Why bother with Religion?

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

That is all heresay. Let me give you a real example from my own personal experience. My grandfather was very religious his whole life. He prayed often and went to church often until he was no longer able. He was overcome by senility the last few years of his life and was barely able to understand what was going on around him. He was always a strong man. He was in pain most of the time for the last year of his life.

I watched him dehydrate to death the last few days of his life. He was unable to digest food. Keeping him hydrated would have just resulted in a longer drawn out death of starvation. A more humane course of death by euthanasia was not possible due to its religiously motivated illegality in my state (suicide is a sin). If this is what you mean by prayer affecting “the way they go” then you can have it.

Meh, at least you got spend a lot of time with him and had the chance to show him you loved him. My dad blew his head off with a rifle-- so you’re not getting much sympathy from me.

The question of pain, in my opinion, is actually the weakest argument against God’s existence-- because many people do continue to believe in God despite the painful things they go through. In fact, many are made stronger by the pain they go through.

Their growth in God despite suffering contradicts the claims of those of no faith who assume bad things disprove his existence. In fact, stuggling is good if you want to learn how to fly. It’s really a matter of perspective, counting it all good so to speak.

And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.

And yes, God can even bring something good out of something evil. So get over it and stop feeling sorry for yourself. Life and death happens regardless of what you want to happen. So too does God exist despite the pain we go through.

---

On the intellectual side, I’m still curious as to what atheism offers over and above religion-- and I’m still wondering why one would bother with atheism in either it’s passive or militant form?

As I said before, the examples you gave were not particularly compelling for either form of atheism-- except to those who are already atheists. I haven’t really seen any compelling arguments for either to be fair

 

[mmortal03]

That’s okay kelly. I know you didn’t ask him to pray but even if you did, there is nothing wrong with that. Don’t let someone like mmortal03 talk you out of praying or even telling Imagine to pray or at least to “read” a prayer.

I must have missed this post of yours AlegreFe. Thanks for completely misunderstanding my (a Catholic’s) point. I was not telling ANYONE not to pray, I was telling EVERYONE that they are not going to make any progress by telling an atheist to pray a prayer, read a prayer, or telling them the fact that someone is praying for them.

 

[mmortal03]

On the intellectual side, I’m still curious as to what atheism offers over and above religion-- and I’m still wondering why one would bother with atheism in either it’s passive or militant form?

I think the atheists say that it is more constructive to see the reality of the world, especially even if it isn’t as comforting to us.

That which is comforting but is false will ultimately just waste the time that we do have here, by spending all the time learning all about the falsity.

I haven’t personally convinced myself that Catholicism is false, so you won’t find me using that argument. However, if I did convince myself that it was, that way of thinking probably WOULD be my way of thinking.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I think the atheists say that it is more constructive to see the reality of the world, especially even if it isn’t as comforting to us.

That which is comforting but is false will ultimately just waste the time that we do have here, by spending all the time learning all about the falsity.

I haven’t personally convinced myself that Catholicism is false, so you won’t find me using that argument. However, if I did convince myself that it was, that way of thinking probably WOULD be my way of thinking.

I understand that.

But what advantage does atheism give over and above religion besides the comfort they claim they have?

It sounds like they find comfort in believing they understand reality better than others, and this understanding is worth the sacrifice they make.

Billions of people find comfort in religion too. And while there are peaks and valleys within the grwoth of religious movements, on the whole I suspect that religions will not be slowing down anytime soon.

 

[buffalo]

T

I watched him dehydrate to death the last few days of his life. He was unable to digest food. Keeping him hydrated would have just resulted in a longer drawn out death of starvation. A more humane course of death by euthanasia was not possible due to its religiously motivated illegality in my state (suicide is a sin). If this is what you mean by prayer affecting “the way they go” then you can have it.

You watched his body die. You do not know the state of his soul and what it was undergoing.

 

[AlegreFe]

I must have missed this post of yours AlegreFe. Thanks for completely misunderstanding my (a Catholic’s) point. I was not telling ANYONE not to pray, I was telling EVERYONE that they are not going to make any progress by telling an atheist to pray a prayer, read a prayer, or telling them the fact that someone is praying for them.

I understood just fine. It seems you are misunderstanding me.

Your statement there could be true for now. But you see, this is just one of the ways that the Holy Spirit can work. Sure “Imagine” could be thinking, “don’t waste your time praying…,” but one day when the Holy Spirit will speak to him he just might look back and remember this. That’s okay, you could say that it’s no good telling him to pray or read or even telling him that we are praying. As for myself, I will keep praying.

 

[Geocacher]

What I learned, is Don’t use a laptop when posting.

I just had a long post just now, and a thumb bumped something that backed my browser to the previous page, then blanked out loosing the very long post. I will be using a regular PC … Many times my all thumb hands keep knocking my browser back a page, while doing a post.

---

It is not so much the church/religion itself, but the holy spirit that is the guide, but I liken it to a TOW plane and a sail plane, in that certain planes can tow you up higher than other planes, just like certain religions can lift you up higher than others. When you are released from the tow plane, you can catch thermals and ride them up even higher, but knowlege from training is required before you can attempt the climb on the thermals.

---

I have had a hard life where I was truely afraid of death, even with the attendance of LDS or even catholic, but a book got into my hands that has been a miracle in my life, and it is called “The Ripple Effect” by Betty J Eddie, and it has answered some questions on what death is, that I could never get from any religion, since it talks about the Near Death Experience.

I was LDS most of my life with a religous family, and I have had many problems including severe sluggishness much of my life, also I was much interested in Evolution, especially dinosaurs and early man of 100,000 years ago, but through many tiny nudges of the spirit I am improving.

You can try **The Ripple Effect **, and see if that book may help, also it is possible to ask the holy spirit directly to help guide you, but if it is like me, I never have had much more than tiny nudges of the spirit, except a couple times the spirit came on strong with a stern message of a few words, to try to set me straight.

This can be very young for a young person to grasp, like Religion, GOD, and prayer.

In this mortal world to me, it has been a school of learning, with a bit of suffering, and lots of help from the spirit, also there have been a few times when I should have been killed by the accidents ive had, but I have been protected from serious harm or injury by unseen forces.

There is a thicker Vail between mortallity and the spirit world, for those with little to no experience, or a lack of disire to follow the spirit, but for those that have followed the spirit but also have suffered much they have a thinner vail between the mortal world and the spirit world, like some NDE experiencers and some of the saints in the church’s history.

Just felt like spilling a can of beans, but hopefully did not open a can of worms.

I have fought with much sin myself, and it is not an easy road.

Two ways to see life is the Material world versus the spiritual world, and both are at war with each other, and Religion may not make a bit of sense to a person that only knows of the material world, until the spirit starts to work on you.

Anybody can live life successfully in the material world, but it makes sense to me now that this world is a school of learning, with the spirit giving occational nudges.

Singing out now,
bye

Geoff
Okay, this time I copied this post to Notepad before submitting Reply.

 

[rafaelcatolico]

Religion is HOPE! How hopless an existance to think that your mortal body is all that is and ever will be! If you were a true Atheist why would you concern yourself with saving the planet? for your posterity?

 

[Eden]

Since imagine is relying on science to “prove” God does not exist, I assume he is willing to experiment. Here is an experiment you might try:

In a quiet room without distractions, experiment with saying any of the following: “Holy Spirit, guide me to truth”, “Jesus please come to me and help me with my disbelief” or “Blessed Virgin, guide me to your Son”. Spend several minutes in contemplation with an open mind and see what you observe. It’s important that you allow yourself for these few minutes to be open to the possibility that God exists.

 

[PaulGH]

Actually, I’m trying to get you all to convince me of God’s existence.

Hi Imagine23,

If you are serious about that statement, then I would strongly recommend that you read a book called Modern Physics and Ancient Faith by Stephen Barr. This book will not prove to you that God exists, or that Christianity is true. However, it does make a very convincing case that belief in God is very rational, given the latest findings of physics. Mr. Barr shows a great depth of understanding of both his subjects (i.e., Judeo-Christian beliefs and modern physics), and he presents his opponents’ arguments in a very fair and coherent manner, followed by an even-handed rebuttal of each argument. The writing style of the book is such that it will not be likely to turn you off; in other words, he does not sound as if he is preaching to the reader. If you have any interest in science, and if you have any interest in the questions you have raised here (which I assume that obviously you do), then I really would recommend this book very highly.

After you read that book, if you then have an interest in learning more about the real basis for Christian beliefs, discussed in a manner that does not simply ask you to rely on blind faith, then I would recommend that you read “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis and/or “Fundamentals of the Faith” by Peter Kreeft. Or, if you are budget-minded (as I am ), you could skip those books and instead read some of the articles on Peter Kreeft’s web site, including several chapters from “Fundamentals of the Faith”.

Also, please feel free to contact me by e-mail at paulgh -at- comcast -dot- net if you would like to have a private discussion on these topics.

Paul

 

[ribozyme]

Hi Imagine23,

If you are serious about that statement, then I would strongly recommend that you read a book called Modern Physics and Ancient Faith by Stephen Barr. This book will not prove to you that God exists, or that Christianity is true. However, it does make a very convincing case that belief in God is very rational, given the latest findings of physics. Mr. Barr shows a great depth of understanding of both his subjects (i.e., Judeo-Christian beliefs and modern physics), and he presents his opponents’ arguments in a very fair and coherent manner, followed by an even-handed rebuttal of each argument. The writing style of the book is such that it will not be likely to turn you off; in other words, he does not sound as if he is preaching to the reader. If you have any interest in science, and if you have any interest in the questions you have raised here (which I assume that obviously you do), then I really would recommend this book very highly.

Does Professor Barr deal with the multiverse? Does he deal with the hypotheses of Andrei Linde and Alexander Vilenkin in his book?

 

[PaulGH]

Does Professor Barr deal with the multiverse?

Yes, he deals with the idea of many universes (a finite or infinite number of universes), the idea of many domains within a single universe, and the “many worlds” interpretation of quantum theory.

Does he deal with the hypotheses of Andrei Linde and Alexander Vilenkin in his book?

I will check the index and get back to you on that; I’m not sure. But I am pretty sure that I do remember seeing the name Andrei Linde somewhere in the book.

 

[ribozyme]

Yes, he deals with the idea of many universes (a finite or infinite number of universes), many domains within a single universe, and the “many worlds” interpretation of quantum theory.

I will check the index and get back to you on that; I’m not sure. But I am pretty sure that I do remember seeing the name Andrei Linde somewhere in the book.

Could you please elaborate on what he says about Andrei Linde and Alan Guth’s hypothesis of eternal inflation. If it is correct, it destroys the fine-tuning argument.

 

[PaulGH]

Hi ribozyme,

Does Professor Barr deal with the multiverse? Does he deal with the hypotheses of Andrei Linde and Alexander Vilenkin in his book?

OK, I looked up Linde’s and Vilenkin’s names in the index. Linde is mentioned several times, and his hypothesis of eternal inflation is briefly discussed. Vilenkin is mentioned once in passing, but Barr does not specifically mention any hypothesis attributed to Vilenkin. It is possible that he deals with Vilenkin’s hypothesis elsewhere, without mentioning Vilenkin’s name, but I’m not sure since I don’t know what Vilenkin’s hypothesis is.

Could you please elaborate on what he says about Andrei Linde and Alan Guth’s hypothesis of eternal inflation. If it is correct, it destroys the fine-tuning argument.

Barr does discuss eternal inflation briefly. He mentions a technical problem which seems to tell against the accuracy of this hypothesis, which he further explains in a footnote, though the explanation was too brief for me to completely understand it. He also discusses anthropic coincidences later in the book, and he makes some arguments which I believe would apply to the eternal inflation hypothesis, even though he discusses them more specifically in terms of the “many domains” or “many universes” hypotheses.

Also, I would point out that in your statement (“if it is correct, it destroys the fine-tuning argument”), the word “if” is pretty important, since eternal inflation is only a hypothesis at this point. Also, while Barr does promote the fine-tuning argument, he also concedes the possibility that much of the perceived fine-tuning in the laws of physics could possibly turn out to be explained by some deeper, more fundamental law or laws. But even so, he still contends (with solid reasoning) that such a development still would not support the materialist point of view.

Beyond that, I would encourage you to read the book, as I am afraid that if I try to get any further into “Barr says X”, I will end up inadvertently misrepresenting his arguments – partly because his arguments are a bit subtle and are not easily encapsulated into short sound-bites.

Also, I would like to point out again that he does not argue that physics proves God, but rather that recent discoveries in physics make belief in God quite plausible – at least as plausible as pure materialism, if not more so.

Paul

 

[ribozyme]

I thank you for your thoughtful response, but could you reproduce that footnote about eternal inflation here… Could you give me more details about what he says about Linde’s ideas (and Alan Guth’s) and eternal inflation (and Barr’s criticism of that hypothesis).

The fact Professor Barr believes that the laws of physics can be explained by a more fundamental principle does not surprise me at all. In fact, I thought he believe in that. Reading the titles of his papers on his website would led one to conclude that.

 

[Imagine23]

Meh, at least you got spend a lot of time with him and had the chance to show him you loved him. My dad blew his head off with a rifle-- so you’re not getting much sympathy from me.

The question of pain, in my opinion, is actually the weakest argument against God’s existence-- because many people do continue to believe in God despite the painful things they go through. In fact, many are made stronger by the pain they go through.

Their growth in God despite suffering contradicts the claims of those of no faith who assume bad things disprove his existence. In fact, stuggling is good if you want to learn how to fly. It’s really a matter of perspective, counting it all good so to speak.

And yes, God can even bring something good out of something evil. So get over it and stop feeling sorry for yourself. Life and death happens regardless of what you want to happen. So too does God exist despite the pain we go through.

---

On the intellectual side, I’m still curious as to what atheism offers over and above religion-- and I’m still wondering why one would bother with atheism in either it’s passive or militant form?

As I said before, the examples you gave were not particularly compelling for either form of atheism-- except to those who are already atheists. I haven’t really seen any compelling arguments for either to be fair

I wasn’t seeking sympathy from you by my post (although I do appreciate that expressed by others), I was using the story to illustrate a point. I’m not surprised that you wouldn’t have sympathy because I don’t think there is a correlation between belief in a supernatural power and concern for your fellow human being. Our sense of morals comes from our own sense of feeling harm and suffering and understanding that others have similar feelings.

Pain is a good thing? An innocent child that is run over by a truck and becomes an amputee should be thankful because that will make her stronger? I really don’t see the sense in that. If there is a God I would think he would want to protect the innocent and make our lives easier rather than leave us to the mercy of other deranged humans.

 

[Imagine23]

How can you insult us believers and God and then say “Peace to all”!!?? I don’t think you have any interest in creating peace!

I PRAY you don’t find out God exists after it’s too late!
You will one day. God loves you and cares for you and all you can do is give Him the two fingers! You’ve become too cynical and hard-hearted.

God bless,
Noel.

There is no correlation between belief in a supernatural creator and desiring peace in the world. Such belief are often the root of much of the violence in the world, including your homeland.

 

[Imagine23]

Ahhh… but this goes back to my original response. You may not have to have faith that DNA is DNA…and you don’t have to have faith that the DNA actually works…but, based on your own experiences, you TRUST (i.e., have faith) that it will. Othewise, you probably wouldn’t get out of bed in the morning-- what would be the point?

Again, the critical point here is that you experience it and…in reality…have FAITH in it. It works. As you say, it is verifiable.

But WHEN did it start working? That is what you cannot explain. Do you need to, you might ask? By your own argument, yes, you do-- turn about is fair play here. I tell you that God is real. He is real from my own personal experience and the experience of billions of other people. I have FELT him in my life. I have SEEN him work miracles (I would argue that one of those miracles is that he brought you here to this board and has kept you pressing… ). I KNOW he exists. You tell me, “prove that he exists FOR ME, but prove it on my grounds, scientifically verifiable grounds.”

That is something I cannot do. I ask you to have faith. You say “AHA! see, I can verify for you that science works…where can you show me God works, why can’t you get beyond the “myth” and get to the substance?” That leads back to one of the two issues I hilighted before: the simple fact that it WORKS is scientific PROOF of God.

Why should you believe it? You already do…you have faith that it works.

How do I know that God exists, that it is God that makes science work? With the same conviction, and ironically for many of the same reasons, you know science works: billions of people believe it, thousands of the greatest minds of every age have agreed that it is so…and I’ve seen it for myself.

One final thing, keeping in mind the caveat that it is unfair (for either side) to adequately justify (pun intended) our arguments in a written online forum: while it may be easy to simply say, “you are not providing me with answers, simply pointing me back to the same old “faith” argument,” the reality is that I am pointing you back to the same arguments that support your foundational belief in science. In other words, you cannot argue for “science” in the vaccum of your own personal experience-- you rely on…you trust… the experience of others to reach those conclusions because they, and millions of others, have been able to verify it. Likewise, you cannot expect Christians to argue for religion in the vaccum of YOUR personal experience. At some point, it will ALWAYS boil down to faith.

It’s up to you, and only you, to decide what, in who, and why you will have faith.

Now, if I say that “you are in my prayers,” please do not take offense. That is not meant as a slam on you, nor does it mean that I see myself in some position of authority over you-- far from the contrary. It means I can identify with your doubt (I’ve been there). It means I sympathize with your frustration (I’ve been there). It means that I wish you the peace, the confidence and the amazing affimation that faith in God brings with it. Think of it as me saying “I hope you never have another need for the rest of your life, that you live for eternity in complete happiness and that we both come to know the greatest love there is.” Gods.

You are in my prayers…

G

You’re still confusing blind faith with faith in facts or ideas that make logical sense within the framework that I have established as a thoughtful rational human being. Please read my post again and see the distinction.

The amount of people that believe in a certain topic is of no concern to me and shouldn’t be to you either. Millions and millions of people believe in non-Christian religions. How does that impact your faith in Catholicism? Remember that everyone can be wrong. Like when everyone thought the world was flat. We now know (not based on blind faith) that that is false.

You say again that you know he exists and you have felt him. I would be curious for examples. Someone I spoke to the other day told me this. She believes God exists because he answered certain prayters of hers. I find this thinking incredibly selfish and arrogant (the charge often directed at atheists). What makes you so special that God answers your calls for help and ignorres the millions of sick and abused children in the world?

 

[Gunger]

You’re still confusing blind faith with faith in facts or ideas that make logical sense within the framework that I have established as a thoughtful rational human being. Please read my post again and see the distinction.

The amount of people that believe in a certain topic is of no concern to me and shouldn’t be to you either. Millions and millions of people believe in non-Christian religions. How does that impact your faith in Catholicism? Remember that everyone can be wrong. Like when everyone thought the world was flat. We now know (not based on blind faith) that that is false.

You say again that you know he exists and you have felt him. I would be curious for examples. Someone I spoke to the other day told me this. She believes God exists because he answered certain prayters of hers. I find this thinking incredibly selfish and arrogant (the charge often directed at atheists). What makes you so special that God answers your calls for help and ignorres the millions of sick and abused children in the world?

Now we have gone from science to logic? You are not playing fair with yourself. The aetheist doesn’t even qualify as an opponent when you get to logic. What is more logical? For someone to believe they exist because of trillions and trillions and trillions of coincidental accidents that somehow, someway ended up on a singular planet at a singluar moment only to create THEM (and, by the way, cannot explain how the first accident started other than this might all be a dream)…or…for someone to believe they exist because the fantastic, imminently verifiable and beautiful order that exists in the universe was placed there and created by an intelligent, loving God? You tell me which one is logical or relying on blind faith

My reference to the “amount of people” was simply to point out that, from an at least pseudo-scientific stand point (i.e., verifiable, repeatable etc.), that billions of people have experienced God in their lives. For someone asking for a framework that a “logical, rational human being” can understand, human experience is all either of us have to point to. And, at least as to God, that experience exists, has consistently existed and…I might add (unlike your reference to the world being flat) has NEVER, in all of human experience, been proven to be false. Hence, as a logical, rational human being, if I cannot prove it to be false and I have the experience of billions of people (and again, thousands of them being the greatest intellectual thinkers in the known history of mankind) AND I myself have experienced it…well, I like my chances in having faith that it is true. Nevertheless, at this point, personally, I have the Church and Scripture to confirm that what I experience when I experience God actually IS GOD. What I do not rely on is the idea that this is all an accident created by nothing…

The best personal example I can give you for how I know God has touched my life individually? Despite all of my faults, despite all of my fears…and perhaps most importantly, despite all of my doubts…he sent his only son to die for ME (not just everyone, but for ME personally). How do I know this? I hate to sound like a song, but, because the Bible tells me so. And 2000 years of documented Church history confirms it not as a myth, not as a story, but as a fact. And you know what? That’s not arrogance. The Church teaches that he died for you too. Even if you do not believe, you are nevertheless redeemed. How is that for a miracle?

Now, before you come back with the piniata bat and take a swing at the last paragraph for it being blatantly religious, please remember…you asked.

As I said before, regardless of how steadfast your position may be, you cannot “unjustify” belief in religion by trying to do so imperically-- you lose every time. More importantly, you cannot “unjustify” belief in religion by proclaiming that no one can show you on your ever-changing terms how God is NOT in your life…that’s not a discussion. It’s intellecutual masterbation (meaning, it only involves you). That was a bit harsh. Sorry (I know, I know, even though I apologized, I left it in here…because it is true…but I still love you anyway ).

I’ve learned from experience that once I get to throwing around pithy insults, it’s best if I hang up my pen on a subject. I’ve enjoyed the lively debate.

You remain in my prayers…

G

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I wasn’t seeking sympathy from you by my post (although I do appreciate that expressed by others), I was using the story to illustrate a point.

Yes. And your point appears to be that suffering is fundamentally meaningless. And that’s simply not true.

Furthermore I am sympathetic to your suffering. What I am not sympathetic too is your suggestion that suffering negates or disproves God’s existence. It doesn’t.

Imagine23:

I’m not surprised that you wouldn’t have sympathy because I don’t think there is a correlation between belief in a supernatural power and concern for your fellow human being.

Yes. And this is yet another astounding claim you’re making.

That must be why so many of us here have expressed genuine sympathy for your suffering and the suffering of your grandfather.

This must also be why James 1:27 says religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

This must also be why Jesus said in Luke 23:34, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

At this point I have to say that I seriously doubt that you are looking for any answers here.

Perhaps you do not know what you are doing?

Imagine23:

Our sense of morals comes from our own sense of feeling harm and suffering and understanding that others have similar feelings.

Yes. Do onto others as you would have them do unto you*. It’s called empathy. And the Church has clearly manifested God’s empathy for humanity-- and we do the same for each other.

Imagine23:

Pain is a good thing?

No. Pain is a bad thing. But God can bring good out of bad things.

Imagine23:

An innocent child that is run over by a truck and becomes an amputee should be thankful because that will make her stronger?

The fact that the childs was run over by a truck isn’t good.

And yet good things can be brought out of this suffering.

Imagine23:

I really don’t see the sense in that.

The reason why you don’t see the sense in it is because you are asumming that God is forcing this to happen so that something good will result. But that’s not what I’m saying. It’s not what God is saying either.
Romans 3:8:

Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”?

Their condemnation is deserved.

God is not doing evil so that good may result.

This passage below is how God works…
Romans 12:21:

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

God intended good. But he also allowed us the free-will to rebel against his will. However, even if something bad happens because people have rebelled against his will, God can still bring something good our of these bad events which happened as a result of their rebellion.

Imagine23:

If there is a God I would think he would want to protect the innocent and make our lives easier rather than leave us to the mercy of other deranged humans.

He does want to protect the innocent and make our lives easier. But God is not a day-dreamer here. He knows full well that bad things will happen. And when they do happen, he lets us know that we need to find the good in these bad things in order to continue.

“I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

We don’t do bad things on purpose in order to bring about good things. The end does not justify the means.

But we more than fully capable of choosing whether or not we will allows these sufferings destroy us or not. Even more, as Catholics, we know that we can offer our sufferings to God so that he can transform them into something blessed.

*Please note that if the things you would have others do unto you do not correspond to the Lord’s will as expressed in the 10 commandments for example, then the things you would have others do unto you would be sinful-- therefore nullifying the goodness of the things you would have others do unto you.