Sunday Morning Greek Blog

April 10, 2011

Turning, Returning, and Repenting

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Luke Gospel of,New Testament,Repentance — Scott Stocking @ 8:26 am

As I have been reading through Luke 3–9, I have noticed the repetition of words I have not seen or noticed before in the other Gospels. This is not unusual. I blogged earlier about Mark’s use of the word εὐθύς (euthus /yoo THOOS/ ‘immediately’), which occurs more than 40 times in his Gospel. Luke uses the word only once as an adverb, but he chose another word that he uses almost exclusively, παραχρῆμα (parachrēma /pah rah CHRAY mah/), to mean the same thing. Of the 18 occurrences of this word, 16 appear in Luke-Acts, with the other two found in Matthew 2:19–20. So Luke’s emphasis on immediacy is not quite as strong as Mark’s, but significant nonetheless.

Another word that kept popping up over and over again was the word Luke uses (again almost exclusively) for “return,” ὑποστρέφω (hypostrephō /hoo po STREH foe/). By itself, the word is not spectacular in any way. Every time Luke uses the word in Luke-Acts (32 times of 35 total occurrences of the word in the NT), it refers to actual physical movement from one place to another. Only Peter, in 2 Peter 2:21, uses the word in a figurative sense, and that negatively, referring to those who “turn their backs on the sacred command.” Keep that in mind, because this passage becomes important a little later in this discussion. The word is only used three times of Jesus returning; most of the other occurrences refer to people returning home, returning to Jerusalem, or returning to Jesus to give a report or to give thanks. Again, nothing spectacular in any of this, but it does suggest that Jesus and his followers never sat still for too long and that there was a lot of activity around him.

This has something to say about what the ministry of local congregations should look like. Congregations that are buzzing with activity through the week, whether in the church building, in the homes of its members, or in popular meeting places like Panera’s or Starbuck’s, are making a difference in the lives of people. In Luke 9:10, the Gospel writer records that the 12 apostles (as long as we’re talking about frequently used words, the number “12” occurs 6 times in Luke 8–9 referring to 4 different entities) “returned and reported to [Jesus] what they had done.” I’m getting ahead of my reading schedule a bit by citing this next verse, but it reflects the same principle: In Luke 10:17, when the 72 return from their mission (similar to the mission of the 12), they report to Jesus that “the demons obeyed us in your name.” What would Sunday morning or small group be like if, each time we returned, we told what the Lord was doing in and through us? What would the dynamic of your small group look like if you not only did a Bible study, but just shared about the great things God is doing for you? Our congregation occasionally shows video testimonies of how God is working in the lives of his people. That has had a powerful impact on those seekers who are looking for a meaningful connection to the body of Christ. So when you return to church or small group or Sunday school class each week, share something good that God has been doing in your life, not just the prayer requests for your concerns.

The beautiful thing about doing word studies like this is that one can make many serendipitous discoveries along the way. One of the questions I asked myself as I began looking at ὑποστρέφω was, “What other words are used for ‘return’ in the NT?” I checked Louw & Nida’s Greek-English Dictionary Based on Semantic Domains for all the Greek words that carry the idea of “return” in their use in the NT. I found a handful of words that, in a few instances, carried the same idea as ὑποστρέφω and together occurred fewer times in the NT than ὑποστρέφω. But one related word stood out, ἑπιστρέφω (epistrephō /eh pee STREH foe/ ‘turn’, ‘return’, ‘turn back to’). Half of the 36 occurrences of this word in the NT are found in Luke-Acts (he does like to corner the market on word usage!). Of those 36 occurrences, 21 of them refer to “repentance” and turning to God, or in a couple cases just the opposite, turning back to the ways of the world. Of Luke’s 18 uses of the word, 12 (there’s that number 12 again!) have the sense of turning or returning to the Lord, often with the idea of repentance present in the immediate context. I mentioned the lone figurative use of ὑποστρέφω in 2 Peter 2:21 above. One of the negative uses of ἑπιστρέφω follows on the heels of that in 2 Peter 2:22, where Peter quotes Proverbs 26:11: “A dog returns to its vomit.” This exemplifies the acts of negative repentance to which the word refers (see also Galatians 4:9).

So how do I tie this all together? Simple. When we return (ὑποστρέφω) to church or small group each week, let’s tell others about the great things God is doing for us, so the world will see that we don’t just come to have needs met and prayers answered. When the world sees that dynamic relationship that we have with God, and that a relationship with him can be about more than just having needs met, they will return (ἑπιστρέφω) to God and join in the great kingdom experience. How much more vibrant would our service and worship be if we adopt this attitude! And in keeping with the sense of παραχρῆμα, let’s not waste any time getting it done!

Εἰρήνη! (Peace!)

March 20, 2011

“Why Have You Forsaken Me?” (Mark 15:34 par. Psalm 22:1)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Christology,Greek,Mark Gospel of,Old Testament,Psalms — Scott Stocking @ 8:40 am

In Mark 15:34 (parallel Matthew 27:46), Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (the Aramaic version is given in the text: ʾEloi, ʾEloi, lama sabachthani; Hebrew:אֵלִ֣י אֵ֭לִי לָמָ֣ה עֲזַבְתָּ֑נִי
ʾEliy, ʾEliy, lamah ʿăzăbtāniy; Greek: Ὁ θεός μου ὁ θεός μου, εἰς τί ἐγκατέλιπές με; ho theos mou ho theos mou, eis ti enkatelipes me?). Jesus is quoting Psalm 22:1 [22:2 MT, LXX] here, but is he quoting it in utter despair? Having just finished reading The Screwtape Letters, I learned again that despair is probably the worst sin with which Satan can tempt us. But we know Jesus did not give into sin, not even the sin of despair. So why does he quote it on the cross, in the hour of his greatest pain?

If you read all of Psalm 22, you will find many parallels to the negative and agonizing aspects of the crucifixion event. In 22:7, we see the mocking (Mark 15:20, 31), insulting (ὀνειδίζω oneidizō; Hebrew is literally: ‘open wide their lips’; Mark 15:29, 32), and shaking of heads (Mark 15:29). In Psalm 22:15, David prophesies, “My mouth is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth.” Jesus sums that up in John 19:28 (the only one to record this) when he says “I am thirsty.” Psalm 22:16 is explicit: “They pierce my hands and my feet” (although there is a variant reading here; see TNIV footnote). The casting of lots to divide Christ’s clothes (Psalm 22:18) is referenced by all four Gospel writers (Mark 15:24, Matthew 27:35, Luke 23:34, John 19:23–24). Psalm 22:24 hints at Isaiah’s suffering servant, especially Isaiah 53. The final verse of Psalm 22 (v. 31) has the declaration, “He has done it!” That sounds very much like John 19:30: “It is finished.”

My point in citing all these is that Jesus quotes Psalm 22:1 not because he is in despair, but because he wants to call attention to the entire Psalm. (Matthew does something similar when he quotes Isaiah 7:14 about the virgin being with child; he is bringing to his readers’ attention the whole prophetic, messianic narrative of Isaiah 7–12.) Psalm 22 is also filled with great hope. It has many positive statements in it that would have served to encourage and strengthen Christ in his final moments on the cross: vv. 4–5 speak of deliverance and salvation; vv. 9–10 speak of God’s closeness throughout life; vv. 11 and 19–20 are pleas for God to stay near and bring rescue in times of trouble; vv. 22–31 look forward to the proclamation of the Gospel message.

Christ gave it all for our salvation. Even when we think we have it bad, look at the example of Christ on the cross, who, in the face of death, did not consider himself forsaken, but held on to the promise of help and deliverance of Psalm 22.

Other Tidbits from the Crucifixion Stories

As I was checking parallel Gospel accounts, I happened to notice in John 19:23 that Jesus’ undergarment was woven in one piece, “from top to bottom,” so the soldiers did not want to tear (σχίζω schizō) this as they did the rest of his clothes. Similar language is used when the curtain of the temple is torn (σχίζω
again) “from top to bottom,” although Mark and John use different words for “bottom.”

Mark records in 15:47 that Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses both saw the tomb where Jesus had been placed by Joseph of Arimathea. This is an important apologetic element, as “every testimony is established by two or three witnesses.” Someone had to have seen where Jesus was placed to know the tomb had indeed been miraculously vacated.

One more thing (not “finally,” because there is so much more I could say): I find it interesting that when the soldiers mock Jesus before taking him to Golgotha, they beat him on the head (Mark 15:19) with a reed (καλάμος kalamos). In 15:36, the same word is used of the stick on which they place the sponge to offer Jesus one last drink. Is it possible that was the same stick or reed? Things that make you go “hmm.”

Peace!

February 21, 2011

Mark 1: More on “For the Forgiveness of Sins”

Filed under: Acts,Baptism of Jesus,Biblical Studies,Christology,Christology,forgiveness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Leviticus,Mark Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Repentance — Scott Stocking @ 6:36 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

February 20, 2011

 It seems odd that just a little more than 1/8th of the year is already gone, but I only just finished the first book of the NT. In fact, according to my reading plan, I will be in the Gospels until almost the end of June, and then I won’t be done with Acts until the middle of August. Some of you have sent some special requests, and I will address those as I’m able. School kicks into full gear this week for me. I’m teaching two online classes now, followed by one online class after that.

 (Just in case you missed it, I had a bonus blog entry last Thursday on the “sleeping saints.” Please check it out when you have time.)

 I spent the last two days poring over Mark 1. One of the first things I noticed is how, when Mark begins the story with Jesus’ immersion by John the Immersing One ([ὁ] βαπτίζων, ho baptizōn, a participle verb form), he (through divine inspiration???) uses some of the very language that Matthew used at the end of his story with Jesus.

 Last week’s entry highlighted the phrase εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν (eis aphesin hamartiōn ‘into the forgiveness of sins’) and its use in both Matthew 26:28 in connection with the blood of Jesus and Acts 2:38 in connection with repenting and being immersed. Peter did not pull that connection out of his exegetical magic hat.

 Mark 1:4 uses the same phrase in connection with John’s immersion ministry. Mark says that John was “preaching an immersion of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” In the next verse, Mark says that people were coming to John to be immersed in the Jordan “confessing their sins.” Then in verse 8, Mark makes a statement that has been one of the sources of the debate surrounding the efficacy and signification of immersion. John the Immersing One says, “I am immersing you in water, but he [Jesus] will immerse you in the Holy Spirit.”

I use the word “but” there, because that is how most English translations render it. But this “but” (δε de in Greek) is considered to be a “weak” conjunction. It is not as powerful as καί (kai ‘and’, ‘also’), but when it can be used as a disjunctive, it is not as powerful as ἀλλά (alla ‘but’). The latter usually indicates a complete or emphatic break. But δε is often used to connect actions that happen in sequence. The primary example of this is Matthew’s use of  δε in his opening genealogy: “Abraham was the father of Isaac; then Isaac was the father of Jacob” and so on.

So when Mark records John using δε with respect to the signification of how Jesus will “immerse” us, he is not saying that his own “baptism of repentance” will be null and void once Jesus starts immersing. In some respects, John could be making a play on words here. But John (and Mark) could also be looking forward to Acts 2:38. (We shouldn’t ignore the fact that Peter and Mark were close companions in the early days of the church, so there is most likely some of that influence represented here, but Luke’s objectivity in Acts makes any possibility of collusion for Mark to redact John’s words to support Peter’s message or to match Matthew’s wording unlikely.)

The bottom-line translation or interpretation here is this: John says, “I am immersing you in water, then he [Jesus, when he immerses you] will immerse you in the Holy Spirit.” John 4:1–2 indicates that Jesus’ disciples continued John’s immersion ministry, although Jesus himself apparently never immersed anyone in water. Additionally, John indicates later in his Gospel that Jesus will send the Holy Spirit after his death, so Mark’s words indeed do look forward to Peter’s declaration in Acts 2:38.

Other notes on Mark 1.

The word εὐθὺς (euthys ‘immediately’) occurs 11 times in chapter 1 and 41 times in the entire Gospel. One of the early lessons I learned in seminary was the urgency with which Mark presented the good news: Jesus couldn’t wait to get the word out.

Jesus casts out (ἐκβαλλω ekballō) many demons in Mark 1. But what I found interesting is that this same word describes what the Holy Spirit did to Jesus when he “sent him out” into the wilderness to be tempted (vs. 12). Mark also uses that word later in the chapter when Jesus “sent away” the cleansed leper and warned him not to speak. The point is that the word has diverse usage: it’s not only used to cast off evil things or entities. But it is a little stronger than simply using the more common words for “come” or “go.”

One last point regarding the cleansing of the leper: it is significant, I think, that the word for “cleanse” (καθαρίζω katharizō) is used rather than the word for “heal” (θεραπεύω therapeuō) in Mark 1:40-45. Healing would have only involved the physical or even emotional scars or wounds. But cleansing took healing to a whole new level. Jesus not only healed the leper, but he made the leper socially acceptable by removing the stigma of his uncleanness. (See Leviticus 14:1–32 where Moses describes the procedure for making an offering for being cleansed of leprosy.)

As we go about our respective ministries, may we offer that same cleansing and acceptance to those who need the restorative power of the good news of Jesus.

Entering Heaven Difficultly (Matthew 19)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ephesians,Eschatology,Greek,Luke Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 5:18 pm
Tags: , , , ,

January 30, 2011

It seems like Sunday is the only time I have to blog on reading through the Greek New Testament, so I’ll just call this the Sunday Morning Greek Blog.

I could say much about Jesus’ discussion of divorce in the first part of Matthew 19, but I think I’ll wait until my own divorce is finalized and well behind me.

However, I did discover something interesting today about Jesus’ encounter with the rich young man in the last part of Matthew 19. Now I am neither rich nor young, but having landed a new job that pays better than any job I’ve had before, I should probably start paying better attention to teachings about wealth.

The thing that struck me most about my reading today was how the Greek text records Jesus’ answer to his disciples about how difficult it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. The English translations usually say something like, “It is difficult for a rich man/person to enter the kingdom of heaven.” This makes it sound like the main verb is “to be difficult” and “to enter” is an infinitive that completes the thought of the main verb.

But this is not the way it is written in Greek. The actual phrase in Greek (for my Greek geek friends) is πλούσιος δυσκόλως εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν, which translated literally would read “[a] rich one difficultly will enter into the kingdom of heaven.” The main verb here is the verb εἰσερχόμαι (“I enter”), which is used as a future tense form here (εἰσελεύσεται, “[he/she] will enter”). The word for “difficultly” (δυσκόλως) sounds a bit awkward for English, but I use it here to emphasize that the word is an adverb, which means it modifies or describes the action of the verb. (Remember “Lolly, Lolly, Lolly, get your adverbs here!)

Jesus says the rich “will enter the kingdom of heaven” (this is not to say that being rich is the only or any kind of qualification for entering the kingdom of heaven!), but they will do so with difficulty. Jesus doesn’t condemn wealth here; he just wants to make sure we have the proper attitude toward wealth. In vs. 24, when he says it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (a real sewing needle, not a narrow gate as some have tried to purport) than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven, his disciples ask, “Who then can be saved?” Think about that for a minute. Jesus tells them the rich enter with great difficulty, then they ask “Who then can be saved?” as if they think the nonrich can’t be saved!

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but that seems to reveal to me an attitude about prosperity in that day. Jesus did much of his ministry among the poor and oppressed, but he did not shy away from confronting (or in this case, reaching out to) the prosperous either. Could it be that the masses flocked to Jesus because the poor thought they had no hope for eternity? Even after all this time with Jesus, did the disciples still think salvation was something only for the prosperous?

Salvation is for all, rich or poor. Prosperity teachers need to sit up and take note here: When you tell your flock that God can make them rich, you might want to include this passage so they know the trouble they’re in for!

Again, this is not to say wealth is bad. I like Ephesians 4:28: “Those who have been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need.” Luke 16:9 is even more compelling: “Use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.” Wealth is a blessing, and if we use it to bless others, I think we discover a new type of neighborly love.

Scott Stocking, M.Div.

How to Calm a Great Storm (Matthew 8)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,Hope,Life of Christ,Mark Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,Miracles,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 4:59 pm
Tags: , , ,

From January 16, 2011

Just few observations on some things I noticed in Matthew 8 earlier in the week.

 The “great storm” (σεισμός μέγας, seismos megas) of vs. 24 becomes a “great calm” (γαλήνη μεγάλη, galēnē megalē) in vs. 26 after Jesus rebukes the wind. The dynamically equivalent TNIV renderings of “furious storm” and “completely calm” for these two phrases are adequate, but they don’t reveal to the English-speaking reader that the same word was used to describe both storm and calm.

 Another thing I found interesting is that the story (pericope for my theologically minded friends) of the calming of the storm at sea is juxtaposed to the healing of the demon-possessed Gadarenes in 8:28-34. In the calming of the sea story, The disciples are afraid, and perhaps rightly so, that their lives are in danger in the storm. But Jesus’ presence should have strengthened them: that’s why he “says” to them (it is significant, I think, that he does not “rebuke” them as he does the storm) that they have “little-faith” (one word in Greek) and are “cowards.”

 Contrast that with the fate of the herd of pigs, who, when possessed by the demons cast out of the Gadarenes, ran off into the sea and drowned. The sea was already a place of superstition, but now the disciples had witnessed a herd of unclean animals drown in the sea. How did this affect them?

 In 9:1, (contrast 8:23), Matthew says that only Jesus got back into the boat and crossed back to Capernaum. There is no mention of the disciples getting in the boat with him this time. Even after witnessing Jesus calm the storm at sea, they were still (evidently) skittish about getting back in the boat with Jesus. In Mark’s version of the story (Mark 5), the healed demoniac does want to get in the boat with Jesus when he crosses over, but there is still no indication that the disciples did, although they had apparently caught up to him by Mark 5:31 (see also Luke 8 where the story follows a similar pattern to Mark’s account).

 How many of us have seen the great works of God yet are still afraid to go forward in faith? I know I’ve been cowardly a time or two (okay, many times), but I pray that each of us would have the strength, faith, and courage to go forward and to share boldly the good news of Jesus with those around us.

Peace!

Matthew 7: Narrow Gates and Good Fruit

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Eschatology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Repentance — Scott Stocking @ 4:55 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

From January 9, 2011.

Wow, a great morning in Matthew 7. Here are just a few things I discovered.

Jesus speaks of “the narrow gate” (τῆς στενῆς πύλης, tēs stenēs pulēs) in Matthew 7:13-14. Verse 14 is where things get interesting, however. Jesus uses the same words to describe the gate in vs. 14, but the NIV, TNIV, and, surprisingly, the NAS all cloud the issue here. Additionally, those three versions shift the translation “narrow” to a different word (a verb), θλίβω (thlibō), in vs. 14. That word means “to be hard pressed or persecuted.” I think the ESV, which tends to be more literal, gets closer to the sense: <span>”Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” “Hard” still seems a bit too soft, however (note the irony), but I suppose if the translators had said, “the way that leads to life is persecuted,” we would be less inclined to read our Bibles.

The next passage about the tree and its fruit has some interesting features as well. The NIV, TNIV, and NAS all repeat the words “good” and “bad” as if Jesus spoke the same Greek/Aramaic words for their respective occurrences. But when Jesus speaks of the “good” tree, he uses the word ἀγαθός (agathos), which typically, but not always, means “good” with moral implications in the NT. The word used to describe the “good” fruit is καλός (kalos), which can have a moral sense to it, but also has aesthetic implications as well (e.g., “beautiful”). I would say a good translation of the first part of vs. 17 is, “The tree that has been properly tended produces healthy, delicious fruit.”

The second part of that verse has similar issues with the word “bad.” Of the tree, Jesus uses the word σαπρός (sapros), which implies “rotten” or “unwholesome” (see Eph 4:29 for the latter). But of the fruit, Jesus uses the typical word for “evil,” πονηρός (ponēros). There is another word for “bad” in the Greek (κακός, kakos) that seems to be an antonym for agathos, but it is not found in this passage. So the latter half could read, “The rotten tree produces evil fruit.” Jesus doesn’t beat around the bush (or the tree) with this one. He jumps straight to judgment of those who aren’t producing healthy fruit.

Matthew 12:33-34 adds to this teaching as well. In a similar passage there, Jesus uses kalos and sapros to speak of both the tree and the fruit, but in 34, when he applies the analogy to his listeners, he uses agathos and ponēros to describe them.

Scott Stocking, M.Div.

A Truly Open Communion?

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Communion/Eucharist,Ecclesiology,Evangelism,Greek,Mark Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 1:40 pm
Tags: , , ,

Today is President’s Day, so I have the day off and the opportunity to record some of my thoughts in writing again. Today, I read Mark 2, and God reminded me of an issue that is very close to my heart. I realize I may stir up a hornet’s nest with this as well, but here it goes.

In Mark 2:13–17, Jesus calls Levi (aka Matthew) from his tax collector booth to follow him. Levi takes Jesus home and organizes a meal for him and many other “tax collectors and sinners.” Mark tells us in this pericope (puh RIK uh pee; fancy theological word for “story”) that Jesus already had a large following, including the Scribes and Pharisees, who were criticizing his every move.

True to form, the Scribes and Pharisees question Jesus’ disciples (note they don’t ask Jesus directly): “Why does he [Jesus] eat with tax collectors and sinners?” But Jesus, always in the know, calls them on the carpet: “The strong have no need of a doctor, but those having sickness [do]. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Here is the question I have that gets at the heart of something I’ve been studying for the past few years: If Jesus calls sinners to himself and eats with them, if Jesus broke bread at the Last Supper with a table full of betrayers and deserters, if Jesus can feed 5000 men in addition to the women and children with just a few loaves of bread and some fish, why do many churches officially prohibit the Lord’s Table (communion, Eucharist) from those who are not professed Christ-followers, or worse, from those professed Christ-followers who are struggling with sin or divorce or other problems? (The latter tends to happen in congregations that have a very legalistic or ritualistic view of communion/Eucharist; some Catholic traditions deny the Eucharist to the divorced.)

Our Sunday school class just finished a series of lessons on the Good Samaritan and how that story should call us to social justice in many areas that the contemporary church ignores. Our final lesson yesterday was on loving the forsaken. I asked myself this same question during the video portion of the lesson, but didn’t get to raise the issue in class. Are we neglecting an opportunity for the Lord to minister to the lost by restricting communion?

Think about it: Jesus knows his disciples will betray him and desert him, yet he still offers up his blood “for the forgiveness of sins.” Jesus, the one who healed us by his stripes, says the sick need healing. In Evangelicalism and the Stone Campbell Movement, vol. 2, John Mark Hicks tells the true story of an 18th-century Scottish preacher who, when approached by a “seeker” who asked if she could take communion, told her, “Tak’ it; it’s for sinners.”

The bread and the cup are a signification (there I go using that word again) of the salvation we have in Jesus. How healing would it be for sinners, the disenfranchised, the prisoners, the divorced, etc., to “taste and see that the Lord is good” by partaking in that salvation event for themselves? This is not to say that taking communion saves you in the same way that I have spoken of immersion in my previous notes, but it does prefigure that salvation event for the one seeking forgiveness and restoration.

And it is, after all, the Lord’s Table, not ours, so who are we to uninvite those whom the Lord has invited?

I can’t speak for other congregations, but I would like to encourage my friends, especially my pastor friends, to rethink how they understand and present the Lord’s Table to their respective congregations and to those to whom they are ministering. The Lord’s Table is a powerful evangelistic element of our services, and as such, it should be completely open to all, regardless of their faith profession or background.

« Previous Page

Website Powered by WordPress.com.