China guns, Piper on King David, Peterson on Academia, Walsh on Gender and questions on Race

Welcome to the Conversations That Matter podcast. My name is John Harris. I hope everyone had a good Lord's Day yesterday. I certainly did, and I was out actually from the time I woke up, went to church, had some good fellowship in the afternoon, and came home late in the evening.

The Attributes of God and Trusting His Providence

So it was a good day, and the sermon was on the attributes of God, various attributes. Always a good reminder. That's something that we can never really forget about, but it's so easy to forget about during the course of life, who God is.

And so I just want to encourage all of you that that's something that I've been thinking about a little bit, and something for you to think about too, even in the situations we're in now. Because I think that was very much a prevalent thought among the people of God as they were hearing this yesterday.

There's trials going on. There's all kinds of things that we don't like. There's bad things. There's evil people. And what does this mean about God? Is he still in control? Is he still good? Are all the attributes that we talk about, the fact that he's unchanging, he's immutable, did these go anywhere?

What's his plan? And when we remind ourselves about who he actually is, a lot of those questions tend to dissipate. It doesn't mean that they're gone completely. It just means that we understand that we are small, God's big, he understands a lot more than us, and we're just part of this very interconnected, interwoven plan that God has.

And we can see our little thread, but we don't see how that connects to everything else. So we're part of a big tapestry. And so I just want to encourage you along those lines this morning. As I talk about some various news issues and answer some questions, that's one of the reasons I wanted to do this podcast, is because there's a lot of questions, and frankly, some objections to my last podcast, which I expected to some extent.

Race, Critical Race Theory, and the Dictionary

I tried to be as crystal clear as I could and let you know also that I was asking questions last podcast. I don't have everything figured out, but there's a big aversion to even the term race. If someone says race in conservative Christian circles, even the use of that term, we immediately have, I think, in our heads either a Darwinist file or a critical race theory file, and there's an aversion to it.

So I want to talk about that a little bit, because when we interact with people in the world, especially, they are used to using this term, and they mean something by it. And even if you don't think, some of you, I'm not saying for everyone, but even if you don't think this is a valid term, we shouldn't use it, I get that.

And I don't even use the term. I use the word people. I think I said that in the last podcast. I don't say race. I say people generally, just because I try to avoid confusion. But the people in the world are using that term, and they mean something by it.

And we need to know what they're talking about in order to interact with them sometimes on these issues. And I believe, preach the gospel, yes, but that's not the only interaction that we have with people in the world.

They're going to have objections. One of them today, against even Christianity and the Bible and the history of the church, is that it gets the issue of race all wrong, and that it's been used to forward all kinds of oppression.

And so we have to understand something about that in order to give an answer for those who ask us about the hope within us. So I'm going to get into those objections a little bit today. And again, I actually appreciate, I invited people to reach out to me, send me resources they think would help.

I think one person did send me a book suggestion by Ken Ham, which I do appreciate. I am pretty familiar with Ken Ham. I grew up actually in a house where we had Creation Magazine every week, or every time it came out.

I've been to the Creation Museum a number of times. I've actually spoken to Ken Ham personally. It was actually, it's an interesting story. I was at a conference. This was probably like 12 or 13 years ago now, I would guess, maybe, yeah, something like that.

And it was a deeper conference. So I was in Covington, Kentucky, and Ken Ham's sitting there by the Answers in Genesis booth, and no one's talking to him. There's a whole room full of people. And I just thought that was interesting.

So I went up and I talked to him, and we had a great conversation. And I really appreciate what he does, his ministry. I encourage everyone to go out to the Creation Museum and the ARC. There's so much truth.

And it's just amazing what they've done out there, too. I remember last time I was at the ARC encounter, we were in line, and the people behind us were not Christians at all. They just came out to see this big ARC.

And in the process, they were exposed to good teaching, and they were exposed to the gospel. And that is, I think, the heart of what Ken Ham is trying to do, which I very much appreciate. But I'll talk about that a little bit, the way that he objects to the usage of the term race, or how he conceives of it.

Because he's very much responding to Darwinists. And it's not the same as responding to critical race theorists. And so I'll explain that a little bit. I don't want to go into a whole lot of detail. I don't want to reinvent the wheel, because I talked about some of this in the last video.

But I do want to talk about the objections and the questions. So let's get into some of the news items for today. Some things in my inbox. I don't always share these on the podcast. But I thought today, there's just a whole bunch of stories.

And I thought, you know what, we'll just go through them. I know some of you like being updated on this stuff. So someone sent me today. This is January 24th, episode 1735 of Desiring God, John Piper's podcast, I guess.

And the question is, did Bathsheba sin with David? So they have this whole podcast. Now the word rape comes up immediately. And was this a rape? And that seems to be the central question. And that's the...

I did a whole podcast, by the way, on this called King David a Rapist, question mark. And then I go into some other stuff. I used to do a lot of... Actually, I used to do podcasts very much like this one, where I would combine a bunch of topics into one.

And I don't do that as much anymore. I try to keep it to one or two topics. But I did a whole thing on King David, was he a rapist? And this was in response to Rachel Denhollander. There was a whole thing on Twitter about it.

And she was correcting someone. And I got into the original languages. I gave you as much as I possibly could, the biblical history. And the long and short of it is, no. It doesn't look like David raped Bathsheba.

And the only reason someone would, I think, have to say that is... And this is what I said at the time, is that you must be influenced by the Me Too movement in some way. Because the main argument used is, well, because there was a power disparity.

Because there was a power disparity, that must mean that it was a rape. And the issue here, there's a few things. The Hebrew word used to refer to what we would think of today as rape. And by the way, today, we're going to find this later in our discussion.

But words in English and concepts in English, we have to do a lot of hard work to go back to biblical languages. And then figure out, OK, what's the closest approximate in the biblical language? And the closest approximate, the Hebrew word that would be used for rape, is not used here.

You also find an example later on in the same book of an actual rape that takes place. And it's very clear. It's not clear in the story of David and Bathsheba. Now, does that mean that there wasn't a lot of pressure on Bathsheba?

This is the king. This, you know, is something that you must do. No doubt about it. But we just don't, we simply don't have the evidence. And it seems actually the opposite. It seems that you really can't make the case based on the words used, that that's what this was.

There's no indication Bathsheba was, you know, making an outcry about any of this. Hebrew law is very clear on the difference between this kind of a situation happening in the city and in the country.

And an audible objection is very important to the Hebrew law and the Mosaic Code. So we're not going into the whole thing. But I just thought it was interesting that John Piper's taking this line more now and using essentially, you know, basically the same kind of, I mean, here's the quote that Desiring God chose to put in the foreground of their article.

We are not exaggerating to use the word rape for David's abuse of his power in the way he took Bathsheba. And so it still seems to be based on there is a power disparity there. And because there was a power disparity there, that's the main reason to look at this in that way.

So I just thought that's interesting. John Piper kind of, you know, what's causing him to think it's important to interpret the text this way? That's the real question. Why is it important that we see it as a rape situation?

And I think we know the answer to that. Because of the cultural pressures that exist today and the way the Church Too movement has in the past tried to really use this passage. I mean, think about it this way.

Does the Church Too, Me Too movement, do they ever use the story of Lot and his daughters as a rape situation passage?

Look what his daughters did to him.

No, no, there's no pressure there to use that. Of course, that's not because it's women. But I mean, look, they took advantage of their dad when he was inebriated. So I just find it interesting the passages that are cherry-picked to forward this narrative that will event drive kind of this Church Too, Me Too, Caring Well type narrative.

So that was this morning. And yeah, well, you know, at one time, I would have thought that Pastor John Piper wouldn't go down that path. But there's been a number of things like this, unfortunately. And so if you want to know more about that, I'm not giving you everything on, you know, that whole biblical passage.

But I do give a lot of information in King David, A Rapist, question mark, from October 8th, 2019. You can go to that podcast. And then, of course, I saw this. And I was like, oh, wow. The Chinese military, next wonder weapon, laser guns.

All right.

So this is from 2021. And then there's a story, though, that came out just recently that I saw on Facebook. I don't have the particular story that I saw this morning pulled up. But it's basically the same thing that shows the capabilities of these new laser guns that they have.

They're pretty insane. From a half a mile away, they can, in silence, burn something up. It's amazing what they're capable of doing. And this is the future of warfare. I mean, we're getting sci-fi here, right?

But it's being compared to the AK -47. It's, and again, silent and deadly and accurate. Scary stuff. And, you know, I think it was scary, probably, for the people who first saw, you know, saw that pipes were being used with gunpowder to project things.

So, you know, there's always a development. There's always something scary. But the fact that it's the Chinese, that the Chinese Communist Party is developing this weapon. And interesting, interesting.

There's a lot I've learned about China in the last year that makes me really realize that we could be in, we are in serious trouble. And in the next decade, I think, I can't see how we don't have a war.

We're already in a state of cyber war with them, an economic war. And I think Trump was one of the few who recognized this. But it could get to a real war. Either that or we just keep fading from the scene.

They invade Taiwan. We retreat. We don't do anything. And we keep just fading. I don't know. And then we have, you know what, actually, in between this, I didn't have the tab pulled up, but I thought it was interesting.

I'll talk about this for just a second, even though I don't have the tab. Pay attention to this. Evangelicals are starting to mimic the talking points of neoconservatives and progressives who are very concerned with Russia's threats against Ukraine.

And there's a few reasons I feel like this is very interesting, but it's some of the same people who are very much on the social justice train in evangelicalism, whatever what that means in evangelicalism, very much for kind of an open borders, evangelical immigration table stuff, that kind of thing.

But they want to secure borders in Ukraine. And I just find that very interesting. Ukraine's borders cannot be violated. They are a distinct people. The Russians shouldn't come in. But on the border of the United States, they think that, you know, that shouldn't be the same.

We shouldn't have the same kind of. Now, I realize, too, there's a war situation that's a little more pressing in some ways, in some ways, not in every way, but in some ways in Ukraine. But, you know, we have a very interesting situation, too, because we have thousands and thousands of unvetted people coming in our southern border.

And who knows who these people are? They could be even spies from other countries and stuff. So I just find it just interesting to me to find out that borders mean something and popular sovereignty means something when it comes to other places, but not to the United States as much.

Denominational Fractures Over LGBTQ Issues

So another story here. Let's talk about this. The Aquila report put this out. Conservatives split from reform churches in America over LGBTQ issues. January 10th, 2022, this came out. So this is a little over a week old.

But let's see here. It's actually two weeks old. 43 congregations of the Reform Church in America split from the national denomination, one of the oldest Protestant bodies in the United States, in part over theological differences regarding same-sex marriage and the ordination of LGBTQ clergy.

The departure of the theologically conservative congregations to the new group, the Alliance of Reform Churches, leave some who remain in the Reform Church in America concerned for the denomination's survival.

Before the split, the nearly 400-year-old denomination had fewer than 200 ,000 members and 1 ,000 churches. At least 125 churches from various denominations are in conversations with the Alliance of Reform Churches leaders about joining.

Realistically, it's a large group of conservative churches that are also providing a lot of income to the denomination.

All right.

So they're having—what's happening in all the denominations is pretty much the same. It's over some kind of a social justice fault line, to take Votie Bauckham's very helpful analogy. There's—in the Southern Baptist Convention, critical race theory seems to be the main fault line.

I know a lot of conservatives really want to make it—so badly they want to make it about complementarianism. It's really about critical race theory, though, right now. In the PCA, it's revoiced theology primarily.

In the Reform Church in America, the RCA, it's over LGBTQ issues. They're a little further down the path, it looks like. And so, yeah, just interesting. It goes on and explains more about the ins and outs of this.

So more fracturing. My prediction is you're going to have more and more fracturing. Denominations are going to get smaller and smaller and smaller, unfortunately. And even the conservative denominations are going to keep splitting from each other.

And I have a podcast coming later this week trying to explain, to the best of my ability, why this might be happening. Why is it that political conservatives and orthodox conservatives in churches, Christians, tend to build denominations, and then they leave them.

Build another denomination, leave them. And they keep getting taken over by progressives. Why is that? We keep seeing it happening. And then you have this big story that you've probably already heard about from January 20th.

Academia as a Corrupt Enterprise

Jordan Peterson resigned as tenured University of Toronto professor, Torpedoes Academia. I'm not reading this headline very well. Jordan Peterson resigns as tenured University of Toronto professor, Torpedoes Academia, a stunningly corrupt enterprise.

And most of you have probably already seen this or heard this, heard commentary, so I'm not going to wax long about it. It's very damning of the current state of academia. And I agree 100%. This is exactly what academia has become.

It's a corrupt enterprise. He says they all lie. Yeah, it seems that way sometimes. Even in Christian academia, I can tell you that it really, to me, Christian academia is also corrupt. And I've had the privilege of being in some places, like I would say the History Department of Liberty University, where it's very much an exception to, I think, the general rule.

But there's weakness almost everywhere I've seen. In my seminary experience, in, well, all the places I've been, all the four different evangelical institutions that I have, or three different that I have attended in person.

So I'm not talking about the online stuff, but the three that I've actually been, brick and mortar, yes, the corruption is insane. I'll give, I don't wanna go through a lot of examples right now. We're talking about Jordan Peterson.

But let me just say that this rings so true to me, everything he says. There's a precondition, he says, to occupy a faculty position. You have to believe in the social justice stuff. That's what he's saying, in order to even be hired.

And there's only one narrative. And if you don't accept it, then you can't be in academia. And the application to this, the thing that I want everyone to think about is, the future of academia looks even more grim than it is now.

The children that from elementary school, all the way up to graduate school, are being educated right now and indoctrinated. In 20 years, what's this country gonna look like? When you have people that are full-fledged, they believed sex is a social construct.

They think that boys can be girls, girls can be boys.

What do we do with that?

Where does that take you? And the corruption that resides at the top levels of all our institutions, makes it so that the men who should be standing up, and women, are not standing up. They won't stand up against this.

They're worried about their retirement. They don't wanna rock the boat too much. They're loyal to their institution. We shouldn't say anything negative about anyone. And the sense of proportion is so off, it's unbelievable.

Even with godly men, that I would consider godly, it's like they can't see the big picture and see what's happening at their institutions. And I've been disappointed in every place I've been. I've been disappointed to meet some people that I would say have the right theology.

Mostly they understand basically what morality is and what God expects. And then when things are happening that they could do something about at their own institution, they're such an aversion to doing something.

And I know part of it is the respect they have for the hierarchy that they're in but the West is on fire. The country that we have now is going to look great compared to the country I think we're going to enter if these things are unchecked.

And the only group of people that seem to be able to take somewhat of a stand are the people that don't have the platform to do it at the high levels. It's common people, blue collar, working class people mostly.

And they're the people that will hang on to traditional Christian values and the country that we once knew. And so that's kind of what's going on. And I'm really grateful that Jordan Peterson decided to take a bold stand, to shine a light against this.

And he, in some ways, he probably is more financially secure than a lot of professors. He has a big following. He has a platform to be able to get the word out there, but I'm glad he took it. There was a high school professor, by the way, high school teacher, I should say, a history teacher.

I posted it on my Facebook page who did something similar recently, exposed his school district for teaching critical race theory. And he said in the video, he goes, I know this is going to ruin my career.

I know they'll come out and destroy me. They're calling me liar. Everything that's been said about me for whistleblowing on a Southern Baptist school is being said about him, that he's a liar, that he's a racist, all this kind of stuff.

That's exactly what happens the first two seconds you come out and say anything. And he's like, I don't care. I'm doubling down. I'm gonna give you all the evidence that this school district is corrupt.

And guess what that does? It's what it's doing right now. It's riling up the parents. And maybe this will create a situation where parents will take back the education of their children from, frankly, the people that amount to pagan perverts, most of them, they're pagan perverts.

They don't think they live in the world that God created. They wanna create their own world. Everything is malleable according to what they want and what their preference is. And they are open to all kinds of perversions because of that.

And they're the ones teaching your kids. And it just shouldn't be done anymore. I'm gonna show you at some point, I think, I had a friend actually, actually, maybe I can show you now. Let me see if I can pull it up.

A friend shared this with me. This is a local school district that is right near me. Let's see if I can pull it up. And I was, you hear about these news stories sometimes and you think like, well, that's a ways away, right?

Like that's not here. That's somewhere else. And someone sent me this, let's see if I can pull it up, this homework assignment from,.

Here it is.

I think this is it. Yeah, let me pull this up for you.

Here it is.

Noah Alvarenga on Facebook posted this and it's public, it's a public post. And it's from Mrs. Omara, who teaches social studies at Walco Senior High School. And he said, let this be a reminder to you, my fellow Hudson Valley residents, the wicked pagan religion sweeping the nation is not just out there in some fancy college, nor in the cities, nor on their TikToks.

It's being fed into them five days a week, eight hours a day. All right, so he's saying this stuff is not just on Fox News or whatever news channel you watch. Here's the homework assignment. For the interest of this survey, the word represented refers to how often you learn about the described groups and how many individuals from these groups you focus on in your current and past social studies classroom.

On a scale of one to five, how well are people of color represented in the subjects of social studies? On a scale of one to five, how well are native peoples represented? On a scale of one to five, how well are women represented?

On a scale of one to five, how, what about LGBTQ plus people? On a scale of one to five, how well are people of mixed ability level? How well are people of low socioeconomic status? Religions beyond Christianity?

There you go.

This is a multicultural education survey given to the students. And then you have to put down your racial or ethnicity categories. Which ones do you identify with? And which of the following gender categories do you identify with?

They put human, which is great. But are you cis female? Are you cis male? Are you non-binary? Are you trans female? This is what elementary school kids are being taught. Elementary school kids. This is in my backyard.

These are the kids that even, according to NOAA, Christian parents are sending their kids to this school. What are they learning? You gotta check what your kids are learning. So Jordan Peterson says, good for him.

Academia is a corrupt enterprise, but it is from the highest levels to the lowest levels, unfortunately. In that vein, we have Matt Walsh on the Dr. Phil show. Can I show you a clip from this? Let's listen to this together and then I'll provide some commentary.

But here's just a clip from the Dr. Phil show recently with Matt Walsh.

I would like to throw out to other members of the panel, actually, because just like the four-year-old can't answer, what is a girl? Well, this is one of the problems with this left-wing gender ideology is that no one who espouses it can even tell you what these words mean.

It's like, what is a woman? Can you tell me what a woman is? No, I can't. Because it's not for me to say. Womanhood looks different for everybody.

Okay, at this point, the debate's over. The debate's over. You can't tell me what a woman is. You're calling yourself a woman even though you're biologically a man. The debate's over. But in the eyes of our current society, it's not.

What do you define a woman as?

An adult human female.

And what does a female mean?

Well, that's someone with female reproductive organs.

Okay.

Someone who's, you know, here's the thing. When you're a female, it goes right down to your bones, your DNA. So that's why if someone dies, we could dig up their bones 100 years from now. We have no idea what they believed in their head, but we can tell what sex they were because it's down in, it's ingrained in every fiber of their being.

Interesting. So I'm trying to understand.

So you're either XX or you're XY. There's no spectrum beyond that.

Your definition is that a woman is someone who is female.

I should say you either have a Y chromosome or you don't because some people are going to point out there's XXY. But you either have a Y chromosome or you don't.

Is that right?

Correct.

As a biological female.

So what happens if we have maybe someone who is female identifies as a woman, right? You know, cisgender woman, right? As you explained, as you just explained, it maybe doesn't have the ability to reproduce.

Maybe it doesn't have those organs that you're talking about that are reproductive organs.

I have answered the question. You stood up here and said trans women are women.

Yes.

Tell me what you mean. What is a woman?

Womanhood is something that just as Ethan explained, I cannot define because I am not myself.

But you used the word. So what did you mean when you said trans women are women if you don't know what it means?

So here's the thing. So I do not define what a woman is because I do not identify as a woman. Womanhood is something that is an umbrella term. It includes people who...

That describes what?

People who identify as a woman.

Identify as. What?

As a woman.

What is that?

What's to each their own. Each woman, each man, each person is going to have a different relation with their own gender identity and define it differently. And so trans women are women, too.

Okay.

And you want to...

Hold on, hold on.

Trans women, you won't even tell me what the word means, though.

You want to reduce women, you want to reduce men down to maybe just their genetics, our genitals, our chromosomes, right? That's what you're saying.

What you want to do is appropriate women. You want to appropriate womanhood and turn it into basically a costume that can be worn. That's a question I would like to throw out.

Okay.

So this is fascinating to me because of the applause line, for one thing. Look who the audience is with. They're not with Matt Walsh. Matt Walsh won that, hands down. There's no doubt about it. Matt Walsh totally decimated the other side.

They can't even define what a woman is, but the applause line is with them because a woman can be whatever you want to be. The idea of sex is a social construct. And then did you watch the projection going on?

They project onto Matt Walsh that he's the one that's engaging in reductionistic thinking. He's reducing what a woman is to just some biological factor. And the reality is, you know, Matt Walsh is saying, that's the determinative factor.

It's not everything that encompasses being a woman. There's certain ways that women tend to think that are different from men and habits they have, and maybe more of a nurturing tendency that they have.

There's actually so many things we probably don't even think about that are part and parcel to the design that the template God used when he made women and he made them different from men. And it comes out, a lot of the romantic comedies bring this out because it is funny.

It is when men and women live together, they have different ways of living together and thinking. And so it's not that you're reducing it. It's that you're saying that this is the starting point, that there's a different chromosome going on.

There's something different in the DNA fundamentally that divides humans in half. And of course, as you read the Bible, as you understand why those differences are there, you realize there's a different role in general.

That's for men and a different role for women, different abilities, different skill sets, all of that. So it's determinative, it's not reductionistic. And actually the ones who are reducing are the, in this case, transgender activists who are saying that the concept of sex is just a social construct.

They're the ones reducing it down to nothing. It's meaningless. They can't even define it. There is no such thing as a woman. It just erases, which is, I think, how can you have feminists and trans activists work together?

Like one saying that we need rights for women, the other saying we don't know what a woman is. But the thing is, they're suppressing the truth and unrighteousness as Romans one says, because they do know what a woman is, because they use the term and they mean something by it.

Even if they can't define it, because if they were to define it, it would undercut everything that their whole position. They know that there is something fundamentally they are trying to copy. There's something in the created order called a woman that God has made that they want to, as Mount Walsh said, appropriate.

They wanna take that and they wanna say that that can be them, even though they're not that. They wanna say that anyone can be that. I saw a video the other day of a church. I kid you not, it was a church, probably some mainline denomination.

Had a little kid come up, like probably eight years old, who was a boy biologically and said that his pronouns were she and her and they honored him. They all clapped for him at the church and said how much they respect him and all this.

I mean, it's child abuse. You're just confusing the kid. And that's because it's not a social construct. It's real. God created it. Okay, let's move on. I think I had a few other stories here.

Let's see.

Oh, okay, I gotta be careful with this one. How about I change the headline around Israel study? The fourth treatment shows limited results with a certain Greek letter that designates a certain malady affecting our culture today, our world.

So read between the lines and you get what I'm saying. Oh, and if you read the article, basically, here's the point. Israel's a smaller country. It's easier to get results from Israel. Now, I know that there's a lot of fudging going on in the United States.

I don't know what's going on in Israel exactly with everything, how they're marking deaths and all that. But I do know this. It's a smaller country and they're probably the most or one of the most treated places with the first initial and then all the booster treatments.

It's one of the places that has the most of that in the world. And it's a controlled situation because they've foisted it on everyone. And you have people that have gone through this process four times.

They've had a needle in them and they still get the malady that they're supposed to be, have prevented. How in the world, I mean, the emperor has no clothes. How in the world are we supposed to think that this treatment with all the side effects that we're still finding out about is a good thing when it can't even after four times within the span of what a year, within four times getting this and it still won't really protect you.

You still gotta wear something over your face and all that. All right, so let's get, I think those are all the new stories I wanted to talk about. Let me talk to you briefly. Let me answer some objections.

Responding to Objections About Race

Shall we do that? By the way, I'm drinking coconut water this morning. And this is something I got into recently. For those who want really good natural fitness and natural electrolytes in their drink, coconut water is so good.

So there's, no one's paying me to say that. I just really like coconut water with pineapple, especially. Straight coconut water, I don't know. Anyway, let's get into the objections though. This is from the last episode of Conversations That Matter, which I encourage you to watch.

I think some people commenting on some of my posts, I don't know that they watched the whole thing. Not sure, I don't wanna judge anyone. But some of the questions I felt like were answered in that. But you may wanna go check that out.

And the question that I posed was, should evangelicals use the definition of race, the same definition of race that CRT advocates use, which is that race is a social construct. And they go farther and say that it just designates power relationships, but it's a social construct.

So I talk about a lot of things. And in that, it's very hard to talk about this because I think I said you're on a minefield when you even say the word race. But here's the thing. We are talking about critical race theory.

The word race is right in between critical and theory. They're using the term race. If you're gonna interact with those people that believe that, you gotta at least understand what they're saying, what they mean by race.