New Thoughts (06/19/13-07/22/13)
I’ll start with two items which more or less fall into the category of technicalities. The first of these is a matter of choices made in translation. I cannot but notice that the NASB opts to exclude the clause ‘and was taken up into heaven’ in its translation of Luke 24:51. The NET, along with many others, include the clause. That translation also provides the helpful note that there is indeed some question about the authenticity of the clause, as certain of the earliest available manuscripts lack said clause. However, as is noted there, the opening of Acts certainly seems to assume prior knowledge (presumably from having read Luke), which would include knowledge of the Ascension. Note Luke’s reference to this event. “In the first book, Theophilus, I wrote of all that Jesus did and taught up to the day he was taken up” (Ac 1:2).
Well, either Luke expected that Theophilus had heard this from other sources, and would understand it as implied in the close of that first book, or it was stated explicitly in that first book. Given the options, it would certainly seem more reasonable to think Luke had made explicit mention of the fact. So, I am returned to the question of why the NASB opted to drop the clause. And, as I look a bit more closely, I think perhaps I find the answer in that the NASU, the update to that translation has restored the clause without so much as a footnote to suggest any question as to its validity. Looking at a print version of the older text, I see that there is indeed a footnote indicating that some manuscripts support the clause.
So, perhaps it is a question of interpretational method. A strict adherence to some sort of rule requiring a majority of witnesses might indeed lead one to exclude the debated text. Or, perhaps some attempt at textual criticism caused the decision. But, the argument for its inclusion is certainly persuasive, and was apparently sufficient to cause a change of heart when the update was made. Indeed, to call it a change of heart seems an understatement, for we seem to have gone from a note regarding the fact that some manuscript support exists to not even suggesting there’s any debate whatsoever. That being said, I have to say that the NET is far more thorough about noting all such points of translational choice.
Now, I would ask a more fundamental question: This event, the ascension of Christ, His acceptance into heaven, and His being seated on the throne of God, is so climactic an event, so foundational to the understanding of redemptive history, that it seems most odd indeed that so little is said of it. Matthew doesn’t bother to even bring it up. These two, Mark and Luke, speak of it almost in passing. Yes. He ascended. But, the Apostles! They went to Jerusalem ebullient! Indeed, both authors seem to do this shift of focus in the final verse of their separate Gospels. Jesus has ascended, it is true, and now, our attention turns to those He left to continue the work, His ambassadors.
I can certainly understand the need to establish the authenticity of these men, and the Gospels overall have rightly kept the focus on Jesus. In fact, if one were seeking an apologetic for apostolic authority, it could be argued that the Gospels are most unfit for the task. They have consistently shown the apostles as slow to understand, slow to grow. Oh, they’ve had their moments of brilliance, but for the most part, we are given to know their constant need for reproofs and admonitions from their Teacher. And these, He leaves to establish His church? You must be kidding!
So, yes, that the authors take pains to make known the authorization of these ambassadors, in spite of their failings, is quite understandable. But, it still seems a bit odd that they should eclipse this most critical, most powerful of concluding scenes in the ministry of Jesus to do so. It just feels so casual! Mark is characteristically brief. “He was received into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God.” That’s it. Nothing more. No explanation of the significance of that event. No exposition on its impact on those who saw it. Meh. They went to work, it’s true, and it was clear that God was with them in the work. But, that’s it about Jesus. Done.
Luke? Well, “He was carried up into heaven.” Let us accept that as a true and necessary part of his account. I suppose that after the Greek fashion, such a statement might suffice. After all, their mythology had enough of blurring the lines between the divine and the human to make such a concept easily acceptable. But, again: Other than the reaction of the Apostles, their shift from despondency to uncontainable joy, what is made of the fact? Nothing! Did the Greeks and Romans have that same significance to the right hand that the Jew would understand? Actually, it matters little, for Luke doesn’t even mention that part, or that He was enthroned at all. For him, it’s apparently enough to note that Jesus is in heaven. What did Theophilus make of that? What would it mean to him? Was the whole import of Jesus set as One with God encoded into that simple phrase? Was there, perhaps, concern as to how Roman authorities might respond to any greater claim should they intercept the message?
I don’t know. It puzzles me. Yet, here we have two texts (three if we count Matthew), all written under the watchful eye of the Spirit of God Himself, and they all seem to downplay this point. Perhaps the magnificence of the statement is sufficient in itself that no more need be said. Perhaps the design is to catch our attention and cause us to ponder what it all means. That would certainly seem a beneficial exercise, and we have seen, through the teaching ministry of Jesus, that He is not inclined to spoon feed His disciples. So, then, this might well be something of a final lesson from the Master. And, as such, it is fitting that I turn my eyes upon both the content of this lesson and such commentary as we have on it from his star pupils.
To that end, I will focus first upon this matter of the right hand seat. There is much that is wrapped up in the symbolism of the right hand. Linguists will point out that our word sinister derives from this understanding, for the sinister is the left hand, the hand of deception. We might recall Ehud, one of the judges in Israel, who was able to slip his weapon into Eglon’s presence because it was not on the expected side, for Ehud was left-handed. Thus, his sword was under his cloak in the right, where it was not noticed, and he slew the Moabite king by trickery.
For all that, consider our word for one who is correct, is as he ought to be. He is right. Or, concerning the things of God, he is righteous. The same root is there. The same connection to the right hand. This connection goes back to the beginnings. When the twin sons of Joseph are receiving the patriarchal blessing, Joseph is dismayed to note that his father’s right hand is not upon the firstborn, but upon the second. Why? Because the firstborn was expected to receive the prime part of the blessing, which was associated with the right hand. Here we see one aspect of the symbolism behind the right hand. It indicates the first choice, the first lot. And, that first lot is deemed the best.
There remains, however, a much greater symbolism when we are given glimpses of the halls of power, as we are in this instance. We might recall the great concerns as to seating arrangements at feasts and the like. There was the host’s seat at the head of the table, then that seat of honor to his right. The left had its honor, too, but the right was the choice seat. This only echoes the habits of the kings. For the king to seat one at his right hand while he is upon his throne is to mark that man as an equal. This is a critical point for us. That one who is seated (particularly upon a throne of his own) at the king’s right hand is acknowledged by that king as having equal honor, equal authority. This might be afforded to a visiting king from another realm, but not if that realm were a vassal state.
So, then, as Thayer points out, there is a clear message being related in this image. Jesus has “become a partner in God’s universal government.” This is more than saying Jesus is the named successor of the Father. After all, how can there be a successor to an eternal being? When would His reign ever begin? But, it is not a line of succession, it is a partnership, a team of equals, not unlike the Triumvirate which held sway in Rome for a time. Clearly, the equality between Father, Son and Spirit is free of the rivalries that plagued the Triumvirate. But, as concerns authority, we see a striking similarity.
Here is another intriguing comment made about this matter of the right hand, this time from Zhodiates: “By the right hand the whole man is claimed.” That’s a somewhat enigmatic statement, but I think we shall find cause to apply it to this event. There is that sense, coming from the Genesis creation narratives, that to name a person or thing is to have ownership of that which is named. This is seen as the reason it fell to Adam to name the animals. It is certainly a feature that plays into those occasions when God expressly changes the names of one of His people. The foremost examples we have of this, though, are the examples of John the Baptist and his cousin Jesus. In both cases, it was not God changing the name. It was God assigning the name, overruling the paternal privilege. In short, He was informing the fathers of these two men that, “These are mine.”
It seems to me that something of that same aspect is found in what Zhodiates is saying about the right hand. This, I should note, adds a certain something to the significance of a handshake in greeting, might perhaps explain the fierceness of John’s admonition not to so much as greet a false teacher, since such greeting would lend credence to his lies. Now, I don’t know that the handshake as we know it was much to do with greeting practices in that day. I suspect those are a later development. But, think about this when you offer, as we do in this church, the right hand of fellowship. What are we saying? We are saying we accept this person whole-heartedly as a member of the body. We welcome him. It might as easily and correctly be interpreted as indicating that we claim this member for our body.
But, let’s return to this scene in heaven. Jesus has ascended, and taken His rightful seat upon the throne at God’s right hand. This is something more than averring that Jesus is His true Son. He already did that in no uncertain terms. This is something more than declaring His acceptance of the atoning sacrifice His Son offered in Himself. That was declared when Jesus departed the grave. It needed nothing more from Him to make this clear. No, this is something more. This is a proclamation of royal significance. It’s not even proclaiming Jesus the crown prince. It is effectively saying the crown has already passed. Long live the King! But, that is not to say that the Father has stepped down. It is not even to say that Jesus has now, for the first time taken upon Himself the authority of cosmic rule.
Let me amplify that a bit from John’s gospel. There, and fairly early on, really, we hear Jesus speaking to His disciples. They have just heard Him preaching about the eating of His body and drinking of His blood, and many are disturbed to the point of leaving Him over this hard statement. How does Jesus respond? “Does this cause you to stumble? Well, then, how are you going to react if you see the Son of Man ascending to His former place?” (Jn 6:61-62). Here, I would note, we hit another revision in the NASB. The earlier text suggests that verse 62 is almost entirely in question, while the later update puts only the ‘what’ in question, and in this instance, the NET doesn’t even note any controversy at all.
But, I would focus us on this point: It is an ascent to His former place, to ‘where He was before’. Now, we are seeing the event of which He was speaking, and where has He ascended? It’s not just a return to heaven. It’s a return to the throne of heaven. Note that: A return to the throne. Jesus has reigned eternally, just as the Father reigns eternally, and as we must understand that the Holy Spirit reigns eternally. The Triune Godhead is not a creature, that it would need to develop and improve over time. As He is now, He ever was and ever shall be.
This is an understanding that we should have with us when we read that opening line of Psalm 110 which is so often brought up in the New Testament. “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.’” Jesus used this passage to make a point to His adversaries (Mt 22:44), and followed it with a question: If David calls this one ‘Lord’, how can it be supposed that this Lord is David’s son? What’s up with that? After all, to seat this Lord at his right hand is to declare Him an equal, not a successor; a king, not a prince.
So, then, here at the end of the Gospels of Mark and Luke, we are granted to see this Jesus, Whose brief career we have been following, not so much arrived at His goal as returned to His true estate. He was King when Eden was first made. He was King the entire time of His earthly sojourn. He is King now, and He shall be evermore. To His dominion there shall be no end. So, then, what happened? What happened was that, in His death and Resurrection, and in His acceptance back to the Father, the full and complete victory over sin and death had been achieved. Yes, we live in this shadow land, as C. S. Lewis referred to it, in which that full and complete victory does not appear to us in completed form. We have skirmishes left to fight, many of them severe. We still know our defeats. We still encounter death. We still fall into sin. But, we do so with this major difference: We who know our Lord and King, and who, more importantly by far, are known by Him, know also that this defeats we experience are but temporary setbacks, for He reigns! And, with His work upon the cross completed once for all time, He reigns victorious!
Notice how Peter reviews this point in his letter. “He is at God’s right hand, having gone to heaven after all angels, authorities and powers had been subjected to Him” (1Pe 3:22). That leaves nothing that is not subject. Obviously, as is pointed out elsewhere, the Father does include Himself in that subjected population. How could He? It would be as though Jesus were subjecting Himself to Himself, and that is simply nonsensical. No. What is proclaimed in no uncertain terms by these two very brief verses is profound in the extreme in its significance: Jesus is of equal authority with the Father. Behold, the Lord your Gods, He is One! God has made a statement here, and it is one which, because He is unchanging, we need never fear might be revoked or altered. And, as I have noted once before, what is stated of Father and Son in this scene, we must necessarily understand as holding for the Holy Spirit as well.
What are we to do with this? How, as Francis Schaeffer said, shall we then live? Here, in this one we call our friend and Savior, we have the equal of the Father. Here we have God. Never mind God’s equal, we have God. Here, as we profess to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, we proclaim that we are indwelt by God. While we may make distinctions as to the particular role and work of these Persons of the Trinity, it is not as though having the Holy Spirit within is something distinct from having God within. It is not. Likewise, to proclaim love for Jesus, if that love be true, cannot but proclaim that same love for the Father, for the Holy Spirit. If we are thrilled and excited by the Holy Spirit because He is Who He is, then it is not just a longing after light shows, signs and wonders. It is a thrill that would persist were He never to do anything we might construe as out of the ordinary, for it is a thrill not at the spiritual, not at the supernatural, but at God Himself, the wonder of what He has already achieved for us.
I have to say (as I have doubtless said many times these last few years), that with what He has given us by this stunning gift of redemption, it would be a most ungrateful child who came to Him insisting that he be given more. You have been granted Life! You have been granted Righteousness! You have been granted a reprieve from a death sentence you had no hopes of escaping! You have been taken out of your prison uniform and your chains, and dressed with the finest clothes of heaven, that you might take your place at Jesus’ side, having been betrothed to Him, and then to know that wedding fully and eternally consummated! What more do you need, really? What personal favors remain that you feel you simply must have if you are to love this King?
Far more important to me at present, though, is the matter of sanctification as I see it unfolding, or failing to unfold day by day in my own life. Here’s the thing. I can look at this and see with absolute clarity that God the Father has proclaimed this Jesus His equal. It has always been thus, I understand that. But, we have not always understood it to be thus. It needed proclaiming. But, here it is: He is God! He is the Supreme Authority. He is All-knowing, All-powerful, Everywhere-present God. What should that mean for me? Obviously, it should mean that whatever He so much as suggests or hints at ought to be my command, and my top priority. I, who would pray as taught, that His will be done on earth as it is in heaven, must ever remind myself that in heaven, there is never a questioning of His will, never a delay for a more convenient time. Yet, I know myself too willing by far to not only delay obedience, but to ignore His commands entirely if it suits me. (And yet, I complain of a child who treats me in like fashion. Go figure.)
What I see, then, is that I am not unlike the Apostles. They saw what Jesus was doing, and by and large, their response was, “Who is this Man?” They saw Him quell the storms by a word, and were, not too surprisingly, absolutely panicked. They saw Him feed thousands with little more than crumbs. They saw Him take on a man whose demon-possessed strength was the terror of the entire region, a man who broke free of chains by main strength. And Jesus freed that man with a word! Indeed, we see hints that the man was not only freed, but made an instant convert and a rather effective evangelist to boot. How would you respond? “Who is this Man?” What doesn’t obey Him? Wind and sea bow to His word. Demons cringe at His mere presence, and flee at His command. And yet, what about us? We question His every suggestion. We seek to rationalize and codify His teachings so that we, like the Pharisees before us, can pretend we are living up to His demands. It is one thing for us to recognize how wholly and completely we depend upon His inward work to so much as approach compliance. It is quite another to presume upon that inward work, to make no effort of our own.
On that note, I want to consider the response we see from the Apostles, that surprise ending, if you will, that these two authors give us. Luke notes that they returned to Jerusalem ‘with great joy’. Well, yes! Their King was seen enthroned. Messiah was not only real, but He was now proven. Talk about having friends in high places! Nothing was likely to top this! So, certainly they were excited and joyful. But, how did they express this? They were “continually in the temple, praising God.” Continually: The term has that sense of perpetual action, but they were finite beings. It could not be perpetual, though they may will have wished it so. Just as retreats and mountaintop experiences as we call them must come to an end, so this time of rejoicing and praises. There was work to be done, and we learn from Mark that they were just as ‘continual’ in that work as they had been in their praises. They went out everywhere. They preached everywhere. And the Lord Jesus was with them everywhere.
Come back to that continual business. Never mind the perpetual aspect. Consider the ‘lesser’ meaning. They were there, praising God in every condition and every matter. When the Sanhedrin sought to have them imprisoned and killed, still they were there praising God. When Stephen was martyred, still they were praising God. Whatever befell, whether good or ill, they were praising God. That same attitude suffused their preaching. It didn’t matter who was there to listen. It didn’t matter how the message was received. They went and preached. It would seem they had fully internalized the parable of the soils. They did not seek to pick winners and losers in advance like some sort of religious politburo. They did not measure their efforts by numbers, at least not entirely. Oh, yes, there are scenes in the earliest days that do take note of the quantities of immediate conversions added to the Church, but these are not measures of Apostolic success. They are simply seen as yet another of those signs and wonders by which Jesus was marking His involvement in matters.
This is where we need to be. This is where I need to be: Praising God in every condition and for every matter, serving God in every situation, declaring God before every man. I am not there. Sometimes I despair of ever being there, ever getting close. But, I praise God, for it is indeed He Who so works within me as to empower me to will and work for His good pleasure. I do this, as yet, in a painfully imperfect and inconsistent fashion, but I know He is with me. And so, when I am mindful of my station as a sworn bondservant of my King, I do work at my salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12-13), ever knowing I can do nothing without Him (Jn 15:5).
Go back to that early conflict with the Sanhedrin. The church was growing, and the power of God was manifestly present with Peter and friends. Those who sought membership without commitment were being purged, as we see in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. This new faith would not accept hypocrisy. If folks wanted to play at holiness, they could stay with the Pharisees. Those of the Way were seeking holiness for real. And then, we have something of a summary statement, that ‘at the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were taking place’ (Ac 5:12). The sect was growing and the sick were being healed, and the high priest and his group were jealous. More likely, they felt threatened. They had struck down the leader, and thought this upstart sect done with. But, they only showed themselves more valid. What to do? Well, they only knew one approach, so they went with it: Jail the apostles. God, however, wasn’t impressed, and felt no need to endorse their plans, so He set the apostles free, with instructions to get back to preaching, and that in the Temple (Ac 5:20)!
Well! The Sanhedrin was hardly going to stand for this! Amazing though it may seem that they were not more concerned with just how these poor apostles had been able to get out of a locked and guarded prison. I guess if they hadn’t understood what happened with Jesus in the equally locked and guarded tomb, this wasn’t going to get through to them either. But, they haul the apostles back before their little court, and insist that they stop preaching Jesus. What is the response? Peter immediately preaches Jesus to them (Ac 5:29)! Oh, but they were mad, now! They were determined to put the whole crew to death, until Gamaliel gave wiser counsel. If they’re for real, then more fool us for trying to stop them. If they are frauds, then we won’t need to stop them, they’ll fade away of their own accord. So, they flogged the apostles, reiterated their insistence that they stop preaching Jesus, and turned them loose.
How did the apostles respond to this? What a marvelous account they give of themselves! Not in that they wrote down glowing reviews of their behavior, but that their behavior was such that when Luke did his interviews in preparation for this book, the accounts that others gave him of the apostolic response were glowing indeed. “They went from the Council rejoicing to have been found worthy to suffer for the sake of the name of Christ.” But, it doesn’t stop there, and this is where I want my focus: “And every day, in the temple and house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ” (Ac 5:41-42).
Here is the very embodiment of Paul’s later conclusion: “If God is for us, who can be against us” (Ro 8:31)? If this is truly the Son of God, God Himself, that we have been called to serve, and if He is the one calling the shots for us, what opposition could possibly suffice to turn us aside? This is God we’re talking about! Is there a tyrant so terrible that we ought be more concerned for his opinion than God’s? Is there a heathen nation so strong that God could not, at His whim, destroy them from the earth? Really! We have nations around the world cringing at the thought of offending the violently peaceful religion of Islam. We have even those in the Christian community who are more concerned with what might happen by way of retribution from that quarter than the purposes of the One we serve. But, it is God we serve! He whom we know to be ALL powerful, ALL wise, ALL knowing. We proclaim Him as King of all kings, Lord over all lords. Are these but words?
Now, this is no call for pursuit of some holy war. We do not fight against flesh and blood. That was a mistake made in the Middle Ages, that men thought holiness could be found in the battlefield. Maybe, and I’d say it’s a very distant maybe, there is a time when God will call His people to purge the land of the unrighteous, as He called Israel to do. But, I rather think that the time when this may be the case is the time at which our King, our Champion, has come down to see His kingdom established in peace once and for all, that time we envision when we think of Armageddon. Until then, we are to understand that our battle is not with men, but with spirits, principalities, powers of darkness (Eph 6:12).
Jesus came not to destroy but to save. We, as His ambassadors are surely required to abide by His mission. We have no cause to seek the destruction of unbelievers from our midst. Far better that we should so live and so speak and so act as to give entry for belief. The fastest, most excellent way to eliminate unbelief is belief. Faith cannot be forced at gunpoint, whatever the competition may think. Faith that is coerced is no faith at all. Christianity has had long centuries of practice by which to understand this point. They have had their own periods of fallenness in which they thought to coerce others into belief. It failed. They have lived, and continue to live, amongst those who would coerce them into rejecting the Truth of Christ in favor of some other religious system. And, have no doubt about it, even the purportedly scientific atheist movement, even the most dedicated secular humanist, though they insist they believe in no gods, are pushing their gods and insisting that one and all bow to their own particular idols.
Science is not evil. Concern for humanity is not evil. Neither is the Law evil. But, evil found means to twist the Law to its own evil ends. Evil likewise manages to twist science, and even human concern, to its own evil ends. It is not against science we battle, any more than it is against men. It is against that spirit which has inhabited the halls of science, and sought to raise it up as a religion unto itself. It’s against every vain imagination that seeks to exalt itself above the God Who Is. That is precisely why the first apostles were sent out to preach, and not to do violence to the Sanhedrin. Not once do we see them instructed to take the battle to the enemy by main force. No! Go! Preach! Make disciples! Train! Spread! Go forth and multiply! It’s the same command given Adam and Eve, but the methodology differs. And that instruction to the Church has never changed.
And so we have Paul’s instruction to heed and to guide: “If you have been raised with Christ, then keep seeking that which is above. That’s where He is! He is seated at God’s right hand” (Col 3:1). There we are, back at the right hand, and brought face to face with its implications for our own lives. He is enthroned. He is so far and away above all other claimants to power as to make them insignificant. Nations mean nothing in light of Him. Armies mean nothing. Empires mean nothing. Super-powers? He laughs at them. Demonic forces? They scatter like dust in a breeze at the merest exhalation from His nose. This is our King! This is our Commander in Chief. This is our Redeemer.
Yet, we know ourselves stuck in a half-finished work. We know our debt has been paid. We know we have been freed from sin. But, we also know that we daily feel the tug of sin, we daily find ourselves facing the deluge of sin’s enticements. And we know full well that our inclination is to give in. We don’t feel freed. We know we are freed, but we feel like prisoners even yet. We know our enemy is defeated. But, we feel his attacks. We see his attacks. We see a world around us in which it seems as though the darkness is winning and the Light receding. We are hardly the first to feel this way. We are unlikely to bind ourselves the last. But, we might be. We might be.
Here in this place of the now and the not yet, we are in training. We train as we battle the proclivities of these fleshly tents. We do not reject them as evil, we but recognize their fallen condition. And, we seek, by the power of God Who is with us even to the end, to effect such repairs as we may. This human condition, when we see it in ourselves, we contemplate with sorrow, but also with compassionate mercy. Oh, we are grieved that we, who have the very presence of God indwelling, cannot manage to do a better job with godliness. But, it’s our own skin, and we are inclined to forgive ourselves the lapse. After all, though the spirit is willing, the flesh is weak. Our own Master told us as much. And, we can be forgiven if we tend to forget that this is no excuse, really. We can be forgiven if we count too much on being forgiven. Right?
But, don’t you see? Yes, I know you do. That very same perspective is what we ought to be carrying into the field with us. As we consider our own situation, so we must learn to consider the situation for those we encounter. Have our brothers in the church failed us in some way? Well, we can admonish them towards greater effort, but we’d best recognize the same need for greater effort in ourselves. Are we faced with those whose errors seem ever so much more egregious than our own? Is God really sending us to pursue the likes of them? Well, yes, He is. It is the sick, as He noted, who have need of the Physician. It is well and good to educate and encourage growth in those who are already safely encamped, the redeemed will ever have need of further training, and somebody must do the training. But, that training is not the end-goal. It’s the beginning! It’s done so that they in turn may go forth and make disciples; that they in turn might not only go forth and discover the sick and dying where they are, not only bring life and liberty to the prisoners, but also train them up in turn.
The Apostles, finding their Master firmly upon the throne of Creation, were continually in the temple, continually praising God, continually out preaching everywhere and anywhere. Circumstances didn’t matter. Dangers didn’t matter. Successes didn’t matter. Numbers didn’t matter. What mattered was the kingdom of God and its righteousness (Mt 6:33). They had learned from the ways of the Master, and they taught the Way of the Master, and so it has gone age to age ever since. We, who have so benefited from that same Way are likewise obliged to the Master, to not only continue in the Way, but to proclaim the Way, teach the Way, promulgate the Way, come what may. May we in this post-modern western society of the 21st century be faithful to our calling.
Meeting the People - Mark (06/22/13-07/04/13)
Meeting the People - Luke (07/05/13-07/22/13)
