Is Jesus Deity?
Comments
-
@Dave_L said:
You are demanding more from Jesus than God did. It is the blood that atones for sin. Romans 5:9I don't think that I demand any such thing from Jesus ... I just believe that God raised Jesus from THE DEAD (and not, God raised Himself from the partially living)
-
@Wolfgang said:
so then, which understanding reflected in these translations is the correct one? Which criteria should be used to determine which of two basically contradicting translations provides the correct and true text and meaning?Great Questions Wolfgang! I would say that all of the translations of Zechariah 12:10 so far posted on this thread present interpretations(and opinions) on a primary text with a complex history. All, of the translations, should be given some respect in that individuals(or committees) struggled with making sense of an ancient text far removed by both from by both time (History) and place. However, none of the translations should be accepted as absolutely authoritative.
Question: What criteria should be used?
Answer: I would say that in this case the rules and norms of classical Hebrew grammar/syntax should be used in conjunction with the greater context of the current pericope (of course Historical and cultural aspects should not be ignored). I also personally find it instructive to consult the Masora, and maybe also the early Rishonim. However, before one can get to that step one must in textually (and theologically) difficult texts like Zechariah 12:10 it may be helpful to consult an apparatus and/or other textual traditions.
-
It was necessary for Jesus to die in the process of shedding his blood for the sins of his people. Why? Because he came to fulfill the Law in their behalf. And this he did.
He gave his entire mind, soul and body and all of his strength in love for God and enemy. When in the garden he said "thy will be done". And as they wrenched from him the last drop of blood his heart could provide for our sins. He loved his enemies as his own self, asking God to forgive them for killing him while paying for their sins.
But fulfilling the Law does not require dying spiritually, something God cannot do. It requires doing all of the above.
-
@Dave_L said:
It was necessary for Jesus to die in the process of shedding his blood for the sins of his people. Why? Because he came to fulfill the Law in their behalf. And this he did.But earlier you claimed that only part of Jesus died ... here now you claim that "it was necessary for Jesus to die .... And this he did". So then, which of your two claims is what happened?
Also, since you here claim that Jesus died, and since God can not die, you yourself are in fact saying that Jesus could not have been God. -
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
It was necessary for Jesus to die in the process of shedding his blood for the sins of his people. Why? Because he came to fulfill the Law in their behalf. And this he did.But earlier you claimed that only part of Jesus died ... here now you claim that "it was necessary for Jesus to die .... And this he did". So then, which of your two claims is what happened?
Also, since you here claim that Jesus died, and since God can not die, you yourself are in fact saying that Jesus could not have been God.When people die, their spirit lives on. The lost go to hell and the saved enter Heaven. Jesus died and went to Heaven but just like everyone else who dies, his body went to the grave. Only it did not begin to decay.
-
@Dave_L said:
@Wolfgang said:
But earlier you claimed that only part of Jesus died ... here now you claim that "it was necessary for Jesus to die .... And this he did". So then, which of your two claims is what happened?
Also, since you here claim that Jesus died, and since God can not die, you yourself are in fact saying that Jesus could not have been God.When people die, their spirit lives on.
Well, according to that idea people then do actually not really die, but only partially die? and, for that matter, most like the body is deemed to be the least important and not such a big problem anyways, seeing that the body matters nothing as to what happens to the person ??
It seems that with these ideas, matters only get more unbiblical ? -
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
@Wolfgang said:
But earlier you claimed that only part of Jesus died ... here now you claim that "it was necessary for Jesus to die .... And this he did". So then, which of your two claims is what happened?
Also, since you here claim that Jesus died, and since God can not die, you yourself are in fact saying that Jesus could not have been God.When people die, their spirit lives on.
Well, according to that idea people then do actually not really die, but only partially die? and, for that matter, most like the body is deemed to be the least important and not such a big problem anyways, seeing that the body matters nothing as to what happens to the person ??
It seems that with these ideas, matters only get more unbiblical ?Scripture teaches spiritual death for all in Adam. But this is not cessation of being. It is a change in relationship to God. From being blessed by God's love to incurring his hatred. But people do not cease to exist, just as Adam did not cease to exist. In time our bodies die but our spirit lives on. Either in a state of wrath or blessedness. According to God's plan for each.
-
@Dave_L said:
Scripture teaches spiritual death for all in Adam. But this is not cessation of being. It is a change in relationship to God. From being blessed by God's love to incurring his hatred. But people do not cease to exist, just as Adam did not cease to exist. In time our bodies die but our spirit lives on. Either in a state of wrath or blessedness. According to God's plan for each.I never read anything in the Biblical Scriptures about a "SPIRITUAL" death ... I also have not read anything in the Bible that a person who is said to be dead is actually not really dead but alive (in either a state of wrath or blessedness) ... Such ideas seem to flat out contradict the very plain and clear testimony found in the Bible.
When God said to Joshua, "Mose, my servant IS DEAD" (cp Josh 1:2), did He actually mean to say "Moses is with Me in blessedness", or was Moses indeed DEAD as God said?
To return to the topic at hand ... the point still is that IF Jesus actually died, he could NOT have been God because it is impossible for God to die.
-
“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” (Colossians 2:13)
“And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;” (Ephesians 2:1)
“Six days later Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John and led them alone up a high mountain privately. And he was transfigured before them,and his clothes became radiantly white, more so than any launderer in the world could bleach them. Then Elijah appeared before them along with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.” (Mark 9:2–4)
“And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong.”” (Mark 12:26–27)
-
Dave_L,
I am well aware of the passages of Scripture you mentioned ... and see nothing about "a SPIRITUAL death" (or, in contrast, about a person's spirit being alive while they are said to be dead ...Col 2:13; Eph 2:1 are about people in sin not having eternal life
Mark 9:2-4 is about a vision / appearance, not about dead people being actually alive
Mark 12:26-27 speaks about the resurrection of the dead -
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
If you consider Jesus is God with a human body, only the body died.The problem with this idea is that the Bible knows nothing about God having a human body ...
@Dave_L said:
Jesus told the thief he would be with him in paradise that day while his body remained in the grave 3 days and nights.My Bible teaches that on that day there was no paradise in existence in the first place and it furthermore teaches that both Jesus and the thief after they died went to the grave (and not to paradise)
Seems clear that there is a translation -- actually punctuation -- problem in this verse which causes such an understanding as you mention which is contradictory to the rest of ScriptureThe Bible does know something about God having a human body. John chapter 1, the Word became flesh.
-
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
Only Jesus' body died. God cannot die. His blood atoned for believer's sins completely.Well, if only part of Jesus died, he himself did not really die ... since there was no real death, there is no accomplished work of redemption.
In contrast to your idea, I believe the Bible teaches that Jesus did really (and not just partially) die and accomplished the mission for which he was sent ... which then means that Jesus could not have been God, because God can NOT (not even partially) die.
Then there is no real death for anyone. No human fully dies, their soul continues.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Then there is no real death for anyone. No human fully dies, their soul continues.I wonder why the Bible never states what you so boldly proclaim? Scripture, when speaking of death, to die or the dead, nowhere speaks of the dead being only partially dead and partially alive.
Prior to resurrection from the dead, the dead are dead ... it is only with the resurrection that the dead receive life again, else a resurrection/change would not be needed in the first place. -
Ps 22,29 All [they that be] fat upon earth shall eat and worship: all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul.
Just this verse alone shows that soul dies, seeing that "none can keep his own soul alive"
Here is another one to consider:
Ps 49,15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.
Obviously, the soul is under the power of the grave/death, it is not going to heaven to be redeemed from there ...
Post edited by [Deleted User] on -
@Wolfgang said:
Ps 22,29 All [they that be] fat upon earth shall eat and worship: all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul.
Just this verse alone shows that soul dies, seeing that "none can keep his own soul alive"
Here is another one to consider:
Ps 49,15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.
Obviously, the soul is under the power of the grave/death, it is not going to heaven to be redeemed from there ...
The way I understand this is we are body, soul, and spirit. The soul or mind is part of the body and dies and goes to the grave. But the spirit lives on in either heaven or hell, depending on God's appointment. “and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7)
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Give your answer, to yes or no. (Yes, I know this has been hashed out on the old forums many times, but this will help get this forum populated)David this type of question can't be asked too often and I am glad that you brought it up again.
Question: Is Jesus deity?
or rather "Is Deity Messiah?"
In other words, does Deity (God) make himself manifest in or as the historical Messiah Yeshua (Jesus)?Answer: Yes, according to Colossians 2:9 at least. And,1 Timothy 3:16 in the Byzantine text.
-
Wolfgang, have you consider the text, John 10:17, "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again" when you said, "I just believe that God raised Jesus from THE DEAD (and not, God raised Himself from the partially living)?"
The New Testament authors consistently speak of Christ’s death as a freely consented action and as a divine initiative (see Matt 26:53, 54; John 10:17, 18; Phil 2:5-11), not as a defeat inflicted by the forces of evil, as is the case with the hero in some ANE myths prior to his recovery and eventual triumph over his contender.
Christ was not created, that “He has ‘life in Himself’ [John 10:17]; He possesses immortality in His own right.” “The Divine unity of the Father and the Son” and averred that Christ is “by nature of the very substance of God, and having life in Himself, He is properly called Jehovah, the self-existent One” (Jer 23:56), “who is on an equality with God” (Phil 2:6, ARV), “having all the attributes of God.”
Jesus lays down his life of his own volition, and will yet take up life again in accordance with the commandment of the Father (John 10:17–18).
When it comes to Christ's incarnated life and death, Christological anthropology, Hebrews emphasizes Christ’s mortal humanity (Heb. 2:9), more precisely, a humanity for (sacrificial) death (2:14; 10:5-9).
Can we expect a change in your view?
-
@Mitchell said:
Question: Is Jesus deity?
or rather "Is Deity Messiah?"
In other words, does Deity (God) make himself manifest in or as the historical Messiah Yeshua (Jesus)?"IS Deity" and "Deity make manifest in" are not "in other words"-type statements. Take a symphony of Beethoven, IS this symphony actually Beethoven himself? No! Is the symphony "Beethoven" in that it was composed by Beethoven and Beethoven manifested himself to some degree in this piece of music? Yes.
God promised and did in due time send the Messiah, however and obviously, this Messiah was not God Himself. Did God Himself accomplish His plan in what the Messiah in obedience and free submission of his will to God's will did? Yes. Did that make the Messiah to be God? No.
-
@C_M_ said:
@Wolfgang said:
I don't think that I demand any such thing from Jesus ... I just believe that God raised Jesus from THE DEAD (and not, God raised Himself from the partially living)Wolfgang, have you consider the text, John 10:17, "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again" when you said, "I just believe that God raised Jesus from THE DEAD (and not, God raised Himself from the partially living)?"
Most certainly ... if you want to understand this one expression from Joh 10:17 as Jesus saying that he raised himself from the dead (which Jesus' words actually do not even say ), then you cause a contradiction to the various other places which plainly state that he did NOT raise himself from the dead, but rather that God (Whom Jesus addressed as his Father) raised Jesus from the dead (cp Rom 10:9.10) ...
@C_M_ said:
The New Testament authors consistently speak of Christ’s death as a freely consented action and as a divine initiative (see Matt 26:53, 54; John 10:17, 18; Phil 2:5-11), not as a defeat inflicted by the forces of evil, as is the case with the hero in some ANE myths prior to his recovery and eventual triumph over his contender.Indeed ... the atoning death of His only begotten Son was key in God's plan for man's redemption and salvation.
@C_M_ said:
Christ was not created, that “He has ‘life in Himself’ [John 10:17]; He possesses immortality in His own right.”If Christ had possessed immortality, he could not have died and could not have been the necessary sacrifice
@C_M_ said:
“The Divine unity of the Father and the Son” and averred that Christ is “by nature of the very substance of God, and having life in Himself, He is properly called Jehovah, the self-existent One” (Jer 23:56), “who is on an equality with God” (Phil 2:6, ARV), “having all the attributes of God.”These theological non-biblical ideas perhaps sound "fantastic", but are contrary to Biblical truth ... Jesus obviously did NOT have all the attributes of God, else why would he say "of my own I can do nothing " (John 5:19; 5:30) ??
@C_M_ said:
Jesus lays down his life of his own volition, and will yet take up life again in accordance with the commandment of the Father (John 10:17–18).Perhaps Peter was wrong, when he said that it was God Who raised Jesus from the dead (cp Acts 2:24) ?
@C_M_ said:
When it comes to Christ's incarnated life and death, Christological anthropology, Hebrews emphasizes Christ’s mortal humanity (Heb. 2:9), more precisely, a humanity for (sacrificial) death (2:14; 10:5-9).Indeed, Hebrews states clearly and emphasizes that Christ, the Messiah, was a human being, and nothing else !! The Messiah was NOT a double/dual {whatever}. Just as Rom 5:12ff states, since sin had come by the disobedience of one human being, Adam, so God's gift of grace became available by the obedience of one human being, Jesus.
@C_M_ said:
Can we expect a change in your view?Why should I change from the rather simple Biblical truths to a theology which contradicts the simple truths of Scripture?
-
This one simple thing will clear it all up:
Wolfgang's body is all Wolfgang, but not all of Wolfgang is body. There is something more, some "being" there that cannot and will not ever die. Same with the body of Jesus.
Wolfgang, the handsome fellow whose picture we appreciate, is fully body and fully something more than his body (but not God). Jesus was fully man and fully God. God is more than just the flesh people saw when they looked at Jesus--flesh, the man part, that could suffer and die and did die. Yet that body/man was not all the being of God.
-
Wolfgang,
When it comes to Christ’s mortal humanity perhaps, one should assume a simple (not composite) ontological singularity of Christ as a divine-human being, the incarnate God experienced death on the cross. Christ’s divinity did not die, as it did not cease to exist (cf. Heb 1:10-12; John 10:17-18). In a mysterious way, His divinity experienced death, but not in the sense of ceasing to exist.Heb 2:9-- seems to indicate that Christ’s incarnation made Him lower than angels (2:9). This passage elaborates on the quotation of Ps 8:5-7 LXX (8:4-6 ESV) in vv. 6-8. According to 2:7, man (ἄνθρωπος, 2:6) was made a little lower or for a little while lower than the angels (ἠλάττωσας αὐτὸν βραχύ τι παρ’ ἀγγέλους).
The temporal and qualitative ambiguity of “being brief in duration” (little while) or “being low in quality” (little) expressed by the adjective βραχύ (see BDAG [Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Chicago, 2000], 183) seems to play a role in the Christological reading of 2:9, which points out that Jesus was made a little lower or for a little while lower than the angels (τὸν δὲ βραχύ τι παρ’ ἀγγέλους ἠλαττωμένον βλέπομεν Ἰησοῦν). While NIV prefers the rendition “a little lower,” other translations opt for “a little while lower” (NASB, NRSV, NET, ESV).
A humanity for (sacrificial) death (Heb. 2:14)-- The concept of suffering of death (τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου) mentioned in Heb. 2:9 is explored in 2:10, 14. In 2:14, human beings share (κεκοινώνηκεν) in blood and flesh and because of that Christ “likewise partook (μετέσχεν) of the same things.” The difference between human beings in general and Christ in this passage does not seem to lie in the verbs κοινωνέω and μετέχω, which are used synonymously, but in their tenses (perfect and aorist, respectively). Attridge emphasizes, the verbs κοινωνέω and μετέχω, which respectively describe human beings sharing in flesh and blood and Christ partaking in flesh and blood, are used synonymously. See the parallel use of these Greek terms in Prov 1:11, 18 (LXX); 1 Cor 10:17-21; 2 Cor 6:14. Attridge, Harold W. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989., 91.
-
@GaoLu said:
This one simple thing will clear it all up:
Wolfgang's body is all Wolfgang, but not all of Wolfgang is body. There is something more, some "being" there that cannot and will not ever die. Same with the body of Jesus.Prior to resurrection, the person (body + your "something more") dies and is dead. There is not a part that lives on.
With resurrection, the dead person (not just a dead body) is raised to life.@GaoLu said:
Wolfgang, the handsome fellow whose picture we appreciate, is fully body and fully something more than his body (but not God). Jesus was fully man and fully God. God is more than just the flesh people saw when they looked at Jesus--flesh, the man part, that could suffer and die and did die. Yet that body/man was not all the being of God.There is NO idea anywhere in Scripture that Jesus or God are "fully man and fully God". This expression by itself ("fully man and fully God") is self-contradictory and nonsensical. A man cannot be "fully man AND fully {some other kind of being, such as God, animal, etc }" because that would make such a man MORE THAN FULLY man.
Why do people so easily throw out reason and logic when it comes a false doctrine about God and His Messiah??
-
@C_M_
what do all these fancy and lengthy as well as complicate theological assumptions and presumptions about Jesus provide in terms of simple, plain and clear Biblical teaching? My answer is, Nothing much!
Such "theological talk" only serves to cloud the plain and clear statements in Scripture and it causes readers at large to maybe read those many words but not understand most of them and as a result they are not able to put in simple words what actually was written in all those paragraphs.
The book of Hebrews is clear and plain in stating and describing Jesus as a human being, a man of flesh and blood. There is not the slightest mention that he was not a real human being but instead some kind of "more than human" being. -
@Wolfgang said:
There is NO idea anywhere in Scripture that Jesus or God are "fully man and fully God". This expression by itself ("fully man and fully God") is self-contradictory and nonsensical. A man cannot be "fully man AND fully {some other kind of being, such as God, animal, etc }" because that would make such a man MORE THAN FULLY man.
Wolfgang, I get the impression that you're unwilling to allow God to be or do anything beyond your human ability to reason or comprehend it. Could it be that God knows a little bit more than His creatures or the created (man)? Is it too much to allow God to reveal what He wants, to whom, and at His choosing? Does faith has a role in understanding God? Also, I reminded of text: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (KJV) Deut 29:29. Think freely, but let God, be God.
-
@C_M_ said:
@Wolfgang said:
There is NO idea anywhere in Scripture that Jesus or God are "fully man and fully God". This expression by itself ("fully man and fully God") is self-contradictory and nonsensical. A man cannot be "fully man AND fully {some other kind of being, such as God, animal, etc }" because that would make such a man MORE THAN FULLY man.Wolfgang, I get the impression that you're unwilling to allow God to be or do anything beyond your human ability to reason or comprehend it.
How can you get such an impression from what I wrote above? I commented on a statement made by humans ("fully man and fully God") ... or can you point me to a statement made by the true God that He is fully man and fully God ?
@C_M_ said:
Could it be that God knows a little bit more than His creatures or the created (man)? Is it too much to allow God to reveal what He wants, to whom, and at His choosing? Does faith has a role in understanding God?Where does what you are talking about have anything to do with what I had written?
As for faith, I would caution to not interpret "faith" as something which it is not ... as I have had people telling me that by human logic one could not believe that "2+2=5", but "by faith such would be no problem" ... I trust, "faith" does not have such a meaning to you ...
@C_M_ said:
Also, I reminded of text: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (KJV) Deut 29:29. Think freely, but let God, be God.I have no problem with this scripture ... but I would like to point out something to you about the Trinity dogma and those who propagate it: Almost always in discussions about the Trinity, things boil down to them saying that of course the Trinity is a mystery, a secret, which cannot really be explained, but just must be believed.
Now, if indeed the Trinity is a secret and mystery, how can they claim they know a lousy thing about it, when Deu 29:29 plainly states that "the secret things belong unto the LORD our God" ??? How could they even know that such a mysterious Godhead is actually a "TRI-nity" rather than a "Bi-nity" or a "Quartet" ? -
@Wolfgang said:
I have no problem with this scripture ...Even if it says, "The Word Was God" and that "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us?"
Prior to resurrection, the person (body + your "something more") dies and is dead. There is not a part that lives on. With resurrection, the dead person (not just a dead body) is raised to life.
So Jesus was wrong about the thief on the cross? Lazaraus, the transfiguration, etc. all not true?
There is NO idea anywhere in Scripture that Jesus or God are "fully man and fully God".
Well, that is kind of a main point of the whole thing.
This expression by itself ("fully man and fully God") is self-contradictory and nonsensical. A man cannot be "fully man AND fully {some other kind of being, such as God, animal, etc }" because that would make such a man MORE THAN FULLY man.
Well, then what if we say nothing less than God and nothing less than man? I think surely you know what this means?
Why do people so easily throw out reason and logic when it comes a false doctrine about God and His Messiah??
I have no answer for you to that one.
-
@GaoLu said:
Even if it says, "The Word Was God" and that "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us?"Even then I have no problem with Scripture ... You know, I just heard Bach and Mozart in a concert shown on TV. Are you trying to tell me that Bach and Mozart were in that concert hall on stage?
See, the problem is made by those who replace "Word" with "Jesus" and then think that Jesus was God in person (a 2nd person of a Trinity construction Godhead)@GaoLu said:
So Jesus was wrong about the thief on the cross? Lazaraus, the transfiguration, etc. all not true?Jesus was absolutely correct ... but those who misunderstand what he said (perhaps influenced by a wrong punctuation in the translation they read) are wrong.
@GaoLu said:
Well, then what if we say nothing less than God and nothing less than man? I think surely you know what this means?It means the same non-sense expressed by using the opposite to describe it.
@GaoLu said:
Why do people so easily throw out reason and logic when it comes to a false doctrine about God and His Messiah??
I have no answer for you to that one.
I don't either ... but I observe constantly when adherents to the Trinity doctrine try and make excuses and explain obviously unreasonable and illogical points of that dogma.
Post edited by [Deleted User] on -
Thanks for adding more insight.
-
@Wolfgang said:
"IS Deity" and "Deity make manifest in" are not "in other words"-type statements...
I am not clear what you mean by "type statements", but I am surprised that you spent so much time focusing on my rewording(s) of David's question, but completely ignored my answer.
-
@Wolfgang said:
@GaoLu said:
Even if it says, "The Word Was God" and that "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us?"Even then I have no problem with Scripture ... You know, I just heard Bach and Mozart in a concert shown on TV. Are you trying to tell me that Bach and Mozart were in that concert hall on stage?
See, the problem is made by those who replace "Word" with "Jesus" and then think that Jesus was God in person (a 2nd person of a Trinity construction Godhead)That is not an equal comparison. John 1 tells us that the Word is Jesus.
@GaoLu said:
So Jesus was wrong about the thief on the cross? Lazaraus, the transfiguration, etc. all not true?Jesus was absolutely correct ... but those who misunderstand what he said (perhaps influenced by a wrong punctuation in the translation they read) are wrong.
Wait, what? What are you talking about?
@GaoLu said:
Well, then what if we say nothing less than God and nothing less than man? I think surely you know what this means?It means the same non-sense expressed by using the opposite to describe it.
@GaoLu said:
Why do people so easily throw out reason and logic when it comes to a false doctrine about God and His Messiah??
I have no answer for you to that one.
I don't either ... but I observe constantly when adherents to the Trinity doctrine try and make excuses and explain obviously unreasonable and illogical points of that dogma.
What are those unreasonable and illogical points? They are only unreasonable and illogical if you try to be above God and put him in your box.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
