[JosephM]

davidk, on Jun 30 2008, 11:35 AM, said:

Joseph,
I believe we agree, truth is true.
Christ, in the context of Scripture, is the Greek title given to the OT Messiah (another title). Particularly, in the context of Scripture, the titles Christ and Messiah are synonymous with only one person.
--
(snip)

If we are in one consciousness with God, why would we have a need for Jesus to give us this commandment to love our neighbor? Why would there be a need for Jesus. There could not be "many problems of modern life".

Hi David,

On the contrary, It seems to me that Christ is not a person (as in living human). In the context of the NT Christ is perhaps not synonymous with only one person (Jesus). ie: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Romans 12:4-5 (KJV) It seems to me one must separate flesh from spirit. We are many in flesh but One in Spirit and this spirit is Christ not the man Jesus.


Christ is the light of consciousness. Christ is direct contact or connection with God. Christ is Life. Christ is Truth. Christ is Spirit and can't be limited to a single person in context even though the title is attributed to one man. This is a common habit even among Buddhists as they use the word Buddha even though they know it is a nature and not a man. Humans seem to be stuck in the flesh and continue to use these words as if it were a single person.

In answer to the second part, Jesus is just a name. Men are used to manifest truth to the world. Perhaps, sometimes we need to focus more on the message than the messenger to get it.

Just something to consider...

Love Joseph

This post has been edited by JosephM: 30 June 2008 - 12:27 PM

[soma]

Quote

"If we are in one consciousness with God, why would we have a need for Jesus to give us this commandment to love our neighbor? Why would there be a need for Jesus. There could not be "many problems of modern life".

"One God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all....." Ephesians 4:6 NRSV

"You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe_____and tremble!"
James 2:19 NKJV

"There is only one God."
EPHESIANS 4:6 NLT

"The lord our God, the Lord is one!"
Deuteronomy 6:4 NKJV

Jesus said, "I and the Father are One." Jesus was one with the one consciousness of God. We aren't so we look to Jesus to guide us. He is pointing the way, but instead of following the path we look at his fingers pointing.

[minsocal]

davidk, on Jun 30 2008, 08:35 AM, said:

minsocal,

Have you a disagreement with Sartre's stated position, or that I used him?

Both. I'm simply following up on your claim. Here is what I find:

Quote

French atheistic novelist and philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre, wrote: "The idea that a transcendent, creator God does not exist is fairly unique to this [20th]century. If there is no infinite, personal, creator-God who transcends His creation then there is no infinite reference point which can give meaning to the particulars of life. Man is alone, there is only the cosmos, and man's consciousness of himself."[16]

Sartre rejected the infinite reference point but Jesus claimed this infinite reference point as God. When I consider the Intelligent Design in the universe, history, archaeology, Old Testament and New Testament prophecy, the manuscript evidence that affirms the integrity of the Scriptures, the logical consistency of the Christian world and life view, and the lives changed through an encounter with the living Christ, I have not been able to find a serious contender – and certainly not in atheism.

I'll give you my sources only after you post yours. You made the original claim.

This post has been edited by minsocal: 01 July 2008 - 01:49 AM

[davidk]

minsocal,

Quote

If there is no infinite, personal, creator-God who transcends His creation then there is no infinite reference point which can give meaning to the particulars of life.

Thank you, I needn't provide any additional quotes. That one serves quite nicely.

Perhaps you have a point in the way I presented the statement. It was nonetheless a profound statement made by Sartre, even though he at first refused to acknowledge God existed while he provided the rational to prove He did. Not able to sustain this unbelief, he did say later, "I do not feel that I am the product of chance, a speck of dust in the universe, but someone who was expected, prepared, prefigured. In short, a being whom only a Creator could put here; and this idea of a creating hand refers to God." He denied God again against his own arguments just before he died, a brilliant but conflicted man.
--
Joseph,
So, in your estimation, if I understand you correctly, Jesus is not the Christ; and Jesus is just a name no more important than any one else's name. It just happens to be the one we use as a literary reference. It could just as well be 'Bob' or something else. So to answer McKenna would be to say there is no Jesus Christ? His incarnation, death, resurrection, etc. serves as no more purpose than mother goose?
--
Soma,
It was your post claiming we were all in one consciousness with God. I'm not sure how else to comment, other than your scriptural quotes are authentic.
"Recognizing that we are all one in God’s consciousness gives us full protection in His unity by integrating our individual life with the world around us and providing a basic harmony and equilibrium in our hearts and minds."- soma; post #35

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 2 2008, 05:09 PM, said:

Joseph,
So, in your estimation, if I understand you correctly, Jesus is not the Christ; and Jesus is just a name no more important than any one else's name. It just happens to be the one we use as a literary reference. It could just as well be 'Bob' or something else. So to answer McKenna would be to say there is no Jesus Christ? His incarnation, death, resurrection, etc. serves as no more purpose than mother goose?

Hi David,
No I didn't say Jesus wasn't ' the Christ. If you will re-read the post perhaps you will find you are not reading carefully. I said "Jesus was the Christ that was foretold to come." and here you said " if I understand you correctly, Jesus is not the Christ" It seems to me obvious that you do not understand my post.

I said Christ was a title and not a name. IT IS NOT THE LINGUISTIC NAME OF "Jesus" that is important. IT IS RATHER THE AUTHORITY BEHIND THE NAME that is important. Yes they could have called him Bob, Joseph, Peter, Phillip, or any other linguistic name. The word name in the Greek signifies authority. The only power in the name of Jesus is the authority behind the name. That was and is the point I was making. And it seems you read in too much to come to the conclusion that we are implying that his incarnation serves no more purpose than mother goose. Jesus manifested Christ. To me that is important. You and I can do the same.

Love,
Joseph

[davidk]

"Jesus was the Christ that was foretold to come."
"Christ is not a person (as in living human). In the context of the NT Christ is perhaps not synonymous with only one person (Jesus). "
"... it is Christ that is your hope of Glory and not the man Jesus."
"Christ is not a man... "

Joseph,

Your position is confusing. Either Jesus is the Christ or not. Which do you claim?

Dk

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 9 2008, 05:38 PM, said:

"Jesus was the Christ that was foretold to come."
"Christ is not a person (as in living human). In the context of the NT Christ is perhaps not synonymous with only one person (Jesus). "
"... it is Christ that is your hope of Glory and not the man Jesus."
"Christ is not a man... "

Joseph,

Your position is confusing. Either Jesus is the Christ or not. Which do you claim?

Dk

David,

Jesus manifested Christ and in that sense he was the Christ that was foretold to come. I do not find that confusing. Perhaps you are confused by believing Jesus = Christ and that is limited to one man. That is not true. Christ in you is your hope of glory. Christ is a title meaning annointed of God. Jesus was a man who grew and waxed strong in the knowledge of God from youth. He was transformed into the image of God as in a process. He manifested the annointing of God (Christ). We are to do the same.

Hope that helps,
Joseph

[davidk]

JosephM, on Jul 9 2008, 07:32 PM, said:

David,

Jesus manifested Christ and in that sense he was the Christ that was foretold to come. I do not find that confusing. Perhaps you are confused by believing Jesus = Christ and that is limited to one man. That is not true. Christ in you is your hope of glory. Christ is a title meaning annointed of God. Jesus was a man who grew and waxed strong in the knowledge of God from youth. He was transformed into the image of God as in a process. He manifested the annointing of God (Christ). We are to do the same.

Hope that helps,
Joseph

Yep, that clears up my understanding of your position: Jesus is not THE Christ and we can all become Christs, too.
--
Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him, and he in God. And whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Savior of the world, is born of God; and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him. By this we know that he who believes Jesus is the Christ has the witness of God in him, and that witness is that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has eternal life, he who does not have the Son doesn't have the life.
By the Spirit of God, every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God. If it does not confess this, it is not from God, but the antichrist. The one who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself.
The one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the witness that God brought forth concerning His Son.

I write this to you in order that you might believe that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true, and be in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

God's grace to you,
Dk

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 10 2008, 10:52 AM, said:

Yep, that clears up my understanding of your position: Jesus is not THE Christ and we can all become Christs, too.
(snip)
God's grace to you,
Dk

Hi David,

No offence meant but it seems to me you jump to conclusions without understanding. No one ever said Christ was plural as in "Christs" as you have written. There is only one annointing of God (One Christ). We are many members but we are one in Christ not in the human man Jesus. Jesus said he and his father were One and prayed also that we would be One even as he was. (John 17:22) This is obviously a mystery to you. That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit. Jesus was a flesh and blood man that manifested Christ (God's spirit) . One can only see this if God reveals it to one directly as flesh and blood cannot reveal this. I have no problem with the other quotations you have listed when read in the Greek with the discerning of the spirit. Perhaps this may help somewhat.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

This post has been edited by JosephM: 10 July 2008 - 11:36 AM

[davidk]

JosephM, on Jul 10 2008, 12:34 PM, said:

Hi David,

No offence meant but it seems to me you jump to conclusions without understanding. No one ever said Christ was plural as in "Christs" as you have written. There is only one annointing of God (One Christ). We are many members but we are one in Christ not in the human man Jesus. Jesus said he and his father were One and prayed also that we would be One even as he was. (John 17:22) This is obviously a mystery to you. That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit. Jesus was a flesh and blood man that manifested Christ (God's spirit) . One can only see this if God reveals it to one directly as flesh and blood cannot reveal this. I have no problem with the other quotations you have listed when read in the Greek with the discerning of the spirit. Perhaps this may help somewhat.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

Joseph,
Thanks for hanging in there with me. The plural was a typo.
-
The notion that Jesus and Christ being the same person is explicitly confirmed by what is said in the New Testament, whether by Jesus himself or witnesses to Him.

The being one with the Father does not mean one person, but one in essence, power, quality, action, design, and agreement.
Christs prayer for His disciples to become one is in the same manner, not as one person but individuals united in essence, faith, action, etc.

It is uniform in the NT that Jesus Christ, in regard to the Godhead, is equal to the Father, but in regard to His manhood, inferior. He was wholly God and wholly man. God was made manifest in Jesus, which is what made Him the Christ. As the Messiah, He was delegated by the Father to deliver such doctrine and instruction as were in keeping with His mission.

As far as the revealing by the Spirit of God is concerned, Peter was the recipient of that very thing when he answered Jesus saying, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
-

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 10 2008, 05:50 PM, said:

Joseph,
Thanks for hanging in there with me. The plural was a typo.
-
The notion that Jesus and Christ being the same person is explicitly confirmed by what is said in the New Testament, whether by Jesus himself or witnesses to Him.

The being one with the Father does not mean one person, but one in essence, power, quality, action, design, and agreement.
Christs prayer for His disciples to become one is in the same manner, not as one person but individuals united in essence, faith, action, etc.

It is uniform in the NT that Jesus Christ, in regard to the Godhead, is equal to the Father, but in regard to His manhood, inferior. He was wholly God and wholly man. God was made manifest in Jesus, which is what made Him the Christ. As the Messiah, He was delegated by the Father to deliver such doctrine and instruction as were in keeping with His mission.

As far as the revealing by the Spirit of God is concerned, Peter was the recipient of that very thing when he answered Jesus saying, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
-

Hi David,

Perhaps I now see our difference in understanding. You seem to see Christ as a person while it seems to me that Christ is an anointing, as in being smeared together in God's Spirit or essence (from Greek) I realize much of the church system teaches 3 persons in God, but I do not share that understanding. God is One and not a person but Spirit.

Yes, that is correct, "being one with the Father does not mean one person, but one in essence, power, quality, action, design, and agreement. " or in other words Spirit. That is why we can also be transformed into the image of Christ. Jesus is the flesh man as is you and I. Christ is the Spirit as in essence of God. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:13 (KJV) The flesh man must die that Christ may be all in all.

Love.
Joseph

[soma]

Joseph nice post. Paul's letter to the Philippians supports your words.

1:18 What does it matter? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed. I rejoice in this, yes, and will rejoice. 1:19 For I know that this will turn out to my salvation, through your supplication and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, 1:20 according to my earnest expectation and hope, that I will in no way be disappointed, but with all boldness, as always, now also Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life, or by death. 1:21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 1:22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will bring fruit from my work; yet I don’t know what I will choose. 1:23 But I am in a dilemma between the two, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better. 1:24 Yet, to remain in the flesh is more needful for your sake. 1:25 Having this confidence, I know that I will remain, yes, and remain with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith, 1:26 that your rejoicing may abound in Christ Jesus in me through my presence with you again.

4:21 Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me greet you. 4:22 All the saints greet you, especially those who are of Caesar’s household. 4:23 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

[davidk]

Dear Soma,
Beautiful text, but evidence is short in support of Joseph's argument: Jesus is not God incarnate, the Christ. Philipppians actually provides unequivical support to the contrary. 1:1-30, 2:1-11.
-
Dear Joseph,
The understanding that Christ is one man: Jesus, is provided to us in simple terms: "Thou art the Christ".
To say He is not is simple denial of the only sources we have to declare Jesus at all, and the denial is specifically condemned in its very text.
-
We are created in the image of God (no need to be transformed).
-
Ephesians 4:13 (KJV) graphically supports the position I testify to; "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and to the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:..." The entirety of Ephesians would provide the more complete response.
-
The understanding of three persons in the Trinity does not mean three humans, but the three personal-infinite beings of the triune God. Our conversations consistently include Jesus Christ, God's Spirit, and God the Father, the three persons, to explain and understand God. "Christ is the Spirit as in essence of God."

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 11 2008, 03:13 PM, said:

(snip)
Dear Joseph,
The understanding that Christ is one man: Jesus, is provided to us in simple terms: "Thou art the Christ".
To say He is not is simple denial of the only sources we have to declare Jesus at all, and the denial is specifically condemned in its very text.

You could not know this unless it was revealed to you by the Father directly. Flesh and Blood can believe this but it is not known unless revealed directly. Never denied Jesus was the Christ foretold to come. Perhaps the only difference is in our understanding of the word "Christ". The word 'the' does not limit its meaning. I could say 'the Doctor' is at the door and that does not equate to one particular human = Doctor.

Quote

We are created in the image of God (no need to be transformed).

If that is so, then which creature is Paul speaking of.......
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Romans 12:2 (KJV)
-

Quote

-
The understanding of three persons in the Trinity does not mean three humans, but the three personal-infinite beings of the triune God. Our conversations consistently include Jesus Christ, God's Spirit, and God the Father, the three persons, to explain and understand God. "Christ is the Spirit as in essence of God."

It seems to me this is church doctrine. Perhaps it is in error.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

[soma]

Paul persecuted the followes of Jesus when he was alive, but converted when he knew Christ in the spirit.

Paul talks about the Holy Spirit and the role that it plays in peoples lives in Romans 8:3-17. His main point is that there is a very distinct difference between people of the flesh and people of the Spirit. If the Spirit of God is alive in a person, then that person is alive because they died to sin, they died to the flesh, they died to the physical world. They are spiritual. He says if the Spirit is not in a person then they are dead. The people of the Spirit and the people of the Flesh are completely opposite from one another, according to Paul in this passage. Joseph states this very clearly.

1 Corinthians 15 (New International Version)
42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"[e]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we[f] bear the likeness of the man from heaven.

Philippians 2 TNIV (Today's New International Version)
1 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

[davidk]

JosephM, on Jul 11 2008, 03:30 PM, said:

1) You could not know this unless it was revealed to you by the Father directly. Flesh and Blood can believe this but it is not known unless revealed directly. Never denied Jesus was the Christ foretold to come. Perhaps the only difference is in our understanding of the word "Christ". The word 'the' does not limit its meaning. I could say 'the Doctor' is at the door and that does not equate to one particular human = Doctor.
2) If that is so, then which creature is Paul speaking of.......
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Romans 12:2 (KJV)
-
3) It seems to me this is church doctrine. Perhaps it is in error.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

Joseph,
(I numbered the paragraphs 'cause the quotes wouldn't carry over.)
1) The difference in our understanding of "Christ" is significant.
Articles and nouns are also significant. If an unknown doctor was expected to arrive one would say 'a' doctor is on the way. When he arrives, 'the' doctor is here. You were expecting one. Once you know his name, it is Doctor Smith. A specific, particular, individual doctor.
A Messiah was expected. The Messiah/Christ arrives. It is Christ Jesus.
--
2) Paul is not saying that our being 'in the image of God' is needing transformtion. We can't change that. But, in a nutshell, the transformation needed is to be renewed from a 'non-believer' to a 'believer'. The text continues but, that is essentially the meaning.
--
3) This is Christian doctrine. One which sufficently communicates the answer, so others may understand. I used your quote as an example of how you have used all three names to be able to articulate the character of God. "Christ is the Spirit as in essence of God." While theoretically you may not agree they are the Trinity, it is impossible to live otherwise.

[davidk]

Thanks Soma, good post.

This post has been edited by davidk: 12 July 2008 - 01:26 AM

[JosephM]

davidk, on Jul 12 2008, 02:10 AM, said:

Joseph,
(I numbered the paragraphs 'cause the quotes wouldn't carry over.)
1) The difference in our understanding of "Christ" is significant.
Articles and nouns are also significant. If an unknown doctor was expected to arrive one would say 'a' doctor is on the way. When he arrives, 'the' doctor is here. You were expecting one. Once you know his name, it is Doctor Smith. A specific, particular, individual doctor.
A Messiah was expected. The Messiah/Christ arrives. It is Christ Jesus.

No disagreement here. And Messiah Jesus did arrive and manifested Christ. You can do the same.

Quote

2) Paul is not saying that our being 'in the image of God' is needing transformtion. We can't change that. But, in a nutshell, the transformation needed is to be renewed from a 'non-believer' to a 'believer'. The text continues but, that is essentially the meaning.

If that is what you believe that is ok with me yet it seems to me your conclusion is in error as he was speaking to believers, not unbelievers and it is the old creature which is transformed into the new. Thats why Paul said "I die daily". It is a transformation in which the saints are perfected. He himself admitted to not having yet reached the mark. Yet he strived daily that Christ would be formed in him. And to the saints at Galatia he wrote .. "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you, Gal 4:19 (KJV) It is a process, a transformation of the creature called David.

Quote

3) This is Christian doctrine. One which sufficently communicates the answer, so others may understand. I used your quote as an example of how you have used all three names to be able to articulate the character of God. "Christ is the Spirit as in essence of God." While theoretically you may not agree they are the Trinity, it is impossible to live otherwise.

Perhaps the point I make is that there are not 3 persons in God. And that Christ is not a person as used in this ...
"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:Col 1:27 (KJV)
This is not the person of Christ. This is not the man Jesus. Jesus was the Christ foretold to come but Christ is not a person. This is the mystery. This is your hope of God's presence (glory). This is an anointing, a smearing together of you with God as in connection, direct contact just as Jesus did. Not that God wasn't there all the time but a direct realization by the creature you now identify with that your essence is found in God. Again, God is not a person. Christ is not a person but used as a title in the case of Jesus. Hope this helps clarify things. Unless you have questions I have nothing else I am able to add at this time.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

[soma]

Very clear. Joseph your understanding is very deep. Thanks

[davidk]

JosephM, on Jul 12 2008, 09:59 AM, said:

No disagreement here. And Messiah Jesus did arrive and manifested Christ. You can do the same.

If that is what you believe that is ok with me yet it seems to me your conclusion is in error as he was speaking to believers, not unbelievers and it is the old creature which is transformed into the new. Thats why Paul said "I die daily". It is a transformation in which the saints are perfected. He himself admitted to not having yet reached the mark. Yet he strived daily that Christ would be formed in him. And to the saints at Galatia he wrote .. "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you, Gal 4:19 (KJV) It is a process, a transformation of the creature called David.
Perhaps the point I make is that there are not 3 persons in God. And that Christ is not a person as used in this ...
"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:Col 1:27 (KJV)
This is not the person of Christ. This is not the man Jesus. Jesus was the Christ foretold to come but Christ is not a person. This is the mystery. This is your hope of God's presence (glory). This is an anointing, a smearing together of you with God as in connection, direct contact just as Jesus did. Not that God wasn't there all the time but a direct realization by the creature you now identify with that your essence is found in God. Again, God is not a person. Christ is not a person but used as a title in the case of Jesus. Hope this helps clarify things. Unless you have questions I have nothing else I am able to add at this time.

Love in Christ,
Joseph

Dear Joseph,
Jesus is described as the physical manifestation/incarnation of God and His Spirit (law and righteousness).
What is said to have been manifested in us is the evidence to display who Jesus is, the begotten Son of God, the Christ, Savior of Man, God incarnate. Rom 1:19.

It is abundantly clear at this point that opposing dogma cannot fathom that Jesus is the Christ (Jesus=Christ). As a result, to say Christ is not the man Jesus, it is the rejection attributed to the liar in 1 John 2:22-24.
-
Because progressive dogma denies the diety of Jesus, the Trinity becomes even more unthinkable, though even the liberals cannot speak concerning the character of God without having to use all three names.
-
As far as 'renewing' is concerned: Of course Paul was speaking to believers. Our image being in the image of God cannot be transformed, but that is why we should treat all men in the way we wish to be treated. It is our fallen human nature (creature) that is in need of transformation, but not of ourselves, but by faith which is the gift of God.
Again, progressive dogma does not tolerate original sin so even the need of a transformation of our minds is rather inexplicable.
-
Therefore no apparent need for Jesus is really required for the task of a ministry and sacrifice. There would be no authority behind the name, since He is not the man Christ, but just another man with a label, some poor martyr, who just happened to make good speeches. It makes no difference.
-
It is curious the progressive believers have a desire to identify with Christianity and yet be so voracious in the effort to dominate and dismember it at the same time. Sounds like the problem many church congregations have had for a long time, just on a bigger scale.


God's grace to you,

Dk