really isn’t any indefinite article. So you could translate it either way because the Greek language doesn’t have an indefinite article. So there wouldn’t be a different way to express it. You could translate it either way – “Elohim is Spirit” OR “Elohim is A Spirit”. I don’t think either translation would make much difference. No matter how open this interpretation is, I personally do not think that it does Christianity any harm theologically. And if heresy can be drawn from it, then I believe that there are logical and theological methods to go about debunking such heresies. Maybe the one would emphasise constitution more (“Elohim is Spirit”) and the other would maybe emphasise his particularity (“HE is a spirit”). By Constitution, it’s like saying, “This rug is wool” rather than “This rug is a wool”. 

POTENTIAL QUESTION (PQ) 8: I know that the appearances of Elohim in the Bible are reduced energies of Elohim. However, can we say that those appearances of Elohim in corporeal forms are really Elohim? Wouldn’t you think that if Elohim wanted to have a relationship with us that HE would come to us in HIS Essence?

So for example we got the visit of the three men to Abraham, El in a corporeal form. We got Jacob wrestling with El. This mysterious figure of the angel of the Lord which seems to be El HIMSELF and yet as you have said it appears in this corporeal way and interacts with physical people in this coporeal way. A theophany would be a vision or appearance or apparition of El. Theos is the Greek word for God and phaneroo is to appear. So this would be an appearance of God, a theophany. Instead of Theophany, we also have Christophany which would be an appearance of Christ. For example, in the book of Revelation, John sees this Christophany, a vision of the lamb on the throne. That would be a Christophany. What we described in the last point about visions of Elohim, those are theophanies. I called them visions of Elohim, but you could call them theophanies. These are where El appears to people and HE does so in this corporeal way, this physical way. But the question is how do we make sense of that if THEY doesn’t have a body? What is it that these people are seeing if HE doesn’t have a body when they had these theophanies? Can the Holy Spirit appear too in a physical body? Can the Father appear in a Physical Body too? These are energised manifestations of Elohim that are a sort of visionary mental seeing but not of some kind of real physical reality even though HE can still interact with real physical realities in these forms. It would be as if I were to cause you to mentally project a vision of your childhood home or something. You would see it in your mind, but you wouldn’t be actually seeing the real building. But it would be an accurate portrayal of the building, and that mental projection can affect your body too. Think of hypnotism and how mental imageries move the body correspondingly. Maybe the building is even gone now, it’s been torn down, but I stimulate your brain to project a vision of your childhood home. So you see it as it is accurately (or as it was). In fact, when the physical entity doesn’t even exist. I think something like that is going on in these theophanies. We will talk more about these in my Part 2.


Daddy God, thank you for giving me this amazing blog to write, I pray Daddy that you bless it, multiply it and let it bless mightily all those who would read and study it in Jesus’ Name. Let the logic the accurate, let every question be answered accurately, in firm love and firm gentleness …. to the Glory and Honour of YOUR Name my Daddy, in Jesus’ Name I pray. Amen