Category Archive

Once Upon a Time: The Church is Born (30-100 AD)

The early church had a very practical understanding of a composite society, this is inherent within the Gospel message, because there will always be those who stumble over the cross and those who glory in it. The following excerpt from The Epistle of Diognetus (ca 100 AD) illustrates this quite well:

“Christians are not distinct from the rest of men in country or language or customs. . . . They inhabit their own fatherland, but as sojourners; they participate in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. Every foreign country is to them a fatherland and every fatherland a foreign country . . . . They live on earth but their citizenship is in heaven.”

It is quite interesting that they were able to live as ordinary citizens in spite of the persecution, which the church endured; they did not cease to proclaim the Gospel nor did they engage in crusades to have Christ replace the god’s of Rome. The persecution was so extensive that none of the apostles saw the close of the century. Herod Agrippa killed James, the brother of John, in 44. Philip was crucified in 54. Peter was crucified in 67. John was the only apostle to escape a violent death and he likely died in 98. Andrew was crucified. Thomas was speared to death in the East. Bartholomew was crucified in India. Matthew was killed in Ethiopia in 60. James, the son of Alphaeus, was stoned. Simon was crucified in Britain in 74. Jude, commonly called Thaddeus, was crucified in 72. Matthias was stoned and crucified in Jerusalem.

Things began to change and the church slowly became disenchanted with inhabiting their fatherland as sojourners.

Losing Our Identity: The Apologists Contend for Themselves (100-200 AD)

In between the period of the Apostles, described above, and overlapping the period of the Apologists, is a period generally known as the Apostolic Fathers. They are considered to have been alive during the time of the Apostles and many were supposedly disciples of the apostles themselves. Their writings are primarily epistles and sermons written to edify the church. It is important to understand these general characteristics because they lived through the same persecutions as the Apologists and yet their responses stand in stark contrast to one another.

The Apologetic Fathers lived around 100-200 AD; however, the persecution that set the stage for their apologies began far earlier in history. Major persecution of the church began with Nero, in 54, and continued unimpeded until Constantine in 300. What makes the writings of the Apologists so different is that they did not write to edify the church, they wrote to defend the church. This sounds great; however, this is, in my opinion, one of the saddest points in church history. Because they did not write to defend church doctrine, they did not write out of evangelistic zeal, they did not write out of a passion for the glory of God, they selfishly wrote to secure the safe existence of the church. They no longer viewed themselves as sojourners in a foreign land whose primary citizenship was in heaven, but as men and women whose primary citizenship was in Rome. They failed to “fight the good fight of the faith” and fought for themselves instead. Little did they know that in the coming century an emperor would come to power and wage war not against them but on their behalf.

A Tale of Two Swords: Constantinianism

Constantine was co-emperor of Rome, with Licinius, from 311-324. In 312, at the battle of Milvian Bridge he claimed to have a vision of a cross, over which was phrase “By this sign conquer.” He was victorious and subsequently proceeded to issue numerous edicts and grants favoring Christians. The effects of this are seen even to this day, the Rx symbol present a most pharmacies is an abbreviated form of the Greek word for Christ and was emblazoned on the shields of Constantine’s army. This marks a massive turning point in church history; no longer was the church persecuted by the state, now it possessed the power to persecute through the state.

The church justified its new political rule by allegorically interpreting one verse of scripture. “And they said, ‘Look, Lord, here are two swords.’ And he said to them, ‘It is enough’” (Luke 22:38). From Constantine on the church has wielded both the sword of the spirit and the sword of steel with the slaughter of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, as the result.

If you wish to fully understand the horrors, which this brought about then I would recommend reading the Malleus Maleficarum (translated: Witch Hammer or Hammer of Witches). This is the standard handbook on the prosecution of witches/heretics. Originally published in Germany in 1487 it has been used by both Protestants and Catholics. The third section details the horrific methods by which confessions are to be extracted.

Constantine set numerous precedents whose influence throughout history cannot be imagined; in fact, much of American law and legal tradition can be traced back, through English law, directly to Constantine. It is because of this that we would do well to understand our history lest we continue to repeat its mistakes.

There are positive effects, though I do not consider them as such, of this new state church. The rights of women were elevated, incest was forbidden, divorce was made difficult, adultery became a punishable offense, as did infanticide, the grip of slavery was lessened, and the gladiatorial shows were partially abolished. I do not consider the results positive because they are the result of a new Sacralism, and this contradicts the very nature of the Gospel. Among the negative effects are the secularization and paganization of the church, the development of idols and icons, the synchronism of the church and Roman civil government, the persecution of heretics, and the secularization of the church led to monasticism. Membership in the church was no longer voluntary; as citizens of Rome you were citizens in the kingdom of God, there was no distinction between the two. This view of the kingdom of God had been proliferated to the degree that when Rome began to fall most thought the tribulation was at hand.

The next fifteen-thousand years of church history can very much be summarized by the church persecuting through the state; everything from the Crusades, to the Inquisition, to the Salem witch trials builds on the foundation Constantine laid. By the grace of God, this movement is not without its defectors and those who rebelled against it, which will be presented in my next post.

The Old Testament: A Sacramental System

In order to have a Biblical perspective on politics one must first understand the two political systems, or more specifically societal paradigms, presented in Scripture. Each of these systems are easily defined and has unique characteristics that differentiate it from the other. The first of these is the Sacramental System; beginning at the fall (Genesis 3:7) and ending as the temple veil was torn (Matthew 27:51).

A Sacral Society is a monolithic society centered around one unanimously embraced religion. The fundamental driving force behind a sacral is the idea that societal harmony requires religious unanimity; it assumes that religious diversity always results in social discord and within a sacral society, it does. The key to understanding Sacral Societies is realizing that there is no distinction between church and state, the two are synonyms, and can be used interchangeably because they refer to the same institution.

There are numerous distinctives of a Sacral Society. First, within a Sacramental System, the church and the state represent a singular institution, this is commonly known as a theocracy. Second, a Sacral Society has only one religion, the state religion. Third, a Sacramental System is physical in focus; religious form outweighs spiritual essence. Because the state cannot judge the heart motives of an individual, outward compliance is the mark of a true believer, and subsequently a true citizen; the state must create and regulate standardized religious forms. Fourth, because Sacral Societies are theocratic and the mark of true citizenship is outward religious conformity they employ coercion to maintain religious harmony.

The Old Testament is replete with examples of what a Sacral Society looks like.
Israel was a Sacramental Society; as a theocracy, they were by definition Sacral. Even Israel’s enemies were Sacral Societies, whether it be Egypt and their god’s, Dagon of the Philistines, Baal-zebub of Ekron, or any of the god’s of the nations surrounding Israel they were all societies united in and by the worship of their god(s). The law given to Israel maintained civil and spiritual unity; there were no distinctions between the two, which is why those who broke spiritual unity were stoned. The nations that opposed Israel also opposed Israel’s God and likewise the nations that opposed Israel’s God opposed Israel, there is no separating of the two in Sacral Society. This is precisely why the Jews, including the Disciples, could not conceive of a Messiah that did not rule an earthly Kingdom (Acts 1:6).

The New Testament: A Composite System

The second of these is the Composite System; beginning at the tearing of the temple veil (Matthew 27:51). A Composite Society is just that, a compound differentiated society, one could even consider this Democracy, where individuals of differing religious orientations can peacefully coexists within a single society. This is a society where individuals can maintain loyalty to a secular political entity while maintaining their religious orientation; a society where one can “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s (Matthew 22:21).” The key to understanding Composite Societies is realizing that there is a clear distinction between church and state; they represent two distinct separate institutions that do not overlap in any way.

There are several distinctives of a Composite Society. First, within a Composite System, the church and state represent two distinctly separate institutions. Second, a Composite Society is religiously diverse. Third, a Composite System is spiritual in focus, since there is no state religion there are no standardized religious forms. Fourth, because the church and state are two separate institutions individuals can maintain loyalties to both institutions and ones religion becomes a mater of free choice. It is implied in the previous sentence that the state neither aids nor hinders any religion.

The New Testament paints a clear picture of what a Composite society should look like. God makes it clear that He establishes all human governments from Hitler to the Romans that killed Christ and He commands us to submit ourselves to these authorities (Romans 13:1; Acts 4:26-28; Colossians 1:16). He even establishes Governments that oppose Him, and His servants, to the point that we are to be encouraged that neither rulers nor powers can separate us from the Love of God in Christ our Lord (Romans 8:38-39). Even at this we do not war with these earthly powers (Ephesians 6:12). Paul even claimed citizenship to Rome, the same Rome that killed Christ (Acts 22:25). Paul understood that the Kingdom of God and the empire of Rome were not in opposition to the point that he could claim citizenship to both. While in Athens Paul noted that they worshipped many gods, even noting an alter inscribed “to the unknown god.” The Apostles recognize that the Sacramental System had ended and the surrounding word did as well, societal harmony was no longer dependant upon religious unanimity.

It is also important to note that the New Testament is completely devoid of prescribed worship forms, as found in the Old Testament. The main word describing Old Testament worship (proskuneo in the Greek Old Testament) mainly occurs in the Gospels and in Revelation, and at that it is in reference to falling down and worshipping Christ. It is also used once in Paul’s letters and that in reference to an unbeliever viewing the literal presence and power of God through the entire congregation prophesying. The gathered church and their actions are never referred to as worship in the New Testament. New Testament worship is no longer bound to strict, location oriented, external, government-enforced forms of worship; we are free to worship in spirit and in truth.

Intermission

Why is this important? I defined the above categories at length because it is imperative that we understand and recognize their characteristics, as the repercussions of their influence has had a profound impact on human history and will play a large role in shaping human history. All this will become clear in my next post, which will be far less in-depth and hopefully far more enlightening.

**I owe much of my understanding and clarity of thought, on this subject, to The Reformers and Their Stepchildren (Dissent and Nonconformity Series) by Leonard Verduin, on which I will post a book review in the coming weeks.

This week the LA Times published a review of an upcoming documentary entitled, Jesus Camp (the article is available here). The film documents “Kids on Fire,” a summer camp in North Dakota. The film focuses on three children Rachael, Levi, and Tory. I may take the time to see the film to learn what perverted distortion of Biblical discipleship is being presented as the status quo among evangelicals, as this documentary will likely play a large role of forming, or confirming, the public’s opinion of Evangelicism.

More important than the documentary itself is the following comment quoted by the reviewer: “I kept saying to myself, ‘OK, these are the Christian version of the Madrassas (those Islamic religious instructional schools in Pakistan and elsewhere, often financed by Saudi oil money) … so both sides are pretty much equally sick.” More and more individuals are comparing Evangelicism to radical Islam; what makes this comparison so important is the clarity with which it pinpoints the root issue. The root issue is that the problem with radical Islam has nothing to do with its violent tendencies but rather its intolerance of other viewpoints, a characteristic shared with Evangelicism.

If this does not serve as a siren to break the silence before the coming storm I am unsure what will. Earlier this month Stephen Green was arrested in Great Brittan for handing out tracts addressing homosexuality (some articles are available here and here). Just last week German parents who home school their children were being imprisoned. I am not going to make prophetic predictions concerning when we will begin seeing laws condemning the Gospel as hate speech or against following Christ[1] on the ballot here in America, although I think it will be soon.
Honestly, if God uses such persecution to shock the dead American Church to life, to rid the church of nominal Christians, and drive the Church out of comfort and complacency and into the nations; then I look forward to it.
___________________________
[1] I say following Christ instead of Christianity because I see a vast difference between the two; furthermore, I am trying to eliminate the term “Christian” from my vocabulary and replacing it with “follower of Christ.” I am doing this for several reasons. First, Christianity is an institutionalized religion, Christ did not come to establish an institution He came to establish His Church. Secondly, the world, especially America, is rife with self-professing Christians, very few of which truly follow Christ. The fulfillment of the Great Commission is not found in individuals from every race and tongue and tribe affirming a catechism or creed; but by individuals from every race and tongue and tribe submitting themselves, in obedience, to everything Christ has commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). In closing, I will leave you with a quote. “During the time of Christ, we would be known as followers of the way or followers of Christ and the surrounding culture would insult us by calling us ‘Christians.’ But now we call ourselves Christians and the surrounding world calls us hypocrites.” -Erwin Raphael McManus

While Rosie is seriously mistaken in her analysis, I think evangelicalism is largely to blame for her misunderstanding. The unbridled push towards greater evangelical political activism has lead to the misunderstanding that its aim is creating a quasi theocracy. An idea that many, if not most, evangelicals would embrace, depending on their eschatology and ecclesiology.

This misunderstanding has proliferated to the point that the primary dividing line between political parties is moralistic. With presidential, among other elections, looming just around the corner we must exercise due diligence in both how and why we vote. We must also be clear in explaining these convictions to others, lest others confuse the actions of the United States with the actions of Christ.

I see Rosie’s understanding of the situation as representative of the culture at large. I also think her understanding of the situation is representative of the international community as well; most internationals tend to view America as a “Christian nation.” While viewing a nation as “Christian” may be distinct from a “Christian Theocracy,” it is very easy to conceive of the US as a “Theocratic Democracy,” where Christ rules through the passions of the masses.

I think it is time that American Evangelicals embrace the fact that America is not a Christian nation; that we would stop reducing the Gospel to a moralistic message enforceable by legislation, that we would cease to belittle God by reducing Him to a political party, and that we would cease misrepresenting the name of Christ for the sake of political gain.

I think it is time that American Evangelicals realize that the gospel is not advanced on the back of public favor, that self-righteous legalism and enforced morality glorifies self and not God, that God is not a Republican, nor is He a Democrat, as He transcends all worldly institutions, that we have become Pharisaic in our quest for a political Messiah, and that failure to realize these things blasphemes the living God.

18For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.” 20Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 22For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption. 31Therefore, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” I Corinthians 1:18-31

I am sure many of you have heard of Rosie O’Donnell’s recent comments on The View comparing radical Christianity and radical Islam. She is quoted as saying, “Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have separation of church and state. . . And as a result of the attack and the killing of 3,000 innocent people, we invaded two countries and killed innocent people.” When confronted about radical Muslims desire to kill Americans. O’Donnell replied, “No, but we are bombing innocent people in other countries, true or false?”

I will post my thoughts on this later, however, I want to know if the majority of you feel that, her actions are unfounded, or are we to blame for her misunderstanding?

Foreign Affairs has an informative article, God’s Country?, describing the current and historical relationship between American Evangelicals and American foreign policy. Below is their description of the article. I hope you find it informative and look forward to hearing your thoughts.

“Religion has always been a major force in U.S. politics, but the recent surge in the number and the power of evangelicals is recasting the country’s political scene — with dramatic implications for foreign policy. This should not be cause for panic: evangelicals are passionately devoted to justice and improving the world, and eager to reach out across sectarian lines.”

Since the five year anniversary of September 11th is just around the corner and it will certainly dominate much of what we read and hear over the coming week I have decided to post a link to the following website: September 11th Revisited. The contents of this site are controversial to say the least; however, I find it to be very thought provoking and just a nice diversion from the norm. Yes, the video is about an hour long; although I am sure you will probably spend an equal, if not greater, amount of time watching similar programs on TV during the coming week. It is unlikely that I will reply to comments on this one, but as always, I look forward to reading your reactions.

Please read this post in its entirety before coming to an opinion. I think many will be offended or upset by my opening paragraph and yet agree with the overall thought conveyed by this post. I look forward to reading your responses.

First, America is not a Christian nation. Yes, individuals came to America fleeing religious persecution, the church was very involved in the early American government, and many of America’s laws reflect a Christian worldview. America is “one nation under God” in the same way that Iraq and North Korea are nations under God; because God is sovereign and rules the nations (Psalm 22:28). God establishes all governing authorities, from Hitler to George W. Bush (Romans 13:1). America, however, is not a Christian nation; it is a nation founded by Christians. The only “Christian” nation in the history of the world was Israel, a nation set apart by God for His glory. America is a nation in rebellion against God. The people of America follow Satan (Ephesians 2:2) and are literally enemies of God (Romans 8:7, Colossians 1:21). As Christians, we must realize this; we must realize that America, from the day of its discovery, has been a nation at war with God.

Second, the answer to this problem is not legislation, laws, or posting the Ten Commandments, regardless of how historical it may be. Listen to the words of Christ when addressing this issue to the Pharisees, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness (Matthew 23:27-28).” Christ was rebuking them because their strict outward obedience was not a reflection of their heart. I Timothy 4:8 addresses the same issue that physical restraint yields only temporary benefits, while true godliness is of eternal value.

How do people find peace with God?

They find peace through the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not through obedience to American law.
If you stop homosexuals from getting married and having sex, is God going to allow them to enter heaven?

No, and Scripture makes this expressly clear. Which begs the question “if this is of no eternal
benefit why do we invest so much time, energy, and money into such vain efforts?”

Do we, as American Evangelicals, care about homosexuals? Do we feel compassion for those who have had an abortion? Read Matthew 12:9-14. Do you look more like the Pharisees or Christ?

If you want to see America change, then you must change Americans. The Ten Commandments are being taken down, prayer is being banned, and “under God” is being taken out of the pledge because American’s are sinners in rebellion against God. The solution is not that we pass laws to enforce state sanctioned piety, but that we share the Gospel; the key to changing people’s actions is changing their hearts. Christ came to seek and save the lost and we should be about that very same business.

The two most frequent comments I receive about my blog are, “I do not read your blog because it is too complicated (or intellectual)” and “What is your blog supposed to be about?” My goal in writing this post is to, as simply as possible, explain what my blog is about and why it is important. I did a long series of posts on this when I began bogging; but this will be far shorter and simpler.

What is the ecumenical monoculture?

As previously defined, the ecumenical monoculture is a single, homogeneous culture without diversity or dissension; a culture unified in thought and purpose. Simply stated it is the inevitable result of the evil system of this world, a global state of pluralistic postmodernism devoid of absolute truth. Now, let me show you why this is true.

First, comes the Biblical understanding that we live amidst an evil world system ruled by Satan (II Corinthians 4:4, Ephesians 2:1-2, Colossians 2:8, and I John 5:19). Secondly, all false teaching originates from Satan and the demonic forces of this world; subsequently submission to such beliefs is tantamount to Satan worship (Matthew 16:23, I Corinthians 10:20, Galatians 1:8-9, I Timothy 4:1, and I John 4:3). Every world religion and philosophical system, other than the one presented in Scripture, originates from Satan, and aims at his praise. We therefore live in a world unified in hostile opposition of God and worship of Satan (Romans 5:10, Philippians 3:18, and Colossians 1:21). There are only two sides to this conflict; there are no neutral parties (Matthew 12:30). This homogeneous system of evil, unified in opposing God, is the ecumenical monoculture.

Secondly, the unity and homogeneity of this evil system will only increase over time. While this evil world system is unified in opposition to God, there is much variety within this system. However, Scripture presents this system as working its way toward unvarying unity. Whether this will take the form of postmodernism or some other life philosophy or religion, we cannot be sure. Nevertheless, we can be sure that we live amongst an evil world system and we must stand, with the Gospel of the glory of Christ, against its unification.

For more on this I would recommend reading the 2000 SBC Resolution On The Threat Of New Age Globalism.

In response to my previous post What do you Think? Nick, concerned with the church’s apparent disregard for theology, asked the question “Why is the church starting to preach the love of God without his wrath?” Now, I think my response would have been slightly different several weeks ago. However, studying I John in my Greek class has given me a slightly different, and hopefully more insightful, perspective on this subject.

I think love often gets a bad rap, not because there is something inherently wrong with it, but because it is presented in such superficial and trite ways. However, the love of God is not superficial or trite; it is not a foolish infatuation. God, being both infinite and unchanging, possesses a love that is likewise both infinite and unchanging. God’s love knows no bounds; it never fades, and never changes over time. God’s love is constant, unlike the fickle affections of men.

Listen to the words of Paul; “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing (I Corinthians 13:1-4).”

And the words of Christ, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these (Mark 12:29-31).”

“If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.” . . . “Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:32, 36).

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments (John 14:15).”

Clearly, love should have a prominent position in the lives of those who follow Christ and in the life of His church. To answer Nick’s question; the problem is not that they are preaching love absent of God’s wrath; the problem is that they are teaching neither.

It was love that provoked Paul’s spirit, in Acts 17, when he saw Athens filled with idols. It was love that cause Christ to have compassion on the crowds when He saw that they were like sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36). God’s abounding love and mercy caused Him to give His only Son so that we might have eternal life. Honestly, I think God’s love, and the effect it has on your lives, should scare you. What drives the martyr to be burned at the stake in hopes that God’s kingdom might be advance through his faithful witness? What is it that drives the missionary to forsake everything and place his family in certain danger if not love? What could have driven Paul to wish himself accursed, and cut off from Christ, that his kinsmen might be redeemed, if not love? When you love Christ, His glory, His holiness, His justice, His mercy, His cross, His mission, and His people your life will look drastically different. This is clearly not the love being preached in most churches; this is a dangerous, a demanding love, and a self-sacrificing love.

If, as Paul says, apart from love we have nothing, are nothing, and gain nothing, then how does the church properly balance love and theology? First, love cannot be abstracted from theology. If theology is the study of God and one of God’s attributes is love, then our theology should drive our love. The Scriptures clearly state that God is love (I John 4:8) and when churches abandon sound doctrine, they are also forsaking their ability to love.

Secondly, throughout I John the Scriptures present a picture of the church as having three essential components, Truth, love, and obedience.

The church is relevant not because it has a popular message, a captivating speaker, or an innovative program; the church is relevant because it has the Truth, namely Christ. When the church ceases to proclaim the Truth, it becomes irrelevant and useless; such churches are merely pagan places of worship engaged in idolatry.

The churches fellowship and witness is proven genuine because of its love. We are not known as Christ’s disciples because of a title we bestow upon ourselves, but because of our love, the love of Christ in us. The Great Commission finds its fulfillment not merely in our proclamation of the Gospel of Christ, to the nations, but in our bearing out of the sufferings of Christ, to the nations. We literally share the fellowship of His sufferings (Philippians 3:10) and through this the world sees God’s longsuffering and abundant love.

All of this culminates in obedience, “4 Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked (I John 2:4-6).” You must not merely know the Truth; you must submit yourself to it (v.4). And by obeying the Truth, the love of God is perfected in you (v.5). That is how Christ’s disciples should live; in submission to the Truth, which perfects their love, so that their life mirrors the life of Christ.