There are TWO kinds of Truth

There is external truth and internal truth. External truth is the knowledge we seek from the physical world through various books, personal experience, philosophy, science or even religion.

This outer approach merely implants knowledge into our memory banks. But internal truth and knowledge penetrates deeper into our minds and hearts. Internal truth represents the truth about ourselves and what kind of a person we really are.

The problems in the world are caused mostly because modern life has taught us to insulate outer knowledge from inner knowledge. In other words, what we know is not necessarily what we do. Hypocrisy, deceit, cruelty, corruption and envy get their power precisely from external truth and internal truth not being in touch with each other. Therefore, self-examination of our inner motives has become atrophied as a cognitive function.

But unbeknownst to us, the Lord God mercifully stores deeper truth and feelings of spiritual love in a protected and deeper layer of our psyche (the subconscious) where it can later serve as a means by which individuals can measure and challenge themselves towards obtaining legitimate spiritual growth.

God performs this hidden function with all people in the world, religious or not!

All true religion, regardless of its differing external rituals, attempts to reconnect outer with inner. In this way, the worldly information that is stored in our memories can be enlivened by these deeper inclinations, stored up by God, and be disposed into a more noble order and worldview.

The successful connecting and linkage between the outer and inner requires inner sincerity.

The resulting clash between external truth and internal truth (what we know and what we do) within us is what activates and creates CONSCIENCE. Conscience is an inner dictate and represents a plane or matrix where God makes His abode in our lives (and prepares us for heaven).

Changing the knowledge we collect from the world and store in our memories doesn’t change who we really are. For instance, we can avoid getting a speeding ticket by remembering to follow external laws (posted speed limits) or by following an inner dictate (posted in the heart). The latter represents an approach to life for spiritual rather than worldly reasons.

About thegodguy

EDWARD F. SYLVIA, M.T.S. Philosopher/Theologian Edward F. Sylvia attended the School of Visual Arts in New York and received his Master of Theological Studies at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, CA and a Certificate of Swedenborgian Studies from the Swedenborgian House of Studies. He is a member of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (C.T.N.S.) and the Swedenborg Scientific Association (S.S.A.). Award-winning author of "Sermon From the Compost Pile: Seven Steps Toward Creating An Inner Garden" and "Proving God," which fulfills a continuing vision that God’s fingerprints of love can be found everywhere in the manifest universe. His most recent book, "Swedenborg & Gurdjieff: The Missing Links" is an edgy collection of anti-intuitive essays for personal transformation that challenges and inspires. He has been a student of the ideas of both Emanuel Swedenborg and George I. Gurdjieff for over thirty years. Read more about TheGodGuy, his books and his ideas at
This entry was posted in god, Inner growth, psychology, Reality, religion, spirituality, unity and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to There are TWO kinds of Truth

  1. Glenn says:


    The successful connecting and linkage between the outer and inner requires inner sincerity. The resulting clash between external truth and internal truth (what we know and what we do) within us is what activates and creates CONSCIENCE.

    I find this remark about CONSCIENCE to be an interesting one, and it prompts me to pose these three questions (I leave for another time the curious notion that a successful correspondence between inner and outer breeds the clash rather than resolves it):

    1. Is CONSCIENCE the same as conscience?
    2. What might cause the sting or pangs of CONSCIENCE?
    3. What might weaken or destroy the CONSCIENCE?

    Swedenborg said that: a) conscience is an inward discernment of goodness and truth (which seems to coincide nicely with a dictionary definition of conscience as being, “The awareness of a moral or ethical aspect to one’s conduct together with the urge to prefer right over wrong”); b) that conscience is formed by means of ‘the truths of faith’ (e.g., the so-called Golden Rule), religious persuasion and what a person presumes to be true and so legitimate, as well as by that which a person has heard, acknowledged, and come to believe; and, c) that acting contrary to conscience gives rise to distress.

    Since CONSCIENCE is defined in your remark as being created by a conflict or clash between external truth and internal truth I couldn’t help but wonder whether by ‘CONSCIENCE’ you mean something other than ‘conscience’.

    I have noticed in an index to Swedenborg’s writings an entry under ‘conscience’ which says, How and Where Conscience is formed. Conscience and dictate are from the combat of spirits and angels. But after referring to the passage cited, I’m inclined to believe that the entry’s summation is misleading.

    The passage does not say that conscience is formed from the combat, but, rather, that it is conscience which renders one sensible of the combat. The difference and opposition between the two statements is clear, and not unlike that to be found between one statement which says that being poked with a knife forms working nerve endings, and another which says that working nerve endings render one sensible of have been poked with a knife.

    However, even if it somehow happen to be the case that the passage cited is wrong and the brief summation of it is correct (?), there still is reason to wonder whether by CONSCIENCE you mean something other than conscience–for you say that CONSCIENCE is formed by a clash between external and internal, while Swedenborg said that the clashes or combats between spirits and angels are purely internal occurrences.

    I’ve also found Swedenborg saying that temptations are means whereby conscience is given and also strengthened. This might at first seem to support the notion that clashes between external truth and internal truth…create CONSCIENCE. However, Swedenborg also said that no one without conscience can undergo temptations–which clearly means that only those who have conscience can undergo temptations. In other words, the existence of conscience precedes the experience of temptations. So, again, I’m left wondering whether by ‘CONSCIENCE’ you mean something other than ‘conscience’.

    And while Swedenborg did say that conscience is the new man himself, i.e., the new person resulting from regeneration, he also pointed out that regeneration is a process whereby the spirit gains dominion over the flesh (before regeneration ‘the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak’; after regeneration has commenced and is proceeding well, ‘the spirit is willing and the flesh conforms’), and that it is through the good of conscience that regeneration is effected.

    Given that by your blogs you hope to encourage others to (amongst other things) think, I hope you don’t mind that I’ve taken the extra step of articulating my thoughts.


  2. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Thank you for your articulation of the topic. I do not write my blogs with a Swedenborgian book always at my side but from my life’s experience and personal efforts to incorporate his various teachings to it.

    Conscience is not one static thing. It must develop. The reason for this is that it emerges from the “remains” which the Lord implants within our internal mind (subconscious). The external/sensual mind encrusts the internal mind – shutting off its heavenly influence when we remove God from our lives and become entirely natural.

    When we are ready for spiritual growth God activates these remains and we begin to feel new spiritual inclinations and affections. The “remains” develop into a new plane called “conscience” (symbolized by the emergence of “Dry Land” on the third day in the Genesis story of creation). Because conscience is the lawful, spiritual unfolding of the “remains” and continues to develop in the regenerating individual, it can seem at times to represent both a prior and posterior condition. The continuing development of conscience requires temptations, so that if victorious, it becomes a “fixed” aspect of our lives. Temptations “crystallize” God’s goodness and truths into our organic fabric – which is an ongoing process.

    Spiritually yours,

  3. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    I predict your next question will be “Is the formation of conscience the same thing as the formation of a spiritual body?”

    Spiritually yours,

  4. Glenn says:


    Thank you for the invitation.

    As a matter of fact, I have been wrestling with my conscience over whether to pose another question. This question, however, does not, I’m sorry to say, validate your prognostication skills. (It is true that I have been thinking of posing another question, though this question hasn’t anything to do with the one you desire me to ask.)

    You write in your blog that, Conscience is an inner dictate and represents a plane or matrix where God makes His abode in our lives (and prepares us for heaven). This is quite true, and is an able restatement of conscience is the plane and receptacle of the influx of heaven, with another truth (that conscience is one form of ‘dictate’) added for good measure.

    I wanted to mention this lest it be thought, as it does sometimes seem to be, that because attention is called to loose lug nuts, it is also thought by the attention-caller that the car is to be junked. That is not so. And the most simple and efficacious approach to take, of course, is to tighten the lug nuts.

    But it is precisely that conscience is the plane and receptacle of the influx from heaven that has me wrestling with my conscience over whether to pose this other question. I’m not sure whether my conscience won out over me, or I won out over my conscience, but I am going to ask it. Before that, however, I think it would be fair for me to acknowledge that the question quite possibly is born of a resentment stemming from envy.

    ‘Influx from heaven’ tells me that however enjoyable is flying by the seat of my pants, and rattling things off the top of my head, might be, it is still a good idea and worthwhile to check the tightness of the lug nuts. I’m a little envious that ‘influx from heaven’ does not bother and annoy you with such a nudging, and somewhat resentful over the extra work involved, as well as the fact that it sometimes interrupts the exquisitely enjoyable ‘flow’.

    So, my question is this: why doesn’t ‘heaven’ tell you to verify the ‘facts’ before instructing others as to what is ‘true’?

    Though in the context of normal conversation with others of a similar understanding, the issue of loose lug nuts likely doesn’t matter all that much, in the context of trying out a new approach designed to make Swedenborg’s various teachings more palatable, digestible and succinctly accurate to those not yet familiar with them, perhaps it does.

    But take heart–as already said, this question is probably born of a resentment stemming from envy. And it is also quite understandable why I’ve had to wrestle with my conscience over whether to pose it. For, in the final analysis, the question is less directed towards your actions, and more directed towards the motives of ‘heaven’. And who am I to do that?


  5. Glenn says:

    Btw, I need to correct myself.

    In saying “resentment stemming from envy”, I got it backwards, and so misspoke.

    The correct order would be “envy stemming from resentment”, for were there no ‘resentment’ over being impelled to double-check and verify, i.e., ‘tighten the lug nuts’, there would be no ‘envy’ regarding those who haven’t the time, energy or inclination to likewise attend to such a ‘trifling’ and ‘petty’ endeavor.

    And since I’ve gone ahead and corrected myself, I might as well also ‘fess up and come clean.

    The truth is, I’m not resentful about yielding to the dictate to double-check (once upon a time, oh so long ago, yes; but that is in the distant past), and so am not envious of others who experience no such dictate. And the truth is, I was being facetious in order to make a point.

    Double-checking is actually part of the fun. Yes, it is a bit more time consuming, and, yes, it might seem like it would interrupt the flow. But having gotten the hang of it, double-checking has become an integral part of the flow.

    And while I can’t say that (in my case) the result of double-checking is something good, I can say that it is something better than what might otherwise would have resulted.


  6. Glenn says:


    And while I can’t say that (in my case) the result of double-checking is something good, I can say that it is something better than what might otherwise would have resulted.

    This reminds me of being on the gymnastics team in high school.

    The only qualification for being on the team was saying that you wanted to be. It was a tough requirement, but I did manage to meet it. I was not very good at what I did, which was free-ex or floor exercise. And I routine scored under 2.00. Though that is a very difficult thing to do, a particular set of quirks, er, skills, enabled me to routinely achieve such scores.

    One day one of the guys, rings-master Brian, pulled me aside and said that the judges might toss me an extra tenth of a point or so if I kept my legs together while doing the headstand. I was offended. What is the point of doing a headstand except to stand on your head? Picky judges.

    At the next meet I was all set to initiate my famous scissors-kicking, flailing twisted-pretzel headstand when the dictate of Brian’s friendly advice intruded. I tried to dismiss it, but it would not go away. After several fruitless moments of trying to make it go away, I resentfully yielded.

    So, with head and legs on the mat, I formed a right-triangle of which even Euclid would have been proud. Then, sans visible effort, I used my stomach muscles to smoothly leverage my legs up and over my head to form a perfectly straight line. I held this position for a moment, then relaxed into a forward tumble.

    Ha-ha. Brian was right. The judges did appreciate my effort to keep the legs straight, and tossed me a few extra tenths of a point, giving me a score of something like 2.13. While 2.13 is not generally recognized as a decent gymnastics score, it was the highest I had ever achieved. Thank you rings-master Brian.

    I’ve always wondered in hindsight, though, why Brian hadn’t suggested I try out for the baseball team instead. With an ERA of 2.00, I’d have been a star.


  7. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn.

    While I marvel at your mental gymnastics I must remind my readers of the original trajectory of this discussion. You had asked me if in my explanation of “conscience” was I really addressing “something else.” Not something else – but something additional. That is why I posed the question: “Is the formation of conscience the same process as the formation of the Spiritual Body?” I was actually giving you the opportunity to tighten the “lug nuts.”

    Let me offer at least one more turn of the wrench. “Conscience,” the “Spiritual body” and “baskets with holes in them” (Genesis 40:16-19) are the same topic because they represent and address where Divine good (from heaven) terminates (becomes fixed) in our lives.

    This blog is not meant just to inform but to challenge, and, not just challenge non-Swedenborgians but challenge Swedenborgians as well!

    Spiritually yours,

  8. Glenn says:


    Possibly I’ve become a bit dizzy from observing all the backflips, somersaults and inversions, but while I do recall something about a prediction having been made, I do not recall any question having been put to anyone, myself included. One moment while I double-check… No, I’m sorry, I fail to find the question you say you posed.

    As for the question you predicted I would pose, but have not, a simple consideration of the definition of ‘body’ leads one to the obvious conclusion that ‘body’ can be used in one descriptive way or another regarding just about anything. So, we have expressions such as “body of water” and “body of evidence”.

    As for baskets with holes in them, such that there is nothing in the middle in which something can terminate, we also have a common expression which captures well the sentiment of this peculiarly recurring phenomenon–in one ear, and out the other.


  9. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Thanks! You have mercifully saved me from making further efforts to present the topic of “conscience” in fresh ways!

    Spiritually yours,

  10. Glenn says:


    Let’s look at some patterns. (Yes, this is all related to conscience.)

    A generic pattern: Those in their communities who begin to think what is wrong, and then go on to will it, are banished from their community[.]

    A more specific rendition of the generic pattern: If you do criminal wrong, you may get caught. If caught, you may be arrested. If arrested, you may be tried. If tried, you may be convicted. If convicted, you may receive a prison sentence. And if you receive a prison sentence, you may come to think of it as a banishment from the community (as opposed to, say, a vacation).

    Albert Gonzalez did criminal wrong by hacking into NASA computers. Albert Gonzalez got caught. He was 14 years old at the time, however, and the FBI did not want to prosecute a 14-year old, so they agreed not to press charges if his parents took his computer away from him for 6 months. Albert’s parents took away his computer, and the FBI did not press charges.

    Albert Gonzalez got lucky. While he had a visit with the pattern, his visit was brief, and he did not become fully immersed in it–or, to look at it another way, the pattern did not fully consume him.

    Eight years go by, and Mr. Gonzalez is again caught doing criminal wrong. This time he is withdrawing cash from an ATM machine using blank debit cards programmed with stolen card numbers. This time he is arrested. And this time it is the Secret Service dealing with him. As the FBI previously was, the Secret Service is willing to work out a deal. They will not prosecute Mr. Gonzalez if he becomes an informant and helps catch other cyber-criminals. Mr. Gonzalez gets lucky a second time. Though his visit with the pattern this time is not quite as short as the previously visit, he again is not fully consumed by it.

    Said Mr. Gonzalez of the matter, “I was 22 years old and scared. When you have a Secret Service agent in your apartment telling you you’ll go away for 20 years, you’ll do anything.”

    Question: Was Mr. Gonzalez acting from his conscience when he agreed to help the Secret Service?

    Answer 1: Maybe yes–after all, it is a good thing to aid a law enforcement agency in the endeavor to put criminals out of business.

    Answer 2: Maybe not–after all, it has been pointed out (by Swedenborg) that Anyone is devoid of conscience if he thinks and does what is true and good not for the sake of what is true and good but for the sake of his own personal position and gain, and also merely because he fears the law and fears for his own life.

    Recalling that Mr. Gonzalez was arrested for stealing–and bearing in mind that Swedenborg remarked that The evil of theft enters more deeply into man than any other evil, because it is united with cunning and deceit; and cunning and deceit insinuate themselves into the spiritual mind of man, which is the seat of thought combined with understanding–let it be known that Mr. Gonzalez went on to perform increasingly more elaborate, sophisticated and damaging thefts while working with the Secret Service.

    While the Secret Service was grateful for Mr. Gonzalez’s assistance in the successful catching and prosecuting of a slew of cyber-criminals, it also threw the book at him (as the saying goes) for the crimes it discovered he had committed while working with it, and Mr. Gonzalez is now serving two concurrent 20-year prison terms at a federal facility in the State of Michigan. Club Banishment, I think they call it. Maybe not. Either way, Mr. Gonzalez has now been fully consumed by the pattern.

    If only Mr. Gonzalez had had a conscience–the kind that Swedenborg talks about–to help guide him along the proper way. But Mr. Gonzalez does have a sister, Maria, and of her he has said, “[She] always learned by listening to our parents’ advice.”

    Mr. Gonzalez himself, however, had ‘holes in his basket’, i.e., his parents’ advice went in one ear, and out the other.

    In his article about Mr. Gonzalez, The Great Cyberheist, James Verini writes: “I’ve been asking myself, why did I do it?” Gonzalez told me over the phone from prison recently. “At first I did it for monetary reasons. The service’s salary wasn’t enough, and I needed the money. By then I’d already created the snowball and had to keep doing it. I wanted to quit but couldn’t.”… Gonzalez relished the intellectual challenges of cybercrime too… But he also liked stealing. “Whatever morality I should have been feeling was trumped by the thrill,” he told me.

    Mr. Gonzalez’s sense of morality was trumped by the thrill? Why and how did this happen?

    In the Bible used by Swedenborg (I’m not sure which it is; definitely not the KJV), Genesis 40:16 reads as, And the chief of the bakers saw that he had interpreted what was good, and he said to Joseph, I also was in my dream, and behold, three baskets with holes in them were on my head. Swedenborg parses the verse, elaborates on the phrase “with holes in them were on my head”, says it means without a termination anywhere at all in the middle, and goes on to say,

    o Without such terminations [‘in the middle’] acting as floors, that good [flowing in from the Lord above] is not received but passes straight through, as if through a sieve or through ‘a basket with holes in it’, down to the sensory level. There, because it has not received any direction on the way, this good is turned into something foul, though it is seen as good by the recipients of it at that lowest level. That is to say, the good is turned into the kind of delight that belongs to a selfish and worldly love, and consequently into [amongst other things] sheer self-gratification and personal extravagance. This is what happens if the degrees of a person’s will exist without a termination anywhere at all in the middle, that is, if ‘they have holes in them’. One can also actually know whether these terminations and therefore floors exist; people’s abilities to perceive what is good and true point to the existence of them, as do their consciences.

    Swedenborg also said that ‘the baskets’, which were on the head, actually represent the powers of the head. Amongst these powers, presumably, is the power to think. Some people, however, behave as if they do not think. That is, they behave as if they have no brains, i.e., as if the space between their ears is empty or devoid of anything substantial. And, so, it is sometimes colloquially said of them that instruction, advice and guidance goes in one ear and out the other.

    Of course, Mr. Gonzalez could not have pulled off the capers he did had he not had a powerful brain. Nevertheless, as the powers of his head were directed to the wrongs ends, with respect to good intents and purpose he most certainly did not have a brain.

    Hastily assembled, so not at all the best it could be,

  11. Glenn says:

    Of course, Mr. Gonzalez could not have pulled off the capers he did had he not had a powerful brain. Nevertheless, as the powers of his head were directed to the wrongs ends, with respect to good intents and purpose he most certainly did not have a brain.

    Hmm. Since the topic is ‘conscience’, perhaps it would be better to add, “Still, even in this regard he had a brain. It’s just that without a conscience it was as if he had not had a brain.”


    PS I ran across Mr. Verini’s article only early yesterday evening. Had we not been hashing things out on the topic, it is not unlikely that I would not have so quickly keyed in on the article’s relation to ‘conscience’.

  12. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    I sincerely appreciate your lengthy contributions to this discussion on conscience.

    Since the Bible story used above embraces three baskets, and, depending on one’s individual efforts (through temptations), the number of baskets in which the leaks occur will diminish. Each basket represents a level of spiritual attainment, one basket represents the conscience of natural angels, another the conscience of spiritual angels, and at the top, the conscience of celestial angels. These terminations of God’s divine influence (influx) are organic planes of living structure – which represent the spiritual bodies that can potentially clothe the soul after the death of the physical body/garment. Without such inner organic distinctions between angels they could not be adapted for life in one of the three levels of heaven.

    I have found that most Swedenborgians do not view conscience in such an anatomical way. Yes, conscience is an inner dictate, but its quality disposes one’s spiritual substances and forms into a real (and new) living organization!

    Spiritually yours,

  13. Glenn says:


    Yes, conscience is an inner dictate, but its quality disposes one’s spiritual substances and forms into a real (and new) living organization!

    It is well known that smoking cigarettes brings about changes in the organic structures of the brain. And smokers who relinquish the smoking habit, experience an extensive renovation of those altered organic structures. But most people who quit smoking don’t have high on their list of reasons to quit, the organic structure of my anatomy will change!

    Likewise, if what you say is true, that most Swedenborgians do not view conscience in such an anatomical way, perhaps it is because they do not have high on their list of reasons to follow the Lord, My spiritual substances and forms will be disposed into a real (and new) living organization!

    Any such changes which occur are epiphenomenal. Being epiphenomenal, they are secondary. Being secondary, something else must be primary. And quite likely, ‘most Swedenborgians’ are more interested in what is primary than they are in what is secondary.


  14. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    How stupid of me – Swedenborgians intensely seek spiritual love above all things. As proof that this is their primary concern they never bicker, nor create schisms and their unified ranks are rapidly growing. So why make things more difficult then they have to be? Why ruin a good thing? If something works don’t fix it! My apologies!

    Wow, I have never heard of the spiritual body being called epiphenomenal before. Big mistake! Spiritual bio-structure transcends the physical brain and is non-material. You are simply defending a churchgoing or ecclesiastical approach to the New Jerusalem. Fine and dandy. However, Swedenborg’s “nunclicet” statement is more far-reaching then most people suppose. Swedenborg’s writings are far from being exhausted!

    Spiritually yours,

  15. Glenn says:


    The mistake is, as is not infrequently the case, yours. Go back, read again and double-check.


  16. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    You never really addressed my assertion that conscience and the spiritual body are the same types of termination. Now you want me to go back into this discussion to look for some “mistake.” Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

    You suggesting that I don’t know the difference between physical and spiritual bio-organization. I spend a good deal of time on it in my new book “Proving God.”

    I am amused that Swedenborgians circle the wagons and call me “paranoid” when I delve more deeply into the process of regeneration than they do.

    I apologize if your “eagle eyes” detect no useful information in my blogs. Oh well, I think I am ready to move on to another topic.

    Spiritually yours,

  17. Glenn says:


    Know you not the difference between a body and changes it might undergo? What was said was that the changes are epiphenomenal (“Any such changes which occur are epiphenomenal”).


  18. Glenn says:


    Regarding your assertion that conscience and the spiritual body are the same types of termination, it should be pointed out that neither the conscience nor the spiritual body are terminations. While they and the spiritual body are things in which something may (or may not) terminate, this does not make them terminations.

    It is because there is a difference between a termination and a terminal, that we have, e.g., airport, bus and train terminals, as opposed to airport, bus and train terminations. Plane flights, bus rides and train trips do terminate, and we can (and do) speak of their terminations. The ‘where’ of their terminations, however, are not themselves terminations; these are called terminals. So, you can walk into an airport, bus or train terminal and buy a round-trip ticket involving some earth-based destination; but if you walk into a plane, bus or train termination, you won’t have to pay for the one-way ticket to the after-life you may likely receive.

    Also, while conscience and the spiritual body are types of terminals, they are not ‘the same types’, as is evidenced by the fact that though everyone has a spiritual body, not everyone has a conscience.


  19. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    I am grateful that you have cleared up for me the nature of your obscurity. You are (like many other Swedenborgians) confusing “spiritual body” with “soul.” We are all born with souls, but our spiritual bodies are formed from the choices and actions we make in life. Without this distinction there would be no reason why all souls would not enjoy the same future in a heaven that was the same for everyone else.

    Swedenborg claimed that the soul was above the perception of even the highest celestial angels – so their spiritual body and organism, from which they function after death must be something distinct – and fully in tune with their conscience (both of which emerge from the spiritual evolution of one’s “remains.”)

    If this spiritual evolution was bottom up, instead of top down, I would have concurred that it is epiphenomenal. Complexity (and influx) descends and imposes new order on all things below.

    You have made it very clear to me why my approach to Swedenborg “pops” lots of “balloons.”

    Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family,

  20. What a material of un-ambiguity and preserveness of precious know-how about unpredicted emotions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s