Why did God favor Israel, and why does He still if it is a Jewish state that denies

[Elizabeth619]

Your lack of discernment and desire for political correctness prevents you from understanding that the above scripture reference is not comparing Israelites to Canaanites (remember Matt. 15:24). It is comparing Jews (i.e., Judah portion of Israel) to non-Jew Israelites of the dispersion. Read post #57 (mine), and stop reading political correctness in scripture. God does not want you to do this.

I asked you one simple question and you respond with trying to degrade me as if I'm ignorant or pay little attention to scripture. I'd suggest you knock off the arrogance and insults toward other believers and understand kindness toward your brothers and sisters in Christ. Because right now the only fruit you are currently baring is rotten to the core.

 

[psalm6819]

1. An American is someone whose citizenship is of America. 2. God does not, as you imply, love all equally. Example:

I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel...It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. Matthew 15:24-26

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Essau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Romans 9:13-14

You, apparently, think there is "unrighteousness with God." I do not. You, as Paul then explained "repliest against God."

Nay, but, O man who are thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make on vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? Romans 9:20-21

Your comment reveals that, not only do you do not understand the terms, Jews and Gentiles, but that you do not accept the sovereignty of God. Stop drinking that Dispensational-Futurist Kool Aid.

Dear Historicist, I have not been disrespectful nor denigrating, so please do me the same courtesy. I'm not throwing canned rhetoric at you. I'll simplify my question: what makes one a citizen of the United States or how does one become a citizen?
God is faithful_ He won't break His promises/covenants. The one He made with Israel is unilateral. I await your reply.

 

[Historicist]

no, i'm assuming that the Lord for His name's sake will never completely forsake Israel. and not just assuming it, i am reading that all throughout the old testament scriptures.

You have neither heard nor understood;
from of old your ears have not been open.
Well do I know how treacherous you are;
you were called a rebel from birth.

For my own name’s sake I delay my wrath;
for the sake of my praise I hold it back from you,
so as not to destroy you completely.

See, I have refined you, though not as silver;
I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.

For my own sake, for my own sake, I do this.
How can I let myself be defamed?
I will not yield my glory to another.

(Isaiah 48:8-11)


but specifically i quoted Deuteronomy to show that though God is not a respecter of persons, He has chosen a people to bear His name in times past, just as He now chooses from among the rest of the world, a people to be grafted into that cultivated tree, and so we that believe now bear His name.

You quoted Deuteronomy because you think it was written of a people it is not. Israel was not, and is not an anti-Christ people. The epistle to the Hebrews is more than ample proof of this. To bad you do not acknowledge Hebrews, James and the other general epistles. You appear to have more respect for the Talmud.

 

[Historicist]

I asked you one simple question and you respond with trying to degrade me as if I'm ignorant or pay little attention to scripture. I'd suggest you knock off the arrogance and insults toward other believers and understand kindness toward your brothers and sisters in Christ. Because right now the only fruit you are currently baring is rotten to the core.

Why, if I am wrong regarding the scripture texts I used do you not explain why? Why do you not like to be reminded that the real Jesus told a Canaanite woman "...I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel...it is not meet to take the children's bread and to cast it to dogs" (Matt. 15:24-26). It's to bad that you are insulted when proper exegesis debunks your politically correctness.

 

[Elizabeth619]

Why, if I am wrong regarding the scripture texts I used do you not explain why? Why do you not like to be reminded that the real Jesus told a Canaanite woman "...I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel...it is not meet to take the children's bread and to cast it to dogs" (Matt. 15:24-26). It's to bad that you are insulted when proper exegesis debunks your politically correctness.

You are laughable. I came in this thread and asked TWO questions. These questions were actually passages in the bible. Apparently you get belligerent when people use scripture. Instead of explaining something you insult. That's sad. And you still haven't ceased degrading others. Do you really expect Anyone to take you seriously with the attitude you have? I pity you.

 

[Historicist]

Dear Historicist, I have not been disrespectful nor denigrating, so please do me the same courtesy. I'm not throwing canned rhetoric at you. I'll simplify my question: what makes one a citizen of the United States or how does one become a citizen?
God is faithful_ He won't break His promises/covenants. The one He made with Israel is unilateral. I await your reply.

psalm6819, I've not been disrespectful nor denigrating, I've just explained, using proper exegesis, the scripture verses you chose to ignore. You are trying to identify Israel based upon, among other things, the idea that all Israelites were Jews. From there you build another error upon the first by assuming that contemporary "Jews" are descended from the Judah portion of Israel. That this is not true is admitted by, not only their own historians, but the recent Johns Hopkins Jewish DNA study.
Yes, because God is faithful he did not break his promise of a New Covenant. Read Hebrews, chapters 8-10 especially, it clearly states that the New Covenant, that which was promised to, and made with "...the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" (Jer. 31:31; Heb. 8:8) went into effect with these people 2000 years ago. The idea that it did not go into effect, that it was put on hold is a lie, one promoted by the Dispensational-Futurist establishment. The bottom line is that Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, Acts, and scores of other references tell us that---latter day Israel, that literal genetic Israel is found in the church. They were then, and they are now. They are not found in the people of the Talmud (i.e., an historically non-Christian people). So please, do not try to identify literal genetic Israel based upon a lie, on idea that those Hebrews rejected Jesus and the New Covenant 2000 years ago. The general epistles totally refute this.

 

[Historicist]

You are laughable. I came in this thread and asked TWO questions. These questions were actually passages in the bible. Apparently you get belligerent when people use scripture. Instead of explaining something you insult. That's sad. And you still haven't ceased degrading others. Do you really expect Anyone to take you seriously with the attitude you have? I pity you.

You have yet to comment on, much less refute, the scriptures I used. Do you not like them?

 

[Historicist]

i thought God was no respecter of persons??

I'm still waiting for you to reconcile the comment in your original post (#51) with Christ's words in his discourse with the Canaanite woman (Matthew 15:24-26).

 

[Elizabeth619]

Your lack of discernment and desire for political correctness prevents you from understanding that the above scripture reference is not comparing Israelites to Canaanites (remember Matt. 15:24). It is comparing Jews (i.e., Judah portion of Israel) to non-Jew Israelites of the dispersion. Read post #57 (mine), and stop reading political correctness in scripture. God does not want you to do this.

Looks to me like you only read part of a passage and dismiss what the rest says if it doesn't agree with your own ideologies. Jesus did say he was sent to save the lost sheep, but later on saw the woman's faith was great and helped her. So the fact he did help her tells me there is more to this passage.
When Jesus stated he was here to save the lost sheep he was confirming that he was fulfilling prophecy, expressing what his priorities are, and it was also a test to the Canaanite woman. She was not a Jew, but she publicly expressed her faith.
For crying out loud the lost sheep were the Jews. You know, God's chosen people. They became lost because they stopped being obedient, but were still His people....THE ONES WHO KNEW THERE WAS A MESSIAH COMING SO HE NEEDED TO LET THEM KNOW THAT PROPHECY WAS FULFILLED SO HIS PRIORITY WAS TOWARD THE LOST JEWS. Never once does Jesus reject teaching to others, and the Canaanite woman is a perfect example of that.

AS far as God "hating" Esau you seem to undermine the power of God and his own divine emotions. You're comparing hate with your own hate for Christians. I guess that is probably why you are so hateful. Since you think God hates others then you feel justified in hating. Quite sad really. Anyway, Esau was a twin. God obviously felt the need to choose one or the other to be the father of His chosen people. He chose Jacob. IT is clear to me that it was a matter of preference. He couldn't choose both.

You seem to don't understand that God's is fair. He is just, and he is loving. So God's "hate" is far more righteous than yours you continue to display.

 

[Historicist]

Looks to me like you only read part of a passage and dismiss what the rest says if it doesn't agree with your own ideologies. Jesus did say he was sent to save the lost sheep, but later on saw the woman's faith was great and helped her. So the fact he did help her tells me there is more to this passage.
When Jesus stated he was here to save the lost sheep he was confirming that he was fulfilling prophecy, expressing what his priorities are, and it was also a test to the Canaanite woman. She was not a Jew, but she publicly expressed her faith.
For crying out loud the lost sheep were the Jews. You know, God's chosen people. They became lost because they stopped being obedient, but were still His people....THE ONES WHO KNEW THERE WAS A MESSIAH COMING SO HE NEEDED TO LET THEM KNOW THAT PROPHECY WAS FULFILLED SO HIS PRIORITY WAS TOWARD THE LOST JEWS. Never once does Jesus reject teaching to others, and the Canaanite woman is a perfect example of that.

AS far as God "hating" Esau you seem to undermine the power of God and his own divine emotions. You're comparing hate with your own hate for Christians. I guess that is probably why you are so hateful. Since you think God hates others then you feel justified in hating. Quite sad really. Anyway, Esau was a twin. God obviously felt the need to choose one or the other to be the father of His chosen people. He chose Jacob. IT is clear to me that it was a matter of preference. He couldn't choose both.

You seem to don't understand that God's is fair. He is just, and he is loving. So God's "hate" is far more righteous than yours you continue to display.

Again is another response wherein you do not quote one verse of scripture. The closest you get to it is your interpretations thereof.
On the Canaanite woman: Yes, Jesus did grant her request, and because of her faith, but this did not give her covenant status. Have you ever seen one place in scripture where Jesus and/or the disciples sought converts among Canaanites? You have not, and you will not, so don't waste time trying.
On the "lost sheep of the house of Israel." You say, "for crying out loud the lost sheep were the Jews." It's obvious that you have not checked Strong's #622 (appolumi) the Greek word from which "lost" is translated. It means separated and punished. In no way does "lost" describe the remnant of Judah in Palestine that the Jews where. See Ezra and Nehemiah for proof that the 42,000 who returned from captivity were a "remnant" only of Judah. This means that they were not even all of Judah, much less all of Israel. It was they, this "remnant" of Judah which became the community of Israelites which occupied Palestine at the coming of Jesus the Messiah. So, it was not as you say, it was not the Jews in Palestine who were "the lost sheep." It was the Israelites who had been divorced by God, sent away, and punished. Again, how could it be the Jews who were the "lost sheep" when it was not they who had been divorced by God, and it was they only who were back in the promised land. Neither were the Jews, as were non-Jew Diaspora Israelites, lacking the oracles of God. It was they who were given this Word, and the responsibilities that came with it. This is why the gospel was preached "to the Jew first, then the Greek." After the Jew it was taken to the Greek (i.e., non-Jew Greek speaking Israelites of the dispersion). It was they who were the "lost sheep," the divorced and punished among Israeliltes. Having not done your homework you are ignorant of the fact that when Jesus walked in Palestine, the vast majority of Israelites ("the lost sheep of the house of Israel") were in dispersion ("scattered among the nations"), and had been for over 600 years.
So, you would do well to brush up on the history, of the house of Israel, and of the house of Judah. Once you get this straight, and exercise proper exegesis perhaps you to will be accused of "hate."

 

[faroukfarouk]

Again is another response wherein you do not quote one verse of scripture. The closest you get to it is your interpretations thereof.
On the Canaanite woman: Yes, Jesus did grant her request, and because of her faith, but this did not give her covenant status. Have you ever seen one place in scripture where Jesus and/or the disciples sought converts among Canaanites? You have not, and you will not, so don't waste time trying.
On the "lost sheep of the house of Israel." You say, "for crying out loud the lost sheep were the Jews." It's obvious that you have not checked Strong's #622 (appolumi) the Greek word from which "lost" is translated. It means separated and punished. In no way does "lost" describe the remnant of Judah in Palestine that the Jews where. See Ezra and Nehemiah for proof that the 42,000 who returned from captivity were a "remnant" only of Judah. This means that they were not even all of Judah, much less all of Israel. It was they, this "remnant" of Judah which became the community of Israelites which occupied Palestine at the coming of Jesus the Messiah. So, it was not as you say, it was not the Jews in Palestine who were "the lost sheep." It was the Israelites who had been divorced by God, sent away, and punished. Again, how could it be the Jews who were the "lost sheep" when it was not they who had been divorced by God, and it was they only who were back in the promised land. Neither were the Jews, as were non-Jew Diaspora Israelites, lacking the oracles of God. It was they who were given this Word, and the responsibilities that came with it. This is why the gospel was preached "to the Jew first, then the Greek." After the Jew it was taken to the Greek (i.e., non-Jew Greek speaking Israelites of the dispersion). It was they who were the "lost sheep," the divorced and punished among Israeliltes. Having not done your homework you are ignorant of the fact that when Jesus walked in Palestine, the vast majority of Israelites ("the lost sheep of the house of Israel") were in dispersion ("scattered among the nations"), and had been for over 600 years.
So, you would do well to brush up on the history, of the house of Israel, and of the house of Judah. Once you get this straight, and exercise proper exegesis perhaps you to will be accused of "hate."

Do you mean that the remnant in the Old Testament were thus regarded because of their law-keeping and circumcision rather than because of their faith?

I have always thought that faith was the key to the faithful remnant.

 

[psalm6819]

psalm6819, I've not been disrespectful nor denigrating, I've just explained, using proper exegesis, the scripture verses you chose to ignore. You are trying to identify Israel based upon, among other things, the idea that all Israelites were Jews. From there you build another error upon the first by assuming that contemporary "Jews" are descended from the Judah portion of Israel. That this is not true is admitted by, not only their own historians, but the recent Johns Hopkins Jewish DNA study.
Yes, because God is faithful he did not break his promise of a New Covenant. Read Hebrews, chapters 8-10 especially, it clearly states that the New Covenant, that which was promised to, and made with "...the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" (Jer. 31:31; Heb. 8:8) went into effect with these people 2000 years ago. The idea that it did not go into effect, that it was put on hold is a lie, one promoted by the Dispensational-Futurist establishment. The bottom line is that Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, Acts, and scores of other references tell us that---latter day Israel, that literal genetic Israel is found in the church. They were then, and they are now. They are not found in the people of the Talmud (i.e., an historically non-Christian people). So please, do not try to identify literal genetic Israel based upon a lie, on idea that those Hebrews rejected Jesus and the New Covenant 2000 years ago. The general epistles totally refute this.

Good Morning, Historicist, I am wondering why you will not answer my question so I will generalize it : describe an "American" and/or the ways of becoming an "American"?

As followers of Jesus we are to be a family so let us speak gently and with love.

 

[Historicist]

Good Morning, Historicist, I am wondering why you will not answer my question so I will generalize it : describe an "American" and/or the ways of becoming an "American"?

As followers of Jesus we are to be a family so let us speak gently and with love.

Good morning psalm 6819, I will answer your question by explaining how I became an American.

My great grandparents (maternal & paternal) crossed the Atlantic from Norway prior to and just after the civil war. They learned English, became legal and productive citizens. I, being native born, am a legal citizen by virtue of that fact. Now, I will wait for your explanation as to how this makes null and void the scripture verses quoted thus far.

Yes, as followers of Jesus we are to be a family, but when professing Christians try to include in this family of God "...them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9; 3:9) they need to be corrected. And, unfortunately, most people do not like to admit when they have been duped. For this reason they will cherry pick scripture texts. They will use a certain few scripture texts, those less clear in context,while ignoring a majority of texts pertinent to the subject and more clear. This will often include entire books of the Bible (Hebrews, James, 1Peter, etc.). These are the Christians (Dispensational-Futurists) whose interpretations create the illusion of Bible contradiction. But this seems not to bother them, until that is, someone reminds them that their interpretation is a contradiction of the Word of God. They will then show their respect for the scripture texts which contradict their interpretation---by trying to discredit anyone who explains them. When they cannot refute logic, reason, and proper exegesis they will resort to name calling ("anti-Semitic, hater, un-Christian," etc.).

So please, when I tell you that Hebrews, James, 1 Peter and others do not describe an Israel who rejected Jesus and the New Covenant do not try to destroy the messenger. Instead, do what Jesus said, "...search the scriptures," read, "search" these epistles for the idea that these Hebrew-Israelites were a non-Christian people (i.e., those you call "Israel").

 

[Historicist]

Do you mean that the remnant in the Old Testament were thus regarded because of their law-keeping and circumcision rather than because of their faith?

I have always thought that faith was the key to the faithful remnant.

"Remnant" in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 describes a remnant of Judahites (i.e., Jews). "Remnant," in this context, is not one and the same with "the remnant" in Revelation, "...the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (12:17). And it is worthy of note that "of her seed" is descriptive of Israelites, of Christian Israelites, not today's impostors ("them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan" [Rev. 2:9; 3:9]).

 

[posthuman]

this is surely fulfilled in Christ, Praise God! but is it only in Christ, or is a remnant of Israel preserved?

For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.
(Isaiah 66:22)

because also, speaking to the people of Israel, the Lord through the same prophet said:

As one whom his mother comforteth,
so will I comfort you;
and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem.

And when ye see this, your heart shall rejoice,
and your bones shall flourish like an herb:
and the hand of the Lord shall be known toward his servants,
and his indignation toward his enemies.

For, behold, the Lord will come with fire,
and with his chariots like a whirlwind,
to render his anger with fury,
and his rebuke with flames of fire.
(Isaiah 66:13-15)

will not those who were blinded at His first appearing, so that God's mercy could be shown to us through the house of Jacob, also see, and receive that mercy through us, and rejoice at His return?

who is arguing with you that that part that is in unbelief and rejection is holy? where i differ with you is that i say the words of this prophecy are true, and that the God of Abraham remembers Abraham, and that this God does not change, and if He blesses those that bless Israel, and curses those that curse her, i for fear of Him don't dare to let the name of Israel be a curse in my mouth.

our salvation came first to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles, and the first will be last, and the last will be first. a wild branch grafted in should not think itself better than the trunk of the tree.

 

[posthuman]

even so, Historicist, you yourself are fulfilling scripture:

And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen:
for the Lord God shall slay thee,
and call his servants by another name:

that he who blesseth himself in the earth
shall bless himself in the God of truth;
and he that sweareth in the earth
shall swear by the God of truth;

because the former troubles are forgotten,
and because they are hid from mine eyes.
(Isaiah 65:15-16)

but that is not the end of truth. this also is true:

For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name;
and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel;
The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth,
when thou wast refused, saith thy God.
For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.
In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment;
but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.

For this is as the waters of Noah unto me:
for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth;
so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
(Isaiah 54:5-9)

 

[Historicist]

even so, Historicist, you yourself are fulfilling scripture:

And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen:
for the Lord God shall slay thee,
and call his servants by another name:

that he who blesseth himself in the earth
shall bless himself in the God of truth;
and he that sweareth in the earth
shall swear by the God of truth;

because the former troubles are forgotten,
and because they are hid from mine eyes.
(Isaiah 65:15-16)

but that is not the end of truth. this also is true:

For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name;
and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel;
The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth,
when thou wast refused, saith thy God.
For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.
In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment;
but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.

For this is as the waters of Noah unto me:
for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth;
so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
(Isaiah 54:5-9)

posthuman,

Ye are of your father the devil...ye are not of God. John 8:44, 47

Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? John 23:33

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah)? He is anti-Christ..." 1 John 2:22 (parenthesis, emphasis added)

For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ (Messiah) is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an anti-Christ. 2 John v. 7 (emphasis added)

Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands. Matthew 26:67

I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not but are of the synagogue of Satan. Revelation 2:9 (emphasis added)

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before they feet, and to know that I have loved thee. Revelation 3:9 (emphasis added)

Of the religious mindsets in the world today which do you think best fits the above scripture texts? Would it be today's descendants of those Chrisitian Israelites in Hebrews, James, 1 Peter and Acts, etc, or would it be today's descendants of "...them which say they are Jews and are not but are of the synagogue of Satan?"

The apostle John, speaking of those who denied that Messiah "is come in the flesh" admonished Christians to maintain a policy of non support for this element (2 John 10-11). Why then do you contradict John, why do you advocate support for these anti-Christs?

Paul, in closing his letter to the Corinthians, reminded them that "If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be A-nath'-e ma..." (1 Cor. 16:22). Anathema means accursed. Why then do you say the opposite? Why do you tell me that I must bless and support those who love not Messiah?

1 John 5:2 says that "we love the children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments." Why then, do you and other CC posters substitute this principle with the idea that we love God when we bless and support "synagogue of Satan" type counterfeit Jews, those whom John and Paul said not to support? Why? Who are you working for?

 

[psalm6819]

Good morning psalm 6819, I will answer your question by explaining how I became an American.

My great grandparents (maternal & paternal) crossed the Atlantic from Norway prior to and just after the civil war. They learned English, became legal and productive citizens. I, being native born, am a legal citizen by virtue of that fact. Now, I will wait for your explanation as to how this makes null and void the scripture verses quoted thus far.

Yes, as followers of Jesus we are to be a family, but when professing Christians try to include in this family of God "...them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9; 3:9) they need to be corrected. And, unfortunately, most people do not like to admit when they have been duped. For this reason they will cherry pick scripture texts. They will use a certain few scripture texts, those less clear in context,while ignoring a majority of texts pertinent to the subject and more clear. This will often include entire books of the Bible (Hebrews, James, 1Peter, etc.). These are the Christians (Dispensational-Futurists) whose interpretations create the illusion of Bible contradiction. But this seems not to bother them, until that is, someone reminds them that their interpretation is a contradiction of the Word of God. They will then show their respect for the scripture texts which contradict their interpretation---by trying to discredit anyone who explains them. When they cannot refute logic, reason, and proper exegesis they will resort to name calling ("anti-Semitic, hater, un-Christian," etc.).

So please, when I tell you that Hebrews, James, 1 Peter and others do not describe an Israel who rejected Jesus and the New Covenant do not try to destroy the messenger. Instead, do what Jesus said, "...search the scriptures," read, "search" these epistles for the idea that these Hebrew-Israelites were a non-Christian people (i.e., those you call "Israel").

Good Morning Historicist,

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I do read my Bible and will continue to. God bless you, Psalms.

 

[Elizabeth619]

At this point I have no idea what is going on here. I don't know if I am tired, or this is a spurt of insanity, but apparently I have been put in the category of a dispensationalist futurist which is far from what I believe. Can someone tell me how that happened?

 

[faroukfarouk]

At this point I have no idea what is going on here. I don't know if I am tired, or this is a spurt of insanity, but apparently I have been put in the category of a dispensationalist futurist which is far from what I believe. Can someone tell me how that happened?

I, too, have kind of bowed out...

Blessings.