Calvinism Clearly Refuted

[CmRoddy]

Now, Pate, if you are going to claim that I don't understand the Gospel then show me how Hebrews 2:10ff doesn't lead to Universalism. Rebuttal the exegesis I provided. Don't just make the assertion; back it up.

 

[Rightglory]

CmRoddy,

Show me one verse that says "Christ died for every single individual."

Rom 5:18-19, Rom 11:32, John 6:39, John 10:11, Col 1:20, Eph 1:10, I Cor 15:13-19 with the summation in I Cor 15:22, Heb 1:14, II Tim 1:10, Eph 2:14ff, II Cor 5:18, Heb 2:9, Rev 20:13, and many more.

It does not just say He died for them but saved them, reconciled them to God, redeemed them from the curse.

RG, you are assuming just that if you cannot provide a passage that states this. Nowhere does the Bible make such a claim, but you say it does. Ergo, you are assuming.

It has not been assumed for 2000 years. The Bible has been making that claim for 2000 years.

Once again, the reformed view denies the Incarnation of Christ. As such Christ becomes meaningless, non-effective, powerless, and cannot save man.

Which leads logically to your understanding that God does not deal with man as His creatures, in His Image. That God, through Christ cannot possibly call all men to repentance because the offer of communion could not possibly be valid, since God did not save all of mankind so they could hear, could respond as man was created to do.

So I'll say it again; show us a passage that explicitly says that Christ died for every individual person and not just a passage that says "world" or "all men" because if you can't, then you are simply assuming into the text what you want.

Not what I want, but what the Holy Spirit gave to the Apostles and the Church through the power of the Holy Spirit has preserved the Gospel as it was given.

You're the one that is changing scripture, adding to scripture, changing the meaning of words just do deny what scripture has always taught.

It must be assumed that IF all things were given to Christ, that would at least exclude you, since you do not believe what the Bible says very clearly. That if all men were under the condemnation of death, and Christ reversed that condemnation, I Cor 15:22, that you are still under Adam and Christ has had no effect upon you whatsoever. But then John 6:39 would be false, because you believe He missed you. So much for your view of the Sovereignty of God. He completely failed in his mission because If He does not save all, if even one is missed, then none are saved. This is stated in John 6:39 and confirmed in I Cor 15:13-19.

Obviously, you cannot believe in the resurrection of the dead, since Christ has not overcome death, at least not yet? You deny Heb 1:14. You deny His resurrection gave Life to the world.

 

[CmRoddy]

Rom 5:18-19, Rom 11:32, John 6:39, John 10:11, Col 1:20, Eph 1:10, I Cor 15:13-19 with the summation in I Cor 15:22, Heb 1:14, II Tim 1:10, Eph 2:14ff, II Cor 5:18, Heb 2:9, Rev 20:13, and many more.

None of these say "every individual." As I said, you are assuming that they are talking about every individual. And you have yet to provide exegesis to prove it. You are once again assuming that your interpretation is correct with no proof.

 

[Rightglory]

CmRoddy,

If Christ died for every individual then they will all be saved. Here is proof once again.
Hebrews 2:9

9But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

All have been saved, saved from the curse of death, John 6:39, not a single person will be lost. Christ did give life to all men. I Cor 15:22. Actually He gave life the world.

Your theology does not allow that Christ actually did anything. You by pass the Work of Christ then want Christ to save you from the very purpose you were both created, and saved. You have missed the entire Gospel as it was given. You have superimposed a man-made version, selecting some verses on which your whole view rests to the contrary of scripture itself.

Many Arminians try to use this text as a "proof" that Christ died for every individual person. However, they don't even consider the context.

I would say you're the one not considering the context of the verse in Light of the rest of scripture. This text is says "everyone" in the sense of "not only Jews but for Gentiles" or "not only Jews but the whole world in terms for groups of people." Of necessity that is what "everyone" means otherwise you get Universalism. Lets continue reading and see what happens when one is consistent in exegesis.[/quote] You better check Universalism once again. Christ dying for eveyone and saving everyone from death is not Universalism. One must also be soul saved, that is everyone, which is not taught in scripture. That part God needs man's cooperation which was His intent in creating man in the first place. He wants union and communion with every soul, but each soul must choose for himself. He saved you from death, just so you could do accept or reject His offer of communion as you were created to do. And not be condemned to death through Adam for the ONE sin of Adam.

That is what it means to be freed from the Condemnation of Adam, death. If not for Christ, it would not matter if you sinned or even never sinned. You are already condemned through Adam. You could believe, but it would not do you any good, since you are already condemned. Christ freed you and every other soul, to be able to choose God, as Adam was able to choose, freely.

You should really consider what you think and ascribe to v. 9 because if you don't, this becomes a perfect Universalistic text. If you notice, the context is constantly giving a reference to a particular group, not just every single individual. Let's continue.

Only in your mind, since scripture teaches clearly that Chrsit died and saved all men form death, from the fall, from the curse, from the condemnation of Adam. But it NEVER teaches Universalism, that is, that God also saved each individual soul. Reason being is that is not the fall. That is not the problem with man. Man was created to be in union and communion with God, but God also created man free to choose whether to be with God or apart from Him.

Hebrews 2:10
10For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings.

Well, this can't possibly mean "many sons" can it? It should say "everyone" or "every man" to glory. Why doesn't it say that? Didn't we just establish that it should be everyone because of v. 9?

Whoever this group is (the "many sons"), they are the saved people. Why? Because their "salvation" is made perfect through suffering. Continuing...

It means many sons. Why not. God saved the world, every single human being, just so He could have many sons. The sons are those that beleive. John 6:40, Christ cannot have a single believer unless and untill He reverses the fall. This is what I Cor 15:13-119 is saying very clearly. Sons are not saved by Christ on the Cross, but the Cross make possible for Christ to have sons.

It also does not say that this "group, the sons" were being made perfect through sufferings. It says that Christ, the author of their salvation was made perfect through sufferings.

So is there any reference to the Father giving a specific people to Christ anywhere in the NT? Well there is in Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 10, and by golly, this even fits with John 6, 8 and 10 and the tremendous passages we find there. But of course, there is no way this could possibly mean a specific group of people, right? I mean, we established that v. 9 is talking about every single individual person, right? OK, well let's continue...

Hebrews 2:14-15
14Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil,
15and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.

It cannot mean a specific group. It can ONLY mean the all people as it says. But Hebrews verifies the understanding of the Incarnation. A view you also have denied, as you are here. Because all of these texts are verifiying the validity of Christ's Incarnation.

You obviously do not think that Christ was successful in defeating the power of the devil vs 14. You cannot believe in the resurrection either, since it is that Resurrection that gave life to the world which you are now denying. You cannot believe in the resurrection of the dead, that is, human beings, because Christ never accomplished the defeat of Satan, and his power of death.

Hebrews 2:17-18
17Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

18For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted.

OK, this is the nail in the coffin of any sort of idea of "Christ died for every single individual." Again it talks about the "brothers" of Christ that we discussed above, but lets see what else it says. Notice how Christ is the high priest here and he does what? "makes propitiation for the sins of the people." Now, do you know what propitiation means? It means the turning away of God's wrath. So if God's wrath is turned away from every single individual person, then on what basis can God justly punish those that reject Christ?

But it does not say what you want it to say. Christ propitiated sin, the sin of the people. It aligns with Col 1:20 again. Christ reconciled ALL MEN to God through Christ. Very clear and direct statment.

Also, this high priest concept is huge in the book of Hebrews. What does the high priest do?

Well, he intercedes only for those that the sacrifice was made, and if Christ died for every single individual than that means He is interceding for those who will be in hell for eternity. Of course, given what the rest of the chapter before said, no one will be in hell, but I'm sure you won't grant that.[/quote] But it NEVER says He is interceding for whom the sacrifice was made. He is interceding for those who have believed of all those saved from the bondage to sin. As High Priest He takes the sins of the confessor, places them upon that once perfected sacrifice for the forgiveness of those sins.

It is obvious you need to shore up your personal interpretation over agianst what the Bible states, and how it has always been understood. Even the clear language does not support your view. Your exegesis by habit changes the meaning of words, to change context so it fits your man-made interpretation.

What does the book of Hebrews tell us about Christs' intercession? Well, Hebrews 7:25 tells us that Christ is able to save perfectly those that He intercedes for at the thrown of the Father.

You don't really understand what you are even saying. If Christ saved your soul on the Cross, then interceding is moot. You just denied your whole view.

So if Christ is the high priest, died for every single individual, is interceding for every individual at the thrown of the Father, you have three options. First, Christ's intercession fails before the Father. Never mind that the entire book of Hebrews calls Him the perfect high priest and says He enters into the temple once for all time, He would simply faith. Or you can believe in Universalism because Christ's intercession is perfect before the thrown. But there is a consistent way of reading this text, and that is to believe that Christ only died for a specific group of people and is interceding for the.

Why leave out the ONLY one that would be correct. The way Scripture presents it, and it has always been understood.

I'll grant that there is ONLY one way to read the text to fit Calvinism. But you have not shown that Calvinism is the same as scripture.

 

[Rightglory]

CmRoddy,

None of these say "every individual." As I said, you are assuming that they are talking about every individual. And you have yet to provide exegesis to prove it. You are once again assuming that your interpretation is correct with no proof.

Not assuming, just understanding the words as they mean. But then again, it is not MY interpretation, but that of the Apostles and the interpretation, meaning that has been handed down for 2000 years which no man has changed. That is the true witness of the Holy Spirit, preserving His Gospel. I don't either depend on my interpretation which is meaningless, and surely not of any other individual. History has consistantly also shown that individual interpretations have always been incorrect.

You cannot even prove your point using sola scriptura with the much more vast number of others that use it and have arrived at different interpretations. All you can prove is that it is your personal take on scripture.

 

[drstevej]

CmRoddy,


Not assuming, just understanding the words as they mean. But then again, it is not MY interpretation, but that of the Apostles and the interpretation, meaning that has been handed down for 2000 years which no man has changed. That is the true witness of the Holy Spirit, preserving His Gospel. I don't either depend on my interpretation which is meaningless, and surely not of any other individual. History has consistantly also shown that individual interpretations have always been incorrect.

You cannot even prove your point using sola scriptura with the much more vast number of others that use it and have arrived at different interpretations. All you can prove is that it is your personal take on scripture.

Which Apostles... RC?....EO? ... LDS?

 

[Rightglory]

drstevej,

Which Apostles... RC?....EO? ... LDS?

the ones of scripture. Can you prove otherwise?

 

[CmRoddy]

All have been saved, saved from the curse of death, John 6:39, not a single person will be lost. Christ did give life to all men. I Cor 15:22. Actually He gave life the world.

Really? So there is no such thing as eternal punishment for those who are lost? Are you a Universalist?

No wonder... that explains a lot about your mindset, believe me this.

Your theology does not allow that Christ actually did anything. You by pass the Work of Christ then want Christ to save you from the very purpose you were both created, and saved. You have missed the entire Gospel as it was given. You have superimposed a man-made version, selecting some verses on which your whole view rests to the contrary of scripture itself.

Christ didn't actually do anything? Sorry, but that is not what Calvinists believe. Since you are so obviously, so plainly ignorant (and I do mean completely ignorant, as in lacking any sort of knowledge at all) of Reformed theology, why are you even here?

It's amazing how tradition has gripped you so; you won't even fairly consider other view points. You have yours and nothing will change that. This kind of thinking is very similar to LDS and JW's mindsets.

 

[Rightglory]

CmRoddy,

All have been saved, saved from the curse of death, John 6:39, not a single person will be lost. Christ did give life to all men. I Cor 15:22. Actually He gave life the world.
Your response....
Really? So there is no such thing as eternal punishment for those who are lost? Are you a Universalist?

But that is why Christ saved all men, so that they could choose for themselves whether they would be with Christ or apart from Him. Eternal punishment are for those that do not believe.

Obviously, you do not understand the Work of Christ on the Cross. You do not understand the direct correlation between Adam and Christ. You also do not understand what constitutes the fall and man's salvation from that fall and by whom.

Your theology is consistantly outside of the meaning of scripture.

Christ didn't actually do anything? Sorry, but that is not what Calvinists believe.

I know that is not what Calvinists believe. But that is the consequence of your view in the light of Scripture. If you do not believe that Christ died for the world, saved every single human being from death, then Christ is meaningless as a Savior. He saved none. It is the opposite of what John 6:39 is saying, what I Cor 15:13-19 is saying, Rev 20:13-18 cannot happen. Your theology does not align with scripture on any single point. You need to reconstruct scripture to fit, thus creating the large number of contradictions.

Christ didn't actually do anything? Sorry, but that is not what Calvinists believe. Since you are so obviously, so plainly ignorant (and I do mean completely ignorant, as in lacking any sort of knowledge at all) of Reformed theology, why are you even here?

Actually I understand it much better than you do. But we are not here to discuss Calvinism, but what scripture means. Scripture, which is quite obvious, is not Calvinism. You have consistantly shown that it is not, which includes the statement you made just above.

It's amazing how tradition has gripped you so; you won't even fairly consider other view points. You have yours and nothing will change that. This kind of thinking is very similar to LDS and JW's mindsets.

not tradition, but the Tradition. The Tradition given by the Holy Spirit, the ALL Truth that was ONCE given. Does the Bible actually say that there are many view points of scripture?

I have the one that I believe in, and if it is the Truth, as I believe it is, then why should there be any other? If you cannot make that claim, then you are teaching a false doctrine.

That kind of thinking is of Christ and the Apostles. Paul was quite adament that it was Christ's Gospel he was presenting, and not the gospel according to Cephas, Apollos, or even himself. Christ clearly stated that He and He alone is the way. Not any other man-made version or personal interpretation. Surely not Calvin or you. Christ cannot be divided. It is apparent that you so believe if there are many views, many interpretations of Christ's Gospel.

Those that need to detect conterfeit money do not look at all the different conterfeit kinds of money. They study ONLY the real thing. If any other money does not align with the True Money, they know it is false. Christ's Gospel is the same way. If it is not Christ's it is easy to detect that it is man's view, version, interpretation.

 

[drstevej]

drstevej,
the ones of scripture. Can you prove otherwise?

But you mentioned something about 2000 years. Paul, Peter and James didn't live that long.

Whose succession is the best succession?

 

[CmRoddy]

Actually I understand it much better than you do.

OK... it's official. I'm done with this nonsense. You aren't even trying to be intellectually honest. I'm willing to bet that if I proclaimed that I understand your position better than you do then you would say otherwise.

I'm done with your arrogance.

 

[Spartan Warrior]

BIG AMEN...

CmRoddy,

But that is why Christ saved all men, so that they could choose for themselves whether they would be with Christ or apart from Him. Eternal punishment are for those that do not believe.

Obviously, you do not understand the Work of Christ on the Cross. You do not understand the direct correlation between Adam and Christ. You also do not understand what constitutes the fall and man's salvation from that fall and by whom.

Your theology is consistantly outside of the meaning of scripture.

I know that is not what Calvinists believe. But that is the consequence of your view in the light of Scripture. If you do not believe that Christ died for the world, saved every single human being from death, then Christ is meaningless as a Savior. He saved none. It is the opposite of what John 6:39 is saying, what I Cor 15:13-19 is saying, Rev 20:13-18 cannot happen. Your theology does not align with scripture on any single point. You need to reconstruct scripture to fit, thus creating the large number of contradictions.

Actually I understand it much better than you do. But we are not here to discuss Calvinism, but what scripture means. Scripture, which is quite obvious, is not Calvinism. You have consistantly shown that it is not, which includes the statement you made just above.

not tradition, but the Tradition. The Tradition given by the Holy Spirit, the ALL Truth that was ONCE given. Does the Bible actually say that there are many view points of scripture?

I have the one that I believe in, and if it is the Truth, as I believe it is, then why should there be any other? If you cannot make that claim, then you are teaching a false doctrine.

That kind of thinking is of Christ and the Apostles. Paul was quite adament that it was Christ's Gospel he was presenting, and not the gospel according to Cephas, Apollos, or even himself. Christ clearly stated that He and He alone is the way. Not any other man-made version or personal interpretation. Surely not Calvin or you. Christ cannot be divided. It is apparent that you so believe if there are many views, many interpretations of Christ's Gospel.

Those that need to detect conterfeit money do not look at all the different conterfeit kinds of money. They study ONLY the real thing. If any other money does not align with the True Money, they know it is false. Christ's Gospel is the same way. If it is not Christ's it is easy to detect that it is man's view, version, interpretation.

 

[archierieus]

LOL!

"Why would it have to be your choice of words"? Seriously?

Indeed. No such specific words would be needed. The Bible says that Christ died for all men. There is no need to go beyond that to 'every single individual.' The Bible is clear exactly as it reads.

You are the one who are constantly asking for passages that explicitly says "as it reads" that men cannot choose to believe in God. I have provided many, many, many, passages that teaches this but you deny them because they do not adhere to your choice of words.

You are the one who made the assertion. They were your words. You were asked to provide Scriptures which say that. In spite of repeated requests, you have failed to do so. It is clear, then, that there are no such Scriptures. Nor have you presented ANY Scriptures which teach that. You have merely asserted that, and claimed that Scripture says it, but there is no such Scripture.

And as I have shown you, if Christ did die for every individual, then every individual will be saved. Hebrews 2:9 is an example of this. If the "everyone" at the end of the verse means every individual, the immediate context shows that it leads to Universalism.

Wrong.

The group being talked about in v. 9 carries over to the rest of the chapter.

Wrong. The difference between the 'every man' described in v. 9 and 'bring many sons to glory' is clear on its face.

Also, if you want to say that Christ died for all individuals but not all are saved, then does that mean that the Atonement is insufficient to save apart from the addition of man's action?

Christ's death was a propitiation. The atonement is made by applying Christ's sacrifice to the individual. God has specified how that is done, by believing on Jesus.

"All men" clearly means "all types of men" as in not just Jews but also Gentiles. That is one of the central messages of Pauline theology and what we see taught by Christ.

Absolutely incorrect based on Scripture as it reads, and on the plain teaching of Scripture.

 

[archierieus]

John 1:10, He was in the world, and the world was made by him, AND THE WORLD KNEW HIM NOT.

John 1:29, The next day John sees Jesus comoing to him and says, Behold the Lamb of God that takes away THE SIN OF THE WORLD.

John 3:17, For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, BUT THAT THE WORLD THROUGH HIM MIGHT BE SAVED.

John 4:42, For we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD.

John 6:33, For the bread of God is he that comes down from heaven and gives LIFE INTO THE WORLD.

John 6:51, I am the living bread which came down from heaven: IF ANY MAN eat of this bread, he shall live forever and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I WILL GIVE FOR THE LIFE OF THE WORLD.

John 8:12, I am the light of THE WORLD.

John 8:23, I am not of this WORLD.

John 9:5, As long as I am in the WORLD I AM THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD.

John 9:39, For judgment I am come INTO THIS WORLD.

John 12:25, He that loves his life shall lose it; and he that hates his life in THIS WORLD shall keep it unto life eternal.

John 12:47, If ANY MAN hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not TO JUDGE THE WORLD, BUT TO SAVE THE WORLD.

John 14:30, Hereafter I will not talk much with you; for THE PRINCE OF THIS WORLD comes and has nothing in me.

John 16:8, And when he is come (the Holy Spirit) he will reprove the WORLD of sin, and of judgment.

John 16:11, Of judgment because THE PRINCE OF THIS WORLD is judged.

John 16:28, I am come forth from the Father, and have come into the WORLD: again, I leave THE WORLD, and go to the Father.

John 16:33, These things I have spoken that you might have peace. IN THE WORLD you shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer I have overcome THE WORLD.

John 17:5, And now Father glorify me with yourself, with the glory that I had with you BEFORE THE WORLD WAS.

John 17:9, I pray not for THE WORLD, but for them which you have given me, for they are yours.

John 17:18, As you have sent me into THE WORLD, even so I send them into THE WORLD.

Sorry I got carried away with all of the scripture about THE WORLD.

Add to that:

Jn. 1:9, That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Jn. 3:16, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Jn. 3:19, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Jn. 6:14, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Looking at the entire list from Jn. 1 through Jn. 3, I cannot find any evidence of a narrower application than the entire world. It is plain as it reads. John first uses the word in ch. 1, it is clearly the entire world there in vv. 9, 10. Continuing to ch. 3, the Son was 'sent into the world,' as mentioned in ch. 1, the entire world is referenced. And v. 19, 'light is come into the world' is again a reference back to ch. 1, the entire world. John's use of 'world' both before and after v. 16 indicates the entire world. Reasonably, v. 16 also indicates the entire world.

 

[Hammster]

Add to that:



Jn. 1:9, That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.



Jn. 3:16, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.



Jn. 3:19, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.



Jn. 6:14, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.



Looking at the entire list from Jn. 1 through Jn. 3, I cannot find any evidence of a narrower application than the entire world. It is plain as it reads. John first uses the word in ch. 1, it is clearly the entire world there in vv. 9, 10. Continuing to ch. 3, the Son was 'sent into the world,' as mentioned in ch. 1, the entire world is referenced. And v. 19, 'light is come into the world' is again a reference back to ch. 1, the entire world. John's use of 'world' both before and after v. 16 indicates the entire world. Reasonably, v. 16 also indicates the entire world.

So where do you see John and/or Jesus switching to a different use of the word "world"? And why do you see it at that point?

 

[archierieus]

Looking carefully at the list, I don't see a narrower application. I do see examples of Christ first, and then His followers, being sent into the world, but in that case also, it is the world. World literally as the planet and everything in it, as the dominion of Satan, and figuratively as all the unsaved. But still, 'all.'

 

[Hammster]

Looking carefully at the list, I don't see a narrower application. I do see examples of Christ first, and then His followers, being sent into the world, but in that case also, it is the world. World literally as the planet and everything in it, as the dominion of Satan, and figuratively as all the unsaved. But still, 'all.'

And you think that is consistent, even with the list Mikey provided?

 

[archierieus]

And you think that is consistent, even with the list Mikey provided?

Just now took a look again, similar usage pattern. One reference was missed in the list, but no matter. Literally or figuratively, 'all.'

 

[Robert Pate]

Add to that:

Jn. 1:9, That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Jn. 3:16, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Jn. 3:19, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Jn. 6:14, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Looking at the entire list from Jn. 1 through Jn. 3, I cannot find any evidence of a narrower application than the entire world. It is plain as it reads. John first uses the word in ch. 1, it is clearly the entire world there in vv. 9, 10. Continuing to ch. 3, the Son was 'sent into the world,' as mentioned in ch. 1, the entire world is referenced. And v. 19, 'light is come into the world' is again a reference back to ch. 1, the entire world. John's use of 'world' both before and after v. 16 indicates the entire world. Reasonably, v. 16 also indicates the entire world.

I think that there are 40 or 50 scriptures in the New Testament that says Christ has provided salvation for the world, all men, whosoever, all. Its tough to be a Calvinist.

 

[drstevej]

There are a world of worldly people in this world. Now, not all of the people in this world are worldly; but some are out of this world worldly.

Dig?