Our website is best viewed using any internet
browser besides Mozilla Firefox versions 6.0 and later (some
users don't have problems). We recommend Google
Chrome, Internet Explorer, and earlier versions of Firefox
(go to "Help
- About Firefox" to know your version).
The excuses of democracy, legality, and of majority do not make it
right.
There are men’s imperfect laws and God’s Perfect Law. Just
because the majority of
members of the House would reject the present government
policies does not make them right. What they do is wrong, if not
by law, then by motive, pretending to serve the true needs and wishes
of the people when you and I both know otherwise.
You see that Harper's Conservatives won 143 seats. On the other hand,
the 2 other national parties, the Liberals won 77 seats and the New
Democratic Party 37 for a total of 114 seats, 29 seats less than
the Conservatives. The Bloc Quebecois won 49 but the BQ is only for
Quebec;
not one
BQ member was elected by Canadians for a united Canada. To allow
them
to tip
the
scale and say it is a legitimate coalition in Canada's favor is like
saying a bit of arsenic is fine in your food.
If you were representing
the BQ or speaking for them, I would understand your prejudiced
logic, but if you presume to speak for the Canadian
people in general, who can question that you do them disservice
with your devotion to legal procedure and lack of understanding?
Furthermore,
God is finished winking at the nonsense that goes on in the government
and everywhere else in Canada. Oppose what is
right
and
true and just in the name of playing by the rules of the game, no matter what the keeping of them may
usher in, and you play
with fire,
coming against God, Who is fed up with the whole charade. I am
here to tell you so.
Better to get on the winning side, for good, don’t you think?
Victor
Nathan's reply:
Are you telling me that God appointed Stephen Harper?
The majority of the House of Commons is the majority of the House
of Commons, whatever way you cut it.
Nathan Weatherdon
Victor's reply:
Yes, Nathan, God appointed Stephen Harper, as He does every ruler
at any time, no matter who that may be – Duceppe, Trudeau, Churchill,
Hitler, Cyrus, Pharaoh – every one of them. The Scriptures are
full of such testimony. And their appointment has nothing whatsoever
to do with any virtue. There is no virtue in man intrinsically.
You are right about the majority in the Commons, but this is not about
majority so much as morality. It is evident to us that God knows this
coalition has not united for the good of Canada, but for its own selfish
purposes. You don’t fool God. Neither does God place system before
wisdom or might above right.
Here are some explicit examples of God
appointing whomsoever He will:
“For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘Even for this same purpose
I have raised you up, that I might show My power in you, and that My
name might be declared throughout all the earth’” (Romans
9:17 MKJV).
“Who says of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall do all My pleasure;
even saying to Jerusalem, You shall be built; and to the temple,
Your foundation shall be laid” (Isaiah 44:28 MKJV).
To Nebuchadnezzar,
likely the most glorious ruler in unbelieving mankind’s
history, God said, “And they shall drive you from men, and
your dwelling shall be with the animals of the field. They shall
make you
eat grass like oxen, and seven times shall pass over you, until
you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives
it
to whomever He will. The same hour the thing was fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar.
And he was driven from men, and ate grass like oxen, and his body
was
wet with the dew of the heavens, until his hair had grown like
eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws” (Daniel
4:32-33 MKJV).
To Pilate, the pagan Roman governor, Jesus said, “You
could have no authority against Me unless it were given to you
from above” (John
19:11 MKJV).
Yes, Nathan, I am telling you God appointed Stephen
Harper. I will tell you something else – until God changes
His mind or His course, those who oppose His appointed ruler
oppose Him
and will reap the
consequences, no matter who they are, technicalities and laws
of men notwithstanding. God is not interested in man’s
systems, majorities, or anything else men can come up with.
I also tell you that you can watch and see for yourself.
Victor
Nathan's reply:
You're a perfect example of why separation of church and state is
one of the most sacred articles of faith in modern politics.
It worked well to prevent revolution among ignorant peasants in the
18th century.
Seriously though, if you're willing to go on record stating that God
appointed Harper, then I'm willing to go on record to state that you're
an ideologically blinded religious zealot.
A question though - God also appointed us to be stewards of the earth.
Does this mean destroying the environment for our own economic interests
or protecting what nature there is left?
I would suggest that your proclivity towards literal interpretation
of religious texts could be much more usefully targeted towards encouraging
people to respect nature. Be a steward of the earth rather than blindly
supporting a leader who puts partisan interests ahead of his country.
Nathan Weatherdon
Victor's reply:
Hi Nathan,
Well, it is obvious that you believe nothing of the Bible,
the Word of God. Whether you know it or like it or not, God runs
the show. Whether
men think to combine church and state or not, God is still sovereign.
Here is a proverb you need to know:
“Start with GOD--the first step in learning is bowing down to
GOD; only fools thumb their noses at such wisdom and learning” (Proverbs
1:7 MSG).
You make many brash, ignorant, and foolish assumptions.
You need to learn before speaking. There is another proverb tailored
to
suit
you:
“Answering before listening is both stupid and rude” (Proverbs
18:13 MSG).
I am not seeking to combine church and state. That
is an impossibility in the true sense of what the Church of God is.
The original
Greek word translated “church” means “a called
out assembly.” The
True Church is the Body of Christ – those called out
of the world and man’s religious inventions that use
the name of “church.” God
does not mingle Himself with unbelievers or with men’s
institutions. If one ever sees the combination, it is the works
of men, and there
is a verse for that (which agrees with your viewpoint, by the
way):
“Concerning the works of men, by the Words of Your lips, I am
kept from the paths of the destroyer” (Psalms
17:4 MKJV).
God forbid that we should have another Catholic,
Church of England, Lutheran, Islamic, or any other kind of religious
tyranny. I
much prefer the status quo. Not that the wedding of man’s
church and state is the only curse or even the worst
curse there is. Try the Soviet
communist experiment, in which the state declared, “There
is no God or Church,” or the Maoist version of
atheism – no
church but plenty of Hell, to which tens of millions
can testify by their blood crying out of the ground in
both
dominions.
However, there is still a much better way than
democracy, a way of which the prophets of long ago and
to the present
have
spoken.
It
is rule, not by men or a combination of church and state
by men (an abomination
to God), but the rule of God in the hearts of men. Think
about it, Nathan - when men’s hearts are changed
so that they will only desire to do good to one another,
then will we be on the way to peace,
health, and prosperity. There is no other way. That is
known as the Kingdom of God on earth.
Now, no man or earthly
organization can accomplish this. Only God can do so.
That is why He sent His Son, Jesus
Christ, to
lay down
His life,
raise it up again (demonstrating He is God), and give
His Spirit to us, regenerating us and redeeming us from
the
corruption that leaves
us incapable of any true good.
You are a silly and ignorant
young man, Nathan, with plenty to learn. That is corruption. The
sooner you begin
to avail
yourself
of true
knowledge rather than man’s, the better you will
like it. Jesus Christ came to change everything and
therefore, as His emissaries,
we speak. You cannot have light or knowledge or wisdom
or understanding of the true kind without Him. It is
that simple, even as the proverb
quoted declares.
Because I will be posting your letter in full context
on our site, you have already
effectively
gone on record,
foolishly and without cause calling me “an ideologically
blinded religious zealot,” as you said you would.
We have gone on record that God appointed
Harper, like it or not, agree with it or not, even
as the Scriptures clearly testify in implicit,
if not explicit, terms. In your opinion, this makes
God “an ideologically
blinded religious zealot,” too. As I have already
told you, God appoints all leaders, and He raises up
and pulls down nations and empires.
All is in His hands; all things are determined from
above, way above even you and your learning and wisdom,
Nathan. Here is what God has
to say about your intellectual prowess:
1 Corinthians
3:18-21 MKJV
(18) Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you
seems to be wise in this world, let him become a fool
so that
he may be
wise.
(19) For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with
God; for it is written, "He takes the wise in their own craftiness."
(20) And again, "The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that
they are vain."
(21) Therefore let no one glory in men.
Curiously enough,
while you believe nothing of the Bible, you still make
reference to God. How so? You
believe
in God, yet
call Him
a liar? The Bible is the Prime Source of written
knowledge of God, as long
as you value and respect the Author of It, Whom He
is. You now say:
“God also appointed us to be stewards
of the earth.”
Yes, He would that we treat creation
with all due care and respect.
You then ask, “Does
this mean destroying the environment for our own economic interests
or protecting what
nature there is left?”
Why ask such a foolish question?
Are you suggesting I support destructive policies because God
has given me to curse the corrupt
and pretentious
spirit and motivations of the coalition and ask God to give wisdom
to the present government in power (which wisdom would include
environmentally-healthful policies)?
You then go on to say in your youthful and arrogant manner:
“I would suggest that your proclivity
towards literal interpretation of religious texts could be much more
usefully targeted towards
encouraging people to respect nature. Be a steward of the earth….”
What
would you know of “literal interpretation” of
the Bible or its validity?
Nevertheless, we are just a bit ahead of you in your suggestion:
Again you speak hastily, in carelessness, irresponsibility,
and ignorance, though you think yourself to be wise. You may
also read Back to
Basics and Christian
Physical Diet, and see
how you fare in your posture as a true environmentalist.
But how did we get there? That is the crucial
question. We can take no credit for it. You see, Nathan, you
need a change of heart,
a
new heart, replacing that stony one of yours with which you
now think, speak, and act. Only Jesus Christ can do that for
you.
So read Victor
Hafichuk, Paul Cohen,
and other
testimonies there, and
see how He has
done it for us, enabling us to do right, if you will care about
the earth as you profess you do.
You say of yourself:
“Nathan is an idealist with little interest in unrealistic
solutions. He believes that each and every vote for the Green Party and its
well-rounded platform is a powerful message from the public that it is in the
interests
of every political party to engage in a genuine debate regarding
the best policies to encourage sustainable social and economic development
that will benefit Canadians today and in the future.”
I am not sorry to burst your idealistic bubble, my friend.
Read:
Trash your man-educated ignorance
and begin to learn from his Creator. Pray to God (which happens
to be Jesus Christ),
the
One you can rightfully believe to be the Creator of the earth,
of which
you rightly think you are to be an effective steward. Find out
from Him directly just what it takes to accomplish such an awesome,
monumental,
and impossible job - successfully.
I can tell
you right now that, notwithstanding all good and sincere intentions,
the Green Party will not do it, nor will Harper.
I think you know that, too. The thing is, will you be honest
and admit
it
to yourself? Or will you go on being a hero, deceiving yourself
and thinking
to impress others? You don’t impress us, and you certainly
don’t
impress God.
Try again, Nathan. We have the counsel to lead
you in the right direction, and we are giving it to you now.
Victor
Nathan’s reply:
Well, I can certainly see that you’re a man of principal, and
I always respect that, whether I agree with the fine points or not.
I think you might be the first person to ever call me either silly
or ignorant, but I 100% agree that I (like every human on earth) has
much to learn. In my mind, the best way to learn is to make an effort
to expose oneself to as many different possible perspectives.
You are correct to guess that I don’t believe that the Bible
is the direct word of God (although, as son of a pastor, I sure do
know it). In truth, I am a complete atheist who takes refuge in agnosticism
if push comes to shove, but I find great spiritual satisfaction in
the exploration of philosophy and the possibilities of the human mind.
Please don’t take that as an indication that I am a target for
conversion because I guarantee you that it would be a waste of your
time. It is my preferred path and one that I am intent on pursuing.
________________________________________
I do, however, have a question though, that comes from a more respectful
tone than I exhibited before. If man is infallible and (as per the
analysis of Kierkegaard in his concept of the absolute paradox) is
inherently bound to misinterpret truth at every step, I wonder if
we might agree that the individual must be permitted to carry out
their spiritual development as they see fit. This is a question that
has interested me since discussing religious philosophy with a religious
community in Indonesia, where we all came to an agreement that honestly
stating ones disbelief is always preferable to a false profession
of faith. After all, what can ‘the right choice’ mean
if there is no choice? They believed I would go to hell either way
because I didn’t accept Mohammed as the last prophet, but why
not at least get there as an honest man?
My guess is that you will say that God fills us with truth, which
would leave me exactly where I stand now with this question, believing
that perceived truth is a unique experience for every individual and
that genuine truth will forever elude even the most enlightened of
us fallible beings.
While I don’t believe in God, I believe that faith in God represents
a desire for truth that is ultimately respectable in every manifestation.
________________________________________
Finally, I apologize. My comments, however, represent a reaction that
a significant portion of Canadians would share, which is something
that you might want to consider when choosing the words to maximize
the impact of your message when targeted to people outside your religious
community.
I have been known to say many times over that I am willing to respect
all beliefs as long as the same is extended to me. I dropped the gloves
first, and did so in a dishonourable manner. I had thought your organization
may have been part of the Conservative Party propaganda machine. Ultimately,
I fear the possibility that the principle of divine right will again
be used to justify dictatorships, which is what motivated my response.
Keep doing what you think is right. And good work with the Harvest
Haven. God or no God, it’s good news.
Nathan Weatherdon
Victor's reply:
Hi Nathan,
Your apology is thankfully accepted. No harm done; no offense taken.
Whether you call yourself an atheist, agnostic, or believer, I can
tell you that relatively speaking, as we deal with all the mail, your
conduct and attitude have a trace, a faint fragrance, of your Judeo-Christian
background, and maybe not so faint as all that. Though many will deny
it, there is extraordinary value in the Mosaic Law and the true Biblical
Christian doctrine and ethic, unlike any other religion.
True Christianity is much more than a religion; it is God Himself.
I am not saying that you have God; you yourself have denied Him as
your God. Yet He may not have denied you.
This is not an expression of partisanship or religious bigotry as
some suppose, but a sure and living knowledge of the Lord and Savior
of all mankind, Jesus Christ, Who is Risen-from-the-Dead, Almighty
God. The problem with the vast majority of Christians is that they
are so in name only, as sincere as they may be.
False Christianity is religion; the true is anything but. Jesus Christ
came not to give us religion, Christianity, or “churchianity,” but
Reality in its glory and splendor by absolute identification with Him.
Of those ascribing to orthodox Christianity, they are
poisoned with many falsehoods, not the least being doctrinal “pillars
of faith,” which are not truths, but lies. Some of these they
regard as keystones of true Christianity, such as the pagan doctrines
of the trinity, free
will, and eternal
torment, all of which serve to increase their confusion and reinforce
their instinctive doubt.
Narrowing it down to a segment of nominal Christendom, evangelicals
preach a false
gospel of “Accept Jesus into the heart and you
are saved – that’s all there is to it.” They deceive
themselves, terribly so, thinking to have the Rock as their foundation,
but finding themselves in quicksand.
Then when we come and preach the Truth with full assurance and conviction,
by the anointing He has bestowed upon us, which anointing He IS,
we are called false prophets, dogmatists, arrogators, fanatics, religious
bigots, fools, heretics, and a cult. So be it; we knew
it would be coming because He told us so in advance.
Think about it, Nathan: Religious establishments are recognized, readily
accepted, and respected in the world, yet Jesus plainly declared that
if we were truly His, we would be hated by all men because the world
hated Him first, and does hate Him to this day. But those in established
orthodox nominal Christianity just don’t see it. As far as they
are concerned, they are the beloved of God and we, who are hated by
all men for His Name’s sake, are the offscouring of the earth – no
different than it was 2,000 years ago and prior.
Sour grapes, Nathan? Not at all! I speak for your sake now. Am I trying
to convert you, as you warned that I shouldn’t try? Not at all.
I know that unless God decides to call and choose anyone, you and I
don’t stand a chance of changing your mind or heart. Nobody could
do a thing with me until the time.
As Jesus said to His disciples, “You have not chosen Me, but
I have chosen you.” That’s the way it is, and not as mainstream
Christendom would have you believe, so that listeners might join them
and become members of their kingdoms (not God’s).
I took a long time to get to your letter because there was plenty
to be said. I am not wasting my time on you. What I have to say is
no waste of time and will bear fruit, if not with you, then somewhere,
somehow. I am not writing in vain.
Now to your question. You and your companions in Indonesia came to
a right conclusion, which was, “Honestly
stating ones disbelief is always preferable to a false profession of
faith.” Of course
that is true! Who would or should argue? That is straight out of the
Bible, which I know to be the Word of God. Who has ever said differently?
Yet you struggle with the fact that you have seen many profess but
not truly believe, and more importantly, you have professed without
true belief. You felt the hypocrite or unsettled about it, but relieved
when you decided to be honest, mostly with yourself, but also with
your family and neighbors, and ironically, even with God, Whose existence
you have honestly confessed to question or doubt. There is nothing
wrong with that.
You write: “If man is infallible and (as
per the analysis of Kierkegaard in his concept of the absolute paradox)
is inherently bound
to misinterpret truth at every step….”
If you mean to say “fallible,” Kierkegaard was perfectly
right insofar as this statement is concerned, if this statement accurately
represents his thoughts. This is the fate of all unregenerate mankind;
it is the very essence, source, and condition of sin. The Bible tells
us that. Man, in and of himself, cannot know the truth, because he
is disconnected from the Truth, Creator God.
That is precisely why we needed a Mediator, a Bridge, a Gate, an Intervener,
a Savior (I capitalize the word not because of an implicit religious
reference to Jesus Christ but in respect to God, the only Power, above
us all) - the Creator, Who is able to give us the change of nature
that alone will solve the problem that Kierkegaard so perceptively
observed and elucidated.
So while he accurately stated the problem, even as the Bible does,
he, true to his philosophy and in his unbelief, was unable to come
to the solution for it, not that he could come to the solution in his
own power, and not that the solution was nonexistent. He needed a Savior!
He greatly erred in believing
that people are entirely free and thus responsible for what they make
of themselves, based on the external appearance of things. And he
has led you, or will lead you, down a dead-end alley, if you have been,
or are, following him.
He and Nietzsche were two intelligent, but spiritually dead, men,
perfectly locked in their own well-defined state, as are all men without
the One Who came, as you know, saying, “I am the Way, the Truth
and the Life; no man can come to the Father but by Me” (John
14:6), and, to those receiving Him, “You shall know the Truth,
and the Truth shall make you free” (John 8:32 MKJV).
Is there choice? Yes, there is, but there is no such thing as free
will. We have some things to say on this topic. You could start with
Diabolical Doctrine 20) "Man has been given a free will," and
then read the selections in “Free Will”?
I think one way to put it is that we have the freedom, it seems, to
choose, but not to do. All things are determined from above, even as
Jesus indicated to Pilate. If we happen to do as we choose, it is only
because we are granted it.
“You may make your plans, but God directs your actions” (Proverbs
16:9 GNB).
Jeremiah, by the Spirit of God, declared:
“LORD, I know that none of us are in charge of our own destiny;
none of us have control over our own life” (Jeremiah 10:23 GNB).
Indeed, we have choice to demonstrate that we have no free will – it
certainly proves so.
At the risk of being won to Christ your Redeemer, read the papers
we offer. Even if you don’t believe God, our writings will prove
those whom you do believe to be in manifest error, rationally and
logically, as well as spiritually.
As you said, I can’t convert you, but as you reserve or presume
the right (whether you have it or not is another matter) to speak what
you believe, so do I. If you were to believe me, your searching would
be over. I have the map to the destination you seem or think to seek;
indeed, all those in Christ ARE the map, which map
He is, in that He said, “I am the Way.” True Christians
are duplicates in process of the One Who creates them in His own image.
Because you don’t believe, I must allow you the “freedom” to
keep banging your head against the wall and searching,
even as I was subjected to doing for a time, even as all men are made
subject to vanity until the time. It is part of the process, Nathan;
it is part of the process that is not of our doing or in any way in
our control.
“All creation is eagerly waiting for God to reveal who His children
are. Creation was subjected to frustration but not by its own choice.
The One Who subjected it to frustration did so in the hope that it
would also be set free from slavery to decay in order to share the
glorious freedom that the children of God will have. We know that all
creation has been groaning with the pains of childbirth up to the present
time” (Romans 8:19-22 GW).
So much for free will. The Bible certainly does not teach it, and
what a relief that we don’t have it! We would have perished long
ago.
So you are wrong in your guess that I will say that God fills us with
truth, unless you mean at some point in time. No, we are all full of
lies until the time when He does fill us, one person at a time, perhaps
sometimes a household, and rarely a group of people, as He did at Pentecost
when 3,000 were saved.
You write: “While I don’t believe in God, I believe that
faith in God represents a desire for truth that is ultimately respectable
in every manifestation.”
I think you refer to worship or religious affiliation and activity,
but that is not what faith is according to Scripture. James had a word
on this that may clarify somewhat:
“You believe that there is one God, you do well; even
the demons believe and tremble. But will you know, O vain man, that faith without
works is dead?” (James 2:19-20 MKJV)
Those who truly desire truth and are prepared to enter into it or
to have it rule them will find it:
“I alone know the plans I have for you, plans to bring you prosperity
and not disaster, plans to bring about the future you hope for. Then
you will call to Me. You will come and pray to Me, and I will answer
you. You will seek Me, and you will find Me because you will seek Me
with all your heart. Yes, I say, you will find Me, and I will restore
you to your land. I will gather you from every country and from every
place to which I have scattered you, and I will bring you back to the
land from which I had sent you away into exile. I, the LORD, have spoken” (Jeremiah
29:11-14 GNB).
Until then, you will search and ponder in vain, and those who indulge
in idolatry and their own chosen machinations are less than respectable
to God.
You write some interesting things here, Nathan:
“I stand now with this question, believing
that perceived truth is a unique experience for every individual
and that genuine
truth will forever elude even the most enlightened of us fallible beings.”
One, people have their opinions and perceptions of
truth, that is true, but truth is not relative. There is the
Real, the Original,
the Origin.
Two, I note that you do acknowledge, wittingly or
otherwise, that there is the genuine truth.
Three, truth is indeed, as you and your philosopher friends acknowledge,
perfectly elusive to, and unattainable by, man, no less than catching
the wind in your hands. As to the word “enlightened,” I
think you use it clumsily. “Enlightenment” means “having
light.” Here is what the Bible says about light:
“Everything came into existence through Him. Not one thing that
exists was made without Him. He was the source of life, and that life
was the light for humanity. The light shines in the dark, and the dark
has never extinguished it” (John 1:3-5 GW).
“He (John the Immerser) himself was not the Light; he came to
tell about the Light. This was the Real Light---the Light that comes
into the world and shines on all people” (John 1:8-9 GNB).
Jesus said this of Himself:
“Jesus spoke to the Pharisees again. He said, ‘I am the
Light of the world. Whoever follows Me will have a life filled with
light and will never live in the dark’” (John 8:12 GW).
In other words, there is no true enlightenment without the Light of
men.
Now here is where Kierkegaard is right, and also how the problem (and
not knowing the Truth is a problem) can only be solved:
“He went to His own people, and His own people didn't accept
Him. However, He gave the right to become God's children to everyone
who believed in Him. These people didn't become God's children in a
physical way-from a human impulse or from a husband's desire to have
a child. They were born from God” (John 1:11-13 GW).
It is God’s doing and not man’s to come into Light and
Life.
You say, “I have been known to say many
times over that I am willing to respect all beliefs as long as the
same is extended to me.”
Do you, and can you, respect all beliefs? God comes
and says, “Believe My Son Whom I send to you,” but the
Muslims say, “God has no son.” Jesus comes to lay down
His life for the world, while Muhammad comes to take lives for himself
in God’s Name.
Another example: Pro-lifers say, “Killing unborn babies is wrong,” while
abortionists (“pro-choicers”?) say, “It is not wrong
to kill unborn babies.”
To respect all beliefs, Nathan, is to be a classical schizophrenic.
As one person said, “If you don’t stand for something,
you’ll fall for anything.” That same person may not have
gone far enough to say, “Believe the ‘genuine Truth.’”
Or are you saying that you respect their right to
believe as they choose? I think the latter. Even there, do we allow
such a thing? Did
you respect our entry when you suspected we were of the “Conservative
Party propaganda machine”? I don’t think so. Therefore,
while the philosophy sounds objective, unbiased, understanding, tolerant,
and wise, it contradicts itself. It is patently irrational, illogical,
foolish, and frankly, insane.
Without the Light is only darkness. Jesus being the Light, without
Him is only darkness. To exist stumbling and fumbling in darkness
when there is Light is insanity. Without Christ, all men are insane,
as the creatures in I Am Legend.
You write: “Ultimately, I fear the possibility
that the principle of divine right will again be used to justify
dictatorships, which
is what motivated my response.”
This has been the bane of mankind throughout all his history, from
the fall of man. It is the very nature of the man of sin, the son of
perdition, which lives in, and is, every person ever born except for
Jesus Christ. That is precisely why He has come and is now here to
do what He has always intended to do. There is no other hope or solution.
He is it, and He will perform His will to perfection. Read The
Restitution of All Things.