1.0 Intro-1a Talking to your head

( you’ll see what I mean )

“THERE IS A GOD”.

THERE IS A GOD.

…

Aware of The GODHEAD

1.0 Intro-1a

...

The Fundamental

Doctrine of Theology

is that;

THERE IS A GOD

…

Because, if it were not true,

that

There IS A GOD,

there could be

no Science of God.

...

The first duty of Theology,

which is,

“The Study of God”,

therefore,

is to set before us,

in an organized way,

the reasons men have

for Believing

that such a BEING

as

GOD Exists,

and

THAT

THE BEING of GOD

is

a True and Worthy Recipient

of our Dependence

and Worship.

......

It is objected,

by the finite reasonings

of carnal men

that there shouldn't be

a “Science of God”,

&

that, if there is a God,

“as they ?? ought to know” ???

then:

that “God” cannot be

Known

and

Comprehended

well enough,

that HE could be considered

as a True Recipient of Worship.

...

However,

GOD CAN BE

SUFFICIENTLY KNOWN:

...

(1.) If it is meant by this

“objection”

that we cannot Know

The Essential Nature of God,

then,

that exact same line

of “reasoning”

(by employing a 'mind'

that is cursed

by being in a state of 'sin'

that is Spiritually Blind to GOD,

Who IS SPIRIT)

...that exact same line

of “reasoning”

proceeds upon a principle

which result is:

“we can know nothing”,

because

WE DO NOT KNOW

The Essential Nature

of

ANYTHING.

…

WE DO NOT

EVEN KNOW

The Essential Nature

of our

own essence.

…

We cannot know

the nature of the essence

of any existent being

or substance

&

NOT EVEN

the smallest atom of matter.

...

We can only judge what

THE NATURE of ANYTHING

“must be”

from the qualities

it is perceived to possess,

or from its presentation

of outward characteristics.

…

And it is in this same manner

that we can discover something

of

The Nature of God

from the Different Ways

in which

He has Manifested Himself

WHEN:

GOD

Has Shown Himself

TO MANKIND,

within ourselves

and

in the Universe.

...

(2.) If there is

an attempt to claim

that we cannot Know GOD,

because

GOD'S NATURE

may be, or must be,

Wholly Different from ours,

the natural answer is

that we do know many things

which differ greatly

from “the finite mind”

which takes cognizance

of them.

…

THE WAY WE KNOW

our own bodies,

although,

they are purely material,

is through our mental faculties,

and yet

we still believe that

“the mind”, which is mental

and

“matter”, which is physical

to be

ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT.

…

We are able to

comprehend also

our modes of existence,

and those of other objects

in time and space,

though these modes

are essentially different

from the thing

which exist in them.

...

Besides, until we Know

WHAT GOD IS,

we cannot be sure

that GOD is in all Respects

Different from ourselves.

…

If there are

any points of similarity,

we can

KNOW GOD,

so far as these

points of similarity

that do exist;

and,

if it is true that

we have been Made,

in any respect,

in the Likeness

and Image of God,

our Knowledge of God

may approach at least

to such completeness

as to enable us to

Recognize GOD'S More

OBVIOUS PERFECTIONS,

and to Perceive that

because of these

OBVIOUS PERFECTIONS

GOD Ought to be

Reverenced and Worshiped.

...

Guided by the analogy

of our own natures

we expect to find in

GOD'S BEING,

a Personal, Conscious,

Intelligent, and Moral Being,

and this expectation

is confirmed by

the manifestations of

GOD'S PRESENCE,

and

Operations in the Universe.

...

This teaching of the analogy

from our own natures

we expect to find in

GOD'S BEING,

a Personal, Conscious,

Intelligent, and Moral Being

is not worthless

because it has also led some

to believe that God

has a material body

as that of a Human Being.

…

Analogy

does not furnish proof,

but only probability

and in some instances

only possibilities.

…

Our use of this Analogy,

in expecting God's Being

to be in some way

similar to ourselves

does not

show us what God is,

but what God may be.

…

That which this Analogy,

of expecting God's Being

to be in some way

similar to ourselves,

will suggest

is confirmed or denied

by other sources

of

knowledge.

…

But so far

we have been taught

through our use of this Analogy,

that we learn that

God must either be a Spirit,

such as we are,

or

that GOD Must Have

a Higher Nature

to which belong

all those Attributes of Spirit

which Constitute

Conscious Personality

and

Intelligent Purpose.

...

The Spirit is a Higher Realm

than the Material Facts

that we may

OBSERVE with OUR FIVE SENSES.

...

(3.) Does the objection

that there shouldn't be

a “Science of God”,

because that

“God”

could not be

Known

and

Comprehended

well enough,

that HE

could be considered

as a True Recipient of Worship

mean( ? )

that we cannot Know God

because we cannot

Come in Contact with Him

through the five senses

as we do with our fellow-men,

and cannot learn

GOD'S NATURE

through

GOD'S Conduct

and

Personal Action

as we do theirs?

…

But it is not only through

personal contact with men

that we know that they are

and what they are;

we both know

and judge of people

by their works,

though we have never seen

nor known them personally.

…

In this same way then,

through our senses

are we brought into

Contact with God,

Who although

HE is not material,

GOD is an Artificer

in

material things,

and

GOD has Displayed

before us,

in the Universe around,

the Evidence of His Wisdom,

Power and Goodness.

…

Surely so Great a Structure

as this UNIVERSE, which

Manifests a Grasp of Thought,

and

a Power of Performance

so

Wonderfully Beyond

that of any human being,

and

a Minuteness of Detail

and

Execution and Finish,

the Limitations of which

Defy Discovery

through

the most powerful microscope

that man can ever make,

shows that

THE UNIVERSE

has been Fashioned,

if not Created,

by some

Being of Personal

Purposing Skill

and

Power

Immeasurably

Beyond Anything

that we can possibly conceive.

...

(4.) Is it “gratuitously” asserted,

by which, in turn:

we may “gratuitously” reply,

THE OPPOSITE;

and yet, for a learning exercise

were we to allow it to be

“gratuitously” asserted

“that the Outward Phenomena

of the Universe

cannot give enough mental

and

Spiritual

Knowledge of God

that is essential

to our Apprehension

and

Worship of Him.”

…

Wow,

Even if this were true,

we get that knowledge

through

our own spiritual

and

mental operations.

…

We find that we have

within ourselves

a consciousness of existence,

and of thought

and

of purpose,

and

thus we learn not only

that there is the

consciousness of existence,

and

thoughts and purposes

that exist

in other intelligent beings,

but that

the “consciousness of existence”,

and

that of

“thoughts and purposes”

“must exist”

in every being

whose nature is as high as,

or Higher than, that of man.

…

We perceive that the mind

is governed by laws

no less binding and effective,

no less regular and permanent,

than those of matter.

…

In our observation

and study of the

consciousness of our existence,

and that of others

with thoughts

and purposes,

within the perception

that our minds

are also

governed by laws,

we learn about the

nature of our own mind

and spirit,

THAT WE POSSESS,

not by having a

direct apprehension

of their essence,

but,

as in our

awareness of matter;

by indirectly

apprehending them

through their phenomena.

…

THERE IS A GOD.

Aware of The GODHEAD 1.0 Intro-1b

“A thing cannot be, and not be,

at the same time.”

…

WHERE ??

DO WE GET this knowledge?

...

And Who?

then,

has Constituted our minds?

...

The Fundamental

Doctrine of Theology

is that;

There IS A GOD

…

The Nature we Ascribe

to

The Divine Mind

and

Spirit.

…

The differences between mental

and spiritual capacities in men

convince us that

there are degrees of greater

or less mental

and

spiritual natures.

…

Hence we Assign to God

Mind and Spirit

in the Highest Degree,

because as

The Author and Creator

of

Mind and Spirit

GOD

Himself MUST be Greater

then all His mental

and

spiritual Creations.

...

But, in addition to this,

we have a

peculiar source of information.

…

We find that our minds are

capable of intuitive knowledge.

…

Some abstract principles

need to only be understood,

and the conviction

that they are true

immediately follows.

…

That "the whole is greater

than any one of its parts"

is perceived

as soon as understood,

as is

likewise that

"a thing cannot be,

and not be,

at the same time."

…

WHERE DO WE GET

this knowledge?

…

We say that the mind

is so constituted

that it cannot believe otherwise.

…

Who has Constituted

our minds, then ?

…

To say that the mind

is so constituted

that it cannot believe otherwise

when we need to

only understand

an abstract principle

to possess the conviction

that they are true,

must proceed and

come from Some One

upon

whose Veracity we rely upon,

when we accept

what our nature teaches.

…

But, if from anyone,

then there is a creating mind,

and that mind operates

directly upon mind

without the

intervention of matter,

and thus teaches us the Truth.

...

When then,

we find other convictions

of like nature relative

to our Dependent upon

A Higher Being,

such as:

our sense of Obligations

of duty to Him,

our sense of right, and wrong,

and the duty to do the right,

and not to do the wrong,

we cannot avoid believing

that these intuitions

come from the Same Source,

and are

GOD ALMIGHTY'S

Instructions to us

concerning our

Moral Relationship

and

Duties to Him.

…

2. But it is further objected

“by those who have

already lived and died

and are now somewhere,

- were they know better”

that,

“if there is a God”

we cannot Know Him

because He Must Be

The Absolute,

The Infinite,

The Unconditioned,

and,

therefore, “cannot be”

an Object of Comprehension

to us,

whose Nature is Finite,

and

whose Mode of Existence

is only Relative,

Finite and Conditioned.

...

But the “objection” itself

Presents its own Refutation.

…

How do we Know

that God must be:

“The Absolute,

The Infinite,

The Unconditioned,

and,

therefore, cannot be

an Object of Comprehension

to us,

whose Nature is Finite”,

if there is a God?

…

In whatever way

“we Know GOD IS:

“The Absolute,

The Infinite,

The Unconditioned”,

we know at least

that much of God

that He must Be

The Absolute, The Infinite,

& The Unconditioned.

…

Even before we are

supposed to Know

that He Exists,

therefore,

we Know this Much ?

of the Nature

which Must

BE GOD'S,

and

on the First Evidence

of GOD'S EXISTENCE

have the right

to Attribute to Him

all that is therein

contained that

He Must Be

The Absolute, The Infinite,

& The Unconditioned.

…

The Characteristics

thus Ascribed to Him,

in that GOD must Be

The Absolute, The Infinite,

& The Unconditioned

Reveal Him,

therefore, to us,

as an Infinite Existence,

without other Limitations

than are Found

in GOD'S Own Nature,

or Essence, Who,

as Absolute,

cannot be dependent,

but must

be the Source

and

Sovereign of all else.

…

And, as the Unconditioned,

THEN GOD

Cannot be Subject to Time,

and

Space,

and

Matter,

and

Must therefore Exist

without

The possibility of Growth,

or Increase,

and

without that Succession of Periods,

such as Yesterday,

Today,

and

Tomorrow,

and

TO ANY OF

those Measures of Space,

and Location,

which belong to Matter.

...

The God, therefore,

Who is thus Proclaimed

to be “Unknowable”

is at least Known

as a Self-Existent Spirit,

Infinite,

Eternal and Unchangeable

in all the Perfections

that Belong to His Nature.

…

Just let

the least evidence appears

that

THERE IS A GOD