"It's fine for people to believe whatever myths they want but unfortunately they want to make everybody ELSE believe them too!"
Well of course! It's the TRUTH after all! Why, you can't just let a bunch of unbelievers run around free. God knows what trouble they'll be brewing up.
That being said, when was the last time you heard of anyone being taken hostage, tortured, or killed by an extreme, fundamentalist group of agnostics?
They didn't do that because of their atheism, but because of their totalitarian forms of Communism.
Truth be told, and I was quite surprised to find this out when I did, but while there is no one dominant political/world view among atheists/agnostics, the largest political view among them is Ayn Rand Objectivist Libertarianism.
-->
Now see, Cynic, this is but one of the things that you learn when you actually talk to the 'infidels' directly instead of just going by the church's orthodox party line. ... You start to find out what misconceptions you'll unlearn when you do.
And I would posit that in those cases (and even throw in Hitler and Mussolini if you'd like) that the state becomes god and communism (or fascism) is the religion. They even have all the cute little ceremonies, symbols, and rites that "regular" religions have.
And naturally they have that one constant among all religions, the unbending tenet of "My Way or the Highway!"
For those whose view of Jesus is more elevated than "spiritual guy", "didn't exist", or "Jewish Cult Leader" (Imbus, George, Sudo & I can take a break :D-->) was your opinion of who Jesus is formed more from a straight reading of the bible, or from personal experience? Or both? Or maybe a different source?
Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot oversaw statist movements that were based on an economic, social and political worldview that was rabidly and consciously anti-theistic. George does not escape historical facts involving those atheists, their particular states and Marxism's significant and directed anti-theistic scheme by defining devotion to anti-theistic collectivism as merely another form of theism.
*****
As for Danny,
A polemical antichristian named Jim Walker, at the site to which Danny linked, qualified Hitler as a Christian on the basis that "A Christian is simply a person who believes in God and Jesus in some form or manner." ( http://www.nobeliefs.com/HitlerSources.htm )
Such loose a definition of a Christian was made necessary by some statements attributed to Hitler -- the authenticity of which, of course, Walker first attacks -- in which Hitler denounced Paul as, among several things, a falsifier of Jesus' doctrine and a proto-Bolshevik, and characterized Jesus as a populist whose activism was directed against Jewish capitalism.
It is not unusual for non-Christians to claim to be the legitimate followers of Jesus. There are Muslims who enter Christian groups on PalTalk and post that Jesus was a Muslim or that Islam was the religion Jesus taught. Thomas Jefferson preened as a Christian on the basis of professed esteem for Jesus' ethical teachings. Jefferson, however, denied the Trinity and the Virgin Birth of Christ, and denounced Jesus' disciples as fabricators for their accounts of Jesus' miracles. John Dominic Crossan of "The Jesus Seminar" does not openly condemn Jesus when he speaks to the media, but he has rejected the biblical revelation of Jesus and has offered his alternative version -- all speculatively construed and made palatable to impenitence and unbelief.
Walker's question, "If Hitler did not see himself as a Christian, then why doesn't he condemn Jesus?" could be used in support of an argument that Muslims who speak flattering words about Jesus are self-consciously Christian.
Christianity is a strong religious, social and intellectual reality that some false religionists, some tyrants, some revolutionaries and some peddlers of apostasy have faced with platitudes and redefinition rather than with direct public opposition. Rather than overtly deride Jesus and risk provoking too-immediate a response from Christians, some will get up and say a few positive words about Jesus and invoke a redefined version of him. They utterly reject him, however, in their rejection of and/or variance from the biblical revelation of who he is.
I'm no Hitler scholar, but Hitler's ultimate commitment seems to have been to some grotesque illusion he held concerning himself.
quote:P.S., oh, and spare me the TWI-approved 'lack of peace' tripe please. I'm doing just dandy in the peace dept., thank you very much; its just that I don't think that 'having peace in my life' has to include blithely whitewashing Der Wierwille's reputation, and goosestepping to his Neo-nazi swill.
Let me get this straight. You're still ....ed at me for stuff I posted on other threads, and you throw them in my face out of context, and you call this having peace? Interesting.
quote: Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot oversaw statist movements that were based on an economic, social and political worldview that was rabidly and consciously anti-theistic. George does not escape historical facts involving those atheists, their particular states and Marxism's significant and directed anti-theistic scheme by defining devotion to anti-theistic collectivism as merely another form of theism.
Frankly, I think that you're endeavoring to get a lot more mileage out of Marx's statement of 'religion is the opiate of the masses' than is actually there. Communism/hard core Socialism focused mainly on the economic/political arena, and mainly opposed religion whenever religious leaders spoke out against the Communist leadership/policies. This is true of any form of dictatorship, whatever its economic/political label. Hitler, Napolean, various kings and emperors throughout European history, etc., always took this tack. So this 'anti-theistic' oppression perhaps has less to do directly with 'atheistic Communism' (which quite a few conservatives have often tried to include Socialism of any stripe, civil rights leaders, etc) than you might think.
(And since when was 'collectivism' specifically anti-theistic? Various Christian/religious groups such as Quakers, Mennonites, et al could arguably be said to be more or less collectivist.)
Ie., in short, Atheism/agnosticism is not the causality here that I know you'd like to make it. Sorry for the reality check.
Basically I think that you are still holding on to that old saw horse of banding atheism with Communism, a McCarthyite wet dream that has long since been disproven and debunked. An idea that is part and parcel of your insecure loathing of those who have done nothing more than to dare to disbelieve in your god.
My opinon about who Jesus is from personal experiences.
which includes
prayer and reading the bible but the bible is last the bible just fills in the story so i understand my own spirit living better.
I began a thread a while back about where is Jesus today and what is His job today.
I think He has changed from a man with a desire and will to obey God to a Livng Messiah with the reserection and rewards God gave Him that allows him to plan and build a new life for us without Sin or satan.
In the furture he will be King of the new world , then again he will change into great man doing Gods will when he hands all of us over to Our creator for the final time.
quote:P.S., oh, and spare me the TWI-approved 'lack of peace' tripe please. I'm doing just dandy in the peace dept., thank you very much; its just that I don't think that 'having peace in my life' has to include blithely whitewashing Der Wierwille's reputation, and goosestepping to his Neo-nazi swill.
Let me get this straight. You're still ....ed at me for stuff I posted on other threads, and you throw them in my face out of context, and you call this having peace? Interesting.
Johniam, it is you who is losing the context here. My posts in response to your 'peace in your life' tripe, was dealing with your attempt to turn my targeting a well known TWI snot nosed attitude of 'I am a Son of God w/All Power', and calling it for what it was ... into a 'guilt trip'. We here at the Greasespot Cafe often do that to twisted TWI dogmas and VPW's rancid life: call them for what they are. If *you* want to take that and turn it into a guilt trip, well then, maybe your long buried conscience is trying to tell you something, y'think?
And simply trying to dodge the issue by saying that 'you are just ....ed off at what I said on other threads' doesn't help your case either.
Face it chief. You, Smikeol, and Oldies need to realize that the dirty old codger (VPW) is long gone, and his song-and-dance is history.
Re:"George does not escape historical facts involving those atheists, their particular states and Marxism's significant and directed anti-theistic scheme by defining devotion to anti-theistic collectivism as merely another form of theism."
Why not? These guys were not promoting the idea that God - if he exists - is beyond knowing. They were the same type of narcissistic ego-maniacs that had been (and are) the heads of religions for years and simply adopted a different "faith".
As Oak pointed out, I was talking about "agnostics", not a bunch of rabid, amoral tin-hat dictators. I don't know how you can draw the parallel.
Don't mean to pick a fight here, as I respect everyone's right to believe what they will. However, I think it's wrong to take these atheists and say "well, their religion was the state." They were atheists, and they performed as many atrocities as the best religious zealots. Redefining their atheism to have them qualify as "religious" is completely disingenuous. Basically, the moment someone commits an atrocity, you're going to redefine "religion" to include their motivation. That's called equivocation.
Having said that, I acknowledge that the original question was about agnostics, not atheists. There's a distinct difference.
The title of this thread is ''Who is Jesus?''...Imbus is asking this question to us for our opinion and beliefs individually. Jesus Christ is to me my savior, my Lord, my friend, my brother, my comforter, and the one true Son of God. That being said, His name, as it has throughout history, has once again begun a very heated, if not (dare I say...DARE! DARE! thank you, Cleavon Little ;)-->) hateful discussion between a few of us here.
In my humble opinion, most folks distaste for Jesus or anything ''religious'' (gawd I HATE that word!) is a direct result of those very things being force fed to them through a cult, as in our case, a church, an over zealous clergy person etc.
There was a news story a few days ago about how the Baptists are deciding to remove the word Baptist from their churches. It seems the word ''Baptist'' is scaring folks off; it carries ''too much baggage'' according to one preacher. Imagine that!!! Could it be that most churches are more about political, social and financial status than about Jesus???
Nah!!! Couldn't be! --> I haven't found a church yet that isn't!
I love my Lord, I love God, I choose to worship them in my own way, in my own time. I tell folks I am a Christian, but even that word has become like kryptonite to Superman to most folks. I choose not to belong to a church because what I've found in them is religion not spirituality
I love Jesus, He knows it...He loves me, I know it. 'Nuff said.
My position on Jesus Christ has come from a myriad of sources. My real first intro came while I was at Gunnison. I read the Gospels like a novel and fell absolutly in love with Jesus. Since that time I have read different works and my understanding has been inhanced.
I believe he was a gifted man that was able to reach a spiritual place and an awareness with all his being ...like no other.
Because of this, I have hope...in acheiving the same thing.
He lived a resurrected life on earth. He lived among the spiritually dead and pointed a way for a life beyond the sences. His example alone spoke of a life beyond our known understanding with endless posibilities. I am forever thankful for those posibilities.
if Hitler did in fact regard himself as "Christian", it was apparently a more pumped-up, "fighter" distortion of the figure of Jesus - one undoubtably more conformed to Hitler's own image, or idea of Christ.
I've heard over the years that Hitler also devoted himself to odd occult notions, such as the "Hollow Earth" theory, and of his zeal toward acquiring the "sword of destiny," the lance allegedly used to pierce Jesus' side during the crucifixion (though if I am recalling correctly, the historicity of the latter pursuit had been recently disputed).
quote:Johniam, it is you who is losing the context here. My posts in response to your 'peace in your life' tripe, was dealing with your attempt to turn my targeting a well known TWI snot nosed attitude of 'I am a Son of God w/All Power', and calling it for what it was ... into a 'guilt trip'. We here at the Greasespot Cafe often do that to twisted TWI dogmas and VPW's rancid life: call them for what they are. If *you* want to take that and turn it into a guilt trip, well then, maybe your long buried conscience is trying to tell you something, y'think?
You're just being a judgemental jerk.
quote:
And simply trying to dodge the issue by saying that 'you are just ....ed off at what I said on other threads' doesn't help your case either.
OK 'councellor', by the way, what is my "case number"?
quote:
Face it chief. You, Smikeol, and Oldies need to realize that the dirty old codger (VPW) is long gone, and his song-and-dance is history.
If it's "history" then why does it keep coming back up in the present tense? Is Jesus "history" too?
quote:Comparing VPW to Jesus is just plain wrong not to mention offensive
questions....
1) You admit it's possible to be right and offensive at the same time?
2) Who says it's "just plain wrong"? I can compare anything I want with anything I want; that's called THINKING! Besides, I wasn't comparing VPW to Jesus, I was comparing Jesus to VPW in the context of past impact slanted toward ridiculing Garth's narrow minded prejudices which you appear to share.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
11
7
7
Popular Days
May 30
29
May 31
16
Jun 2
10
Jun 1
9
Top Posters In This Topic
mj412 11 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 11 posts
Oakspear 7 posts
imbus 7 posts
Popular Days
May 30 2004
29 posts
May 31 2004
16 posts
Jun 2 2004
10 posts
Jun 1 2004
9 posts
George Aar
Sudo,
"It's fine for people to believe whatever myths they want but unfortunately they want to make everybody ELSE believe them too!"
Well of course! It's the TRUTH after all! Why, you can't just let a bunch of unbelievers run around free. God knows what trouble they'll be brewing up.
That being said, when was the last time you heard of anyone being taken hostage, tortured, or killed by an extreme, fundamentalist group of agnostics?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
The atheists Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot were such exemplars of tolerance and compassion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
They didn't do that because of their atheism, but because of their totalitarian forms of Communism.
Truth be told, and I was quite surprised to find this out when I did, but while there is no one dominant political/world view among atheists/agnostics, the largest political view among them is Ayn Rand Objectivist Libertarianism.
Now see, Cynic, this is but one of the things that you learn when you actually talk to the 'infidels' directly instead of just going by the church's orthodox party line. ... You start to find out what misconceptions you'll unlearn when you do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
And I would posit that in those cases (and even throw in Hitler and Mussolini if you'd like) that the state becomes god and communism (or fascism) is the religion. They even have all the cute little ceremonies, symbols, and rites that "regular" religions have.
And naturally they have that one constant among all religions, the unbending tenet of "My Way or the Highway!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
George made a staement about agnostics, Cynic responded with examples of bad atheists.
THEY'RE NOT THE SAME
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
For those whose view of Jesus is more elevated than "spiritual guy", "didn't exist", or "Jewish Cult Leader" (Imbus, George, Sudo & I can take a break
:D-->) was your opinion of who Jesus is formed more from a straight reading of the bible, or from personal experience? Or both? Or maybe a different source?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Hitler as a "Christian" (at least as one site would suggest - http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm )
could give Stalin and Mao a run for their money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot oversaw statist movements that were based on an economic, social and political worldview that was rabidly and consciously anti-theistic. George does not escape historical facts involving those atheists, their particular states and Marxism's significant and directed anti-theistic scheme by defining devotion to anti-theistic collectivism as merely another form of theism.
*****
As for Danny,
A polemical antichristian named Jim Walker, at the site to which Danny linked, qualified Hitler as a Christian on the basis that "A Christian is simply a person who believes in God and Jesus in some form or manner." ( http://www.nobeliefs.com/HitlerSources.htm )
Such loose a definition of a Christian was made necessary by some statements attributed to Hitler -- the authenticity of which, of course, Walker first attacks -- in which Hitler denounced Paul as, among several things, a falsifier of Jesus' doctrine and a proto-Bolshevik, and characterized Jesus as a populist whose activism was directed against Jewish capitalism.
It is not unusual for non-Christians to claim to be the legitimate followers of Jesus. There are Muslims who enter Christian groups on PalTalk and post that Jesus was a Muslim or that Islam was the religion Jesus taught. Thomas Jefferson preened as a Christian on the basis of professed esteem for Jesus' ethical teachings. Jefferson, however, denied the Trinity and the Virgin Birth of Christ, and denounced Jesus' disciples as fabricators for their accounts of Jesus' miracles. John Dominic Crossan of "The Jesus Seminar" does not openly condemn Jesus when he speaks to the media, but he has rejected the biblical revelation of Jesus and has offered his alternative version -- all speculatively construed and made palatable to impenitence and unbelief.
Walker's question, "If Hitler did not see himself as a Christian, then why doesn't he condemn Jesus?" could be used in support of an argument that Muslims who speak flattering words about Jesus are self-consciously Christian.
Christianity is a strong religious, social and intellectual reality that some false religionists, some tyrants, some revolutionaries and some peddlers of apostasy have faced with platitudes and redefinition rather than with direct public opposition. Rather than overtly deride Jesus and risk provoking too-immediate a response from Christians, some will get up and say a few positive words about Jesus and invoke a redefined version of him. They utterly reject him, however, in their rejection of and/or variance from the biblical revelation of who he is.
I'm no Hitler scholar, but Hitler's ultimate commitment seems to have been to some grotesque illusion he held concerning himself.
Edited by CynicLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oak, i think my opinion was formed when i was a little girl so i guess from my mom and catholic school
not so much the bible, really
ps. i don't try to convince anyone
in fact i prefer agnostics since i hate religion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Garth:
quote:P.S., oh, and spare me the TWI-approved 'lack of peace' tripe please. I'm doing just dandy in the peace dept., thank you very much; its just that I don't think that 'having peace in my life' has to include blithely whitewashing Der Wierwille's reputation, and goosestepping to his Neo-nazi swill.
Let me get this straight. You're still ....ed at me for stuff I posted on other threads, and you throw them in my face out of context, and you call this having peace? Interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Cynic,
Frankly, I think that you're endeavoring to get a lot more mileage out of Marx's statement of 'religion is the opiate of the masses' than is actually there. Communism/hard core Socialism focused mainly on the economic/political arena, and mainly opposed religion whenever religious leaders spoke out against the Communist leadership/policies. This is true of any form of dictatorship, whatever its economic/political label. Hitler, Napolean, various kings and emperors throughout European history, etc., always took this tack. So this 'anti-theistic' oppression perhaps has less to do directly with 'atheistic Communism' (which quite a few conservatives have often tried to include Socialism of any stripe, civil rights leaders, etc) than you might think.
(And since when was 'collectivism' specifically anti-theistic? Various Christian/religious groups such as Quakers, Mennonites, et al could arguably be said to be more or less collectivist.)
Ie., in short, Atheism/agnosticism is not the causality here that I know you'd like to make it. Sorry for the reality check.
Basically I think that you are still holding on to that old saw horse of banding atheism with Communism, a McCarthyite wet dream that has long since been disproven and debunked. An idea that is part and parcel of your insecure loathing of those who have done nothing more than to dare to disbelieve in your god.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
My opinon about who Jesus is from personal experiences.
which includes
prayer and reading the bible but the bible is last the bible just fills in the story so i understand my own spirit living better.
I began a thread a while back about where is Jesus today and what is His job today.
I think He has changed from a man with a desire and will to obey God to a Livng Messiah with the reserection and rewards God gave Him that allows him to plan and build a new life for us without Sin or satan.
In the furture he will be King of the new world , then again he will change into great man doing Gods will when he hands all of us over to Our creator for the final time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Johniam, it is you who is losing the context here. My posts in response to your 'peace in your life' tripe, was dealing with your attempt to turn my targeting a well known TWI snot nosed attitude of 'I am a Son of God w/All Power', and calling it for what it was ... into a 'guilt trip'. We here at the Greasespot Cafe often do that to twisted TWI dogmas and VPW's rancid life: call them for what they are. If *you* want to take that and turn it into a guilt trip, well then, maybe your long buried conscience is trying to tell you something, y'think?
And simply trying to dodge the issue by saying that 'you are just ....ed off at what I said on other threads' doesn't help your case either.
Face it chief. You, Smikeol, and Oldies need to realize that the dirty old codger (VPW) is long gone, and his song-and-dance is history.
Try to keep up.
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Cynic,
Re:"George does not escape historical facts involving those atheists, their particular states and Marxism's significant and directed anti-theistic scheme by defining devotion to anti-theistic collectivism as merely another form of theism."
Why not? These guys were not promoting the idea that God - if he exists - is beyond knowing. They were the same type of narcissistic ego-maniacs that had been (and are) the heads of religions for years and simply adopted a different "faith".
As Oak pointed out, I was talking about "agnostics", not a bunch of rabid, amoral tin-hat dictators. I don't know how you can draw the parallel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Don't mean to pick a fight here, as I respect everyone's right to believe what they will. However, I think it's wrong to take these atheists and say "well, their religion was the state." They were atheists, and they performed as many atrocities as the best religious zealots. Redefining their atheism to have them qualify as "religious" is completely disingenuous. Basically, the moment someone commits an atrocity, you're going to redefine "religion" to include their motivation. That's called equivocation.
Having said that, I acknowledge that the original question was about agnostics, not atheists. There's a distinct difference.
Interesting chat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jezusfreaky
The title of this thread is ''Who is Jesus?''...Imbus is asking this question to us for our opinion and beliefs individually. Jesus Christ is to me my savior, my Lord, my friend, my brother, my comforter, and the one true Son of God. That being said, His name, as it has throughout history, has once again begun a very heated, if not (dare I say...DARE! DARE! thank you, Cleavon Little
;)-->) hateful discussion between a few of us here.
In my humble opinion, most folks distaste for Jesus or anything ''religious'' (gawd I HATE that word!) is a direct result of those very things being force fed to them through a cult, as in our case, a church, an over zealous clergy person etc.
There was a news story a few days ago about how the Baptists are deciding to remove the word Baptist from their churches. It seems the word ''Baptist'' is scaring folks off; it carries ''too much baggage'' according to one preacher. Imagine that!!! Could it be that most churches are more about political, social and financial status than about Jesus???
Nah!!! Couldn't be!
--> I haven't found a church yet that isn't!
I love my Lord, I love God, I choose to worship them in my own way, in my own time. I tell folks I am a Christian, but even that word has become like kryptonite to Superman to most folks. I choose not to belong to a church because what I've found in them is religion not spirituality
I love Jesus, He knows it...He loves me, I know it. 'Nuff said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
My position on Jesus Christ has come from a myriad of sources. My real first intro came while I was at Gunnison. I read the Gospels like a novel and fell absolutly in love with Jesus. Since that time I have read different works and my understanding has been inhanced.
I believe he was a gifted man that was able to reach a spiritual place and an awareness with all his being ...like no other.
Because of this, I have hope...in acheiving the same thing.
He lived a resurrected life on earth. He lived among the spiritually dead and pointed a way for a life beyond the sences. His example alone spoke of a life beyond our known understanding with endless posibilities. I am forever thankful for those posibilities.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Imbus -- very good.
:)--> 
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Me too. Maybe someday ....
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Excellent post, Cynic.
if Hitler did in fact regard himself as "Christian", it was apparently a more pumped-up, "fighter" distortion of the figure of Jesus - one undoubtably more conformed to Hitler's own image, or idea of Christ.
I've heard over the years that Hitler also devoted himself to odd occult notions, such as the "Hollow Earth" theory, and of his zeal toward acquiring the "sword of destiny," the lance allegedly used to pierce Jesus' side during the crucifixion (though if I am recalling correctly, the historicity of the latter pursuit had been recently disputed).
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Garth:
quote:Johniam, it is you who is losing the context here. My posts in response to your 'peace in your life' tripe, was dealing with your attempt to turn my targeting a well known TWI snot nosed attitude of 'I am a Son of God w/All Power', and calling it for what it was ... into a 'guilt trip'. We here at the Greasespot Cafe often do that to twisted TWI dogmas and VPW's rancid life: call them for what they are. If *you* want to take that and turn it into a guilt trip, well then, maybe your long buried conscience is trying to tell you something, y'think?
You're just being a judgemental jerk.
quote:
And simply trying to dodge the issue by saying that 'you are just ....ed off at what I said on other threads' doesn't help your case either.
OK 'councellor', by the way, what is my "case number"?
quote:
Face it chief. You, Smikeol, and Oldies need to realize that the dirty old codger (VPW) is long gone, and his song-and-dance is history.
If it's "history" then why does it keep coming back up in the present tense? Is Jesus "history" too?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jezusfreaky
Ummmmmmmmm....John-you-be...
Comparing VPW to Jesus is just plain wrong not to mention offensive.
Sorry to interrupt...carry on the tyrade boys...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
JF:
quote:Comparing VPW to Jesus is just plain wrong not to mention offensive
questions....
1) You admit it's possible to be right and offensive at the same time?
2) Who says it's "just plain wrong"? I can compare anything I want with anything I want; that's called THINKING! Besides, I wasn't comparing VPW to Jesus, I was comparing Jesus to VPW in the context of past impact slanted toward ridiculing Garth's narrow minded prejudices which you appear to share.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
Johniam,
Tell us what your really thinking!
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.