Run To Read This, As If It Were News About Piper And Warren

Do I have your attention? Yes? Good. I could have labeled this post, something along the lines of "Piper and Warren To Write A Book Together" (which is deceitful, thus the reason I didn't do it), and I'm sure the views would of shown an exceedingly proportional increase when compared to something like this (though, I bet that this one will receive an equally outstanding number of views when compared with the former link). What is my point here? Is it to defend Piper's and Warren's affiliation? No. Simply, it is a demonstration of something that I myself am guilty of. Sometimes I find myself looking for "easy reads", instead of looking for something like this. Why is it that I rather spend my time reading about Mixed Martial Arts entering churches, or the newest provocative statement Driscoll made, instead of entering into an in depth study of God's word? I think because its easier to critique Driscoll, Piper, or the wrongs of others, rather than getting serious about things that matter. Entering in this new year, I have resolved to be more serious about loosing up the theological knots in my theology. I have resolved to quit wasting unnecessary time, looking at the speck in my brother's eye, and ignoring the log in my own. I hope that you will do the same.

Humbly, awretchsaved

Weekly Dose Of Lloyd-Jones

Let us just remind ourselves that surely the purpose of the biblical revelation of God’s holiness is to teach us how to approach Him. It is not mere theoretical knowledge that we are asked to try to grasp with our understandings. Its purpose is very practical. In the words of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, we are to approach God ‘with reverence and godly fear’ (Heb. 12:28). He is always to be approached in that way, wherever you are; when you are alone in a room, or when you are meeting as a family to pray, or when you are in a public service, God is always God and He is always to be approached ‘with reverence and godly fear’. No such expression as ‘Dear God’, for example, is to be found in the Scriptures.*

Soli  Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando

*Lloyd-Jones, D. M. (1996). God the Father, God the Son (71). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

That We May Know He Is The Lord

Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you are more turbulent than the nations that are all around you, and have not walked in my statutes or obeyed my rules, and have not even acted according to the rules of the nations that are all around you, therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I, even I, am against you. And I will execute judgments in your midst in the sight of the nations. And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again.Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in your midst, and sons shall eat their fathers. And I will execute judgments on you, and any of you who survive I will scatter to all the winds. Therefore, as I live, declares the Lord GOD, surely, because you have defiled my sanctuary with all your detestable things and with all your abominations, therefore I will withdraw. My eye will not spare, and I will have no pity. A third part of you shall die of pestilence and be consumed with famine in your midst; a third part shall fall by the sword all around you; and a third part I will scatter to all the winds and will unsheathe the sword after them. 

 “Thus shall my anger spend itself, and I will vent my fury upon them and satisfy myself. And they shall know that I am the LORD—that I have spoken in my jealousy—when I spend my fury upon them (Eze 5:7–13).

A very hard truth for all people, Christians and non-Christians, is that God does every thing He does for His own glory. When God acts in the world He does so for His own name sake, pleasure, plans and purposes. It really is about God's glory. It matters not that when God acts upon His creatures whether it be for judgment or blessing. He does so that we know He is the Lord. The Creator demands glory and recognition from His created subjects.

Of course this is all strange to the ears of modern man. We are accustomed to thinking, being taught and hearing that it is all about us. That message comes explicitly or implicitly but surely it is the common sentiment of man. The popular idea is that sinners (if some are even willing to admit that much) are so lovable  or valuable that God must have acted upon them to show them mercy and love through Christ. The idea that "I'm someone worth dying for" is popular.

However, much it is espoused, it is grossly wrong. God needs nothing outside of Himself. The triunity of the Godhead is self-sustaining and self- sufficient. He needs nothing and no one. He is perfectly satisfied in Himself. One may then ask why did He create man? A simple question that has a simple but often rejected answer. He did so out of His will and for His own glory (Eph. 1:3-13, Ro. 9:14-29). Now, I suppose one can try to get "really deep" and ask why God created the angels. Same answer. Out of His own will and for His own praise and glory. They are ever testifying to the greatness of God. You can change the question all you wish but the answer will always be the same. God acts for His own glory and that we may know He is the Lord.  Here some pour soul will say that is narcissism. Sorry, only created sinful beings are narcissistic; since God is not like man He is without sin and evil. Actually to make the blessing and mercy of God, in the salvation of man, to be about our worth and value is a form of narcissism.

Whatever God does in creation is so that we may know that He is the Lord. That we may fear, honor, glorify, love, revere, worship, obey, submit and proclaim His glory. Even in acts of judgement. As I have been reading Ezekiel there is one phrase that stands out over and over again. It is, "And they shall know that I am the LORD."  When God acts it is that we may know He is the Lord is there is no other. Time and again the Lord sends Ezekiel to warn and pronounce impending calamities upon idolatrous Israel and the pagan nations that persecuted them. The message is often sever and graphic, judgment that ends with the phrase "And you shall know that I am the LORD." Observe: Wherever you dwell, the cities shall be waste and the high places ruined, so that your altars will be waste and ruined, your idols broken and destroyed, your incense altars cut down, and your works wiped out. And the slain shall fall in your midst, and you shall know that I am the LORD (Eze 6:5–7).


We can attempt to blunt the force of this proclamation from the Lord by saying that He "allowed" this calamity. But that is not what the Lord says in the texts. God is the one acting and not allowing. Of course He may use secondary means like people, nations and nature but He is still the one bringing such events about so that we may know He is the Lord. Our God is a consuming fire. His special revelation (the Bible) about Himself is very clear on this point, "Now the end is upon you, and I will send my anger upon you; I will judge you according to your ways, and I will punish you for all your abominations. And my eye will not spare you, nor will I have pity, but I will punish you for your ways, while your abominations are in your midst. Then you will know that I am the LORD (Eze 7:2–4). As you read that text ask yourself these questions. Who is acting? Who's is on the receiving end of the action(s) and what is the purpose of the action(s)?

How about the mercy and grace of God? Why does He act merciful and gracious? Let's be more specific. Who is the cross primarily about?The cross is about God. It is about the glory of God. Still more specifically about the glory of God in the salvation of His people- those whom He set His love and affections on before He ever created them. It is put this way in Romans 3:21-26:

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

When we look to the cross of Christ of course we should see the love of God towards sinners. But it must not just be that. For only thinking the cross of Christ in terms of God's love for sinners has led to much of the narcissism, in Christianity, that is rampant. We must see the glory of God there. We must meditate on the fact that it pleased the Father crush the Son (Is. 53: 10-12). If I can put it in a biblical phrase it would be what the Lord declared- that we would know He is the Lord. Both forensically and experientially. When we look to the cross we see, as Luther, put it "where wrath and mercy meet." It is where God is glorified.

Perhaps we should ask ourselves what the Lord Christ thought of His own death and resurrection? Here we are not left to theological speculation. For we find in the Lord's high priestly prayer His own thoughts on the subject:

When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. 

“I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they know that everything that you have given me is from you. For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me. I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them (Jn 17:1–10)

I usually don't quote this much Scripture because if readers have little patience for anything, sadly, it is reading large quotes of God's Word. However, on this topic I find it necessary. Please note how many times the word glory and it's related words (glorified, glorify e.t.c.) are found in this short passage. I have counted six times in the span of 10 verses that the glory of God is mentioned. In the Christ the Son, the Father and the glory of Christ in the elect. The Lord was emphasizing a point here. The glory of God. Also note the basis for all the talk of glory. Christ starts His prayer by saying "Father, he Hour has come." Which is clearly a reference to His cross. The Lord well understood His death to be about God. The glory of God. It is so that all may know He is the LORD. Some to their eternal perdition and others to their eternal joy in Christ.

Finally, if one cannot think of the cross of Christ in terms of God's glory, then chances are that individual has some narcissistic leanings. We must always remember that God always acts so that we may know He is the LORD.

Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando

Before You Argue With Me, Please...

Please admit that you are arguing with me. Contrary to popular understanding, arguing is not bad. It is not wrong. Quite the opposite it is a good thing. My theological growth can be contributed to the great arguments from godly men that have persuaded me (biblically) to abandon, not only, un-biblical views but dangerous ones, too. A simple definition of the word argue should reinforce the idea that arguing is not bad in itself. Merrian-Webster's Dictionary defines argue as follows:

1

: to give evidence of : indicate <the facts argue his innocence>

2

: to consider the pros and cons of : discuss <argue an issue>

3

: to prove or try to prove by giving reasons : maintain<asking for a chance to argue his case>

4

: to persuade by giving reasons : induce <couldn't argue her out of going>

I tire of Christians telling me that we should not argue especially as they're arguing with me. Of course what they mean is shouting, screaming or the obnoxious form of argumentation. Just pause for a moment, though, and try to imagine Paul doing this- "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ, being ready to punish every disobedience, when your obedience is complete" (2 Co 10:5–6) and this- "Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade others. But what we are is known to God, and I hope it is known also to your conscience"(2 Co 5:11)- without any form of argumentation.

With that out of the way let's now come to some basic rules for arguing. Here's an extremely helpful one- know your own position. This is very beneficial since it communicates to your opponent that you have spent the necessary time and energy in the Word of God as well as using the minds of the godly men that God has gifted to the church. I cannot recall how many times I've been in discussions with fellow Christians that do not really know their own position. They understand that so and so holds to it (usually their favorite preacher or theologian) or perhaps they just grew up hearing a position continually repeated enough times that they just adopt it without studying it in depth. When they hear me or someone else arguing a position that opposes theirs, they immediately react on impulse, get frustrated and wind up showing they do not comprehend the very position they are trying to defend. They cannot explain it. They must use someone else to present their position for them.

What typically happens at this point is simply quoting so and so or saying so and so says (insert theological position). Of course there is absolutely nothing wrong quoting someone else because they can articulate a position better. The problem arises when one does not test that persons understanding of Scripture themselves to see if he can draw a line from point A to point Z and not just state his conclusions. In other words can they handle the whole of the Bible as a unit rather than a few pocket of passages? Can they rightly handle the texts of Scripture so that it does not do injustice to the rest of the Holy Writ. Because if it does then someone has made it fit into their preconceived theological construct.

If I can break it down further into a sentence it would be this: If your opponent is in a theological disagreement with you and can explain your position better than you can, that is not good for you nor the discussion.

It would be extremely helpful if you knew your opponents position. Far too often I have encountered people that seem to be arguing against me but do not understand what I believe. They have been told by their pastor or favorite preacher/theologian what I believe but that person does not understand my position either. As an amillennialist and covenant theologian I get this all the time. Especially from dispensationalists. An example of this is, recently, when discussing the kingdom or covenant theology, dispensataionalists immediately have directed my attention to John MacArthur's "Why Every Calvinist Should Be A Premillennialist" message (or someone else). Any amillennialist and covenant theologian that listens to that message immediately sees the gross misrepresentation and horrendous misunderstanding of our position.

Sadly, many Christians learn about their opponents viewpoint  from the those that are against it. If you are going to engage in arguing against my position (strongly), please seek to honestly learn what I actually believe. Read books, listen to messages to honestly learn. No one is saying that you have to abandon your position to adopt the other but it is the right thing to do when you learn your opponents position fairly and accurately from them. Disagree all you want but demonstrate for them that you've taken the time to sincerely learn and can object from a proper understanding of their position and interact with exegesis of Scripture. Otherwise we're spending more time going backwards rather than forward. Too much time is wasted clearing up the false understanding of a position.

I learned this the hard way. I grew tired of the Reformed Christians saying that I did not understand their position. So I decided to read them for myself. Of course my intentions were dishonest because I only wanted to refute them and say that I read them for myself. However, in the process I noted that what I was taught about them from others was not accurate at all. Not only that but I saw how they not only handled my proof texts to demonstrate my faulty understanding of them but were able to present their own, that I and others had to dance around, that fit perfectly in harmony with the whole of Scripture.

This brings me to a very brief point. Handle the Word of God in discussions. If a verse is presented to you against your position, please do not avoid interacting with it and jump to your own proof text and simply say "Scripture interprets Scripture" as if your passage trumps the one presented to you. You must be able to explain both and demonstrate that they are in harmony with one another.

Finally, if you cannot accomplish any of these basic principals then you should avoid entering any theological discussion. Sit back learn, study, listen, ask but by all means inform yourself.

Of course there are some people you just shouldn't argue with:

"If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet" (Pr 29:9).

Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando

Responding to Apostasy

Recently, on Facebook, a once firm Reformed Christian has publicly announced his apostasy. He has denied the faith and turned to atheism. His basis for it is that Christianity is illogical. Ironically he came to this understanding through reading a well known Christian apologist Vincent Cheung. The topic of study- logic.

This has shaken up and angered my circle of "friends." The anger, slander, ridiculing and mocking of the man is baffling. Sure I understand that many unbelievers will use his de-conversion "testimony" as more fuel for their hatred and opposition to Christ but the reactions I'm observing have more to do with the fact that many knew him on Facebook well and feel personally betrayed. It seems, to me, that it has become personal rather than from a genuine concern for the Christian faith. Let me say that insulting the man does not bring honor to Christ nor does it show that one really cares about the state of his soul. Some "friend" we are if we make the situation out to be more about us than the honor and glory of Christ and the concern for unrepentant sinners.

Some (not all) of the responses to him only confirm what has been said before- that the greatest threat to Christianity comes from within it, from those purporting to be Christians and are not; those Christians that behave in an immature manner. The whole situation should grieve us more than anything else. For we know that his apostasy reveals that he never was a Christian and therefore his soul is in jeopardy of damnation. Is that not why we proclaim the glorious Gospel in the first place? Is it not because we know that when a person is outside of Christ they are His enemies and will be consumed by just judgment in the lake of fire? Is it not because we understand that apart from the supernatural working of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, the natural man can never understand the peril of his soul for all eternity without resting in Christ; therefore they will never flee to Christ? And if they do not come to Christ they never will know the greatness, joy, goodness, love, comfort, hope, rest, and glory of God without repentance from sin and faith in Christ and Him crucified. It is only the Holy Spirit that can make such sinners (this includes all believers) understand such truth.

If we know such things and are moved to preach Christ why then are Christians responding to him in, what seems to be, hatred? The main emotion from us should be grief and sadness. I believe a little compassion is in order. Please do not retort that compassion at such a moment is to condone his apostasy. In fact we should be praying that this is only a temporary moment of doubt and not final apostasy. And do not drag me to Galatians where Paul calls the the brethren there "idiots" for putting up with and pondering a "different gospel." Nor to the situation with Paul publicly rebuking Peter. The situations may have some similarities but are different and the adjectives and nouns used to refer to this gentleman are not synonymous.

We would admit that a denial of the existence of God is sheer idiocy and foolish. In fact that is what Scripture says (Ps. 14:1). We can be harsh and compassionate. But harshness without compassion, in such a moment, is not beneficial.

With that tangent aside I now come to some of my own thoughts upon hearing of this gentleman's denial of the faith. First, it only brings home the truth of Scripure:

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father (1 Jn 2:19–24).

Apostasy is real. We were warned about it. It should not shake our faith in Christ. Our faith is not in other people's conversions but in Christ Jesus the Son of God. Ironically, apostasy strengthens my faith in God. It proves that His Word is true and that every thing comes to pass as He declared.

It also proves that no amount of study without the aid of the Holy Spirit can bring a person into the presence of God. Apostasy proves to show that salvation through faith in Christ is a supernatural event. It lies in the gracious and sovereign hand of God. It lies outside of the power of humanity. That is to say no study of God can convert the human soul. It can only be used as a means. One can lock themselves in a room for days upon days and study logic, reason, philosophy, theology, doctrine and so on. Yet at the end of the day, it lies solely in the will of God to reveal Himself to any sinner, just as He declared:

But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, 

                 “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, 

      nor the heart of man imagined, 

                  what God has prepared for those who love him”— 

these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. 

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ (1 Co 2:7–16).

This is why it is important to not only continually share the Gospel with unbelievers, even though they may know it and even proclaim it, and even with ourselves on a daily basis. It can be so easy to get caught up in how much we can figure out and explain about God through the study of doctrine and theology but forget that knowledge does not save, Christ does.That is not to say that one can come to Christ apart from knowledge but rather the knowledge itself does not save. All study of God (even that is limited since He is far beyond all comprehension) should lead closer to Him; not away from Him.

As the above passage states, one cannot think themselves to God. God must first act upon the sinner. No amount of the study of logic, or it's use, can bring one before the throne of glory. Antony Flew is a classic example. A renowned atheist that attempted to use "logic" (rather the illogical understanding of it) and science to disprove the existence of God and who came to a "logical" understanding that a god must exist; therefore he became a deist. Sadly, he died apart from Christ. It seems for all his use of "logic" it could not take him to Christ.

What a clear demonstration that the illogical understanding of "logic" or it's proper use cannot bring one to the feet of Christ. Only the Holy Spirit can. He may use the study of "logic" but only He can internalize the message of the cross of Christ. Salvation, as the Word of God declares, is of the Lord (Jonah 1:9). Salvation comes only from God. "Logic" does not lead one to Christ, the Holy Spirit does.  Perhaps, now we can see why the Apostle Paul declares to the Corinthians:

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God (1 Co 2:1–5).

My brethren, apostasy does not shake my faith. For I am ever fixed and gazed upon Christ the Lord of glory, crucified and risen, ascended to the right hand of the Father. Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando

Weekly Dose Of Lloyd-Jones

Every pastor, if he is faithful to Christ, must deal with false teaching and false teachers. Not only is it a biblical mandate (Ti. 1:10-11), it is a historical fact. Great men of God have always stood against those that oppose Christ with their "different gospels."

Martyn Lloyd-Jones is an example and here he deals with false theories of the atonement:

Another theory is commonly called the moral influence theory. Now this is the most popular of the theories; let me summarise it in this way. It says that God had no difficulty in forgiving us; as far as God was concerned there was no need to do anything. His love is so great that He always, at every point, is full of forgiveness; but the difficulty was to get mankind to believe that. So, they say, what really happened on the cross was a marvellous display of the love of God. I remember once listening to the sermon of a man who ridiculed the substitutionary atonement. ‘You must not say,’ he said, ‘that God was offering forgiveness because of the cross. God forgives even without the cross, but the cross was the proof of God’s love. God is telling us on the cross: “Though you have killed my only begotten Son, I will still forgive you.” ’ Christ’s death was a manifestation of the love of God. In the cross we see Him suffering in and with His sinful creatures and taking upon Himself the woes and griefs of human life. So the cross is meant to break us down; as we look at it our hard hearts are to be softened. The death of Christ is to do something to us alone.

Now that theory, again, as I think we shall see when we come to the positive theory, is entirely wrong, because it does not mention the justice of God at all. It says that nothing was necessary on God’s side—there was no obstacle there—but the trouble was only with man. So Christ is not a mediator, because He was dealing with man and not at all with God. The theory takes no notice whatsoever of some of the most glorious scriptural statements which we shall be considering together.

Another idea is that the death of Christ is just an example. He came into the world to live a perfect life. He kept the law, yes, and He wanted to leave a good example of obedience to God and His will, so He went as far as death. He was ready to do even that in order to do God’s will and thereby He provided us with an example. The answer to that is that we still have to save ourselves and we save ourselves by imitating His example. We are not saved by Him, it is not His blood that redeems us. Furthermore, what about those who lived before Christ?*

And here he states the biblical view:

Having considered some of the false theories with respect to the doctrine of what exactly happened when the Son of God died on the cross, we come now to a positive exposition of what I claim to be the biblical teaching. It is certainly the view of the atonement that was taught by all the Protestant Fathers. It was taught by Martin Luther and John Calvin and by the Reformers in Britain.

So what is it? The biblical teaching emphasises the supremacy of the substitutionary element in the atonement. It asserts that the Lord Jesus Christ suffered the penalty of the broken law vicariously, as the substitute for His people. That is, in a brief compass, a statement of what has been known as the reformed view of the biblical doctrine of the atonement. Now you will notice at once that there is a difference between this and those false theories which we have considered. This view has two main characteristics. The first is the emphasis upon the fact that Jesus Christ has done something as our substitute, and the second is the penal aspect—it states that the law pronounced a penalty which He, as our substitute, has borne in our stead.*

Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,
Fernando


* Lloyd-Jones, D. M. (1996). God the Father, God the Son (314). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

*Lloyd-Jones, D. M. (1996). God the Father, God the Son (317). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Can you order "a sandwitch in greek"?

"If you can't order a sandwitch in greek, your just going of of man's wisdom written in a lexicon".

Theological discussions on facebook can be both a blessing and a curse. I've had the privilege of getting to know some wonderful brothers in the Lord. I also get a chance to engage with those who oppose all that is reformed, and sometimes those conversations can be down right humorous. The conversation above is an example of the latter. Informing a non-reformed facebook acquaintance about the Greek in John 12:32 (and the fact that the drawing here literally means to drag)- he proceeded to ask me whether I can order a "sandwitch in greek". Now, I am no expert in Koine Greek (how many of us can say that we are). I do, though, make use of the resources that the Lord in His providence has given, and Greek Lexicon's are such a gift.

The New Testament was written in Greek not English (sorry for the disappointing news). It is our duty, to go back to the original language, and deal with the text. The person above sees no need to go back to the original. Ultimately, in his mind, they are just the words of men. And remember, if you can't order a "sandwitch in greek", you are just going off of man's wisdom. 

-awretchsaved