Prophesy

[Lily_Bernans]

Mike from NJ!

Silly me. I hadn’t noticed your religious affiliation - of which you don’t have one. Well, really you do but that’s another story.

I’m always in such a darn rush.

So, what are you going to do? Take each prophecy and prove to some crazy christians that they’re not true??

I wish I had the time to sit here and go thru your stuff up there.
Nazarene does mean branch.

Mathew was speaking to a JEWISH audience. They knew a heck of a lot more about what Mathew meant than what anybody today thinks they know what Mathew meant.

So a psalm was about Israel and not about Jesus. Study “prefiguring” and “analogy”. It would take you a long way along to understanding how christians think of the Old Testament. Oh. and study Jeremiah a bit more. The New Covenant is in there somewhere. Why would the New Covenant be in the Old Testament? So many questions.

And calling Him Jesus and Immanuel. Maybe Immanuel is just a title and that other stuff doesn’t matter all that much? Peter was given a name by Jesus that was a title too. You could look that up also.

Or you could just give it up since we don’t depend as much on prophecy as you would want to think. It might help some Jews to become Christian (and some have) but it won’t help Christians remain Christian because it’s almost irrelevant.

Fran

 

[Faith1960]

Of course I believe in all you say in your other post just above.

And I understand what Kaninchen is speaking of. How did Jesus get to be born in Bethlehem? Was there a census? We’ve romanticized the Christmas story to a degree. Embellished, maybe. For instance, the magi didn’t come to honor Jesus the night He was born. It took maybe two years from then and they showed up at a house, not a cave.

But, God bless St. Francis, for trying to teach his religion to uneducated people, I do agree with you that it doesn’t matter at all. The ONLY thing that matters is the resurrection. I certainly hope the O.P. isn’t having a problem with this.

Here’s my reason for believing it: The Apostles!

Maybe the first thing I learned in theology class is that if you can’t trust the apostles, then what are we basing our faith on??

So Jesus was arrested and tried (unlawfully BTW) and sentenced all in one evening/morning. John stayed in Jerusalem the whole time and went to the foot of the cross with Him.

Peter, and the other 9 apostles were terrified. Could they be next? They all hid that evening, probably in the home of Martha and Mary in Bethay, where they probably had stayed during Holy Week (Passover) and returned to each evening. Anyway, yeah, they were hiding out.

Within a week, they were roaming the streets, with a new courage and conviction. Their fear had passed and all was well.

Why?

Something extraordinary must have happened. How extraordinary must it have been to cause such a change in them?

Maybe seeing a person whom they had seen dead come back to life?

And what life did they lead after that? One of comfort? No. They lived hard lives, read the biography of Paul. Whipped, stoned, imprisoned and went to a martyer’s death. Ditto for Peter and the others. And all this for what? To propagate some lie they wanted to spread about some faith they didn’t really believe in? I think not.

All they taught has to be true or they were a group of madmen who put together and studied the biggest conspiracy in history and died for it.

To say nothing of Jesus. Who thought He was God.

So that’s my reason for believing and not needing to know HOW MANY prophecies were fulfilled by Him. Although many were. Just read Isaiah 52, 53, 54. Who else could it be speaking of??

Fran

I don’t have any problems with the Resurrection ( at least not at this time ) but what did you mean about the census and romanticizing the birth story?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I don’t have any problems with the Resurrection ( a least not at this time ) but what did you mean about the census and romanticizing the birth story?

I cannot speak for Fran, but for me it’s the manger, the magi, the shepherds, among other things. As Fran has pointed out, no magi visited. Jesus would not have been born in a manger. Shepherds only watched their flock by night in the springtime when the sheep were giving birth. That is romanticizing. We really don’t know what happened at Jesus’ birth. We do know he was resurrected and ascended into heaven, and that is what matters.

 

[Faith1960]

I cannot speak for Fran, but for me it’s the manger, the magi, the shepherds, among other things. As Fran has pointed out, no magi visited. Jesus would not have been born in a manger. Shepherds only watched their flock by night in the springtime when the sheep were giving birth. That is romanticizing. We really don’t know what happened at Jesus’ birth. We do know he was resurrected and ascended into heaven, and that is what matters.

So the Bible is wrong or a lie?

I remember a book by Pope Benedict where he said there were probably no animals but did he say the rest?

 

[frangiuliano115]

Thank you for sharing the basis of your belief. I agree with you almost line-for-line. The best proof of the Resurrection is the changed life of the apostles, and I also agree with you that the Resurrection is what matters.

A side note, which you probably already know: When a first century Jew spoke of or wrote of “resurrection,” he or she was talking of bodily resurrection, not a spiritual only afterlife, etc.

Since I agree with you so completely, you saved me a lot of typing! Thank you, and have a Blessed Advent! If you’re in Italy, send me a panettone! LOL Not really. I bought one from Italy, and it is wonderful! Moist and fresh. When I lived in Italy, I ate too much panettone,

D’accordo for second paragraph. Some today think it was spiritual.

As far as panettone goes - you could get one for very little nowadays. Not like years ago. I think they’re a tradition but you do get tired of them. Wait till after Christmas and you could get them for as little as E2.- !

But this thread isn’t about panettone!

A joyous Natale to you too.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

I don’t have any problems with the Resurrection ( at least not at this time ) but what did you mean about the census and romanticizing the birth story?

Hello Faith1960

What’s the sad face all about?

You know the New Testament is not supposed to be a history book. It wasn’t written to tell you every little thing that happened to Jesus, either when He was a boy in Nazareth or when he began His ministry in Galilee.

The only reason the New Testament was written was to make sure that people like us, in the future, would know who Jesus was, how important He was, that He was the Son of God, that He died to forgive our sins and to give us an opportunity to go to be with Him in heaven.

You can’t really be too concerned with anything else and it seems to me like you are.

Don’t you know the story of St. Francis? He lived in a beautiful place in Italy with little towns all around. His town was up on a hill. People back then were either rich or poor. Poor people didn’t know how to read or write and didn’t have access to books. Really, back then no one read the bible except priests, bishops, etc. So St. Francis got the idea to teach people about the birth of Jesus by making the nativity scene. So, for instance, he put the magi in the nativity to show that these wise men knew a King was supposed to be born and they set out to look for Him. That King was Jesus. But really they didn’t find Him the same night He was born - it really took about 2 years or so. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen! It was just to make the nativity scene more beautiful and to explain everything to the people.

You seem too worried to me. Remember that all the apostles and even disciples and even believers in Christ went to their death for Him and for what the Apostles taught. So we could be sure it was the truth.

Oh. And BTW, we’re disciples too! Followers of Jesus.

Keep following!

Fran

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Hello Faith1960

What’s the sad face all about?

You know the New Testament is not supposed to be a history book. It wasn’t written to tell you every little thing that happened to Jesus, either when He was a boy in Nazareth or when he began His ministry in Galilee.

The only reason the New Testament was written was to make sure that people like us, in the future, would know who Jesus was, how important He was, that He was the Son of God, that He died to forgive our sins and to give us an opportunity to go to be with Him in heaven.

You can’t really be too concerned with anything else and it seems to me like you are.

Don’t you know the story of St. Francis? He lived in a beautiful place in Italy with little towns all around. His town was up on a hill. People back then were either rich or poor. Poor people didn’t know how to read or write and didn’t have access to books. Really, back then no one read the bible except priests, bishops, etc. So St. Francis got the idea to teach people about the birth of Jesus by making the nativity scene. So, for instance, he put the magi in the nativity to show that these wise men knew a King was supposed to be born and they set out to look for Him. That King was Jesus. But really they didn’t find Him the same night He was born - it really took about 2 years or so. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen! It was just to make the nativity scene more beautiful and to explain everything to the people.

You seem too worried to me. Remember that all the apostles and even disciples and even believers in Christ went to their death for Him and for what the Apostles taught. So we could be sure it was the truth.

Oh. And BTW, we’re disciples too! Followers of Jesus.

Keep following!

Fran

Lovely post!

Faith, realize your burning desire for faith you really feel is, indeed, faith. Be at peace.

Joyeux Noël to you Fran, and to you, Faith.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I think your post is fascinating, especially since I read Hebrew. Had to learn it for my PhD, and I’m still a candidate by the way, haven’t finished my dissertation.

Do you read Hebrew? I think “Nazarene” does mean “branch.” I won’t go into this any more until I know if you’re interested or not. You may not be, and that’s fine. I should be working on my dissertation or grading papers.

I am quite interested; but at the same time I have a tendency to go days between responses on a thread so definitely consider me a far, far lower priority than your dissertation or grading papers

I don’t read Hebrew, so I’m forced to put my trust (which may be unwarranted) in interlineal translations.

Let me start with the English translation of Matthew 2:23, “and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.” That passage is linking the term Nazarene with living in Nazareth.

Looking at an interlinear translation of Matthew 2:23 it says:

kai elthōn, katōkēsen eis polin legomenēn Nazaret hopōs plērōthē to rhēthen dia tōn prophētōn hoti Nazōraios klēthēsetai
καὶ ἐλθὼν, κατῴκησεν εἰς πόλιν λεγομένην Ναζαρέτ ὅπως πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι Ναζωραῖος κληθήσεται
and having come, he dwelt in a city called Nazareth so that should be fulfilled that having been spoken through the prophets that a Nazarene will he be called.

I then went to an interlinear translation of the Septuigant for Isaiah 11:1 (to have both passages in the same language - Greek). It says:

καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ῥάβδος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης Ιεσσαι καὶ ἄνθος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης ἀναβήσεται
and he/she/it-will-be-COME-ed-OUT hooked staff out of the root Jesse and flower out of the root he/she/it-will-be-ASCEND-ed
And a rod will come from the root of Jesse and a flower will be ascended of the root.

So the Greek isn’t giving us any straightforward link, any commonalities to bridge the two passages.

I see in the interlineal for Isiah 11:1 it shows that nê·ṣer is Hebrew for branch.
.
Now read what I wrote initially:

Matthew 2:23 “He shall be called a Nazarene” do not appear in the Hebrew scriptures. It’s said to link to Isaiah 11:1 "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit." There is no evidence that the etymology of the town of Nazareth comes from branch.
From the very beginning I said that netzer was branch. What I also said was that there is no known etymology for Nazareth coming from the word branch. Does the name of the town derive from the Hebrew word for branch? Does Nazōraios not only mean someone from Nazareth in Greek but also mean branch?

 

[Purgatory_Pete]

Faith1960

They are not stating that they have all the answers,
they are theorising about what they think happened.
Like you ,I have read of the census that took them to Bethlehem.
I have also read Matthew 2.

Douay-Rheims Bible

The Pilgrimage of the Magi

1WHEN Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem. 2Saying, Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to adore him. 3And king Herod hearing this, was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4And assembling together all the chief priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where Christ should be born. 5But they said to him: In Bethlehem of Juda. For so it is written by the prophet:

6And thou Bethlehem the land of Juda art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come forth the captain that shall rule my people Israel.

Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda

This doesn’t seem to be saying anything other than fact.
It doesn’t say that He was possibly born there or that He was
born around that area. It said ***was born in Bethlehem ***.
no offence to anyone, but I will believe what Mathew is telling us
over any theory brought forth 2000 plus years later.

Faith 1960,
note that Lilly B says (below) “I and the professors at my school believe…”
LB didn’t say that this is Church teaching or that all theologians follow this line.
and the line used to back up this line of thinking is

Jesus was never known as anything but a Nazarene

Mel Gibson is known as an Australian Actor (but he was born in America)
Olivia Newton-John is known as an Australian Singer/Actress (she was born in England)
And there are thousands of more examples we could all throw in here.

I do believe the early Church members combed through the OT looking for prophecies of the Messiah and then attempted to apply them to Christ’s life. Some they got right, some they didn’t get right. For example, all of the professors at my school, including me, believe that Jesus was born in Nazareth, not Bethlehem and that no flight into Egypt occurred. Jesus was never known as anything but a Nazarene, there is not a whiff of Egyptian culture about him or his teachings. I think the writer(s) of Matthew and Luke performed some very great verbal acrobatics to get him to Bethlehem. Some, well, many, posters took a vehement stand against my belief on another thread, but that’s fine. Bethlehem is the only data we have, so I think non-theologians should go with that. I don’t want to get into another discussion of Jesus’ birthplace.

I think the writer(s) of Matthew and Luke performed some very great verbal acrobatics to get him to Bethlehem.

I think modern theologians are the ones drawing the long bow on historical matters.

Most people knew that the 3 wise men were not at the Birth
and were brought into the Nativity scene to condense the line of events.
but that lends no weight to everything else being embellished from thin air.

Hold strong Faith 1960,
Why would Mathew mislead and why would the others allow him to do this.

Faith 1960 I hope this helps.
:tiphat:

 

[Faith1960]

Hello Faith1960

What’s the sad face all about?

You know the New Testament is not supposed to be a history book. It wasn’t written to tell you every little thing that happened to Jesus, either when He was a boy in Nazareth or when he began His ministry in Galilee.

The only reason the New Testament was written was to make sure that people like us, in the future, would know who Jesus was, how important He was, that He was the Son of God, that He died to forgive our sins and to give us an opportunity to go to be with Him in heaven.

You can’t really be too concerned with anything else and it seems to me like you are.

Don’t you know the story of St. Francis? He lived in a beautiful place in Italy with little towns all around. His town was up on a hill. People back then were either rich or poor. Poor people didn’t know how to read or write and didn’t have access to books. Really, back then no one read the bible except priests, bishops, etc. So St. Francis got the idea to teach people about the birth of Jesus by making the nativity scene. So, for instance, he put the magi in the nativity to show that these wise men knew a King was supposed to be born and they set out to look for Him. That King was Jesus. But really they didn’t find Him the same night He was born - it really took about 2 years or so. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen! It was just to make the nativity scene more beautiful and to explain everything to the people.

Is that not in the Bible?

Did Pope Benedict say it wasn’t really like that, besides the animals not being there?

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Mike from NJ!

Silly me. I hadn’t noticed your religious affiliation - of which you don’t have one. Well, really you do but that’s another story.

I’m always in such a darn rush.

So, what are you going to do? Take each prophecy and prove to some crazy christians that they’re not true??

No, I’m not going to go through each and every prophecy, but I do want to show that the threshold for claiming a fulfilled prophecy is embarrassingly low. Kancihen touched on it quite well, I think, and the author of the video series I linked to initially also did. The number of prophecies is an attempt to impress non-believers. Over 300 prophecies? Surely if one is not awed by such an amount than one must be willfully blind to the truth of Christianity, is what it implies.

I wish I had the time to sit here and go thru your stuff up there.
Nazarene does mean branch.

As I mentioned above nê·ṣer means branch, but I haven’t see evidence that the term also mean “one from Nazareth” or that Nazarene means branch. The words are a bit similar, but it would be like saying that we knew Ike Turner would be a “louse” because he came from “St. Louis”.

Mathew was speaking to a JEWISH audience. They knew a heck of a lot more about what Mathew meant than what anybody today thinks they know what Mathew meant.

So a psalm was about Israel and not about Jesus. Study “prefiguring” and “analogy”. It would take you a long way along to understanding how christians think of the Old Testament. Oh. and study Jeremiah a bit more. The New Covenant is in there somewhere. Why would the New Covenant be in the Old Testament? So many questions.

It’s not a prophecy if the words have to be twisted or their meanings ignored to make it seem like they were fulfilled.

And calling Him Jesus and Immanuel. Maybe Immanuel is just a title and that other stuff doesn’t matter all that much? Peter was given a name by Jesus that was a title too. You could look that up also.

Then it should be easy to show that Immanuel was a title and that Jesus was called it. Again, words and definitions are twisted or ignored to make things seem like they fit (so long as one doesn’t look to hard).

Or you could just give it up since we don’t depend as much on prophecy as you would want to think. It might help some Jews to become Christian (and some have) but it won’t help Christians remain Christian because it’s almost irrelevant.

I’m not saying that because there are those who would stretch what is and is not prophecy to laughable levels that Christianity isn’t true. It could very well be true, but this list of 300+ prophecies is a house of cards. It’s things like this and people who are willing and eager to violate the commandment on bearing false witness that give a poor impression of Christianity to non-believers.

 

[Faith1960]

Hello Faith1960

What’s the sad face all about?

You know the New Testament is not supposed to be a history book. It wasn’t written to tell you every little thing that happened to Jesus, either when He was a boy in Nazareth or when he began His ministry in Galilee.

The only reason the New Testament was written was to make sure that people like us, in the future, would know who Jesus was, how important He was, that He was the Son of God, that He died to forgive our sins and to give us an opportunity to go to be with Him in heaven.

You can’t really be too concerned with anything else and it seems to me like you are.

Don’t you know the story of St. Francis? He lived in a beautiful place in Italy with little towns all around. His town was up on a hill. People back then were either rich or poor. Poor people didn’t know how to read or write and didn’t have access to books. Really, back then no one read the bible except priests, bishops, etc. So St. Francis got the idea to teach people about the birth of Jesus by making the nativity scene. So, for instance, he put the magi in the nativity to show that these wise men knew a King was supposed to be born and they set out to look for Him. That King was Jesus. But really they didn’t find Him the same night He was born - it really took about 2 years or so. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen! It was just to make the nativity scene more beautiful and to explain everything to the people.

You seem too worried to me. Remember that all the apostles and even disciples and even believers in Christ went to their death for Him and for what the Apostles taught. So we could be sure it was the truth.

Oh. And BTW, we’re disciples too! Followers of Jesus.

Keep following!

Fran

Scripture says there WERE three wise men.

 

[Purgatory_Pete]

Scripture says there WERE three wise men.

frangiuliano115 also says there were 3 wise men.

Scripture says there WERE three wise men.

Yes it does, and there were.
But read carefully,
it does not say that they were at the birth.

Douay-Rheims Bible

The Pilgrimage of the Magi

1WHEN Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem. 2Saying, Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to adore him.

They spoke as if it has already happened. (because it had)

Douay-Rheims Bible
Then Herod perceiving that he was deluded by the wise men, was exceeding angry; and sending killed all the men children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.

Even Herod knew that this was an event that had
already taken place.

:tiphat:

 

[frangiuliano115]

frangiuliano115 also says there were 3 wise men.

Yes it does, and there were.
But read carefully,
it does not say that they were at the birth.

They spoke as if it has already happened. (because it had)

Even Herod knew that this was an event that had
already taken place.

:tiphat:

Well, if we want to be precise, we don’t know if there were three wise men. We only know that three gifts were brought to give to the new born king. It says that wise men came to seek Him, but not how many.

I don’t really understand where this thread is headed… We’re not talking about a history book here.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Scripture says there WERE three wise men.

Scripture is correct.

There were wise men. They were seeking Jesus. They found Him.
That’s all that matters really.



Fran

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Well, if we want to be precise, we don’t know if there were three wise men. We only know that three gifts were brought to give to the new born king. It says that wise men came to seek Him, but not how many.

I don’t really understand where this thread is headed… We’re not talking about a history book here.

Fran

I suppose Nativity scenes depict three wise men because three gifts were mentioned, as you pointed out. If five gifts had been mentioned, we might have five magi.

In our parish, they are moved a little closer to the infant Jesus every week until they “arrive.” The first time I saw that they had been moved, I moved them back, thinking someone had tampered with them! I can be stupid about some things.

Fran, Faith, all, have a good night and wonderful week. I’m going back to my neglected dissertation, I think.

 

[Purgatory_Pete]

Well, if we want to be precise, we don’t know if there were three wise men. We only know that three gifts were brought to give to the new born king. It says that wise men came to seek Him, but not how many.

Ooops! yes that is correct. my bad, sorry Fran. :doh2:

I don’t really understand where this thread is headed… We’re not talking about a history book here.
Fran

I think it’s off on its own journey now. (pun intended)

:tiphat:

 

[frangiuliano115]

Ooops! yes that is correct. my bad, sorry Fran. :doh2:

I think it’s off on its own journey now. (pun intended)

:tiphat:

Cute!

Good Night.

I think. Second try!

 

[frangiuliano115]

No, I’m not going to go through each and every prophecy, but I do want to show that the threshold for claiming a fulfilled prophecy is embarrassingly low. Kancihen touched on it quite well, I think, and the author of the video series I linked to initially also did. The number of prophecies is an attempt to impress non-believers. Over 300 prophecies? Surely if one is not awed by such an amount than one must be willfully blind to the truth of Christianity, is what it implies.

As I mentioned above nê·ṣer means branch, but I haven’t see evidence that the term also mean “one from Nazareth” or that Nazarene means branch. The words are a bit similar, but it would be like saying that we knew Ike Turner would be a “louse” because he came from “St. Louis”.

It’s not a prophecy if the words have to be twisted or their meanings ignored to make it seem like they were fulfilled.

Then it should be easy to show that Immanuel was a title and that Jesus was called it. Again, words and definitions are twisted or ignored to make things seem like they fit (so long as one doesn’t look to hard).

I’m not saying that because there are those who would stretch what is and is not prophecy to laughable levels that Christianity isn’t true. It could very well be true, but this list of 300+ prophecies is a house of cards. It’s things like this and people who are willing and eager to violate the commandment on bearing false witness that give a poor impression of Christianity to non-believers.

Mike from NJ

It’s a relief to know we’re not going to go through each prophecy!

Although I agree with you to some degree, I do stand by my original post and I always feel that atheists are not willing to accept too much of what we believe. All those concepts I asked you to check out was for a reason. But you’d have to be really interested and the only reason you’d be really interested is if you were thinking of becoming christian and I doubt you are.

The Nazarene - branch thing is a play on words.

Immanuel means “God With Us”. Jesus was God With Us. I’m sure you know this - you sound very knowledgeable. So, yes, it was a title.

Jesus gave Peter the name Cephas in Aramaic because it means the rock, as Pietro is the masculine of pietra which means rock. It’s also a title.

You picked a couple of prophecies which you think were twisted in the wording to make them fit Jesus. Well, maybe some were. Are we sure He was born in Bethlehem, for instance?

BUT, are you willing to concede that some prophesies were fulfilled? There had been other supposed messiah’s that fulfilled one prophecy - I’m not even sure about two; maybe. But if you go beyond 4 or 5 the chances do become astronomical.

So, I mean, how many do you need? I had said that I personally will not use more than 15. Just Isaiah alone is incredible. 52, 53 and 54. But you’re saying the NT story was fixed to make it agree with the O.T.

So, in the end, it always comes back to the resurrection. Even Paul said it. If that’s not true, we’re the most pitied men on earth.

1 Corinthians 15:10-19
10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 11Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.
12Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; 14and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.

Yes. Mike from NJ, it all rests on the resurrection.

Fran

 

[Faith1960]

frangiuliano115 also says there were 3 wise men.

Yes it does, and there were.
But read carefully,
it does not say that they were at the birth.

They spoke as if it has already happened. (because it had)

Even Herod knew that this was an event that had
already taken place.

:tiphat:

Oh, ok