Theology or Revelation?

The structural guise

You call yourself a Christian because you are saved according to Romans 10:9 and place your trust in the precious blood.  You also believe the Bible because it is recognized as the Christians manual for life and identifies your faith to the world.  Having just arrived in town after moving from another district, finding 'the right' church (what we have been duped into calling "finding a spiritual home") is a top priority for both you and your family.  After purchasing a local newspaper you scan the latest church notices in order to find this appropriate church for regular Sunday attendance, because you are not aware your family is actually the family of God and that you have exchanged the kingdom you have been born into, for a man-made alternative called Christendom.  You are also not aware that this religious mentality you have adopted, confuses nominal Christianity with biblical Christianity in the first place.  This is the reason you look to a newspaper, or bulletin board, or an advertisement, in regards to finding the right people of God to sit with in passive mode, a least once a week.

Now just imagine when you looked through those newspaper 'church notices' that among all the "relevant" and varied churches advertised, there was one particular Sunday invitation which stood out the most.  The reason, it read like this ... 

"Everyone is welcome to our family services!  We are a dedicated Christian community that DO NOT BELIEVE in the Bible and will rationally teach you from well researched commentaries and reliable manuscripts how the word of God is INACCURATE and can never be relied upon for revelation!"

Would you circle the name of that particular denomination as a possibility to check out and attend?  Not in your life dear saint!  Just as most other folk, who call themselves professing Christians, would not do either.  In fact, wouldn't there be some sort of verbal blacklisting against this particular church, as well as hugh outspoken opposition made by the other churches bearing the name Christian?  Also, wouldn't this blatant denial against the Bible in turn work against this non-bible believing church, and cause a widespread drop in its attendance?

The incredible thing, which most do not want to face, is that this church (or denomination, or whatever you prefer to call it) would actually be (in most cases) more honest than other churches advertised on this or any other typical Sunday church notice.  Of course a so-called Bible believing church is not going to lay all its cards on the table like this anyway, and blow its cover, and admit it represents a charade at worst, or a contradiction at best, when it came down to the tin-tacks in whether the Bible was fully inspired and fully dependable ...  would it?  Unless it is going confess and genuinely recant its unsound and anti-bible stance.  Either way, would it not be to its demise?  Furthermore, would it not also at least allow the Holy Ghost to move in conviction power and even blessing on some individuals, who out of this crucial mishap, happen to call out to God they are suppose to serve?

Now it does not take much for most people to understand that all denominations depend on 'the numbers game' to achieve wide spread support and monetary input, in order for the denomination to exist and function as a visible and justified (Christian) institution.  Hence, the reason it must present itself as "Christian" and look as "Bible based" as it can.  While at the same time survive and even flourish unbiblically.  This means, in order for it to function to this capacity, its government must be somehow crafted in the art of how to be seen as being scriptural, when in essence it is not, while reaping the benefits as if it was the gateway to heaven and had the monopoly over truth.  This is skilled trickery in how to rob the common people of direct revelation they are entitled to, if they have indeed found Christ.  It is achieved when men cleverly set up theological smokescreens who are trained and honed enough to know how to execute it to a tee, and successfully carry it on, under the cloak of social decency and pastoral care.  Even if a Minister happens to be clumsy, less astute and glib than his peers.  Or happens to be as harmless as a fly or very genuine in his endeavours; the religious machinery in place is so entrenched in modern society anyway, that it rolls on, without missing a beat, by its sheer dominance and integration within the system in general.

The difference

You have probably heard it said before ...  that theology is all about learning about God, and nothing to do with knowing God.  Therefore, by now we should understand that the religious way of philosophizing the truth is by using what is referred to as theology.  Moreover, before we go any further I think that it would be best at this stage to see very clearly the difference between theology and revelation.  Remembering, one is of man (using biblical terminology and phraseology in complicating the plain words of scripture) while the other is of God (simple, forthright, spiritual insight).  Here we go:

Theology - the universal schools of thought examining religious questions and philosophy.  Or the learned profession of religious studies.  Taught by man for man, in order to redirect focus from divine revelation to an array of ongoing questions and disputes.  This is what the word of God says in relation to man looking to mans' wisdom instead of God's:

Titus 3:9.  "But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain."

With man there is no end to questionings and debates, and questions that only lead to more questions, like looking for the proverbial pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  However, with God there is nothing to question or nothing to debate or dispute ...  the truth is non negotiable!  However, the truth may be bought (revealed at a cost).  But according  to Proverbs 23:23 the truth can't be sold (how many people do you know today who peddle their ministry selling their anointing and tapes and books in, or at, the back of "the temple"?)!  Before moving on, it is important to understand that the truth is only revealed as the Holy Ghost leads us into ALL truth!

Revelation - hearing directly from God.  Or the truth made real to the believers spirit by the illumination of the Spirit of God.  Taught by God to man.  Bearing in mind, if we don't hear we can't apply; or 'do' or 'know' God's will.  This is what the word of God tells us to do in regards to hearing from God:

John 8:31.  " If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Revelation is to do with hearing or seeing and knowing the truth.  It is nothing to do with being trained or well learned.  Theology is to do with learning concepts, which consequently can be a conception or a misconception, or both running in parallel, to disguise the truth in order to obstruct someone coming to a knowledge of the truth.  In a line ...  theology has nothing to do with revelation or being a disciple of Jesus.  Because, at the end of the day, the only apparatus necessary for the Bible student is the Holy Bible ...  God's tangible book we can hold in out hands and read from for ourselves.  In the art of theology, many apparatus' have to be set in motion and promoted as (almost) vital, in order to aid the student in the process of  becoming a source of knowledge outside light and truth.  This is what God's word has got to say about this (2 Tim. 3:7):

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

When all is said and done, it will come down to whether an individual is prepared to listen to an unseen God or place his trust in visible man and his palpable reasons.  Is this not where revelation is smokescreened by mans religious doctrines and mesmerized by his slick and polished commentaries?  The fact of the matter is ...  theology is of man, whereas revelation is of God!  It could not be put any simpler in regards to comparing God's word with man's scholarly alibis.  As the book of Proverb declares in regards to God's voice ...  "They are all plain to him that understandeth"!  Or, as the book of Revelation declares in regards to what proceeds out of the throne of God ...  they are "as clear as crystal"!

Reiterating ...  they are all plain and they are clear as crystal!!  How plain and clear is that?  However, when man wants to remain in control, without losing his position and cushy livelihood and cosy lifestyle (but be seen as being helpful and professional in his dealings with those he makes out he has right to rule over) he must obscure what is clear as crystal and confuse what is plain to him that has understanding.  This is why he learns to "shut up the kingdom of heaven against men".  Why, because Jesus also said, "for (he) neither go in (himself), neither suffer them that are entering to go in."

That's because he is not even interested in entering himself.  Why?  Because he probably doesn't even believe the kingdom exists, let alone ever experiencing being changed by the word.  However, he may see it as a good opportunity to gather in as many as he can who are seeking, in order to exploit the situation and make merchandise out of them (2 Pet. 2:3).  Proof of this is found in the above verse (Matt. 23:13) showing very clearly that as people are actually entering the kingdom, they are prohibited from going any further by man "officially" getting in the way and complicating things through philosophizing the truth (is the penny being to drop?).  A beautiful way to bamboozle the unsuspecting and gullible.  Or those who commence their journey in simplicity, but end up being swung over to using human proxies, who convince them they know best.  A beautiful way to justify ecclesiastical authority, religious rank, and a higher calling.

A person who looks for answers theologically, will ever quote man using both his historic and present commentaries.  Whereas a student of the scripture, will always quote scripture to back the truth and rightly divide.  This is the difference between a Bible believer and a Bible corrector.  It is also the difference between those who will minister the E-E-C through scripture ("to edification, and exhortation, and comfort") than those who would rob you of your revelation (Matt. 23:13) ...  "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God"!  It is also the difference between what the word says about the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1 John 4:6):

"We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error."

A theologian, or scriptural critic, or religious professional, will always question scripture in order to build a critical case and therefore provide critical explanations, while avoiding crucial biblical fact and allowing scripture to substantiate itself.  You may be familiar with this spin used from politicians to theologians, in order to gain control by creating a problem in order to bring a solution.  Just like the tactic of the serpent in the garden with Eve.  Therefore, if the Bible corrector can win his case, it is only he who can apparently substantiate the facts, therefore justifying his position as the final authority in the end.  This is contrary to God's way which is allowing scripture to correct man and does not allow man to correct scripture.  By correcting scripture man is therefore audaciously correcting God Almighty the Creator, by replacing His written authority through his own expertise and textual credence.  Let us be reminded here from 2 Peter 1:20:

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

Meaning, as soon as a fraternity, or institution, or church, or clerical system, comes across as having ownership (or holds the key) of revelation, this will be an indication it wants to replace your relationship with the Lord with a condescending 'right of interest' over your spiritual walk in the Lord, cancelling out what the word of God says, in order to bring you back (professionally and plausibly) under some sort of bondage and control.  2 Thessalonians 2:3 speaks for itself:

"Let no man deceive you by any means"!

Also, note 1 John 2:27 here and ask the Lord to show you what it really means?  After all, it must have been included into the canon of scripture for a reason wouldn't you say, and is either figurative or literal, or practical advice or just airy-fairy eloquent poetic phraseology?:

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

From the non-conditioned novice to those who have not been indoctrinated by religiosity, they would simply see the above verse to be taken LITERALLY without questioning it as an abstract or mystical implication, or just hidden symbolic representation!  They would also see it as both practical, plain and clear instruction, from a God who does not play games or minister confusion.  Moreover, they would also not dismiss it as saying eldership has no place in the New Testament.  With this mind, following is where elders have a place in the Body and are there to safeguard you in the faith, respect your right as a Berean (meaning you can think things out for yourself using the scriptures), and encourage the saints to perfection in Christ (Eph. 4: 11-16):

2 Cor. 1:24.  "Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand."

Many prefer to be hinderers of your joy and liberty in the Spirit and keep dominion over your faith, in order to preserve their status and not have their role as hireling jeopardized.  They would rather you be in bondage than have their own profession challenged or bypassed, making their call or ministry both unnecessary and obsolete (Heb. 7:12, 23-24).  The good new according to Hebrews 8:6 is ...  Jesus has obtained for us "a more excellent ministry," being "the mediator of a better covenant (the new covenant), which was established upon better promises".  Meaning, it is all over for priestcraft, man-made mediums, religious mediators and go-betweens.  Today, there are genuine teachers of the word of God and there are commentators of the word of God.  The latter is superfluous and comes as a relic of the Old Covenant, which was annulled at the cross.

"This commentary" or "that commentary" or simply the Book?

A commentary means there first must have been a commentator!  Moreover, the dictionary meaning of a commentator is an expert who observes and comments on something.  Oh how many times do we hear people trying to use or point to the so-called allusive ORIGINALS in regards to getting the right gist on what God is trying to convey?  At first, when one sees past this device, it appears as the most cleverest trick around, before he comes to realize how stupid (but effective) this ploy is.  Moreover, when one totally wakes up to this fact, he then understands how it is actually working like a disease/leaven throughout the Body and the main weapon of all Bible correctors and Bible thieves.  Quite frankly I am very tired of all this mundane nonsense of  folk using their expertise or quoting the lines of what others have conveyed to them, in regards to the phantom "original" Greek or the 'Hebraic root word' of what God apparently originally intended a passage, or a verse, or a word in the Bible to have supposedly meant.  As if God is not clear and simplistic enough, and smart and wise enough, and great and powerful enough, to keep and preserve His word "from this generation for ever" ...  just as He promised to.

When a seasoned Bible corrector or a young ignhairy-fairyorantist comes to you, undermining your Bible by mentioning the so-called 'originals' in order to place man back in control of revelation, and you try to explain there are no originals to use (whether a direct letter or very early manuscript), they haven't a clue to what you are actually saying.  They are so blinded by religious proposition that they don't realize they are trying to support their case using wind and empty rhetoric.  This is because the actual God breathed, original autographed scripts that Moses, the prophets, and the apostles had written, have perished over time due to the limited time span these parchments could have survived.  F'instance, most (if not all) of the material used by these inspired writers would have been written on papyrus, which usually only has about a 150 years life span.  So please, ask these Bible experts to show you or point  you to a copy of at least one of these original letters written by the men of God of old?  Answer, they can't do it because they simply do not exist.  Somehow they can't accept that physical material perishes over time.  They don't want to admit the originals scripts are no longer here to pick up, hold, read and quote from.  They don't want to accept the very obvious plain facts that we only have copies of copies of copies of copies, and so on, to read from.  End of story!!!

Furthermore, this is the reason you draw a blank line from them and the reason they will now go past attacking just your doctrine, but YOU in person, because they are left wanting with nothing else to prove their futile and unfounded case.  Unless they go waaay ooover into the other extreme, into the fantasyland realm in propagating a mystic unfound bible, that awaits to be written sometime in the near future.  I am not pulling your leg here!  These people, with written credentials and with Reverend in front of their name, have tried to pull this one over us, on the odd occasion.  I recommend that you question all these people when they come at you with all these plausible or crazy notions, and you will see they only trust or give reference to a phantom bible that does not even exist.  Ask them to point you to it, or hand you a copy, as simple questions should get simple answers, simply because "the way of the righteous is made plain (Pr. 15:19)."  No one has been able to produce the goods at this point of time, but they have only flown off the handle and accused me of being divisive or standing on very dangerous ground.  Yes, we are dangerous ...  but only to Bible correctors and those who want to baffle you with science so-called, in order to win their prideful game.

Another big question that needs to be asked  ...  how do we know what Moses, the prophets and the apostles wrote in the first place, if the originals have all perished with time?  I can only point you to God's word here, simply because the scriptures speak of 'divine preservation' as well as 'divine inspiration'.  God is either a liar or He is not.  He is either quite capable of preserving His written word or He is incapable.  What do you believe?  Moreover, if God has promised to keep and preserve His word to every generation and that "every word of God is pure" to the very jot and very tittle (fullstop, comma and single letter - Matt. 5:18), then you either believe it or you do not believe it.  Those that deliberately or unbeknowingly don't, will do all they can to convince you from the phantom 'originals' not realizing what they are actually trying to prove.  Now ain't that incredible and is not 1 Corinthians 1:20 very fitting here?:

"Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?"

Furthermore, when this sensible argument is applied to Bible correctors and those students of the School Of Naïveté, instead of coming to their senses, they then attack YOU and accuse YOU for not believing the originals nor complying to their outrageous and insane demands.  Or accusing you for preferring English above the originals.  Or that you are undermining or being disrespectful to Hebrew or Greek.  Have you ever heard anything so preposterous?  Just because a person will say English is more accurate to go by today than pieces of so-called scattered commentaries and manuscripts, this does not mean they loathe Hebrew or Greek, or Latin or Aramaic, or any other language for that matter.  This is just pure strawman building in order to justify their cause. 

My case is what I have always said ...  that the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew whereas the New Testament was originally written in Greek.  Now that is not being distasteful or disrespectful in any way, is it?  Moreover, if God has kept and preserved His written word, until this generation, then why would I need to go back to the original Hebrew or original Greek scripts for trusted revelation if they are no longer with us and cannot be found?  Is this not an unsound case and totally absurd?  A meaningless argument?  This logic would say that just one copy passed onto another fellowship from just one of Paul's hand-written letters, was not as reliable as the very first hand penned letter written by Paul himself.  Why, because God could not preserve the second God fearing  person's (copied) letter under the direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost!  God is just not capable, according to this silly notion!  However, scripture declares He is, as Psalms 12: 6-7 confirms to a tee:

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth (proven), purified seven times (to completion).  Thou shalt keep them, O LORD (a promise), thou shalt preserve them (a promise) from this generation for ever (always in the continued present tense)."

Back in the days of Moses and the prophets, of course Hebrew would have been the most accurate way of expounding and being versed in scripture.  The same would have happened with Greek when the New Testament was first being penned.  And YES, English did not even exist then and was not even thought of.  Just as Hebrew never existed pre flood, yet God had His people at this time as well.  Therefore, the case against the English Bible today does not stack up.  If we have God's word today in English, and English is the universal endtime language in the immediate NOW, as Greek was at the beginning of the church age, and God is well able to keep and preserve His word to every generation, then surely the language God's words is found in today should be the best and most accurate!  Also, the buck should stop there as far as final authority is concerned!  Especially if God has ordained it, confirmed and proven it to be, by centuries of fruitfulness, genuine conversions and true Holy Ghost revivals.

Yes, Greek was the best and most accurate for the four gospels and the epistles of the apostles, having been first penned in this language, when it was the universal language at the beginning of the first century, which happened to be the beginning of the church age.  However, now they have been superseded due to the non availability of the originals and the fact that we now have God's full written word in English called 'the Holy Bible', at the very end of the church age.  Otherwise termed 'the Authorized Bible'.  Or otherwise nick named 'the King James Version' of the Bible.

Honour the king

Moving on again, and due to a king coming into the equation this time, let's look at 1 Tim. 13 - 17 from the New Testament itself:

"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;  Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.  For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:  As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.  Honour all men.  Love the brotherhood.  Fear God.  Honour the king."  

Please also note in the next following verse 18 ...  whether the king is froward or not, this has got nothing to do with going against the king or not.  The fact that the Holy Bible was linked to the name King James was nothing to do with whether King James was a child of God or not (Ps. 61:6, PR. 29:4).  After all, who was King Cyrus in the Old Testament, who sanctioned the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem?  Was he not a heathen king?

It was nothing to do with King James manipulating the fifty or so scholars on the revision committee either.  It was merely to do with the king sanctioning a full Bible being written in the language which would happen to govern the world and because God had sanctioned James Stuart as king at the time.  This is irrespective of a king's motive, but everything to do with the will of the King of kings (Pr. 16:1).

Did not Daniel prosper during the reign of King Darius, another heathen king?  Just remember, when the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem was finally carried out, it was because it was sanctioned by a back slidden king this time.  Going back in time, it was also a pagan king which sanctioned the children of Israel's freedom from slavery and exodus out of Egypt.  This is the reason why the ploy connecting King James with the Holy Bible, and saying he manipulated the committee without a shred of proof, and therefore undermining the man, works in the hands of those who are out to undermine the Book.  Forget about the quality of the vessel.  It is the quality of the Book that counts ...  Is it or isn't it the written word of God?  After all, this is the issue!  It can only be one or the other can' it?  It is either a fraud or something you can lay your life and salvation on.  If it is a fraud, then stop given it token credence or spoken niceties, while at the same time trying to expose it as an inaccurate book at best, and an impostor book at worst?  This is nothing but hypocrisy or pretence and speaking with a forked tongue.  If it is God's Book then treat it as such and honour and obey it!  If it is not, then say so, and warn the world, without pretending to treat it as just a lovely, poetic, and historic piece of literature!  Just the same, let's not get hung up on a historic king but let's get focused on the King of kings and His trusted written decrees!  All written and kept as the inspired, recorded, living oracles of God, in the book we call the Holy Bible, which we can hold in our hands and read from, and quote from, believing and confidently saying with full assurance ...  "it is written"!!

Here's how the spiralling downwards, from the ultimate authority of the scriptures works:  First, it is by the subject questioning elements of verses or passages of scripture.  This is the serpentine phrase "hath God said" being dressed up to look thought provoking and credible.  It is the enemy trying to sway you from partaking of one particular tree to another particular tree ...  exchanging the tree of life for the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  This way the truth of God's word is exchanged for mere biblical commentary.  At this point it can now be dissected and analysed further by other students of the "Hath God Said Club", which in turn means commentaries of scripture are made into further commentaries of scripture, until the plot gets lost in a haze of jumbled and sophisticated analyse and subjugation.  Thus the school of scholarly 'higher learning' and credentialed scholarship is born and celebrated as a worthy and justified profession.  Whether this school of higher learning is rightly called the Hath God said Club, the Alexandrian Cult, or the Alexandrian spirit, I would have to say that the word 'spirit' is the closest biblical conclusion that can be found here.  Because it is just that ...  a spirit!  An underlying lying spirit which is ultimately responsible for the confusion and questioning of God's written word.  Whereas deceived and captivated men are his agents in promoting this serpentine goal.
 
"And no marvel; for Satan himself (a lying spirit - the father of lies) is transformed into an angel of light (illumination and insight).  Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers (Bible correctors and Bible thieves) also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness".

Furthermore, the enemies leader, Satan, will do all he can to thwart the credibility and divine authority of the written word which is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword.  Because, at the end of the day when everything boils down to either truth and error, there is only two spirits to yield to with no neutral stance in-between.  These two spirits are defined and revealed as the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.  The word of God quickly divides what side of the fence the believer and the so-called believer make a stand on ... the side of error with the Devil and his cohorts, and those who are out to correct the Bible ...  or the side of truth?  This is where the Holy Bible stands out as the Book above every book, and the only reliable source to where truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, is found.

2 Cor. 13:8.  "For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth."

Line upon line

Paul made it quite clear to the intellectual Corinthians that knowledge can puff up a believer, as he also made it quite clear about the dangers of following a personality.  He also pointed out to them the futility and foolishness of the wisdom of men, from the scribe to the mighty and noble, with this question in mind coupled with a true declaration:

"Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?"

Paul also made it clear about the type of people the Lord will choose to use.  Is it the well learned and intellectually gifted and high minded?  In contrast, weren't some or most of the apostles unlearned (Acts 4:13)?  Additionally, is it a hugh advantage to God if one is brilliant and well qualified and is skilled in the likes of say academia, philosophy, anthropology, or other valued practices?  Answer:  Only on the condition the true servant's abilities are surrendered to God as academic and intellectual giftings can be a stumbling block to the individual, as he finds it hard to place God above his education, and trust in the simplicity of the gospel.  The reason "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him".  And the very reason the well educated but broken Paul (an ex Pharisee who had been well schooled in the Jewish faith) stated the following:

"And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh (man) should glory in his presence."

The wonderful thing is that God does not expect us to be a "know all".  Nor does He choose us on the basis of our education or how excellent our IQ is.  Or how many letters we have in front of our name.  He is merely interested in a relationship above all things, with us, His children (with dimples or pimples), and that we would just trust in His word and be obedient.  Yes, likened to children that is!  The reason we have to become as a child to enter His kingdom and start off in our pilgrimage as babes.

As far as revelation goes, it does not all come at once.  It is a faith thing that must be learnt by hearing from God and experiencing His transforming power daily, as we walk in Him and continue in His word.  We can never change ourselves and the inheritance should not begotten hastily according to Pr. 20:21, as "the end thereof shall not be blessed."  However, He can change us from within, taking us from one height of glory to another, as we abide in Him in childlike simplicity and trust, believing His word and doing it, without being puffed up and self conceited.  It's true ...  without Him we can do (absolutely) nothing!  And as we continue in His word, He reveals Himself to us ...  "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little", while we mature and grow by grace.  Jesus said ...

"All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."

Confirmed by 1 Cor. 2:10 this side of heaven ... "But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit"!