Posted on 10/06/2008 6:22:20 AM PDT by Gamecock
Propitiation
Propitiation describes the act whereby God’s wrath toward sin is fully satisfied through the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross. It is debated among Christians as to whether Christ’s death was a propitiation for all sins of all people, or limited only to the elect. 1 John 2:2 seems to suggest that the propitiation is universal, but this is not without its problems. “Propitiation” translates the Greek words hilaskomai (Luke 18:13 “be merciful” and Heb 2:17 “to make expiation”, hilasmos (1 John 2:2 and 4:10 “expiation” or “propitiation”), and hilasterion (Rom 3:25 “an expiation” and Heb 9:5 “mercy seat”).
TWOTD Ping
The TWOTD Ping list is published daily, except weekends. If you would like on or off of the TWOTD Ping List please FReepmail me.
If the misconduct of Adam and Eve tainted us all with sin, then why shouldn’t the death of Jesus get us all off the hook?
You'll have to ask God. I'm in sales, not management.
The sense of the two words, propitiation and expiation, usually used to translate hilasmos (and cognates) differ. This is one of those cases when it's good to look at how hilasmos is used in the LXX, where it translates the Hebrew word KaPhaR, as in Kippur, as in Yom Kippur.
An interesting side trip here is that the root means to "cover", and in Arabic an infidel is a kaffir becuase he "conceals" (covers) the truth, while in our language we are invited to "put on" Christ, to cover our moral shame by clothing ourselves with Him.
If any man sin, we have an advocae with the Father, IHs XP the righteous, and He is the hilasmos for our sins, and not for our sins only but for the sins of the whole world.Now that's something to lift up your heart about, huh?
Great question. Actually, the Scriptures don’t say the “misconduct of Adam and Eve tainted us all...”. It says, through one man, sin entered the world and through sin, death. As unpopular as this may sound, nowhere does the Scripture say that Adam was created without a nature such as ours. Sure, it says that God finished creation and said, “It is good.” (argued as “holy”). But, this ignores the existence of the angel Lucifer, which by this time was long kicked out of heaven.
Thus, if Adam and I are related by natures, and he was just on the scene earlier than I, there is nothing he did that “tainted” me, except that he was the first to display outright rebellion. To think that Adam could have done what he did (average, stupid, rebellion) without possessing the “equipment” to sin, is as your question infers, inconsistent. The “spreading” of sin is simply the spreading of man’s influence over the world.
Conclusion: You and I are guilty all by ourselves, having natures enslaved to rebellion. Adam was just as pre-destined to his failure as we are, but beat us by a few thousand years.
If this is correct, then there is not “one man” to blame. And, the principles of pre-destination and election operate on those chosen (for reasons unknown except to God) to make some escape this dreadful position.
With free will? That doesn't make a lot of sense.
and hilasterion (Rom 3:25 “an expiation” and Heb 9:5 “mercy seat”).
Expiation is the RSV (v 1.0) translation. Propitiation is the classic (AV, ASV, etc.) translation. The NRSV (new and improved!!!) goes the NIV route of avoiding the issue, with "sacrifice of atonement".
Were the words “free will” used? That is the myth promulgated by the Peglagians & semi-pelagians.
I haven’t heard Larkin’s name in a long time. Those drawings are dizzying.
I don’t mean to start a sectarian flame war, but I don’t see the problem with this:
1 John 2:2 seems to suggest that the propitiation is universal, but this is not without its problems.
Propitiation is universal, but the unrepentant sinner’s heart renews eternally the offense against God.
You aren't going to go that way are you? Is the word "Trinity' or the words "Sola Scriptura" or "Pre-destination" used or "Bible" used ?
I meant, were the words, “free will” used in my response? I purposely avoid those because the concept is not consistent with the Scriptural story. Notwithstanding all of the calls to obey, change, repent, etc. Read the whole story through; you will find that we are captive of God’s managment of our wills. Free will is a myth. The fact you “perceive” yourself to be “free” does not make it so. You cannot perceive yourself to be lost, either. Nor can anyone really perceive themselves to be under the wrath of God, yet many are.
>>>> Adam was just as pre-destined to his failure <<<<
>> With free will? That doesn’t make a lot of sense. <<
Actually, it does... sorta Supposed you’re stranded in the woods. If you don’t get medicine within several hours, you will die. Deep in your backpack, there’s a cell phone, which you could use to call for help. 911 respondents could then triangulate your position and rescue you. But you don’t realize you HAVE a cell phone, so you vainly try to escape the woods with your own wit, and starve. You might choose any of several courses of action, but all will result in you remaining lost.
Now suppose you find the cell phone. There’s a certainty that if you know about the cell phone, and how it works, you will use it to seek rescue.
This is the source of Catholics arguing free will with Calvinists. (As a Catholic, I’ll inevitable do a better job at selecting words which reflect the Catholic position; Calvinists please respond to poor word choices charitably.) Both actually do believe in predestination and free will, but have opposite perspectives on what that means.
The Calvinist sees the fact that the lost hiker may do just about anything and calls that free will. When the cell phone is found, the hiker is obliged to use the cell phone to be rescued. Because this obligation exists as a survival imperative, the Calvinist does not regard this as free will.
The Catholic, on the other hand, sees that no action that the hiker may make is helpful. The Catholic sees the hiker, therefore, as a “slave to sin.” There is no free will, for the hiker cannot be saved despite the great yearning of the hiker to be rescued. (The hiker has no will to use to call for help on the cell phone, so the Calvinist doesn’t regard this as a salvific longing. Any other actions besides making the cell phone call are regarded as “total depravity,” since they will be unsuccessful.)
When the hiker discovers the cell phone, he now has the power to do that which he knows to be good, so the Catholic person sees such a person as set free.
This, then, is the substantial disagreement in the definition of freedom between Catholics and Calvinists: Calvinists see a “free” person as having a range of choices; Catholics see a free person as having the God-given ability to do what is good.
Both are biblical perspectives: For instance, Paul describes himself as being freed by Christ and a “slave to sin” beforehand, but then also describes himself as being a “slave to Christ.”
(Larkin's)drawings are dizzying.
You can tell he was an engineer.
To placate or appease an angry person. It is one of the three fruits of every good work; the others are impetration and merit. It is also one of the four ends of the Sacrifice of the Mass, whose propitiatory power extends to sin, to satisfaction and punishment for the living, and to punishment for the dead. (Etym. Latin propitiare, to render favorable.)
>>>Free will is a myth.
Then so is sin.
You sound very much like the audience Paul was writing to in Rome...”You will say to me then, ‘How can he still find fault, for who can resist His will?’” Romans 9:19.
You may want to read Paul’s answer to your question in the verse following. Go ahead. Romans 9:20.
You forget one thing;
We are made in His image. For my own limited understanding, this includes we having powers of imagination, creation, and choice.
It is in this way, we have "wills" of our own, which we ourselves can have a hand in guiding. We must choose, we are urged to "choose", choose life, and live!
Still, without His help, I see no real way of overcoming the animal instincts that affect us, much the same as they drive the animals, even so far as affecting their own social interactions and orders.
Mankind, is much different than the other animal species inhabiting this planet, no? What is it, that makes us different?
Does The Creator have free will? If you say "yes", then you may need to rethink your original position, stated here.
This gives an added dimension to the verse from Romans you have referenced, doesn't it?
When we find our freedom in Him, along with that comes responsibility.
I say, He is Spirit above all other spirits. For He is beyond being just the idea, or expression of "an idea".
A Deist might think of God much as; the condition of the natural universe, in that "God" made it all as it is, then left it to run or operate on autopilot. Various sorcerers, magicians, and more recently the "New Age" spiritualists, along with the mechanistic naturalists, see the cosmos as a collection of forces, nothing more...
Yet we hold the contrary view. We hold that; He is the creator of the idea. Not merely the carrier or medium of such.
>>>Go ahead.
Now why would I choose to do that?
Unless God moves you, you won’t be able to.
Not sure where you are going with this post because you start off with me forgetting “one” thing, then list a large number of topics.
If the “one” thing you wish to draw my attention to was “We are made in His image.” Then allow me to focus on that for a moment.
I think you would allow that, “made in His imgage” would never imply that we could under our own power...
1. create a universe
2. forgive sin
3. perform miracles
4. grow plants
5. answer prayer
6. foresee the future
7. fashion an angel
or any other of a host of things God does. Thus, I think you would agree that we both would place severe limitations on the extent to which that “image” has been imprinted on us humans.
Further, in spite of this “image”, I think you would also agree that the animal instincts (your words, my words = sinful nature) leave us desparately in need of His intervention. So, in effect, you and I both WANT Him to reach in and control us, to some degree or other.
As far as whether God has free will, I would say that the Scripture intimates that He is the only One with what we would truly call free will. But, then (and don’t fly off the handle here) He has purposely limited Himself. He has determined that He will not sin.
Now, you will say, “ah Ha”. If He cannot sin, then how could He “control” those that are sinning and not stain His hands. I don’t know. In a court of my choosing, this wouldn’t fly. But, I remind you He is not like us. He is transcendent, not just sovereign. Transcendent means He is the only truly Other Being that exists.
Think about that. All other is created. Satan, you , me, rocks, love, death, time, etc. It is all a creation of His. Nothing exists that did not come into existence by His word (John 1:1 -3). If this is true, then there is nothing, repeat nothing, that is not dependent upon Him for its mechanisms, its desires, its foibles, its sin, its thinking, its rebellion against Him.
Don’t immediately think I am impugning His character. If I said this about myself I would be condemning myself. But, He is not stuck here in this creation. He is outside of it, beyond it, holding it in His mind and in His hands.
The answer Paul gave in Romans to the concern he knew the Italians would raise to his point was, “Who are you, Oh (puny) man, to answer back to God.” Okay, I added “puny” but the idea is clearly there. Paul understands this is an absolutely outrageous claim to think that man cannot respond to His call to come to salvation UNLESS God Himself grants it. That is such a wild concept that he knows it will infuriate some of the hearers. And his answer? Tough. God holds all the power, we hold nothing but indebtedness to Him. So, no, it doesn’t change my view about the “...verse in Romans...”.
The words you are using are all conditioned by other words in the Scripture that give them context. For example, when the Scriptures tells us to, “Repent!”, it goes right on to say, “...and those who were appointed unto eternal life believed.” Acts 13:48.
Catch what I mean? No argument it says, “think, believe, change, obey, behave, love” etc. Just read the entire story to see where these commands get enablement. The Book says: God. “So, then, it does depend upon the man who wills (chooses) or the man who runs (acts), but upon God. And God will have mercy upon some, and some He will harden.” Romans 9:16
This is serious stuff and I don’t pretend to understand all the “hows”. But, we can come to grips with the “whats”, assuming of course that He permits the understanding.
The question was not about ability, but choice.
Again: Why would I choose to do that?
Do you have any, or not? You say we are created, so therefore--- then postulate your assumption that we lack our own free will. Poppycock. Not supported by the texts, and by other readily available evidence.
As far as our abilities and lack thereof, you miss your own number 2, by a mile. We DO have the ability to forgive sins. At the very least, those committed against us.
Perhaps you lack the Holy Ghost, and the powers associated? Get it, and you too will discover the truth of "the spirit of the prophet, is subject to the prophet." Meaning in part --- even with giftings coming personally to us from the Lord, we humans can still mess it up! And there are real world consequences when we do so, too. Or, we can be more fully submitted, and even go so far as "performing miracles", [from your own list of what God can do, but we cannot, # 3] and at times (admittedly much of the Lord's own choosing, but also open to our request) foresee the future, which is part of prophecy, and is among the giftings of the Spirit. But then, these sort of things are more usually associated with those whom are born of the spirit...
I suppose you are asking a loaded question, the point of which I cannot quite catch. But, the most straightforward reason would be to see what Paul wrote to people who believe (like you) that not having free will would be an unjust, unfair, impossible and therefore an untrue situation.
But, your enablement to read it is closely associated with your choices, which is why I noted that you would read it only if God allows. This is the underlying picture that Solomon paints when writes (at the direction of the Spirit), “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord; He directs it like a watercourse (river) wherever He pleases.” Proverbs 21:1.
Forgive me for ducking the question. I re-read your post and, as I mentioned, was not clear exactly what you were getting at. My fault.
If the question is, “Do I have free will or not?”, then my answer is “no”. You do not have free will.
That is, assuming you mean by “free will” the power within yourself to exercise behavior, thought pattern, feelings, spiritual leanings, ideas, or anything else completely on your own, unaided, undirected, unpromted. I hope this did not duck the question.
My contention is that the text of the Scriptures maintain that we are ultimately subject to the direction of God even though you cannot feel it, see it, smell it. The control is described by Solomon in the verse I noted to DFendr, Proverbs 21:1 “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord; he directs it like a watercourse (river) wherever He pleases.”
This is not to say that from our created state it does not seem like we can choose, are told to choose, even scolded to choose the right and shun the wrong. But, read the tortured state Paul describes in himself in Romans 7. We are called to
My list was those things that you cannot do unaided. The Deist is the one who believes that God created the world then went fishing. I am claiming the Scriptures maintain that everything you do, especially those things which are considered “good” are because you are empowered by the Spirit. Paul tells us this in a thousand ways, but one of the most direct is Phil. 2:12-13 “...continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God at work in you both to will (choose) and to act (live) according to His good purpose.”
The reason we should be fearful and tremble is that we ought to continuously recognize that it is God who is empowering, enabling, moving and directing our lives. The sacchrine sweet spirituality taught by the TV preachers is not only incorrect, but bordering on blasphemy.
And, my friend, the Holy Spirit is not an “it” to get. “He” is the manifestation of God indwelling those whom God has rescued.
>>>The point was you asking me to choose to do something while telling me I had no free will.
It’s not that I think not having free will would be “unjust... and therefore untrue” It is that it is just untrue.
We illustrate this nearly every moment of our waking lives. You experience it now, you were asking me to exercise it.
I am exercising my free will now in choosing to respond to you. And you will make a free will decision whether and how to respond to this.
Of course we can only make choices within our ability, however this is far from making “free will a myth.”
I realize there is an entire systematic theology in which ‘no free will’ is a key element. However, a theology which is disprovable by direct personal experience is doomed to fall on its own premise.
According to you, when I ask you to choose something while saying you had no free will, I was apparently proving my “premise” (and consequently, my theology) to be untrue. That conclusion would be true...if free will is necessary to choose to do something. But nothing in a “choice” mandates that free will be the driving force causing someone to execute that “choice”. You made that connection, but without Scriptural support. What I am maintaining is that the Scriptures teach that, irrespective of what you may feel, choices are not made by free will. Yet, this is not the same thing as saying you are not held responsible for them.
So, if you chose to pick out the green socks instead of the blue sox, nothing in that choice required you to not be influenced by something (or someone) outside of yourself. Your conclusion that, “I choose, therefore I am free” has not been demonstrated as valid. On the contrary, the Scriptures gives a large number of statements about God affecting the thought processes of mankind: Deluding influences, darkened minds, hardened hearts, open hearts, etc. If you wish to read about some of them I will include a list, not as “proof-text” argument, but just to give you some passages to examine.
And the Scriptures couples those influential movements with God's overall plan of rescue (election). That is why some of the Gentiles chose to believe - if they were appointed unto eternal life. Acts 13:48. The rest did not choose to believe. So, were these choices from free will? Apparently not.
Please don't understand this to be a “systematic theology” as if that means a certain club or group. If you would look back over the roots of good, biblical theology for centuries (or really millenia), this has been the Gospel back to Paul. Granted the Roman Catholic community refutes this claim, because they require a semi-pelagian world view in order to hold the keys and demand we acquiesce to their organization. Similarly, the Arminian community of Protestants seems to cling to this view because, as I have been told, it is more “just” than what I have presented here. But, in spite of the numbers being against it, most all of the reformers held to this perspective (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Huss, Edwards, etc.). Today Sproul, Packer, Crabtree, Horton, etc. teach something similar.
I may reply more fully, but first of all I disagree with your premise. Further the premise is false by definition.
Free will by definition means one can make choices. Just as I am choosing to answer you partially.
Now you can revert back to this “choice” and hence free will in general are an illusion.
I think is the route you are taking. And that entails a greater problem of whether our perception of reality is an illusion.
False, otherwise Jesus whole ministry and teaching are made nonsensical.
Yet, this is not the same thing as saying you are not held responsible for them.
No court, nor parent, holds someone responsible for actions outside their control. In church we begin to hold a child capable of sin, and responsible for repentance, at the age of reason, of informed conscious choice.
No free will, no choice, no sin.
Or what worth is your own opinion, even here? Why should I even consider it? Who are you? [no need to provide to me answer to these questions -- they are meant for you to ask of yourself].
More realistically;
We all need make decisions and choices. We do so daily. Many times a day, quite typically. This is part of the sort of thing another poster here, D-fendr, might have been speaking of when he states; a theology which is disprovable by direct personal experience is doomed to fall on its own premise.
Since you continue to dispute, saying none has free will;
Perhaps you are confusing "being free from influence" with having free will.
One can be free enough with the help of the Spirit, yet that doesn't mean one will always be free from pressure. Christ's own intense struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane, was a internal struggle taking place in His own heart & mind. I can only imagine how those pressures may have come from different sources, including those of the fleshly mind, for he was at the time, in the form of human flesh. Regardless, it was intense. Acknowledging His own fleshly will as being contrary to the highest calling, He chose to set it aside. For that, the Father again, was most pleased, even as it grievously pained Him, that to save us He had to come to us in the person of his own son. Such is love.
You say;
If you had only added to the end of that last sentence, the word "alone", then you could find wide agreement!
I understand that one can use scattered scriptures indicating the Lord closing, opening, hardening persons hearts and minds --- yet there also those verses indicating that a person CHOSE to harden themselves, or that the upon the word of another, their heart was pierced, softened or otherwise reached, also. As far as one's hardening their own heart, Pharoah comes to mind here. As it is explained, he first hardened his own heart (more than once?), then in a following incident, the Lord claims to have done so, for His own higher purposes.
That collection of verses (concerning Moses & Aaron's negotiations with Pharaoh, and Pharaoh's reactions) give use an early clue as to choices we can make, and those which can be made for us.
On another note, going back to our own callings to works of love and service to the Lord;
Look back into the Mosaic law. Which priests had the highest calling, but them who ministered unto the Lord?
Then, much later when Christ was asked by a young man, "what is the greatest commandment", what did He answer?
That answer, is perhaps the biggest "clue" of them all.
You may need to read between the lines here to understand what it is I'm getting at...yet I doubt that any will be able to see the simple truth as long as it continues to be considered as just a bunch of word games and human logic.
We will never, ever, be able to "figure out" the Lord and His ways using our own powers of logic and wordsmithing, no matter how acute those skills of ours may or may not be.
I will tell you now plainly, that irregardless of one having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit --- one is still free to reject it and disobey --- or, when seeing one's own error in doing such, work to repentance of such inward attitude.
Why else would the Lord have sent message; "chose this day whom thou shall serve"? Is there not some aspect of free will there?
Please feel free to save yourself the trouble of responding to or answering the questions I pose here. I'm not looking for or requiring you to provide the answers.
Perhaps one more response, this time from the bottom up. I may be confusing things by causing you to infer that people have no capacity to choose. That is not what I want you to infer. What I am saying is that the Scriptures taken together (not snippets or single verses) tell us that that the world, history and all human activity is being directed by God. Therefore, the concept of a “free will”, if that means I can act independent from God’s influence, is not true.
Notice how interrelated this is to God’s foreknowledge. I believe we would both acknowledge that God has perfect foreknowledge of every event about to occur, now, the next moment, and infinitely into the future. If this is true, then really all actions are fixed. If that is true, then you are not, in spite of how it feels to your human sensibilities, acting independent from God’s direction.
This should give us great comfort, but I can tell it disturbs you. Nevertheless, this is why the Scriptures can tell you that the outcome of history is certain. It is why Jesus knew with certainty Peter would deny him. It is why you can know that, “...all things work together for good for those that love God, that is for those who are called according to His purpose.” It is why there is nothing to be afraid of, because your Heavenly Father is playing out every detail of the man next door, you, me the crazy economy, and, yes even Satan. No one can escape His control.
That is why He is God. He is free to set the course for His universe and each particle in that universe. We are players on His stage watching this all play out. You don’t believe that something has ever happened that surprised Him, do you? Even the death of His Son was based upon the “...predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God...” Acts 2:23. Rest in it, revel in it, live in it. Enjoy it. You are alive and “free” within Him, not according to your own will.
So, “...work out your own salvation, for it is God at work in you both to will and to do His good pleasure.” Phil. 2:13. These are not spurious passages but the main message of the Gospel.
You say;
Not exactly. The Lord has the last, and final "input" on things of course, as He had the original "inputs". This is true, even as mankind rejects to extents both large and small, His ongoing leadings, and desires for us, to how we should be, act, and do. He has overview, but it is still WE who are "playing out the details", as you put it, to an extent. Which is why we are or can become responsible for our choices & the results.
He can also make what was meant for ill towards one of His, rectified as being for or part of, a greater good. Yet that is not His "first order" desire, nor was or is His highest order original intent. He is not the only player upon the stage. We are here by invitation to participate, not to be merely puppets in His show...
Yet still, this very thing precious to Him, free will, which He has bestowed upon all mankind, can quickly become to ourselves the problem. We either learn, or we don't. Many times, we must be "saved" along the way.
He is NOT behind or in agreement with all the free will choices made contrary to His will [your-- Heavenly Father is playing out every detail of the man next door?], as a careless reader (and one not acquainted with the word, and the Lord Himself) might make from your own explanations.
Those things contrary to Him, are not His doing --- not in the case of human beings, anyway. We are free agents. Free enough to argue the point. Free enough to disagree, here amongst ourselves, and even so far as to argue with Him, though I'd advise against doing that too much...for I know too from direct experience, that it can be a dangerous practice.
I'm talking here [above] about what the Lord speaks directly to a person, not simply disobeying the written Word...though that also, is risky business, as many can show cause to agree!
Much of what mankind does, grieves Him greatly. That, I have had Him confirm to myself, most directly. Hearing anguish, and grief in His voice, was quite surprising, I'll admit. But it did emphasis to me, just how "free" mankind can be, even to do wickedly. For His own Holy & Higher purposes though, He many times does allow it [mankind to do evil]. And in the end, yes, he can steer it (all of human history & future) to His own ends,for He is truly Saviour.
That still does not nullify mankind having the power of choice which was much your original and seemingly persistent argument.
Regardless of His influences towards us, He remains un-forceful towards us, allowing us still the power of choice, and our own "free will". He does not rudely or casually take such power from us. There are Holy reasons for this decision, on His part, I have been lead to believe...
Which is also much why I attempted to point out to you, in the beginning of this discussion:
We have been made in His image, and do have choice.
I have to leave for a while, but your last paragraph is telling. The original discussion was not about “choice”, it was about “free will”. Ponder that.
"Choice", and "free will" have no relationship in your universe?
I have attempted to testify to you, of my own experience with the Lord, concerning our God-given abilities of free will & choice, including mentioning the consequences of the exercising of such. Yet you casually brush it all aside, in the interests of trying to earn debating points?
All this, on a thread concerning the word "propitiation".
A price was paid for us. A ransom. This is part of the Gospel, part of the earliest teaching, supported and foreshadowed also by the more ancient Hebrew texts.
It comes into further clarity with the latter day Word telling us most explicitly; None can come unto the Father, except by His Son, the Christ.
Ponder that.
Your anger is palpable, my friend. I am not attempting debating points, I am attempting to inform you about the truth of the Scriptures.
Quite honestly, though, your “experience” with the Lord is only valid if it matches the Gospel previously delivered in the Scriptures. That is according to Paul, not me. Your personal experience may be anything from gas, to hallucinations, to demonic oppression. Many, many folks claim all kinds of “experiences, and yours is relevent only as it aligns with Scripture. The same goes for mine. Our lives are not our authority, the Scriptures are.
Now, as to your remarks about choice and free will. That these are not identical does not mean there is no relationship. All through my posts I have noted that “choosing” means selecting, preferring, deciding upon, or opting for one thing over another. Free will, on the other hand, means that these choices are completely, utterly, fully without any influence from anything other than your own being and the contemplations therein. Go look that up before you holler about this distinction. And, it is an important distinction.
Free will is a myth. Choices are made all the time and they are real. They just are not without influence. That you are being maneuvered may bother you, but that in itself does not change whether that is happening or not. Only if the Scriptures said it was not happening would prove that it is not happening. Would you agree?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.