PreTrib's insurmountable problem with "the first resurrection":

[MattTooFor]

OK,stop your lies.

What "lies" are those?? In Matthew 24, the believers (Peter, James< John, etc.) asked Jesus what wouold happen in the end times. Jesus told them to look out for the Abomination of Desolation, followed by the Great Tribulation, and ened with the glorious "gathering" into the arms of Jesus...a supernatural translation, i.e. a "rapture.

This is the teaching which Peter, james and John carried with them throughout their lives.

I have repeatedly asked you and the "Ahwa" guy repeatedly (and some others here)...and you guys have repeatedly run away from this question:

If you could have pulled Peter aside any number of years after that Olivet Discourse and asked him "do you still hold to the teachings Jesus gave you that day?...do you still have an expectation of the Abomination of Desolation, followed by the Great Tribulation, followed by the "gathering"?...

...what in the world else would anyone expect Peter to have said other than "well of course we still hold to His words...yes, we still live with an expectation of the Abomination event...what ELSE would we believe other than what Jesus told us that day...and why would anyone think there could be a contradictory teaching to Jesus???"

Jesus told Peter, James and John they would be raptured/gathered in a POST-"great tribulation" rapture.

So...are you calling Jesus a liar? Would you walk up to Peter and tell him he was "confused" because he believed in the post-"great trib" rapture he had been taught by Jesus? I'd pay good money to watch that little rendezvous.

 

[MattTooFor]

...with no verses pointing to a post trib rapture. He NEVER HAS POSTED A SINGLE VERSE.

What do you consider truth?????

Either you have literally zero comprehension...or now you're the one being dishonest. I (and others) have repeatedly been discussing Jesus' description of a supernatural translation of the believers in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

What in the world are you talking about, bud? I have a theory you're just propagandizing. To you this is a big, fun game. It's the equivalent of rooting for your favorite NFL team or some dumb thing like that.

So for you, it's 'fair game' to simply wallpaper the discussion thread with blaring and deliberate false claims. Truth is of no consequence. It's whether your "team" wins or not -- LOL. Quite sad...and funny at the same time.

So even though you know we (I) have repeatedly (dozens of times) pointed to the post-trib rapture passage sitting there in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, clear as a bell...it doesn't bother you in the least. It's all a game. So...you lie through your teeth, making a ludicrous claim that no one had presented "a single verse".

I guess your thought is...if someone casually browses through the thread and sees your "bold" and wildly dishonest false claim that we haven't provided a "single verse"...it might dissuade some.

You may be right. Maybe your deliberate falsehood will have the intended effect. But someday when you're answering to God about why you tried to contradict the Lord Jesus in His simple and direct words to Peter, James and John (and which also obviously therefore apply to ALL believers) in warning them to look for the Abomination, followed by the Great Tribulation, followed by the Great Gathering rapture...

...and you're even going so far as to straight up lie about it here on this discussion board...and when you're answering to God about why you think Jesus' words to Peter, James and John should not have been heeded by Peter, James and John (ROTFLOL -- I sure hope I'm within earshot to hear THAT conversation)...nor heeded by any other believers...and that they should not have lived with an expectation of the Abomination, the Great Trib, followed by the Gathering, as Jesus had explicitly explained to them...

...that, my friend, will be your moment of truth. Then you'll realize this wasn't a game like rooting for your favorite sports team.

 

[MattTooFor]

Just to review -- the Bible plainly and clearly states the "first resurrection" will occur when the martyrs are resurrected.

There is no rebuttal to the Bible. No one can rebut the Scriptures...even though this has been attempted several times in this thread.

There is NO scripture which authorizes anyone to stretch, twist, contort or otherwise mangle the Scriptures to say the "first resurrection" is other than what is stated in Rev. 20:4-5.

So...when PreTrib claims the "first resurrection" occurred before the commencing of the 70th Week...they are utterly bereft of ANY scripture passage whatsoever. It is a claim derived out of thin air.

Not only that. There are ZERO passages in the Bible which describe a "PreTrib" rapture. What PreTribbers do is...they simply point to a passage which is describing a "rapture" and without further ado simply make a baseless assertion that this is a "PreTrib" rapture. Amazing. Meanwhile, three enormous passages (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) sit there, big as life...and are all describing a post-"great trib" rapture in massive detail.

There is no "first resurrection" which occurs before the 70th Week (i.e. at the time of an alleged "PreTrib" rapture) because there is no PreTrib rapture!

In answer to the questions of the believers who came to Him that day, Jesus told them in the plainest language that they needed to live with an expectation of the Abomination of Desolation, followed by the Great Tribulation, after which they would be rescued by the great and "glorious" gathering of all the believers...just in time to get out of the way of God's great "day" of wrath.

The question I have asked and which has been run away from by an assortment of PreTrib proponents here at this discussion board...is...what in the world else do you think any one of these believers (Peter, James, John, etc.) would have said if you were able to pull them aside some fifteen or twenty years after the Olivet Discourse...and you could have asked them "say, do you still heed the words Jesus told you that day when He said to look out for the Abomination event, followed by the Great Trib??"...

...what ELSE would they have said other than "well, of COURSE we still heed Jesus' words! Why in the world wouldn't we? And who would dare contradict Jesus' advisories to us???"

And so the $64,000 question is this: If the top and original leaders of the Christian era (Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc.) heeded Jesus' words to them throughout their lives...how could any other believers NOT believe the same way??

It's a very simple question and a very simple scenario. As I had said previously -- my little 12-year-old daughter read the Olivet Discourse in fifteen minutes and at the end of those fifteen minutes understood all the pertinent facts of the end times which believers need to know.

 

[tanakh]

Just to review -- the Bible plainly and clearly states the "first resurrection" will occur when the martyrs are resurrected.

There is no rebuttal to the Bible. No one can rebut the Scriptures...even though this has been attempted several times in this thread.

There is NO scripture which authorizes anyone to stretch, twist, contort or otherwise mangle the Scriptures to say the "first resurrection" is other than what is stated in Rev. 20:4-5.

So...when PreTrib claims the "first resurrection" occurred before the commencing of the 70th Week...they are utterly bereft of ANY scripture passage whatsoever. It is a claim derived out of thin air.

Not only that. There are ZERO passages in the Bible which describe a "PreTrib" rapture. What PreTribbers do is...they simply point to a passage which is describing a "rapture" and without further ado simply make a baseless assertion that this is a "PreTrib" rapture. Amazing. Meanwhile, three enormous passages (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) sit there, big as life...and are all describing a post-"great trib" rapture in massive detail.

There is no "first resurrection" which occurs before the 70th Week (i.e. at the time of an alleged "PreTrib" rapture) because there is no PreTrib rapture!

In answer to the questions of the believers who came to Him that day, Jesus told them in the plainest language that they needed to live with an expectation of the Abomination of Desolation, followed by the Great Tribulation, after which they would be rescued by the great and "glorious" gathering of all the believers...just in time to get out of the way of God's great "day" of wrath.

The question I have asked and which has been run away from by an assortment of PreTrib proponents here at this discussion board...is...what in the world else do you think any one of these believers (Peter, James, John, etc.) would have said if you were able to pull them aside some fifteen or twenty years after the Olivet Discourse...and you could have asked them "say, do you still heed the words Jesus told you that day when He said to look out for the Abomination event, followed by the Great Trib??"...

...what ELSE would they have said other than "well, of COURSE we still heed Jesus' words! Why in the world wouldn't we? And who would dare contradict Jesus' advisories to us???"

And so the $64,000 question is this: If the top and original leaders of the Christian era (Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc.) heeded Jesus' words to them throughout their lives...how could any other believers NOT believe the same way??

It's a very simple question and a very simple scenario. As I had said previously -- my little 12-year-old daughter read the Olivet Discourse in fifteen minutes and at the end of those fifteen minutes understood all the pertinent facts of the end times which believers need to know.

Convincing a Pre Tribber is like flogging the proverbial dead horse.

They not only misuse whats in the Bible but rely on what isn't in it to justify their position.
A prime example is where John is told ''come up here'' From then on they claim because the word Church isn't mentioned again in Revelation but only Saints the Church cannot be on the Earth. It has been pointed out to me that the word Church is not used in the OT but only Saints. Its obvious that Church wouldn' be used in the OT because there was no such thing
until Christs ministry and the coming of the Holy Spirit. However both Church and Saint are used in the Epistles so how do they know that the use of saints in Revelation four onwards doesn't include the Church? Because I was told 'Saint isnt used in the seven letters. My answer is why should it?

Also they claim that the great crowd in Revelation 7 were people who had been killed by the Antichrist having refused the mark and accepted Christ after the rapture. This crowd than no man can number following Christ are dubbed by them as 'Tribulation Saints' a term not found anywhere in revelation or anywhere else. As these people are all killed they must have got to heaven some how. Which leads to other questions like were they resurrected and then raptured? If so did Christ have to make another trip to the earth to collect them as he did the first time Does this mean that there are at least three further comings of Christ and at least two more raptures? Exactly how many raptures are there in the pre trib version of events? How I see it is there are The Church/Bride, The righteous OT Saints, the two witnesses the 144000, and the Tribulation saints. That amounts to five rapture events. Does Christ and his Angels appear at each one complete with shouts and trumpets? I leave you to decide.

 

[popeye]

One major problem you and many Pre tribbers have is failure to realise that Johns visions are not in a strict Chronological time line They are in the order that he received them. According to every Pre Trib scenerio I have read or heard of.the first tribulation event is the arrival of the Antichrist who makes a seven year peace treaty with Israel and breaks it after three and a half years. He creates a false sense of peace during that first half of the tribulation. When he breaks it all hell breaks loose. That is where Mid Tribbers claim that the rapture happens Paul says there is sudden destruction and they shall not escape. If all the things that the Horsemen bring take place the instant the rapture has happened as you seem to suggest that he is referring to then there would be no point in having a seven year tribulation period which is basically what I am trying to say in my post.

the Ironic thing about Pre trib eschatology is that it is held by some that it was originally invented by a Jesuit Priest to take the heat off the Pope to counter claims by the reformers who believed that he was the Antichrist. He placed a secret coming of Jesus and the appearance of the Antichrist at some undetermined time in the future thus avoiding the charge. People who believe in it still have an issue with the RCC but hang on to the biggest Heresy in their arsenal
with the help of John Darby and company who created a cult supporting it.

Actually the irony lies in the falseness of your foundation.

You jettison verses in favor of invoking alensky tactics shoot the messenger.

We pretribs never heard of those dead men you rely on. There lies the irony . You will never,ever see anti pretribs make their "case" without those carcasses being invoked.

Are you guys aware that those dead men are NOT working for you????

All I hear when those carcasses are exhumed is "we are unable to BIBLICALLY make our case ,so we will shoot our dead men at the debate"

 

[popeye]

Convincing a Pre Tribber is like flogging the proverbial dead horse.

They not only misuse whats in the Bible but rely on what isn't in it to justify their position.
A prime example is where John is told ''come up here'' From then on they claim because the word Church isn't mentioned again in Revelation but only Saints the Church cannot be on the Earth. It has been pointed out to me that the word Church is not used in the OT but only Saints. Its obvious that Church wouldn' be used in the OT because there was no such thing
until Christs ministry and the coming of the Holy Spirit. However both Church and Saint are used in the Epistles so how do they know that the use of saints in Revelation four onwards doesn't include the Church? Because I was told 'Saint isnt used in the seven letters. My answer is why should it?

Also they claim that the great crowd in Revelation 7 were people who had been killed by the Antichrist having refused the mark and accepted Christ after the rapture. This crowd than no man can number following Christ are dubbed by them as 'Tribulation Saints' a term not found anywhere in revelation or anywhere else. As these people are all killed they must have got to heaven some how. Which leads to other questions like were they resurrected and then raptured? If so did Christ have to make another trip to the earth to collect them as he did the first time Does this mean that there are at least three further comings of Christ and at least two more raptures? Exactly how many raptures are there in the pre trib version of events? How I see it is there are The Church/Bride, The righteous OT Saints, the two witnesses the 144000, and the Tribulation saints. That amounts to five rapture events. Does Christ and his Angels appear at each one complete with shouts and trumpets? I leave you to decide.

Amazing that you express "how I see it" and never invoke a single pretrib verse.

That reveals a lot about your position.

I wonder why a positin is created and 15 or so verses are throw off the table

 

[popeye]

Either you have literally zero comprehension...or now you're the one being dishonest. I (and others) have repeatedly been discussing Jesus' description of a supernatural translation of the believers in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

What in the world are you talking about, bud? I have a theory you're just propagandizing. To you this is a big, fun game. It's the equivalent of rooting for your favorite NFL team or some dumb thing like that.

So for you, it's 'fair game' to simply wallpaper the discussion thread with blaring and deliberate false claims. Truth is of no consequence. It's whether your "team" wins or not -- LOL. Quite sad...and funny at the same time.

So even though you know we (I) have repeatedly (dozens of times) pointed to the post-trib rapture passage sitting there in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, clear as a bell...it doesn't bother you in the least. It's all a game. So...you lie through your teeth, making a ludicrous claim that no one had presented "a single verse".

I guess your thought is...if someone casually browses through the thread and sees your "bold" and wildly dishonest false claim that we haven't provided a "single verse"...it might dissuade some.

You may be right. Maybe your deliberate falsehood will have the intended effect. But someday when you're answering to God about why you tried to contradict the Lord Jesus in His simple and direct words to Peter, James and John (and which also obviously therefore apply to ALL believers) in warning them to look for the Abomination, followed by the Great Tribulation, followed by the Great Gathering rapture...

...and you're even going so far as to straight up lie about it here on this discussion board...and when you're answering to God about why you think Jesus' words to Peter, James and John should not have been heeded by Peter, James and John (ROTFLOL -- I sure hope I'm within earshot to hear THAT conversation)...nor heeded by any other believers...and that they should not have lived with an expectation of the Abomination, the Great Trib, followed by the Gathering, as Jesus had explicitly explained to them...

...that, my friend, will be your moment of truth. Then you'll realize this wasn't a game like rooting for your favorite sports team.

Funny.

Mat 24 is solidly pretrib rapture.

We both believe Jesus returns postrib.

You guys,for years misplaced the gathering of mat 24.(pssst,angels gather not Jesus,and they are gathered from heaven,not earth.

You have no verses. A misplaced mat 24 is a poor,poor starting place sir.

You have no verses. Not a one

Jesus even gave you lot and Noah as prejudgment examples.

 

[bluto]

Funny.

Mat 24 is solidly pretrib rapture.

We both believe Jesus returns postrib.

You guys,for years misplaced the gathering of mat 24.(pssst,angels gather not Jesus,and they are gathered from heaven,not earth.

You have no verses. A misplaced mat 24 is a poor,poor starting place sir.

You have no verses. Not a one

Jesus even gave you lot and Noah as prejudgment examples.

Oh boy popeye! Why would you make this statement? "Mat 24 is solidly pretrib rapture." You think! The disciples at Matthew 24:3 ask the following question? "And as He/Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming, AND THE END OF THE AGE/CONSUMATION/COMPLETTION/END OF THE WORLD?" Greek, aion.

This would mean popey that the so-called pre-trib rapture is the end of the world, BUT, how can that be when you guys say the Great Tribulation follows the pre-trib rapture? You must not be eating too much spinach in order to help your brain cells think more clearly?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[popeye]

Oh boy popeye! Why would you make this statement? "Mat 24 is solidly pretrib rapture." You think! The disciples at Matthew 24:3 ask the following question? "And as He/Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming, AND THE END OF THE AGE/CONSUMATION/COMPLETTION/END OF THE WORLD?" Greek, aion.

This would mean popey that the so-called pre-trib rapture is the end of the world, BUT, how can that be when you guys say the Great Tribulation follows the pre-trib rapture? You must not be eating too much spinach in order to help your brain cells think more clearly?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

Good to see you!

Where you been?

Uh,no,you guys have no traction,but that's ok,I get a kick out of you guys' creativeness

 

[popeye]

At least you admit He was asked 3 questions. Most postrib adherents assert 2 were asked.

That's impressive.
You got most of the 10 virgin deal sorta right,and got the 3 question dynamic sorta right too.

Interesting

 

[TMS]

The Bible is clear, there is only two resurrections. There are exceptions like Lazarus and people that were not resurrected to eternal life. And the resurrection of Jesus and those that rose at His resurrection were the first fruits of what the saints could look forward to, and it was our assurance that Jesus had succeeded.
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead..

Let’s not say what isn’t plainly stated in the word. You can smear the word and make it say what you want, but the resurrection isn’t in phases or before the coming of Jesus. The resurrection of the Just (than 1000 years) and the resurrection of the unjust is what Revelation plainly teaches.

1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

 

[TMS]

Heb 11:32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:
Heb 11:33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions,
Heb 11:34 Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.
Heb 11:35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
Heb 11:36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:
Heb 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
Heb 11:38 (Of whom the world was not worthy they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:



If they could go through tribulation by faith in a future reward and through love for God, than i know that by faith i can go through tribulation too. God can give me the strength to do it too. Can you do all things in Christ? or just about everything except tribulation?

 

[tanakh]

Actually the irony lies in the falseness of your foundation.

You jettison verses in favor of invoking alensky tactics shoot the messenger.

We pretribs never heard of those dead men you rely on. There lies the irony . You will never,ever see anti pretribs make their "case" without those carcasses being invoked.

Are you guys aware that those dead men are NOT working for you????

All I hear when those carcasses are exhumed is "we are unable to BIBLICALLY make our case ,so we will shoot our dead men at the debate"

By dead men I assume you mean some well known people in the past who have exposed the Pre Trib position.
People like Charles Spurgeon for instance. I would prefer to believe him than the likes of La Haye. There are a number of living writers who are not Pre Tribbers and millions of living Christians who dont believe it. The majority of those who do come from the US which is not suprising because this teaching spread through US Seminary's during the 19th Century thanks to Darby and Scofield. It was at that time that the JW SDA Morman and Christian Science Cults got started there. It seems that the US is a fertile ground for dubious doctrines.

 

[TMS]

Convincing a Pre Tribber is like flogging the proverbial dead horse.

..... As these people are all killed they must have got to heaven some how. Which leads to other questions like were they resurrected and then raptured? If so did Christ have to make another trip to the earth to collect them as he did the first time Does this mean that there are at least three further comings of Christ and at least two more raptures? Exactly how many raptures are there in the pre trib version of events? How I see it is there are The Church/Bride, The righteous OT Saints, the two witnesses the 144000, and the Tribulation saints. That amounts to five rapture events. Does Christ and his Angels appear at each one complete with shouts and trumpets? I leave you to decide.

i agree it's like flogging a dead horse.
But you said "As these people are all killed they must have got to heaven some how."
There is another belief which i take and that is that the dead do not go straight to heaven they stay dead until the resurrection. This would mean only one comming of Jesus was needed to collect all the dead in Christ.

If death is like a sleep and you know nothing than those that have been dead for 1000 years and those that have been dead for 1 minute will have experience the same time in the grave, which is fair and it is also Biblical.

Whats the use of a resurrection if your already alive in heaven?
As for the pre trib believers, they may have to find out the hard way.

 

[tanakh]

i agree it's like flogging a dead horse.
But you said "As these people are all killed they must have got to heaven some how."
There is another belief which i take and that is that the dead do not go straight to heaven they stay dead until the resurrection. This would mean only one comming of Jesus was needed to collect all the dead in Christ.

If death is like a sleep and you know nothing than those that have been dead for 1000 years and those that have been dead for 1 minute will have experience the same time in the grave, which is fair and it is also Biblical.

Whats the use of a resurrection if your already alive in heaven?
As for the pre trib believers, they may have to find out the hard way.

Your thinking of the doctrine known as Soul Sleep. This is taught by JWs and the SDA. I have problems with it not just because they teach it but because of what Paul said about not knowing what is better to stay or to be with the Lord which is far better. He also spoke about a man he knew who went to third heaven. He said he didn't know whether it was in the body of in the spirit, Also Jesus told the thief that ''This day you will be with me in Paradise''

I do take your point about it seeming unnecessary to be resurrected having been alive in heaven. I suppose we wont know the answer until we are dead as well.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Hello TMS,

Whats the use of a resurrection if your already alive in heaven? As for the pre trib believers, they may have to find out the hard way.

The "use of a resurrection" is because the resurrection has to do with the spirit reuniting with the body and standing up again. When a believer dies, their spirit/soul departs and goes to be in the presence of Christ, while their bodies decay in the dust of the earth. If it just has to do with the spirit/soul it is not a resurrection.

You could ask the same question regarding the Lord's resurrection. If he was already in spirit, why did he return to his body and rise again? When the Lord was crucified, his spirit went to that place of paradise where Abraham and Lazarus were. After three days, his spirit/soul returned to his body, which at that time was made immortal and glorified. This is exactly what is going to happen with all of those who have died in Christ from the beginning of the church. It's not a resurrection unless the body stands up again. Below is the definition of the word "anastasis" translated "resurrection."

==============================================
anástasis (from 303 /aná, "up, again" and 2476 /hístēmi, "to stand") – literally, "stand up" (or "stand again"), referring to physical resurrection (of the body).


Christ's physical resurrection is the foundation of Christianity, which also guarantees the future resurrection of all believers (see Jn 6:39,40,44).


[386 /anástasis ("resurrection") refers to the physical, bodily resurrection of Christ – and people (both of the redeemed and the unredeemed).]

===============================================

Notice the highlighted references to the resurrection being "bodily."

According to 2 Cor.15:6-8 and Phil.1:22-23, when the believer dies their spirit/soul departs and goes to be in the presence of the Lord, where they are also anticipating the resurrection. When it is time, the Lord will descend from heaven and will bring with him the spirits/souls of those who died and have been in his presence and their bodies will be resurrected immortal and glorified with their spirits/souls being reunited with their now resurrected bodies. Immediately after that, believers in Christ who are still alive at the time the resurrection takes place, will be transformed into their immortal and glorified bodies wherever they are and will be caught up with those who will have just previously resurrected.

At that time, we will all be in our immortal and glorified bodies where according to the Lord's promise in John 14:1-3, he will take us back to the Father's house to those mansions/dwelling places that where he is, we may be also. And that is how it is going to work.

Just remember, the resurrection has to do with the physical body standing up again and Jesus' bodily resurrection is our example.

 

[tanakh]

Amazing that you express "how I see it" and never invoke a single pretrib verse.

That reveals a lot about your position.

I wonder why a positin is created and 15 or so verses are throw off the table

Its amazing how you never address the actual points that I and others make in our posts. Do you want me to copy out the whole of Revelation? With your supposed expertise I should think you could find the relevant passages without my having to laboriously copy out each passage. As you choose to ignore the main content anyway what would be the point.