-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
L
Re: Were Men Born Again Before Pentecost?
Originally Posted by ladylynn
Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.
So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?
I really look forward to both of your answers.
IMHO, Israel was a chosen people to be God's representatives on earth to the other nations. They were given the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the promises and the service (Rom 9:4)
This brought with it a greater responsibility and to misuse it may mean physical death but for those Israelites who clung to God's mercy and Promises, still had eternal life. The conditional Law never abrogated the unconditional Promises.
Romans 9:4 KJVS
[4] Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises;
skylove7, Gr8grace and chancer like this.
I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.
Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.
I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.
Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.
crossnote likes this.
Hey you guys., I'm glad you both can agree with each other but what about my question??? How can you say that the 'conditional law never obrogated the unconditional promises'? They were UNDER covenant and ALL WAS CONDITIONAL. That is the horrible problem!! There was NO new covenant of Grace yet. So if they disobeyed, they died! We can't just say these covenant requirements were just a good idea to follow., these laws were REQUIRED. They could cling to God's mercy all they wanted but they didn't OWN the promises., the promises were not paid for. So they had to DO THE REQUIRED COVENANT DUTIES. If they didn't, they died. They suffered.
If the High Priest went into the Holy of holies and he failed by some sin he had or if he was sloppy not only did he get zapped, the whole of Israel suffered. I don't see this sweeping brush solution you guys are using to blend the covenant of law and grace together as one mixed bag. They ARE totally separate and one can not exist with the other. One has to GO.
The good news of the Gospel is that we NO longer must DO anything. Jesus paid it all.
Eph.2:8-9 For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast. It's the finished work of Jesus Christ. It's Jesus plus nothing added to clear us of sin before a Holy and righteous God.
The saints of old did not have the gift of righteousness that we have. Under the old covenant, the Israelites enjoyed a temporal covering through the animal sacrifices, but for us the atonement and payment for ALL our sins by Jesus is eternal.
I believe it is vital to see the difference in these covenants and know which one your under. Those under the old covenant could NOT bypass the work of getting their own spotless animal and slitting it's throat so they could be temporarily forgiven. If they did not do this, they would not have any sort of forgiveness temporary or not.
Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.
So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?
I really look forward to both of your answers.
IMHO, Israel was a chosen people to be God's representatives on earth to the other nations. They were given the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the promises and the service (Rom 9:4)
This brought with it a greater responsibility and to misuse it may mean physical death but for those Israelites who clung to God's mercy and Promises, still had eternal life. The conditional Law never abrogated the unconditional Promises.
Romans 9:4 KJVS
[4] Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises;
skylove7, Gr8grace and chancer like this.
I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.
Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.
I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.
Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.
crossnote likes this.
Hey you guys., I'm glad you both can agree with each other but what about my question??? How can you say that the 'conditional law never obrogated the unconditional promises'? They were UNDER covenant and ALL WAS CONDITIONAL. That is the horrible problem!! There was NO new covenant of Grace yet. So if they disobeyed, they died! We can't just say these covenant requirements were just a good idea to follow., these laws were REQUIRED. They could cling to God's mercy all they wanted but they didn't OWN the promises., the promises were not paid for. So they had to DO THE REQUIRED COVENANT DUTIES. If they didn't, they died. They suffered.
If the High Priest went into the Holy of holies and he failed by some sin he had or if he was sloppy not only did he get zapped, the whole of Israel suffered. I don't see this sweeping brush solution you guys are using to blend the covenant of law and grace together as one mixed bag. They ARE totally separate and one can not exist with the other. One has to GO.
The good news of the Gospel is that we NO longer must DO anything. Jesus paid it all.
Eph.2:8-9 For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast. It's the finished work of Jesus Christ. It's Jesus plus nothing added to clear us of sin before a Holy and righteous God.
The saints of old did not have the gift of righteousness that we have. Under the old covenant, the Israelites enjoyed a temporal covering through the animal sacrifices, but for us the atonement and payment for ALL our sins by Jesus is eternal.
I believe it is vital to see the difference in these covenants and know which one your under. Those under the old covenant could NOT bypass the work of getting their own spotless animal and slitting it's throat so they could be temporarily forgiven. If they did not do this, they would not have any sort of forgiveness temporary or not.
Last edited:
L
Hey Kefa, I know what you mean! It's like we got to remember ABC...after we went to HIJK and then go waaay back to AB and take part of C and go to XYZ.....
But it is beginning to make sense as the map is being laid out in front of us. Am looking forward to some of the conclusions but the unfolding is terrific.
Blessings!
Re: Were Men Born Again Before Pentecost?
Originally Posted by ladylynn
Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.
So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?
I really look forward to both of your answers.
IMHO, Israel was a chosen people to be God's representatives on earth to the other nations. They were given the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the promises and the service (Rom 9:4)
This brought with it a greater responsibility and to misuse it may mean physical death but for those Israelites who clung to God's mercy and Promises, still had eternal life. The conditional Law never abrogated the unconditional Promises.
Romans 9:4 KJVS
[4] Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises;
skylove7, Gr8grace and chancer like this.
I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.
Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.
I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.
Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.
crossnote likes this.
Hey you guys., I'm glad you both can agree with each other but what about my question??? How can you say that the 'conditional law never obrogated the unconditional promises'? They were UNDER covenant and ALL WAS CONDITIONAL. That is the horrible problem!! There was NO new covenant of Grace yet. So if they disobeyed, they died! We can't just say these covenant requirements were just a good idea to follow., these laws were REQUIRED. They could cling to God's mercy all they wanted but they didn't OWN the promises., the promises were not paid for. So they had to DO THE REQUIRED COVENANT DUTIES. If they didn't, they died. They suffered.
If the High Priest went into the Holy of holies and he failed by some sin he had or if he was sloppy not only did he get zapped, the whole of Israel suffered. I don't see this sweeping brush solution you guys are using to blend the covenant of law and grace together as one mixed bag. They ARE totally separate and one can not exist with the other. One has to GO.
The good news of the Gospel is that we NO longer must DO anything. Jesus paid it all.
Eph.2:8-9 For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast. It's the finished work of Jesus Christ. It's Jesus plus nothing added to clear us of sin before a Holy and righteous God.
The saints of old did not have the gift of righteousness that we have. Under the old covenant, the Israelites enjoyed a temporal covering through the animal sacrifices, but for us the atonement and payment for ALL our sins by Jesus is eternal.
I believe it is vital to see the difference in these covenants and know which one your under. Those under the old covenant could NOT bypass the work of getting their own spotless animal and slitting it's throat so they could be temporarily forgiven. If they did not do this, they would not have any sort of forgiveness temporary or not.
Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.
So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?
I really look forward to both of your answers.
IMHO, Israel was a chosen people to be God's representatives on earth to the other nations. They were given the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the promises and the service (Rom 9:4)
This brought with it a greater responsibility and to misuse it may mean physical death but for those Israelites who clung to God's mercy and Promises, still had eternal life. The conditional Law never abrogated the unconditional Promises.
Romans 9:4 KJVS
[4] Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises;
skylove7, Gr8grace and chancer like this.
I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.
Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.
I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.
Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.
crossnote likes this.
Hey you guys., I'm glad you both can agree with each other but what about my question??? How can you say that the 'conditional law never obrogated the unconditional promises'? They were UNDER covenant and ALL WAS CONDITIONAL. That is the horrible problem!! There was NO new covenant of Grace yet. So if they disobeyed, they died! We can't just say these covenant requirements were just a good idea to follow., these laws were REQUIRED. They could cling to God's mercy all they wanted but they didn't OWN the promises., the promises were not paid for. So they had to DO THE REQUIRED COVENANT DUTIES. If they didn't, they died. They suffered.
If the High Priest went into the Holy of holies and he failed by some sin he had or if he was sloppy not only did he get zapped, the whole of Israel suffered. I don't see this sweeping brush solution you guys are using to blend the covenant of law and grace together as one mixed bag. They ARE totally separate and one can not exist with the other. One has to GO.
The good news of the Gospel is that we NO longer must DO anything. Jesus paid it all.
Eph.2:8-9 For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast. It's the finished work of Jesus Christ. It's Jesus plus nothing added to clear us of sin before a Holy and righteous God.
The saints of old did not have the gift of righteousness that we have. Under the old covenant, the Israelites enjoyed a temporal covering through the animal sacrifices, but for us the atonement and payment for ALL our sins by Jesus is eternal.
I believe it is vital to see the difference in these covenants and know which one your under. Those under the old covenant could NOT bypass the work of getting their own spotless animal and slitting it's throat so they could be temporarily forgiven. If they did not do this, they would not have any sort of forgiveness temporary or not.
Galatians 3:17 KJVS
[17] And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
In other words, the Mosaic Law never superseded the Abrahamic Covenant nor put it on the shelf.
L
Wait as sec., I know my cut and paste stinks but the last questions and statements were very clear. What do you do with the covenant you are under?
NAS;
Galatians 3:17 During those hundreds of years before the law, God had also justified men only by faith. BEFORE the law.
The law was mediated through angels and Moses., whereas the covenant with Abraham was given directly by God (Gen.15:18)
The presence of a mediator assumes two parties, and the need of a mediator shows the INFERIORITY of the law.
So again, the covenant of law as stated before was given because people said WE CAN DO ALL YOU REQUIRE OURSELVES and so God gave them the law and thousands died. When Pentecost came., thousands were saved. But the Mosaic Law was a covenant and had to be adhered too. You still have not answered my question.
NAS;
Galatians 3:19 Why the law then? It was added because of the transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed should come to whom the promise had been made.
So the law had to be obeyed and people suffered the consequences of not doing the requirements of that law covenant. Not sure why you don't understand my questions. Please re read and answer what happened to those who did not obey the law?
K
I am sorry but this thread has run amok. The answer is easy.....NO!
How people went to heaven in the old testament is interesting but they were not born of water and Spirit.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
John 3:5 Jesus answered, "I assure you: Unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
No one before Pentecost was born of water and the spirit.
Matthew 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
How people went to heaven in the old testament is interesting but they were not born of water and Spirit.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
John 3:5 Jesus answered, "I assure you: Unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
No one before Pentecost was born of water and the spirit.
Matthew 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Hey Kefa, I know what you mean! It's like we got to remember ABC...after we went to HIJK and then go waaay back to AB and take part of C and go to XYZ.....
But it is beginning to make sense as the map is being laid out in front of us. Am looking forward to some of the conclusions but the unfolding is terrific.
Blessings!
But it is beginning to make sense as the map is being laid out in front of us. Am looking forward to some of the conclusions but the unfolding is terrific.
Blessings!
Last edited by a moderator:
the text here seems to refute the fact that the people in OT times did not have the Spirit within them here it is... 1Pe 1:11
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
now this seems to say the apposite of what many believe and claim, how does one reconcile this text if they claim the men of old did not have the spirit dwelling in them? and please understand this is not an attack but rather a sincere question to see what the answer would be...
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
now this seems to say the apposite of what many believe and claim, how does one reconcile this text if they claim the men of old did not have the spirit dwelling in them? and please understand this is not an attack but rather a sincere question to see what the answer would be...
G
EXACTLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THANK YOU, YOU GET IT!!!!
Those people that said "We will do all that the Law required" did not understand the law neither were they walking by faith...
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. "
(Gal 3:10)
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. "
(Gal 3:10)
P
I wondered when someone would bring this up.
"That they rise" is a reference to the future Resurrection of the dead, not the spiritual Resurrection of Regeneration. He is dealing with the false doctrine of annihilation.
We cannot nullify Christ's teaching that the fathers ate manna and were dead, and that apart from eating His flesh and drinking His blood men have no life (John 6).
God bless.
"That they rise" is a reference to the future Resurrection of the dead, not the spiritual Resurrection of Regeneration. He is dealing with the false doctrine of annihilation.
We cannot nullify Christ's teaching that the fathers ate manna and were dead, and that apart from eating His flesh and drinking His blood men have no life (John 6).
God bless.
P
I accept the Word of God, but question conclusions which come into conflict with other teachings which are clear in Scripture. We will see one huge conflict you create in proposing Adam and Eve as the first members of the Church.
You violate most of the New Testament in saying this.
The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sins.
Their sin, like every Old Testament Saint...was only covered, it/they did not produce eternal Redemption.
Adam never trusted in the shed blood of Christ. He never confessed Jesus as Christ the Son of the Living God.
The Elect are in the Lamb's Book. What do you do with those who will be blotted out?
It true there is only one fold...now.
We see a division between Jew and Gentile until they are made one in the church.
God bless.
You violate most of the New Testament in saying this.
The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sins.
Their sin, like every Old Testament Saint...was only covered, it/they did not produce eternal Redemption.
Adam never trusted in the shed blood of Christ. He never confessed Jesus as Christ the Son of the Living God.
The Elect are in the Lamb's Book. What do you do with those who will be blotted out?
It true there is only one fold...now.
We see a division between Jew and Gentile until they are made one in the church.
God bless.
P
The only problem with presenting a detailed lesson plan is that on the average forum...most disregard posts. Whereas most are willing to respond to short questions.
This is the beauty of discussion forums. It allows all members to participate and we can fellowship in discussion.
I would post Malachi 3:16 but can't figure out how to do that with this taplets, lol.
God bless.
This is the beauty of discussion forums. It allows all members to participate and we can fellowship in discussion.
I would post Malachi 3:16 but can't figure out how to do that with this taplets, lol.
God bless.
P
Hey Kefa, I know what you mean! It's like we got to remember ABC...after we went to HIJK and then go waaay back to AB and take part of C and go to XYZ.....
But it is beginning to make sense as the map is being laid out in front of us. Am looking forward to some of the conclusions but the unfolding is terrific.
Blessings!
But it is beginning to make sense as the map is being laid out in front of us. Am looking forward to some of the conclusions but the unfolding is terrific.
Blessings!
Some of the suggestions that promote a positive answer to the OP are very reasonable at first glance, but when they are examined become questionable. So many issues arise in this discussion that need to be dealt with that as we go...we will touch on nearly every essential doctrine of Soteriology.
My taplets isn't allowing me to "like" right now so have to come back later for those, lol.
God bless.
P
Notice that the promise, not the Covenant, is in view.
We know God promised a new Covenant for His People, and that this was established through Christ.
And we see the promises to and through Abraham are fulfilled in the New Covenant, such as at this time all families of the earth have been been blessed through the Seed, Christ.
God bless.
We know God promised a new Covenant for His People, and that this was established through Christ.
And we see the promises to and through Abraham are fulfilled in the New Covenant, such as at this time all families of the earth have been been blessed through the Seed, Christ.
God bless.
P
Which is why Paul distinguishes between Adam and Christ.
Nowhere is Adam said to be eternally redeemed or to have had the life he lost imparted back to him. The suggestion that animal sacrifices redeemed on an eternal basis is refuted often in the New Testament.
Adam brought death...Christ brought life.
And it was not until Christ died that eternal life became available to men. Notice that Abel's sacrifice is contrasted with the Lord's:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+12:22-24&version=KJV
(Think I figured out how to copy and paste, lol, hope it works)
While we do 't have a specific record of sacrifice for sin being commanded in this Age, we do see Abel and Noah offering up sacrifice. We see Job and Abraham as well offering up. And we see it laid down in the Covenant of Law.
Sacrifice for sin is a consistent practice right from the Garden. It was temporary and incomplete. And that is all the Old Testament Saint had.
Consider:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10:1-4&version=KJV
One of the issues that is integral to understanding eternal salvation is understanding the theme of perfection/completion in Hebrews. The sacrifices of the Law (and that would speak of pre-Law sacrifices as well) could never take away sins, nor could they make the comer thereunto (the worshipper) complete in regards to remission of sins.
Christ's did. That is the subject of chs.9 and 10.
Now contrast that with...
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10:10-14&version=KJV
The "perfection" in view is in regards to the promise of forgiving sins for ever.
God bless.
Nowhere is Adam said to be eternally redeemed or to have had the life he lost imparted back to him. The suggestion that animal sacrifices redeemed on an eternal basis is refuted often in the New Testament.
Adam brought death...Christ brought life.
And it was not until Christ died that eternal life became available to men. Notice that Abel's sacrifice is contrasted with the Lord's:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+12:22-24&version=KJV
(Think I figured out how to copy and paste, lol, hope it works)
While we do 't have a specific record of sacrifice for sin being commanded in this Age, we do see Abel and Noah offering up sacrifice. We see Job and Abraham as well offering up. And we see it laid down in the Covenant of Law.
Sacrifice for sin is a consistent practice right from the Garden. It was temporary and incomplete. And that is all the Old Testament Saint had.
Consider:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10:1-4&version=KJV
One of the issues that is integral to understanding eternal salvation is understanding the theme of perfection/completion in Hebrews. The sacrifices of the Law (and that would speak of pre-Law sacrifices as well) could never take away sins, nor could they make the comer thereunto (the worshipper) complete in regards to remission of sins.
Christ's did. That is the subject of chs.9 and 10.
Now contrast that with...
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10:10-14&version=KJV
The "perfection" in view is in regards to the promise of forgiving sins for ever.
God bless.