Ye the Temple of God

“We don't know what is the Temple of God because we don't understand who we are.” – PoTai

“Finding out who we are is a ongoing process that's integral to life's purpose. And finding out who we are is not something we will do once and then be done with.” – PoTai

Ye are the Temple of God
by Eleazar, 2012

        This narrative is one of a series written about finding newer perspectives in old notions. It is being written in a language common to Mormon religion and Christian experience. This narrative will explore newer meanings of a passage of scripture that appears in the New Testament: “Ye are the temple of God.” (1 Corinthians 3:16).

        This narrative will briefly refer to symbolism in the LDS temple endowment ceremony that might appear confusing to those who have not read other narratives on the endowment by this author. If that is the case, it may be helpful to take a look at Temple Book II: Narratives on meaning beyond the LDS endowment ceremony.

        There are no claims that ideas being presented are doctrinal positions or approved by church leaders. There are no religious, civil, political, or personal agendas at play here. The ideas are merely offered in a spirit of free thought, open discourse, and a desire to share with others how discovery can result in finding a more wonderful path in this world rather than continuance on a difficult one.

        The statement,Ye are the temple of God embodies a deep and profound concept that is almost entirely missed by the world. Within that grand statement of what is, emerges a common question that many will find familiar. Understanding the answer to that question is a starting point to comprehending the meaning of the relevant passage in First Corinthians. This important question is embodied in the first word of the passage: Ye. Otherwise stated, we do not comprehend what Ye are the Temple of God means because we don't know who we are.

        Mormons are counseled to go to the temple, an edifice, to get an endowment for themselves (appropriately called a 'living endowment') and, thereafter, return often to obtain endowments for the dead. The profound symbolism in the endowment experience is missed by nearly all of the patrons attending. Unbeknown to the most who have 'taken out their endowments', the failure to understand is perfectly mirrored (reflected; acted out) in the ritual being experienced.

        The word endowment refers to a bestowal of knowledge and that is precisely what occurs in the LDS temple endowment experience. Fallen Adam (symbolizing the patron) is presented with the knowledge (s)he foolishly seeks. At the same time, Adam fails to see (perceive) that obtaining additional light and knowledge (per his desire) is not a escape from his Fallen condition, but rather a continuance of it. Fallen Adam mistakenly believes that increasing his knowledge will solve his problems, but the root problem is that he fails to understand. As a result of his failure to understand, Adam (endowment patron; carnal man) experiences a bitter sojourn in life, living out his existence in a lone and dreary world.

        The problem is that Adam (the patron), having consumed fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, is not in his right mind. As a result of being out in his mind, Adam is found in the wrong place doing the wrong thing. For one, the temple in which the endowment patron (Adam) finds himself acting out, is not the true temple. Appropriately, the endowment that the patron receives in the LDS temple is a carnal one. And when the endowment ritual ends for the patron, (s)he leaves the temple, goes back into the world, and (hopefully) returns to the (true) temple on another day.

        Why all of this talk about the LDS temple endowment? It should be easy for even the most literal-thinking mind to realize that the temple building (an edifice constructed by men) is not to what the passage in First Corinthians refers. The Temple, to which devout Mormons show great veneration and aspire to enter (and renter), is a carnal temple.

        However, when the carnal mind is faced with such a prospect, it is not easily deterred from a path of knowledge. Instead of giving up on older notions, carnal man mistakenly tries to build on them. As a result, the carnal mind would reason that if the true temple is not an ornate building constructed by men, then it must be something else that (s)he can easily identify with.

        A popular notion is that the true temple is the physical body, a vehicle for the Spirit. However, simple consideration will reveal that too is mistaken. On hearing the true temple is not the physical body, the carnal mind is prone to proceed further along it's usual line of thinking. That is, if it is not the physical body, then it must be the spiritual body. And if it's not the spiritual body, then it must be the mind (mental body). And if it's not the mind, then it must be the heart. After all, the heart is what truly 'knows', right? And the heart is the very thing that led us to the temple (building) and our precious knowledge in the first place!

        The real truth is that while all of this is going on in the mind (and heart) of carnal man, there is little change in what is going on in the sojourn of the same. As carnal man continues to obtain the further light and knowledge he desires, he remains walking the same path of frustration in a lone and dreary world. He is ever learning, yet never coming to a knowledge (comprehension; understanding; realization) of the truth.

        With all of that said, what is the grand secret that's being missed?

        A beginning point to understanding has already been stated in this narrative. For clarity, we will restate it again here: In order to better understand the meaning of the passage in First Corinthians, we will need to first understand who we are. The question of who we are will be covered next in this narrative. But, there's much more than that too, for that is merely a starting point. This narrative will also explore what is meant by this.

Who am I?

        'Who am I?' is a question that devout Mormons are prone to mistakenly believe they know about. In a nutshell, someone whom is believed to have knowledge of the answer, has told them and that answer is consumed eagerly like a delicious fruit.

        In much of what is being experienced, there is great symbolism at play. Prior to patrons going through the LDS temple endowment ritual, there is an event that takes place that is either mistakenly overlooked as being of lesser significance or it is taken to mean what it doesn't. This event is the ritual of being given a new name.

        Those who have been through the LDS temple endowment ritual will have a new name given to them which they are told to never divulge except at a place which will be shown to them thereafter. The place they are shown to divulge the (new) name is during the ceremony at the veil where it is a name (symbol) of a token (First Token of the Aaronic Priesthood) given earlier in the endowment ritual.

        Much symbolism is conveyed with regard to all of the names used in the endowment ceremony and it is not reasonable or necessary to digress further here for the purpose of examining what is being conveyed by the (so called) new name. However, a few important keys to understanding might be considered. These are: (1) Noticing that giving back names of the tokens fail in getting Adam (patron) through the veil, and (2) Noticing that names of all tokens given in the endowment are given names (ie. names given at birth or given during the endowment ceremony). However, there is one minor exception to point one, the name of the second token of the Melchizedek Priesthood which is, significantly, given through the veil at the moment it is needed.

        In the case of the new name, it might also be important to notice that the name is recognizable as someone else who lived in history. One might even call these new old names or old new names. Examples of new names are (for males) Hyrum, Isaiah, Amos, Jacob, John, or Joseph. On a given day, all of the new names given to males (alternatively, to females) are the same ones, except in cases where the given name matches the new name of the day (eg. John is both the new name for the day as well as the given name of the relevant patron), in which case the new name is (always; and appropriately) given as Adam (or Eve for females). When someone forgets their new name, it can be deduced by looking though records that show what new name was given on the day the endowment occurred.

        Patrons are told in the endowment to never divulge their new name (or endowment tokens, signs, and penalties) to others. To the contrary, that is exactly what the patron does (divulges them to others) and thereby suffers death (figurative; spiritual death). The patron can't help from revealing the name (or tokens and signs), since names are (symbols) of what Adam is, and carnal man always reveals who he is to others who have eyes to see (are able to perceive). The tokens (partial handshakes) given in the endowment are symbols of incomplete fellowship with God. Fallen Adam unwittingly reveals that to everyone around him. For Adam's sake, most (though not all) of the people he associates with are as blind as he is, so few are the wiser.

        Why all this talk of names? It may be important to first understand that names are symbols (as well as tokens and signs). Names, as symbols, are meant to identify ourselves to others. That way, others can (supposedly) know who it is they are interacting with. But, do these names really work in doing what they say they do?

        It's important to notice that all of these names we have spoken about thus far are given names. That is, they given to us by others. As it has already been stated, all of the names used in the LDS endowment ritual are either given at birth (ie. are our state names; legal names) or they are given to the patron as a part of the endowment ritual itself.

        With that said, consider this question: Can anyone else tell you who you are? Sure they can and that is exactly what is going on. Carnal man foolishly plays out a role that (s)he fails to comprehend. Dear reader, if you aren't getting it, go back and re-read the first paragraph in this section (immediately following the title: Who am I?).

        Our failure in understanding who we are is a foundational message that emerges in the symbolism of the LDS temple endowment. In it, there is great comedic irony. At the same time that patrons don't know who they are, others (endowment administrators; church leaders) believe they are about a sacred business of telling them.

        Continuing on, it might be worthwhile to notice that question being considered here is one of three that LDS missionaries will pose to candidates investigating Mormonism: (1) Who am I?, (2) Why am I here?, and (3) Where am I going? The third question is only important to the carnal mind that endlessly worries about what the future will bring. It has no true relevance to what is really going on now. The second question, in it's essence, is redundant and fully integral with the first (this itself is symbolically meaningful).

It might also be worthwhile to notice that these two questions (Who am I?; Why am I here?) are inseparably related to the purpose of being (life). Simply said: The 'why' of it is all about the 'who' of it all. At a risk of oversimplifying, the who/why can be stated this way: Adam is that God may discover himself and find joy in experience. That might appear to be overly cryptic, but it's a simple idea that is easily understood when a bigger picture is seen. And a wonderful secret is that you, the temple (Adam), are the means by which that happens. But, there's a lot more magical wonderfulness in it than you, the temple, as the means.

Who am I? (part 2)

At this point in the discussion, we still have not fully addressed the question of who we are. Moreover, there is also a pregnant question that has arisen in the prior section. It's this: If it's true that no one can tell you who you are, then how do you find out? Moreover, can this narrative tell me who I am? A simple response to that last question is no. However, it may help to point to a way.

Each individual can only find out who they are by their own experience (that very thing is foundational to the purpose of life). But that does not mean that there are not important thresholds to cross. In this section of the narrative, we will point to one of them. Paradoxically, this threshold to understanding can be approached by a practice of doing the opposite to what is desired: In a search to find out who you are, it is helpful to start eliminating the things that you are not.

This approach to self-discovery is taught by a variety of eastern religious philosophical systems. When approaching the question of what is “not I” (Am I that (thing)?), what is found at the earliest stages can be rationally understood by the mind. However, as the easy choices of what is not the true self are eliminated, the exercise becomes more difficult, most especially when the rational mind itself is being considered.

As an example, it might be asked: “Am I my physical body?” For some, that should be fairly easy to answer using the rational mind (though it isn't an easy question for scientists who harbor notions that the material universe gives rise to consciousness rather than the other way around). So, when the physical body dies, does that mean 'I' am no more? It should be easy to follow that if I still exist after the physical body is dead and decomposed, then I am not the physical body.

Going further, we will use the Vipassana (self-observation) tradition of meditation as the example. In Vipassana (Goenka method), students are asked to do nothing for one hour except concentrate all of their attention on feeling sensations on the upper lip coming from the breath emerging from the nose. That is the only goal in the early exercise of Vipassana meditation, nothing else. Sit in quiet with eyes closed for one hour in observation of the sensation of the breath passing through the nose onto the upper lip.

That exercise might seem nonsensical on the surface, but new realizations that emerge from such an exercise of self-observation can be surprising and manifold. New practitioners find that maintaining concentration on the sensation of breath for an hour is more difficult than imagined. The task will seem impossible on first trying it. Often, concentration can't be maintained for longer than a minute at a time. With continued practice, one might progress to maintaining the watchful concentration for a few minutes at a time. The reason is that the mind craftily enters into the concentration and diverts it. Instead of concentrating on the sensation on the lip from the breath and nothing else, as willed, a thought or two might first present itself briefly onto the stage of the mind. That catches the attention. After that, a thought process begins and soon thereafter diverts attention until concentration on the breath is lost completely. Where it goes from there is anyone's guess. The student may start thinking about tasks that need to be done, reviewing past events, daydreaming and, in some cases, gets bored with where the mind has gone and falls asleep.

As a result, a practitioner of Vipassana experiences first-hand about what is often referred to as the “monkey mind”. The mind is revealed to the practitioner to be like a monkey that is out of control and swinging freely though the trees. It can be said that a realization of the monkey mind is a threshold understanding (one of many) which is revealed through meditative experience.

What also becomes noticeable is that the mind and the will are separate from each other and mind easily undermines will. At some point, the practitioner comes to a realization that this thing we call 'mind' wields tyrannic control over choices made in everyday (waking) life. It begins to be realized that older ideas of exercising free will and free choice can be fantasies in which we indulge ourselves during our everyday existence. A lot of people in the world erroneously identify with their minds and erroneously believe that they practice free will (agency; choice) in their lives. At some point, it is realized that mind can act as a prison for the Spirit.

Additional realizations emerge from a meditative practice of self-observation. As the mediator sits in observation of the self, there starts to be a watching of the mind at work. As one watches the mind, it's realized that it is possible to sit as an observer (separate from) of mind. This leads to an understanding that what we call the “I” (the me) is not mind (or will).

As the meditative experience continues, even more realizations that are not easily obtained in the non-meditative state present themselves. Advanced practitioners of meditation can completely shut off the mind where no thoughts are present at all. When this happens, a beginning of wakeful awareness remains. In this state of awareness, one starts noticing subtle sensations that were not experienced in the non-meditative state. Ultimately, a state of pure non-reactive self-observation (conscious awareness) is reached. Some practitioners refer to this heightened state of awareness as being “fully awake”, “fully aware”, or 'fully conscious'. Being in this heightened state of non-mind conscious (wakeful) awareness is also referred to as 'being (or becoming) the Witness'.

Later on, after experiencing meditation, a practitioner is able reflect back and revisit the question of “Is that (thing I experienced) me?” As a result of this exercise, many things are eliminated as being the 'I' spoken of. However, this practice of questioning eventually reaches an endpoint where the practitioner is unable to differ between the 'I' (me) and 'that' (something else other than me). This occurs when one gets to the question of who/what is it asking the question of 'Is that me', or is it 'that'?

In continuing on this line of thought, we might refer to this fully conscience awareness (observer) as the 'Witness'. Again, this Witness (whatever it is) is the only thing that one cannot say is 'not me'. Whoever that Witness is, it's the same one that is (witnessing you) reading this sentence now and it is who is watching (witnessing) everything going on in your everyday life. This Witness is synonymous with Ye (you) and it is the same one that is being referred to in the 'Ye are the Temple of God' passage of scripture.

To experience it now, find a quiet place, sit down, still you mind, be at peace, be passive, be relaxed, watch, and wait. Don't think any thoughts and don't get distracted. As best you can, be fully passive and still. For many people it's difficult to be fully still like this for longer than a few seconds at a time. Despite that, try it for as long as you can do it. If it seems too difficult, keep trying (to be still) until you can experience it for a few recognizable moments in time.

Now realize that whoever/whatever it is (Consciousness; Awareness; the Witness) that watches and waits during these still moments is YOU. And that is the only thing that is you. That is the true Temple.

The Dweller Therein

With that covered, this narrative will proceed to uncovering the most important part of the passage in First Corinthians.

Here, it may be important to first look at the complete passage (1Cor 3: 16): Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? An important idea, perhaps the most important, is embedded within the last four words (God dwelleth in you).

Consider this: There is not just you, but there are two who are always present in your life, you and God.

This idea is conveyed by a variety of symbols in our lives. It might be said that symbols can have many levels of understanding, but only one level of true meaning. Otherwise stated: All symbols ultimately point to the same place. It may be worthwhile to look at a few examples that are familiar to those having Mormon experience.

The Temple of God. You as the temple of God should be getting easier to understand after reading this far in the narrative. There is you (the Temple) and then there is God, the dweller in the Temple. Popular notions of the Temple being a building or the physical body are carnal misinterpretations of the true meaning.

New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage (including plural marriage). The relationship of you and God is often symbolized as a marriage (it's a metaphor). God (Christ) is called the Bridegroom and you are the bride. The ideal marriage relationship describes the two who are here present in the eternal now of time. Plural marriage, at a higher understanding, is about each individual (as a bride) being married to the Bridegroom (God; Christ), a profound metaphor of what is. Carnal man takes this great truth and perverts it into an unflattering metaphor of himself, first by taking multiple wives (a practice of polygamy). In doing that, carnal man figuratively usurps a role (Bridegroom) that is not his to occupy. Moreover, in taking multiple women as wives (notice that women are symbols of the senses, sense world, knowledge), a new parable is created around carnal man that he fails to see (perceive; understand). Carnal man also fails to notice himself acting out as the one who is Fallen (Adam; Lucifer). The Old and New Testaments are replete with instances where the marriage metaphor is used in describing Israel as a chosen people (the bride) who has abandoned the Bridegroom (in marriage) and gone off seeking after a whore (symbol: Babylon, Egypt).

Second coming of Christ. Figuratively, the Second coming of Christ is when God returns again to his (cleansed) Temple. That entire metaphor is redundant with Ye are the Temple of God (see narrative: Second Coming of Christ).

Adam/God. The Adam-God doctrine was taught by Brigham Young during the mid-1800's, but repudiated by the modern LDS church and the teaching is generally unfamiliar to mainstream Mormons today. However, Adam-God remains a staple teaching among Fundamentalist Mormons. As taught by Young, Adam was the God that Mormons refer to as their Father, coming to earth at the beginning of time, with Christ (Jesus; Jehovah) coming during the meridian of time, and the Holy Ghost coming at the end of time. As usual, carnal man (symbolized by Young) said much more than he meant, for his was the carnal interpretation that plays itself out as a mistaken worship of the Fallen and carnal man (Adam). It might be noticed that this teaching by Young is at odds with what is presented in the modern LDS endowment ceremony where Adam is Michael, a subordinate to the Father. Rather than digress too much on this topic, it may be more beneficial to point out that Adam-God conveys (in deeper symbolism) an idea that is redundant with what is discussed in this narrative. In a positive and uplifting sense, it may help to consider Adam being the Temple with God as the indwelling presence (or Spirit). The meaning of this metaphor is the same either way with Adam being the Father (taught by Young) or Michael (taught now). The metaphor of Adam as temple and God as the indwelling presence is redundantly repeated with the garden (creation) parable where the garden (of Eden) is the temple and Adam is the indwelling presence. The same is repeated again with Eve as the temple (bride) and Adam as the husband (Bridegroom) in a marriage relationship (see New and Everlasting Covenant, above).

One Mighty and Strong. The OMS (One Mighty and Strong) may be a term that mainstream Mormons find unfamiliar, but it's a title claimed by a lot of leaders of Fundamentalist Mormon groups and a familiar idea to many who participate in the same. The OMS name comes from a prophecy made by Joseph Smith (cf. D&C 85:7) foretelling someone who would come and set the (corrupt) church in order. Over the years, many claimants to the OMS title have emerged and new ones continue to identify themselves every day, frequently as leader of a Mormon Fundamentalist (protestant) movement. In the past century and a half, these include James Strang, Otto Fetting, Joseph Musser, Joel LeBaron, Ervil LeBaron, John Bryant, Ron & Dan Lafterty, and Brian David Mitchell. There are a legion of others. Sometimes, these OMS claimants will emerge new scripture that, in essence, is not much different than what is found in the preexisting cannon of scripture. A few attract great followings. Here, it may be pointed out that these individuals and their movements arise from a carnal interpretation of the meaning of OMS and, in acting in such a capacity, they alter the symbolism in a meaningfully appropriate way. The true OMS is Christ, who sets the (unclean) house (Temple) in order. Ye are the house (temple) spoken of (note symbolic meaning that is redundant with Ye are the temple of God). When men take upon themselves the title of OMS and proclaim it to others, they usurp a role that is not theirs to have and act out a role in this world as Lucifer, the archetypal usurper, light- (knowledge) bearer, and Fallen one. The great truth that an OMS claimant misses is that it is their own polluted (carnal) house (temple) that is to be cleansed rather than the houses of those around them. Whenever a person is seen proclaiming themselves as the OMS who is come to set your house in order, you can be sure of one thing: They are not the OMS, but usurpers of a role that is not theirs to perform. The mainstream church claims that the OMS prophecy was already fulfilled by a Presiding Bishop (Edward Partridge) in the 1800's. This too, is symbolically meaningful. It should be noticed that is not that the Christ (OMS) will come (future tense), or Christ has come (past tense, per LDS proclamation) but it's Christ IS come (present tense) to you, the Temple.

The Son of God. Jesus is the most recognizable symbol for the Son of God, although he is not the only one who is recognized as the same (cf. other religions). The New Testament describes Jesus as both the Father and the Son, a powerful metaphor that is redundant in meaning with 'Ye are the Temple of God' and many other symbols, a few of which are being listed here in this narrative. It might be rightly said that Jesus is the Temple in which the Father dwells. That is a key to decoding a lot of sayings by Jesus in the New Testament that appear to be contradictory, such as when he (Jesus) claims to be the Father in one statement, then turns around and says in another statement that he (Jesus) can 'do nothing'. In a profound way, all beings (men and women) are Sons of God.

The Godhead. The Godhead is popularly thought of as a trinity of three persons, two of which (in Mormonism) are embodied personages and one which is a Spirit (an appropriate metaphor). Here, it might be worthwhile to notice descriptions of the Godhead in the Fifth Lecture on Faith. The Lectures on Faith were written by Joseph Smith and used for instruction in the School of the Prophets by Smith and others. In the Fifth Lecture, it states that the Godhead is comprised of two personages, one being the Father, a personage of Spirit, and the Son, a personage of tabernacle. This is deeply meaningful with many layers of symbolism stacked one inside another (eg. when speaking of Father as a personage of Spirit or when speaking of the Son as Spirit/tabernacle). Here, tabernacle is synonymous with Temple and so is the word personage. In a way, all men (including you; me; ladies too) are Sons of God (Temples) in which the Father dwells. There is a lot of repeating/redundancy of symbols. The Father as a personage of Spirit is synonymous with the statement that the Father (Spirit) and the Son (Jesus; a personage) are one. However, such statements, are commonly mistaken by carnal man to support an erroneous belief in himself as God which leads him to a life of bitter experience in a lone and dreary world as the one who is Fallen under illusion (symbolized by Lucifer; Adam/Eve). 'Man is (not a) God' and 'God is (not) a man', both misleading statements as they are popularly stated in Mormon theology (though not repeated so much over the past few decades). It might be better to say that God dwells within man (though often unacknowledged) or, better yet, Ye are the Temple of God.

If I am Me, then Who are You?

Carnal man will tend to get stuck at this point in considering who he is and go off doing what (s)he has been doing until now: Stepping into the position as God, a role that does not belong to him. There are a lot of levels where this occurs. And it goes on at much higher levels than humankind is aware of. With that said, there are other thresholds to cross. A few potentially useful ideas will be presented next for consideration.

In the meditative experience, one comes to experience of being the Witness. In doing that, one realizes that everything being witnessed is not the self (see above: Who am I? p2). That is, except when one comes to a point of witnessing the witness. Are there two who are present or is there just one? This is a very difficult question to approach by reason. In truth, it is something that can be comprehended only by experience. However for purposes of this narrative, it might be best to say that what is you (the Witness; the experiencer) who sits in observation is inseparable from whatever it is that is doing the Witnessing (Awareness). Yes, there are indeed two present, yet at the same time, there is only one.

To avoid the pitfall stated in the first paragraph of this section, it may help to consider the world in which we are living. In this world, a lot of things are going on every day. We experience them without really understanding why. We eat, we work, we rest, and we enjoy the company of others (or sometimes not).

This writer has penned a several narratives about understanding the meaning of the LDS temple endowment ritual. It is hoped that the grand message of the endowment is starting to be realized by some of those who read these narratives. However, there is a significant question that hangs over all of these discussions that has not, until now, been addressed. It's this: Where did the LDS temple endowment originate? Restated: Where does the temple endowment come from?

There is a lot to that question that can't be discussed here, but some simpler aspects of it are valuable to consider at this time. A foolish response to the question of where the endowment originates would be “From God”, which is indeed correctly stated, but it fails to convey something to which we can relate. Those who speak such things are often those who have no clue about it and are (as is the usual case) saying much more than they mean.

It may be helpful to consider a question of where the endowment did not originate. It should be clear to even the most hardened mind that the LDS temple endowment did not originate from the mind of man. If the early founders of Mormonism (eg. Joseph Smith; Brigham Young) or the modern custodians of LDS temples (modern church leaders) truly understood the endowment, it would never be (or have been) promoted with great enthusiasm and zeal. The endowment conveys to anyone who can see (perceive) it, a message that is quite opposite than popularly believed. Venerating and promoting the endowment experience as a mark of holiness can be compared to wearing a sign on the forehead that says “I'm stupid.”

Admittedly, the precious egos of some readers will become offended at such a statement. However, this statement is made so that a greater consideration can emerge, one that is very much relevant to what was stated in the first paragraph of this section. We might ask ourselves if the endowment came from us? That is, did you or I create it? The answer is clearly no.

It may also help to realize that the LDS temple endowment is only a small dot in a very, very big universe. And when we focus on that dot, we miss the greater picture. In truth, everything that exists out there, including what is happening around you this very second in time is as profoundly symbolic (meaningful) as the LDS temple endowment.

So, where does all of this wonderfulness come from? There would have to be infinite intelligence to keep it in perfect order, wouldn't there?

Once you start noticing and acknowledging this, you will start to be transformed. The lone and dreary world will start to look more wonderful and your life experience will be more joyful.

Outwardly, there may be little change in you noticed by others. But inwardly, a miracle will have taken place, known only to you. Understanding will come to you. Fear will be replaced by peace. A joy of discovery will return to you. And life will never be the same again.

And when you meet others about you, despite who they are and what evil they might be doing (some whom act out as thieves, liars, murderers, the walking dead), you might even be moved to bow down to them in honor of God that is in them too.

Home