The Holiness Movement - sound doctrine?

[Big Drew]

Honestly Drew, your desperate efforts to divert talk away from the topic of examining the holiness movement AND the organizations that are directly related to her are pretty transparent.

ROFL!!

You must be confused, because I am discussing the Holiness Movement...not wanting to discuss the Pentecostal Movement, because that's not the topic of this thread.

 

[Big Drew]

hi Drew...

how many Holiness believers do you know?

Many.

 

[child of Jesus]

Note what your wiki article says..."many Pentecostals were from the Holiness movement"...but, many were not, and are not.

Two completely separate movements...they do intertwine in some areas...but not all mesh together...so no sense in trying to make it so.

There are many Holiness folks that reject the Pentecostal idea of baptism of the Holy Spirit.

ok Drew!
thanks.
i'm glad you're onboard because it is rather challenging to keep it all straight.

why do the Holiness folks reject the Pente idea of baptism of the Holy Spirit?

 

[child of Jesus]

The Mosaic Law stuff, for one...I don't know of any Holiness believer that's trying to follow the Law.

The other, something that has been stressed by myself and others, is that Christian Perfection is not sinless perfection, as you keep insisting that it is.

well, a poster here provided a link by a Holiness teacher/preacher who says many of the problems the Movement found within itself was Legalism. now, as Christians when we speak of Legalism, we mean The Law. Mosaic Law....don't we?

 

[Big Drew]

ok Drew!
thanks.
i'm glad you're onboard because it is rather challenging to keep it all straight.

why do the Holiness folks reject the Pente idea of baptism of the Holy Spirit?

The same reason other folks reject it...they don't believe it to be correct. Simple really...

 

[Big Drew]

well, a poster here provided a link by a Holiness teacher/preacher who says many of the problems the Movement found within itself was Legalism. now, as Christians when we speak of Legalism, we mean The Law. Mosaic Law....don't we?

I haven't read the link yet, but legalism doesn't necessarily refer to the Mosaic Law...for example, one could be legalistic in the sense that they insist that the KJV is the only correct translation of scripture...that's found nowhere in the Law...they could be legalistic about the type of programming members of their church are allowed to watch...or many other things...but the Law has nothing to do with it...just folks interpretations of scripture.

 

[Dr.Strangelove]

ROFL!!

You must be confused, because I am discussing the Holiness Movement...not wanting to discuss the Pentecostal Movement, because that's not the topic of this thread.

Q: subsequently, do the movements which found their origins in it have sound doctrinal foundations?

It's on topic Drew. Pentacostalism is fair game in this thread.

 

[Dr.Strangelove]

Q: subsequently, do the movements which found their origins in it have sound doctrinal foundations?

It's on topic Drew. Pentacostalism is fair game in this thread.

The belief that the baptism for power was a "third blessing" brought a large controversy to the Holiness people. It lead to a near impasse between those who saw the "second blessing" as the power of the Spirit and those who believed in a distinct, subsequent experience that followed the pattern of infillings in the Book of Acts.

"Nevertheless, the developing history of the holiness and Pentecostal movements increasingly indicates that the rise of this teaching within the more radical elements of the National Holiness Association movement, encouraged by a renewed awareness of John Fletcher's use of the 'Spirit baptism' terminology, and the effective dissemination of the Keswick holiness movement's 'baptism for service' teachings by R.A. Torrey, all worked together to create the potentiality for the immediate, worldwide response aroused by the Azuza Street meetings in 1906."

The belief in the need for restoration was a deeply held idea in the minds of Holiness people. The belief in the need for restoration joined with the beliefs and method of revivalism. The working out of the theological logic inherent in both revivalism and restorationism gave birth to a number of groups, one of which was Pentecostalism. It seemed inevitable that, the longing for "deeper" spiritual experience, experientialism in piety, the belief in the sensate "moment" of the "Baptism of the Spirit," the use of the Book of Acts and Pentecostal terminology, and a preoccupation with themes of "power" related to the work of the Holy Spirit in the believers life, would lead Holiness theology and praxis to spawn what has become the Pentecostal movement.

Revivalism to Pentecostalism

Doc:

Seems to me its the FRUIT that we need to look out for when linking these movements together. What are the characteristics that show a relationship?

It's obvious...

"the longing for "deeper" spiritual experience, experientialism in piety, the belief in the sensate "moment" of the "Baptism of the Spirit," the use of the Book of Acts and Pentecostal terminology, and a preoccupation with themes of "power" related to the work of the Holy Spirit in the believers life"

 

[Dr.Strangelove]

ROFL!!

You must be confused, because I am discussing the Holiness Movement...not wanting to discuss the Pentecostal Movement, because that's not the topic of this thread.

"The roots of the Pentecostal movement lie deep within the Holiness movement. Between 1901 and 1906 the Pentecostal movement emerged from the Holiness movement that had been flourishing among Wesleyan Methodists for a half century."

Arthur Piepkorn (prolific preacher, lecturer, researcher, and author)

 

[child of Jesus]

I haven't read the link yet, but legalism doesn't necessarily refer to the Mosaic Law...for example, one could be legalistic in the sense that they insist that the KJV is the only correct translation of scripture...that's found nowhere in the Law...they could be legalistic about the type of programming members of their church are allowed to watch...or many other things...but the Law has nothing to do with it...just folks interpretations of scripture.

Drew:
ok.

let's not call Legalism Mosaic then.

if i tell you that God is more concerned with YOUR (sinful) attempts to please Him by an impossible obedience by your own behaviour (sinful) than He is with His OWN PLAN of Redemption Purposed and Accomplished by JESUS THE CHRIST, i'm using THE LAW.

no matter what you say, i have SEEN and heard one-on-one that without a continual preaching of the True Gospel to the Church (she needs it continually as we see Paul stressing...i.e.: to the messed up Corinths), man will always fall back to Legalism (a righteousness of one's own).

if new converts do not see Christ placarded CONSTANTLY and understand the Gospel, their only other direction is LAW.

~ child

 

[child of Jesus]

Doc:

Seems to me its the FRUIT that we need to look out for when linking these movements together. What are the characteristics that show a relationship?

It's obvious...

"the longing for "deeper" spiritual experience, experientialism in piety, the belief in the sensate "moment" of the "Baptism of the Spirit," the use of the Book of Acts and Pentecostal terminology, and a preoccupation with themes of "power" related to the work of the Holy Spirit in the believers life"

my research and one-on-one shows the same fruit....
cutting it closer to the root:

what God Has done for us isn't sufficient.

tell me what part we have in God's Redemptive Plan other than the last 2 words below?

According to the Scriptures, Christ died for our sins.

 

[Mr Dave]

thanks Dave!

so, basically the Holiness folks say the process of salvation is initiated (by our belief in the Gospel?) and we are in the process of being saved: do we ever know for sure if we are?
(its just arminianism, right?)

and, at what point did we become without sin, but are now just in ignorance or error? like, sin is transgression of The Law. since the Law isn't "done away with", something had to happen to make our transgression of it no longer become offensive to God, deserving death.

so, the idea is, then, if i get this, that when the process of salvation was initiated God changed the definition of sin?

or is it that our new ability to fulfill the whole of the Law by fulfilling the Two (loving God & neighbour) is what covers our sin?...our mistakes?

here's where i'm having trouble....i really am not sure we ARE able to fulfill the Two great commandments to GOD'S SATISFACTION (at least according to Mosaic Law) - there's far more to the FIRST COMMANDMENTS which pertain to God than loving Him as best we can.

idolatry means we AREN'T loving Him the way He requires and desires. and, if we are honest, aren't we still guilty of idolatry at times? (not worshipping a statue) but the meaning and implications of it as laid out throughout THE TWO-EDGED SWORD?

i dunno....i'm pretty unworthy, but about as grateful as anybody can be (most of the time)

thanks for your reply, it's very helpful because i want to understand.

~ child.

Do we ever know for sure if we are? (If we are ever saved I assume?) A mon avis, that would be when we are in Heaven, and no longer in a position to make mistakes and sin (heaven will be perfect so no sin will take place). Whilst we are on Earth we are still able to sin, and do, to say we don't would be wrong. We can know however aspects of salvation, we can know we are redeemed, justified etc... These are all part of the process of salvation.

What John Wesley said,

"In asserting salvation by faith we mean this:
1. That pardon (salvation begun) is received by faith producing works;
2. That holiness (salvation continued) is faith working by love;
3. That heaven (salvation finished) is the reward of this faith. If you, who assert salvation by works, or by faith and works, mean the same thing (understanding by faith, the revelation of Christ in us - by salvation, pardon, holiness, glory), we will not strive with you at all. If you do not, this is not a "strife of words," but the very vitals; the essence of Christianity is the thing in question." The Third Annual Conference of The Methodist Church, 12 May 1746, Bristol

Soooo, We get to heaven (are fully saved) by God's grace, a grace that is always present (that is prevenient grace) that works within us, from pardoning (that is, the justifying grace), through the transforming of us to make us holy (that is, sanctifying grace), up until we become fully saved and are truly living with God.

This is all made possible by God's love, mercies... and Christ's atoning sacrifice.



To the rest of your post,

I totally agree that fulfilling the first commandments is not easy and that the whole meaning is deeper. Christian Perfection doesn't say it's easy to perfectly love God but that it is possible, it is possible to refrain from all forms of idolatry however slight, it is possible to give money to the homeless man on the street (or any other example of showing love to our neighbour) etc... It is possible to stop willfully sinning (in our fallen state some things will still happen though that run contrary to God's law). This living a holy life is sometimes seen by others as being legalistic, and trying to gain favour with God, but it is not, this must always be a response to what God has already done for us. Surely by allowing the Holy Spirit to work within us, it is possible to love God fully.

I think I've answered some of your points, sorry if I've just given you a rambly post

 

[child of Jesus]

Do we ever know for sure if we are? (If we are ever saved I assume?) A mon avis, that would be when we are in Heaven, and no longer in a position to make mistakes and sin (heaven will be perfect so no sin will take place).

hi Mr Dave!

well, i do believe not only can we know we are saved, we are to know it.

here's where i suppose we greatly differ theologically, specifically re Soteriology.

for me, a simple reading of The Bible shows that we are SAVED by Grace through faith (qualifier: saving faith). i believe God Purposed and will Accomplish the absolute redemption of all who receive saving faith, which is by Grace, not of works....Grace, Faith, Jesus: ALL GIFTS

i believe God calls, God saves. He is able, and He is willing. He has Purposed it, and it will be.

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

Romans 3:24
and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Romans 4:4
Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due

......you know the rest.

What John Wesley said,

Soooo, We get to heaven (are fully saved) by God's grace, a grace that is always present (that is prevenient grace) that works within us, from pardoning (that is, the justifying grace), through the transforming of us to make us holy (that is, sanctifying grace), up until we become fully saved and are truly living with God.

This is all made possible by God's love, mercies... and Christ's atoning sacrifice.

i find all this to be man's reasoning since he can not understand the power of God, nor the Purpose of God, nor the Finished Work of Jesus Christ.

look Mr. Dave: God is FULLY ABLE to justify the ungodly:

Romans 4:5
And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

what seems to be missed is that not only are we graciously forgiven our sins by the Penal Substitutionary Atonement, we have Christ's Righteousness (born under Mosaic Law, LIVED TO perfectly FULFILL IT) imputed to our account....BY FAITH. and He died and rose, according to the Scriptures.

this is for HIS GLORY.

its not our doing.

To the rest of your post,

I totally agree that fulfilling the first commandments is not easy and that the whole meaning is deeper. Christian Perfection doesn't say it's easy to perfectly love God but that it is possible, it is possible to refrain from all forms of idolatry however slight, it is possible to give money to the homeless man on the street (or any other example of showing love to our neighbour) etc...

hi Dave.
i couldn't disagree more.
it is NOT possible for man to fulfill even the First Commandment (even Christians, no matter how holy or devoted). we do not grasp how HOLY God is, and what the FIRST COMMANDMENT really means. only Jesus fulfilled The Law. Jesus is Divine.

the Law's purpose is primarily to

- establish God's PERFECT STANDARDS (as revealed to man....i feel great fear when i consider that He has condescended to even make THE LAW so "simple" - He is far GREATER than the Law given at Sinai.

- show us how sinful and unable and utterly hopeless we are

- point us to Jesus Christ, the Righteousness of God, which we may partake of through Faith in HIM - His Work...on our behalf...Jesus is the only way to God and eternal Life.

- the Law provides us with our moral and judicial imperitives whereby we may live a life on this earth in keeping with His Love and Justice - it can not bring us to eternal life.

It is possible to stop willfully sinning (in our fallen state some things will still happen though that run contrary to God's law).

i'm sorry Dave.
sin = transgression of The Law....you call it "run contrary to"....Mosaic Law does not allow for that redefinition.

unless he has changed the definition of that, we are still sinners.

one sin = DEATH.

so, we are either still sinners and in trouble, or God through Christ has performed a Redemptive Work APART FROM OUR SIN whereby He is able to satisfy His requirement for punishment of transgression of the Law, AND impute the required Righteousness (PERFECTION) to enter His presence: is this something we do? no. Jesus DRANK THE CUP OF WRATH MEANT FOR ME AND YOU, and He is PERFECT.

James 2:10
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.

does james mean to say, then, that in order to not be accountable for ALL OF THE LAW, we should only try to fulfill parts of it? or is he saying we are incapabale of pleasing God under Law?

Galatians 5:2
Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.

Galatians 5:3
I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.

is Paul saying as long as we don't submit to circumcision we can please God under the Law?

This living a holy life is sometimes seen by others as being legalistic, and trying to gain favour with God, but it is not, this must always be a response to what God has already done for us. Surely by allowing the Holy Spirit to work within us, it is possible to love God fully.

I think I've answered some of your points, sorry if I've just given you a rambly post

Dave...i truly am grateful for this discussion, and your graciousness.

i know we are to live right and be separate, strive to PRACTISE righteousness and live for God.

but the evidence that The Holiness Movement doctrines ARE legalistic in the starkest form is in its inherent inability to move away from Arminianism; and in its misunderstanding of Whose Righteous Garment has been provided for the WEDDING.

~ love you
child

Soli Deo gloria

 

[Mr Dave]

hi Mr Dave!

well, i do believe not only can we know we are saved, we are to know it.

here's where i suppose we greatly differ theologically, specifically re Soteriology.

for me, a simple reading of The Bible shows that we are SAVED by Grace through faith (qualifier: saving faith). i believe God Purposed and will Accomplish the absolute redemption of all who receive saving faith, whic is by Grace, not of works.

i believe God calls, God saves. He is able, and He is willing. He has Purposed it, and it will be.

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

Romans 3:24
and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Romans 4:4
Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due

......you know the rest.

The rest, yep all that good stuff people mention
I agree with you here

"for me, a simple reading of The Bible shows that we are SAVED by Grace through faith (qualifier: saving faith). i believe God Purposed and will Accomplish the absolute redemption of all who receive saving faith, whic is by Grace, not of works.

i believe God calls, God saves. He is able, and He is willing. He has Purposed it, and it will be."
Absolutely! Although I would say that as a response, works would naturally follow (always a response, never a pre-requisite).

Knowing our salvation. I don't know why I never said it before, and why I rambled incessantly before Assurance of one's salvation is a distinctive of Wesleyanism, from which the Holiness Movement grew. The Methodist Church of Great Britain | Assurance of God's love
Also, see my signature of the 'four alls' of Methodism (from which the Holiness Movement was a part and grew) "...All may know themselves saved..." Is the doctrine of assurance. (The others being the doctrines of 'Original Sin', 'Unlimited atonement', and 'Christian Perfection' respectively)

Btw, the first line of my previous post was me writing my thoughts as they came, that was a quote from you and me responding to it, I realise it could have seemed like a rhetorical question which would have then coloured my entire post No-one's perfect eh, or free from mistakes

i find all this to be man's reasoning since he can not understand the power of God, nor the Purpose of God, nor the Finished Work of Jesus Christ.

look Mr. Dave: God is FULLY ABLE to justify the ungodly:

Romans 4:5
And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

what seems to be missed is that not only are we graciously forgiven our sins by the Penal Substitutionary Atonement, we have Christ' Righteousness (born under Mosaic Law, perfect fulfillment) imputed to our account....BY FAITH.

this is for HIS GLORY.

its not our doing.

Man's reasoning yes, are not most theological understandings the reason of man? That does not mean that he failed to grasp the power of God...

You say it yourself, faith is needed which would be in agreement with Wesley that faith is the starting point that then by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, bears out fruit for God's Glory.

To keep the post shorter than it would otherwise be, I won't quote the rest of your post, but I'll give myself another facepalm (there you go ) for not linking you here. The Methodist Church of Great Britain | Living a holy life That better describes everything as allowing God's love to permeate through every aspect of our lives.

You said that holiness doctrines are legalistic. Could you give me an example, and do you see these as different to Wesleyan/Methodist ones (from which they will have sprung if they differ)?

I'm sure you'd agree that there needs to be a balance between the legalism (the false accusation often thrown at Arminianism) and antinominianism (the false accusation often thrown at Calvinism).

I thank you too for the discussion It's a while since I've really got into a discussion, tis good (good fun, and good for my conscience to be questioned).

 

[child of Jesus]

The rest, yep all that good stuff people mention
I agree with you here

"for me, a simple reading of The Bible shows that we are SAVED by Grace through faith (qualifier: saving faith). i believe God Purposed and will Accomplish the absolute redemption of all who receive saving faith, whic is by Grace, not of works.

i believe God calls, God saves. He is able, and He is willing. He has Purposed it, and it will be."
Absolutely! Although I would say that as a response, works would naturally follow (always a response, never a pre-requisite.

i AGREE!

and, since i do not believe The Miraculous Acts of The Apostles are normative for today, our works (which God ordained beforehand we should walk in) are the signs following!

Knowing our salvation. I don't know why I never said it before, and why I rambled incessantly before Assurance of one's salvation is a distinctive of Wesleyanism, from which the Holiness Movement grew. The Methodist Church of Great Britain | Assurance of God's love Also, see my signature of the 'four alls' of Methodism (from which the Holiness Movement was a part and grew) "...All may know themselves saved..." Is the doctrine of assurance. (The others being the doctrines of 'Original Sin', 'Unlimited atonement', and 'Christian Perfection' respectively)).

THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION!
this is helpful.

and i will surely look at the links.

Btw, the first line of my previous post was me writing my thoughts as they came, that was a quote from you and me responding to it, I realise it could have seemed like a rhetorical question which would have then coloured my entire post No-one's perfect eh, or free from mistakes ).

you made a MISTAKE? how dare you!

Man's reasoning yes, are not most theological understandings the reason of man? That does not mean that he failed to grasp the power of God...

You say it yourself, faith is needed which would be in agreement with Wesley that faith is the starting point that then by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, bears out fruit for God's Glory.).

mkay...i don't much like the taste of camel anyway!

You said that holiness doctrines are legalistic. Could you give me an example, and do you see these as different to Wesleyan/Methodist ones (from which they will have sprung if they differ)?.

i'll come back to this, okay?

I'm sure you'd agree that there needs to be a balance between the legalism (the false accusation often thrown at Arminianism) and antinominianism (the false accusation often thrown at Calvinism).

I LOVE THIS! thank you SuperDave!

I thank you too for the discussion It's a while since I've really got into a discussion, tis good (good fun, and good for my conscience to be questioned).

ditto Davey.
let's K.I.S.S.....the simpler the better.

 

[~RENEE~]

thank you Renee!

ok.

so, though from what i can see by reading, the order of existence was:

1 -Holiness
2 -Pentecostal
3 - AoG
4 - others

you've said the Holiness doctrine has crept in (back in?) to AoG?

renee, in your assessment, is there unsound doctrine that may be inherent to all that comes from the same doctrine (relating to the idea of perfection?)

i can't seem to get a handle on how the various organizations see perfection as happening - seems to range from a purging or burning out of the sin nature; to a divinely enabled power to cease sinning; to a righteousness now possible under an ability to fulfill the requirements of Mosaic Law....??

can you simplify for me?

sorry got busy and forgot bout his

Unfotunately some churches in the AOG movement are so still to this day so full of the Holliness movement that the only thing seperating them from Oneness is the belief in the Trinity.

Relating to the idea of perfection? Yes I would say so. In the AOG I was raised. The Holiness movement had such a strangle hold that the way you dress was viewed as a way to perfection. In fact after the great split of the church I have seen some that tried to find that "perfection" some other way and falling very short.

Let me also add that there is such a heavy bondage that some even go so far to the other side after leaving that you can not tell them at all from the world. It's almost like they start rebelling against the Holliness movement to the point of almost becoming like the world

 

[child of Jesus]

sorry got busy and forgot bout his

Unfotunately some churches in the AOG movement are so still to this day so full of the Holliness movement that the only thing seperating them from Oneness is the belief in the Trinity.

Relating to the idea of perfection? Yes I would say so. In the AOG I was raised. The Holiness movement had such a strangle hold that the way you dress was viewed as a way to perfection. In fact after the great split of the church I have seen some that tried to find that "perfection" some other way and falling very short.

Let me also add that there is such a heavy bondage that some even go so far to the other side after leaving that you can not tell them at all from the world. It's almost like they start rebelling against the Holliness movement to the point of almost becoming like the world

hi Renee.
i so appreciate when we can be honest about what we have experienced.
so, it's reasonably fair then to say that a soul could come to believe they can only be pleasing to God by Law (Legalism), or as you so well said it, BONDAGE. they may not be taught this explicitly as Written, but its not hard to imply it.

i know we're making a distinction between us working (conforming) toward holiness and stopping sin (The Spirit in us is working this sanctification): as opposed to this is how we are saved/maintain our salvation.

thank you again Renee.
~ child

 

[ParaCristo]

Not many Nazarenes biting on this one huh?
I have been a Nazarene for over 20 years...(Catholic prior to that)
I guess I feel like Holiness is what we should aim for...will the most upright Sanctified Christian achieve it...nope probably not.
It can be a doctrine that makes us feel inadaquate and insufficent...if we let it.
Instead I find it my goal to strive for...becoming a little more Christ like each day.

Let Jesus judge me how close I got...

 

[Big Drew]

sorry got busy and forgot bout his

Unfotunately some churches in the AOG movement are so still to this day so full of the Holliness movement that the only thing seperating them from Oneness is the belief in the Trinity.

Relating to the idea of perfection? Yes I would say so. In the AOG I was raised. The Holiness movement had such a strangle hold that the way you dress was viewed as a way to perfection. In fact after the great split of the church I have seen some that tried to find that "perfection" some other way and falling very short.

Let me also add that there is such a heavy bondage that some even go so far to the other side after leaving that you can not tell them at all from the world. It's almost like they start rebelling against the Holliness movement to the point of almost becoming like the world

Renee, the problem here is that you are confusing the Holiness Movement with legalism...You say that you were part of the AoG...if you research the AoG you will see that they have no ties to the Holiness Movement, only to the Pentecostal Movement.

The Assemblies of God has its roots in the Pentecostal revival of the early 20th century. The Pentecostal aspects of the revival were not generally welcomed by established churches, and participants in the movement soon found themselves forced outside existing religious bodies. These people sought out their own places of worship and founded hundreds of distinctly Pentecostal congregations. By 1914, many ministers and laymen alike began to realize just how far-reaching the spread of the revival and of Pentecostalism had become. Concerned leaders felt the desire to protect and preserve the results of the revival by uniting through cooperative fellowship.

Assemblies of God - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The holiness movement refers to a set of beliefs and practices emerging from the Methodist Christian church in the mid 19th century. The movement is distinguished by its emphasis on John Wesley's doctrine of "Christian perfection" - the belief that it is possible to live free of voluntary sin - and particularly by the belief that this may be accomplished instantaneously through a second work of grace.

Holiness movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but I haven't been around much in the last few months.