Theology of Salvation Archives - Page 12 of 35

Yesterday we look at the context of Romans 3 to see that Paul is not teaching Total Depravity or total inability in Romans 3:9-20. Today we want to take a closer look at Romans 3:10-12 to see what Paul is really teaching in these verses. We argued briefly that Romans 3 is part of an “epistolary diatribe” against an imaginary objector.

Of course, even if one does not accept the idea that Romans is an “epistolary diatribe,” the point of Romans 3:9-20 is still the same.

In either case, Paul is saying that Jewish people have traditionally thought that as God’s elect, they existed in a privileged position before God. In a sense, Jewish people believed God needed them to carry out His plan and purposes for the world, and so even if they sinned and fell away from Him, He would eventually rescue and redeem them so that His promises to them could be fulfilled. One of Paul’s points in Romans 1–3 and 9–11 is that this is not necessarily so.

Paul Quotes from the Hebrew Bible to Prove His Point

Paul’s collection of quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in Romans 3:10-18 is intended to show his readers that despite being the chosen people of God and having the Law and the Prophets, the Jewish people are just as guilty as the Gentiles.

Paul’s point in Romans 3:9-20 is that if the Jewish people did have a privileged position by virtue of having the “oracles of God” (Romans 3:2), then these oracles of God condemn them all as sinners, which puts them right back on equal footing with the Gentiles. Paul defends this point by quoting numerous texts from the Hebrew Scriptures which condemns them all as sinners.

Of course, Paul is not at all denying that Gentiles are sinners. To the contrary, he states in Romans 3:9 that “all” Jews and Greeks are under the power of sin. But Paul is not intending to make a statement about the universal Total Depravity of mankind. Instead, his point is that when it comes to being in right standing before God, Jews are on the same footing as Gentiles. Whatever Jews want to say of Gentiles is also true of Jews. To prove his point, Paul quotes numerous texts from the Hebrew Scriptures (Rom 3:10-18). Laurence Vance is absolutely right when he says this about Paul’s point in Romans 3:

Paul, in establishing the universal guilt of both Jews and Gentiles (Romans 3:1, 9), quotes from the Old Testament to give weight to his arguments, not to charge each individual of the human race in particular with every indictment, nor to teach the inability of the unregenerate man to believe on Jesus Christ. There is a difference between establishing the universal depravity of man and charging individual men with sins (Vance, Other Side of Calvinism, 229).

Paul Quotes from Psalm 14 (cf. Psalm 53)

It is important to note that Romans 3:10-12 are quotations from Psalm 14:1-3 (cf. also 53:1-3). Many modern people like to say that Psalm 14 and 53 are condemning atheists when the Psalmist says, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”

But in the Psalmist’s day, there was no such thing as atheism. Everybody believed in a God or gods. There were, however, many people who chose to live “godless” lives, that is, to live for themselves and not serve God. They believed that God existed, but they chose to not obey Him or follow His commands. It is this sort of person that the Psalmist has in mind in Psalm 14:1 (cf. 53:1).

Therefore, the rest of the statements in Psalm 14 describe this sort of person. Psalm 14 then, is not a chapter describing the Total Depravity of all people everywhere throughout time, but rather, the specific behavior of the people who choose to live with no regard for God in their lives.

Some argue from Psalm 14:7 that this Psalm was written during Israel’s captivity, and so those who live without regard for God are the foreign captors who worship their own god but do not accept or believe in the God of Israel.

However, if this were the case, Paul would not be able to quote from Psalm 14 as a way to show that the Jews were just as guilty as the Gentiles. It seems better to understand Psalm 14 as a Psalm which calls to account those Jewish people who turned away from worshipping the God of Israel after being taken into captivity. Maybe they started worshipping foreign gods, or maybe they just decided to live without any god whatsoever.

Either way, note what the Psalmist says about these people. He does not say that they were born this way, or that they have always been this way. No, the Psalmist specifically says that they have become this way. He writes that they have “turned aside … become corrupt” (Psalm 14:3). These Jewish people have chosen to abandon the worship of the God of Israel, and have turned aside into corruption and sin.

Poetic Hyperbole in Psalm 14

Furthermore, when the entirety of Psalm 14 is read, it becomes obvious that the Psalmist is using poetic hyperbole to describe the sin into which God’s people have fallen. Just like most poets, those who wrote the Psalms often used exaggerated imagery to make their point. This is true of the author of Psalm 14 as well.

For example, Psalm 14:4 says that the workers of iniquity “eat up my people as they eat bread.” They are not literally eating God’s people; they are not cannibals. No, this is an exaggerated and poetic way of saying that these people who live without regard for God are misusing, abusing, and destroying God’s people. So also with the rest of the Psalm.

The Psalmist is not saying that these people can never do any good whatsoever at all. No, he is using poetic hyperbole to point out the error of their ways. It is likely that Paul understands this, and has the same point in mind. His quotation from Psalm 14 is not a statement about the total depravity of mankind, but a statement about how Jews too have fallen into sin, just like the Gentiles.

Ultimately, as Paul states, “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). While Romans 3 does not teach Total Depravity, it does teach universal sinfulness.

People Can (and do) Seek God

Romans 3:11, often thought to be a statement about the total inability of mankind, is also balanced by the fact that it comes from the exaggerated statements of Psalm 14, and is further balanced by the numerous statements in the Bible which says that humans can and do seek God (1 Chr 16:11; 2 Chr 11:16; Lam 3:25; Isa 55:6-7; Jer 29:13; Amos 5:4).

Furthermore, it is critical to remember that one does not gain eternal life by seeking God, but by believing in Jesus Christ (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47), which all people can do, for along with humanity’s ability to seek God, Jesus seeks after people (Matthew 18:11; Luke 19:10), and in doing so, calls on all to believe in Him for eternal life. Many do not seek God, not because they cannot, but because they are proud and refuse to seek him (Psalm 10:4).

So by way of summary, Romans 3:9-20 does not teach Total Depravity or total inability.

While the chapter can be used to teach the universal sinfulness of humanity, the real point of this section of Paul’s letter is to show that the Jewish people are on equal footing before God with the Gentiles.

There is no privileged position before God, not special status as God’s chosen people. Jewish people are sinful just like Gentile people. Both are equally in need of God’s righteous deliverance, which He offers freely to all through Jesus Christ.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Is Paul teaching Calvinism in Romans 3:10-12?

By Jeremy Myers

4 Comments

Of all the various texts used to defend the Calvinistic teaching on Total Depravity, Romans 3:9-20 is one of the most popular (another being Ephesians 2:1-3). Rather than quote the entire passage, a few select verses from the beginning of this section are representative of the whole.

As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one” (Romans 3:10-12).

It is not difficult to see why these texts are popular among Calvinistic defenders of Total Depravity. The text clearly teaches that nobody is righteous or does any good, which sounds like Total Depravity, and that nobody understands or seeks after God, which seems to infer total inability.

Below are a few quotes from Calvinists on Romans 3:9-20.

The text … moves in a remarkable way from the general to the specific. Not only does it say there is none righteous, but it says there is none who does any good, no, not one. We are not considered unrighteous because the dross of sin is mixed together with our goodness. The indictment against us is more radical: in our corrupt humanity we never do a single good thing (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 120).

According to Romans 3, no one unaided by God 1) has any righteousness by which to lay a claim upon God, 2) has any true understanding of God, or 3) seeks God (Boice and Ryken, Doctrines of Grace, 79).

Romans 3:9-10 does not teach Total Depravity

Despite these sorts of statements from Calvinists, Romans 3:9-20 does not actually teach either Total Depravity or total inability. While Romans 3:9-20 does teach that all are sinners (cf. Romans 3:23), the overall context of this passage must be understood in light of the progression of Paul’s argument if we are to grasp his point.

In other words, though this passage does seem to defend both Total Depravity and total inability when quoted out of context, when studied in its context the passage teaches something else entirely (See Campbell, The Deliverance of God).

To fully grasp the argument, a complete analysis of Paul’s entire letter would be necessary. But since that is impossible to do here, let me try to just point out a few of the highlights.

Romans Is Not about How to Go to Heaven When you Die

First of all, it is critical to note that the overall message of Romans is not about justification or how to receive eternal life. In other words, Romans is not primarily directed toward unbelievers. Instead, the message of Romans is primarily directed toward believers, and specifically, how they can live and function as followers of Jesus who live according to the gospel of Christ (Romans 1:16-17).

In Romans, “Salvation” is about Deliverance from the Temporal Consequences of Sin NOW

Related to this, it is important to note that “salvation” in Romans is not about how to go to heaven when you die, but about the salvation (or deliverance) that God provides to believers.

Lots of people think that Romans is just about how “unsaved” people can get “justification” so they can go to heaven when they die. But this approach to Romans doesn’t really know what to do with Romans 9–11 when Paul seems to suddenly switch gears and start talking about God’s covenant with Israel.

However, if we understand that Paul is primarily writing to believers and instructing them about the deliverance available to them in this life, then Romans 9–11 becomes immediately applicable, for Paul uses the example of Israel to show what happens when God’s people do not live by faith, and as a result, are not delivered.

And don’t think that Paul is threatening believers with hell. Hell is nowhere in Paul’s discussion in Romans (not even in the phrase “the wrath of God”).

So when Paul writes what he does in Romans 3:9-20, he is writing a warning to believers in Rome about becoming proud of their privileged position before God. In this section of Romans, Paul is pointing out that all people are on equal footing before God. There is no privileged position.

In Romans, Paul uses “Epistolary Diatribe” to Make His Point… (What?)

Third, and related to this, it is critical to understand exactly how Paul goes about making his argument. He is using specific rhetorical rules from the first century called epistolary diatribe argumentation.

What does that mean?

Paul didn’t just sit down and write Romans based on whatever he wanted to say. No, in writing Romans, Paul followed a set pattern and structure which was quite common in the first century for when scholars, philosophers, and teachers wanted to refute the ideas of an opponent.

A large part of this diatribe structure involved quoting the ideas and words of your opponent so that you might then turn around and refute them. This means that some of the statements in Romans which have traditionally been attributed to Paul are actually the ideas and statements from an opponent of Paul, whom Paul quotes so that he can then refute those ideas (See Campbell, The Deliverance of God).

So Romans 3 is not exactly a continuation of Paul’s own argument and logic, but rather, a continuation of the argument Paul is having with an imaginary objector.

In other words, Romans 3:9-20 is part of Paul’s rebuttal of an opponent, not a continuation of his own argument. In this way, Paul’s collection of quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in Romans 3:10-18 is intended to show his objector that despite being the chosen people of God and having the Law and the Prophets, the Jewish people are just as guilty as the Gentiles.

Up to this point, Paul’s objector was trying to argue that only the Gentiles were guilty, and that the Jewish people had a privileged status before God. Paul’s point in Romans 3:9-20 is that if the Jewish people did have a privileged position by virtue of having the “oracles of God” (Romans 3:2), then these oracles of God condemn them all as sinners, which puts them right back on equal footing with the Gentiles.

In Romans 3:9-20, Paul defends this point by quoting numerous texts from the Hebrew Scriptures which condemns them all as sinners.

So far, we have only really looked at the context of Romans 3. Tomorrow, we will discuss what Paul is saying in Romans 3. Until then, what do you think about the context of Romans 3 as laid out above? Has anybody read that book by Campbell? What do you think of it?

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

3 Tactics Calvinists Use Against Non-Calvinists

By Jeremy Myers

226 Comments

In my current series on Calvinism, I have had several Calvinists leave comments about their areas of disagreement with what I have written.

I fully expect and invite disagreement. Please … if you are a Calvinist and disagree with what I am writing, let me know, and present your views!

However, I have noticed a trend in the comments that have been left by Calvinists thus far. There seems to be three main tactics or approaches that Calvinists have used in their attempts to defend their ideas and disprove mine.

1. Name Calling

It always surprises me how quickly some Calvinists turn to name calling as a way to defend their ideas. If you are not a Calvinist and seek to teach your views, be prepared to be called a heretic, a reprobate, a mouthpiece of Satan, and a fool. Some Calvinists may simply say that you are stupid, ignorant, or spiritually blind.

When I was in grade-school, I never understood why some kids thought they could win arguments by calling other people names, and I still don’t understand it today.

Very rarely is there any proper place in serious theological discussion for cajoling, slander, vilification, and the mocking of others.

If you are a Calvinist and you believe that I am stupid, ignorant, and the mouthpiece of Satan because I am not a Calvinist, show it by the weight of your exegetical arguments; not by calling me silly names.

2. Scripture Quotations

Along with name calling, Calvinists seem to think that everybody would become a Calvinist if they would just “read their Bible.” I often find that when Calvinists disagree, they think they can settle the argument by telling the person to go “read their Bible.”

Of course, I find this tactic used by many various groups within Christianity. Most people seem to think that what they believe is exactly what the Bible teaches, and if people would read the Bible, they would come to the same beliefs.

What many Calvinists do not seem to grasp is that reading the Bible is one thing; understanding it is another. Even highly educated and well-respected scholars and Bible teachers disagree with each other about the meaning of the text.

Do I read and study the Bible? Of course! I have been reading and studying it for decades. In fact, it is exactly because of my reading and studying that I eventually abandoned Calvinism.

Often, along with inviting non-Calvinists to just “read the Bible,” Calvinists like to type out longs lists of Bible quotes which the Calvinists thinks proves and defends the Calvinistic system of theology.

Their approach goes like this:

You heretic! If you had simply read the Bible, you would know that you are filled with the lies of the devil! Here’s proof:

Bible Quotation 1

Bible Quotation 2

Bible Quotation 3

etc …

In fact, one classic book on Calvinism (The Five Points of Calvinism) contains little else but pages upon pages of Bible quotations.

In a post from several years ago, I referred to this tactic as Shotgun Hermeneutics. Some people seem to think they can win theology debates by simply quoting a lot of Bible verses, as if the other person was not aware of those verses and had never read them in the Bible.

Usually, when Calvinists do this to me, I simply reply with a comment like this:

I am fully aware of all of these verses. I have read them many, many times, and I have deeply studied most of them in the Greek or Hebrew, as well as in their historical, cultural, and grammatical contexts. I simply have a different understanding of these verses than you do, and if you read some of the others posts on this blog, you will learn how I understand those texts you quoted.

Of course, Calvinists think their understanding of Scripture is the only valid one, and part of this is because of their appeals to tradition and authority.

3. Appeals to Tradition and Authority

The final tactic that Calvinists often use to defend Calvinism is with appeals to tradition and authority. Usually, if you disagree with a Calvinist on the meaning of a particular Bible verse, rather than deal with the exegetical evidence that was prevented about the verse, they will say that your understanding is wrong, because it disagrees with what John Calvin, John Piper, or John MacArthur teaches (or some other Calvinist).

I have a book in my library where an extremely popular Calvinist in which he lays and defends the Calvinistic doctrines. When I first read it, I was a Calvinist, but I remember being extremely uncomfortable with how he defended his views. Rather than base his arguments on a detailed analysis of pertinent Scripture texts, he tended to quote St. Augustine (who predated Calvinism), John Calvin, and other prominent Calvinistic theologians.

There is nothing inherently wrong with pointing out that other Bible teachers and scholars agree with your views, but the trouble comes in when some people seem ignorant of the fact that there are many good and respectable Bible teachers and scholars who disagree.

Furthermore, I always find it interesting that Calvinists praise men like Martin Luther and John Calvin for seeking to reform the traditional teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, but then condemn those who want to reform the traditional teachings of the Calvinistic system of theology.

Anyway, even though you can quote a bunch of scholars, authors, and Bible teachers who agree with your perspective, this does not prove that your view is correct.

Main Problem: A Lack of Grace

The main irony or problem with lots of the disagreement that comes from Calvinists is that it lacks grace.

Usually, when a Calvinist engages in the 3 tactics listed above, it is done with a complete lack of grace. I find this most troubling. Why is it that Calvinists, who claim to teach ‘The Doctrines of Grace” are so ungracious when dealing with those who disagree?

If we truly hold to grace, does it not seem that our dealings with others should also be full of grace? I think so.

I know that many non-Calvinists are guilty of the three things above (I fall into them myself sometimes), but what have been your experiences with debating Calvinists? Share in the comments below!

John 15:4-5 Does Not Teach Total Inability

By Jeremy Myers

6 Comments

The teaching of Jesus in John 15 about the vine and the branches is sometimes used by Calvinists to support the idea of total inability, especially when Jesus talks about how without Him, people can do nothing.

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing (John 15:4-5).

Calvinists focus on the statements in these verses that a “branch cannot bear fruit of itself” and that without Jesus “you can do nothing” and claim that these statement prove that people cannot do anything on their own, including believe in Jesus for eternal life.

[Jesus] used the illustration of a grapevine and its branches. In speaking of the inability to do good works, He said: “Just as the branch is not able by itself to bear fruit—unless it abides in the vine—so neither can you unless you abide in me. … Apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:4-5). That’s total inability (Palmer, Five Points, 14-15).

So how can we understand John 15:4-5?

First of all, it is important to note that this chapter is part of the “Upper Room Discourse” of John 13–15. It takes place in the upper room of a house in Jerusalem where Jesus and His disciples shared their last supper together, which was a Passover meal. After the meal, Jesus washed the feet of His disciples (John 13:1-17) and then proceeded to give them some final words of instruction and encouragement.

So when Jesus spoke the words which are recorded in John 15:4-5, Jesus was not speaking to people who did not have eternal life, but to those who did. That is, He was speaking to His disciples, to those who were already regenerate.

Among many other things He told His disciples during the Upper Room Discourse, John 15:1-8 is about how the disciples can be productive and fruitful as followers of Jesus.

He basically tells His disciples that they must not try to engage in ministry on their own strength, but must abide and remain in Him. They must stay attached to Jesus. They must look to Him for guidance, wisdom, and strength.

If they try to work in the world under their own power, they will not get very far. They will accomplish nothing.

The Illustration of the Vine and the Branches

The illustration Jesus uses for this lesson is the vine and the branches.

Just as a branch cannot bear any fruit unless it remains attached to the vine, so also, the disciples of Jesus will not be able to accomplish anything for the kingdom of God unless they remain connected to Jesus by looking to Him for guidance and direction.

So when John 14:4-5 is studied in context, it quickly becomes obvious that these verses have absolutely nothing to do with the inability of unbelievers to do anything.

Jesus isn’t talking about unbelievers at all!

Instead, Jesus is talking to believers, and specifically to His disciples, telling them (and all future disciples as well) that if we want to minister faithfully within the kingdom of God as followers of Jesus, they must abide in Jesus.

That is, they must look to Him for guidance, seek to follow His example, learn to listen to His voice for wisdom, and depend upon Him for strength.

John 15:4-5 is talking about total inability, but not the total inability of unbelievers. Instead, Jesus is teaching about the total inability of disciples to do anything in the Kingdom of God by their own strength and resources.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

John 8:43 does not teach total inability

By Jeremy Myers

3 Comments

Calvinists often refer to John 8:43 as evidence that the mind of the unbeliever is so enslaved to sin and bound to darkness that far from being able to do anything to please God, they cannot even hear or understand the truth of Scripture. Here is what Jesus says:

Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word (John 8:43).

The Context of John 8:43

In the context of this passage, Jesus is chastising some of His Jewish audience for not comprehending His message. He then asks the question about why they do not understand, and His answer is that they do not understand because they are not able to listen to what He is saying.

Since Jesus talks about their inability, this text is a favorite text for the Calvinistic idea of total inability (cf. John 8:47).

However, is this really what Jesus is saying?

Inability to Hear is not Inability to Believe

First of all, it should be pointed out that an inability to hear and understand the message of Jesus is not necessarily the same thing as an inability to believe in Jesus for eternal life.

Nowhere in this chapter does Jesus say that the people to whom He speaks cannot believe. He says they cannot hear, which means they do not grasp, comprehend, or understand the truth of what He is saying.

Inability to Hear was Not Permanent

But even this inability to understand Jesus was not a permanent condition.

The Jewish people to whom Jesus spoke had developed this condition, and in John 8, Jesus warns them about it, inviting them to reject the lies they had come to accept, and believe in Him instead.

The real issue, then, is how they had come to believe the lies in the first place. To understand this, we must understand what had happened during the ministry of Jesus up to this point.

The Inability to Hear Developed Over Time

Jesus had come as the fulfillment of Jewish Messianic hopes, but since Jesus challenged many of the traditional Jewish teachings and traditions and refused to engage in a military campaign against the Romans, many of the Jewish people rejected Him as the promised Messiah (cf. John 1:11; 2:18; 5:31-47; 6:41-42; 7:25-31, 40-44).

The consistent message of Jesus to the Jewish people is that if they continued to reject Him as the Messiah, they would eventually become completely blind to His message and ministry.

As they continued to reject the clear teaching and the accompanying signs of Jesus which proved He was the Messiah, they sank deeper and deeper into darkness (cf. Matt 12:31-45). Along the way, Jesus continued to warn them and plead with them, but they refused to repent and believe.

What this means is that the condition of being unable to understand what Jesus is saying is not something that the Jewish people began with from birth, but is a condition that developed over time as they continued to deny the truth they had heard and ignored the signs they had seen.

Rather than believe the truth about Jesus, they had chosen to believe a lie.

In John 8 and other similar texts, Jesus warned them that although they had made their choices, they were coming to the point where their choices were making them. They had denied the truth about Jesus for so long, they were now at the point where they were completely blind and deaf to the truth when it was presented to them.

This self-deception was not permanent, and could be reversed if only the people who listen to Jesus and believe in Him.

Even in this very chapter, Jesus tells them the truth and invites them to believe (John 8:24, 45-46) before their unbelief become permanent. “From a not wanting to hear develops a not able to hear, an incapacity of giving a hearing to the message of Jesus. Unbelief has become an attitude of life” (Beasley-Murray, John: WBC, 135).

A Calvinist Agrees

Interestingly, one famous Calvinist agrees with this explanation:

Jesus does not say they fail to grasp his message because they cannot follow his spoken word, his idiom, but that they fail to understand his idiom because they cannot “hear” his message. The Jews remain responsible for their own “cannot,” which, far from resulting from divine fiat, is determined by their own desire (theolusin) to perform the lusts (tas epithumias) of the devil (8:44). This “cannot,” this slavery to sin (8:34), itself stems from personal sin (Carson, Divine Sovereignty, 166).

So John 8:43 is not a statement about the lifelong inability of some people to believe in Jesus for eternal life, but is a warning to those who reject the Gospel, continuing instead to deceive themselves.

The longer we reject the truth, the harder it becomes to believe it. Jesus wanted people then (and now) to believe in Him for eternal life so that they did not die in their sins.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Paul Does Not Teach Total Depravity in Romans 3

Paul Quotes from the Hebrew Bible to Prove His Point

Paul Quotes from Psalm 14 (cf. Psalm 53)

Poetic Hyperbole in Psalm 14

People Can (and do) Seek God

Is Paul teaching Calvinism in Romans 3:10-12?

Romans 3:9-10 does not teach Total Depravity

Romans Is Not about How to Go to Heaven When you Die

In Romans, “Salvation” is about Deliverance from the Temporal Consequences of Sin NOW

In Romans, Paul uses “Epistolary Diatribe” to Make His Point… (What?)

3 Tactics Calvinists Use Against Non-Calvinists

1. Name Calling

2. Scripture Quotations

3. Appeals to Tradition and Authority

Main Problem: A Lack of Grace

John 15:4-5 Does Not Teach Total Inability

So how can we understand John 15:4-5?

The Illustration of the Vine and the Branches

John 8:43 does not teach total inability

The Context of John 8:43

Inability to Hear is not Inability to Believe

Inability to Hear was Not Permanent

The Inability to Hear Developed Over Time

A Calvinist Agrees

Theological Study Archives

Bible Study Archives

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!