How to Read the Bible

[Rhea]

That is putting a lot of words in my mouth

It may not be apparent, but I’ll spell it out because written words are hard to parse.
I am not trying to put words in your mouth. I am trying to reflect and understand what you said. It’s a time-honored method of increasing understanding. It is fine for you to correct me. I put what I think I heard innto my words, and I type them out so you have a chance to see if I got it right. I am quite sincere in my curiosity - don’t read trolling where there is none.

as well as misspelling my acronym.

I apologize for that. I was using my phone and going back to check was untenable.

My views of the text are not any more important to yours. It's a text. whether you are Orthodox and believe that God gave the Torah to Moses on Mt. Sinai and it has been passed down from generation to generation in an unbroken chain, a person who believes it was divinely inspired , or created entirely by human beings. It matters not.

I would submit that it matters a lot to those trying to make it into laws. But irrespective of that, I was discussing the concept of there being a “way to read” the bible, which the religionists often tell us there is (you must read it while infused with the spirit, you know, or you won’t understand it).

Whether you are reading the Bible, The Magna Carta, The Declaration of Independence, The US constitution or Fedralist #10, you must understand the language and culture of the time to understand what the text is saying.

Or the National Enquirer, really

Every translation is by definition a commentary. If you picked up the Plaut Commentary I linked to above, you would have no trouble understanding what the editors were trying to convey whether you you read the text in English or Hebrew. Since you have no knowledge of Halacha,

Well now, there you are making an assumption. I actually know quite a bit of detail about the laws of divorce in Judaism, and how they apply to mixed marriages with Gentiles.

Agaddah or the Talmudic way if thinking you would be lost picking up Heschel's commentary. Even though it is entirely in English. I'm not arguing for any particular position. For better or worse it's a foundational text in US society. I'm giving you a way to understand what the authors/editors are trying to get across.

Bear in mind, they are trying t get across things like “miracles” and “gods” which no amount of language or culture of the time can excuse.
Bear also in mind that my understanding, or lack of it, of the culture of sanctioned rape of servants will not make it acceptable in any context. The culture of that time was not okay to do it just because that was the culture - they were wrong and barbaric no matter how “normal” it was to them.

It is a complicated text with multiple levels of meaning. Do with it what you want, but the National Enquirer is only foundational at the bottom of bird cages

My comparison is that despite the “ contemporary culture and the language” that you rightly insist is necessary to interpret any historical text, any tale about a parting of a red sea or plagues upon a nation who never had any record of such plagues, is a fantasy no different than the National Enquirer’s tale of alien abductions. Perhaps 2000 years from now, that will be “foundational,” you don’t know.

 

[steve_bank]

As I recall Moses got the 10 Commandments not an entire text.

The texts that ,ade to today were not nearly all of the writings. They were not written at one time. They were were written at different times by different groups of Hebrews, likely why the rampant contradictions in morality. It was never a coherent set of writings.

The point is for us non believers the bible is just a set of probably oral traditions put to paper along with embellishments like supernatural events. Whatever emotions r a believer feels when reading or thinking about the bible is their subjective trip, so to speak. It is all created in the brain.

There was a book written by an Israeli academic that was discussed a ways back on the forum. Forget the name. It essentially described how modern Israel is built on the myth of a continuous culture going back to antiquity. Thereby justifying action today.

More recently an Israeli book The Lie how mostly Netanyahu spins the story-myth of Jews being today what was once was.

Even today Jews are far from homogeneous. I expect it was always so. Circa the New Testament there was a dispute between Jerusalem Jews and Syrian Jews over who were the real line of Jews.

The idea of continuity for Jews is a cultural construct. No different than many other cultures. Egyptians and Persians see themselves in an unbroken line back to pharaohs and kings. The ancient cultures are their identities.

As to reading the bible, beer and potato chips go hand in hand with reading the bible.

For me to say the Hebrew tradition and scripture is just one of many from an objective academic view is not necessarily an attack on faith or belief. It is a statement of my belief. If that gives you trouble that is for you to resolve.

The idea that the bible represents a coherent Hebrew culture covering a thousand years is preposterous.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

As I recall Moses got the 10 Commandments not an entire text.

Well from the traditional POV, read Orthodox, Moses received the entire Torah and Talmud while on Mt Sinai for 40 days and 40 nights. The Talmud in Pirke Avot says:

"Moses received Torah from God at Sinai. He transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to the prophets, the prophets to the members of the Great Assembly "

Pirke Avot 1:
The texts that ,ade to today were not nearly all of the writings. They were not written at one time. They were were written at different times by different groups of Hebrews, likely why the rampant contradictions in morality. It was never a coherent set of writings.

The point is for us non believers the bible is just a set of probably oral traditions put to paper along with embellishments like supernatural events. Whatever emotions r a believer feels when reading or thinking about the bible is their subjective trip, so to speak. It is all created in the brain.

There is no question archeological evidence has proved the Bible is not an oral history. We really don't know who the editors were and there is still debate about authorship of many of the books that make up the biblical canon.

There was a book written by an Israeli academic that was discussed a ways back on the forum. Forget the name. It essentially described how modern Israel is built on the myth of a continuous culture going back to antiquity. Thereby justifying action today.

More recently an Israeli book The Lie how mostly Netanyahu spins the story-myth of Jews being today what was once was.

There is plenty of archeological evidence Jews have been there for a long time. Digs have shown pig bones in Cananite homes but nor in Israelite homes. As for Netanyahu, he is all about Netnayhu. As long as he can retain power he will do whatever that takes. Not a fan....

Even today Jews are far from homogeneous. I expect it was always so. Circa the New Testament there was a dispute between Jerusalem Jews and Syrian Jews over who were the real line of Jews.

Jews are not homogeneous. They are not a race. They are also not homogeneous in belief or practice. You never heard the old saying if you gather 4 Jews together in a room you get 5 opinions.

For me to say the Hebrew tradition and scripture is just one of many from an objective academic view is not necessarily an attack on faith or belief. It is a statement of my belief. If that gives you trouble that is for you to resolve.

Don't know where you got the idea I think the Hebrew tradition is the only tradition from any POV.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

I would submit that it matters a lot to those trying to make it into laws. But irrespective of that, I was discussing the concept of there being a “way to read” the bible, which the religionists often tell us there is (you must read it while infused with the spirit, you know, or you won’t understand it).

As for the laws, in the USA they have the right to advocate for whatever they want and you have the right to advocate for whatever you want. The majority view will prevail. As for religions forcing their views on others it worked pretty well during the Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement.

Note that is REV King and Rabbi Heschel Marching at Selma Alabama Heschel was quoted as say he was "Praying with my legs."
Not once did I say anything about spirit, I would expect you would approach the text in an intellectual manner. Hence why I offered you commentaries by people a great deal brighter than me

Whether you are reading the Bible, The Magna Carta, The Declaration of Independence, The US constitution or Fedralist #10, you must understand the language and culture of the time to understand what the text is saying.
Or the National Enquirer, really

No, the National Enquirer is foundational to nothing. The founding fathers were a combination of Atheists, Deists and Theists and the theists were motivated by the Bible. To deny the influence of the Bible on the USA and compare it to the National Enquirer is intellectually sillly,.

Well now, there you are making an assumption. I actually know quite a bit of detail about the laws of divorce in Judaism, and how they apply to mixed marriages with Gentiles.,

You would have to enlighten me Since Jews can't marry Non-Jews under Jewish Law, there are no divorces. Please enlighten me here. Since you are bringing up sanctioned rape, that proves your knowledge of Judaism is so small it would be lost in a thimble,.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

My problem with the Torah is first, it is based on faux history. The exodus, et al never happened. I am interested in the things missing from that work. Mention of an after life, heaven and hell, the existence of Satan and devils. Yet it goes on and on about ritual sacrifices, how they were to be done and what goodies the priests got to eat and what offal was burnt as an offering to God. And the long and minute instructions of how to build the tabernacle, how many rings the curtains were to have and how to use the badger skins. I am interested in the ridiculousness of it all. And why so few people notice that. I have no interest in what the learned rabbis have to say about any of this as they seem to have not noticed any of this and had no clue about the falseness of the whole tall tale as exposed by modern Near East archaeologists.

Here was God's chance to tell the world about the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, and God prattles on about inane sacrifices and magic hair ointment that if anybody unauthorized made some was a serious crime.

Exodus 30:30
³¹And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, This shall be an holy anointing oil unto me throughout your generations. ³²Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured, neither shall ye make any other like it, after the composition of it: it is holy, and it shall be holy unto you. ³³Whosoever compoundeth any like it, or whosoever putteth any of it upon a stranger, shall even be cut off from his people..

The Bible is a silly book. You do not have to be an expert in Biblical Hebrew to understand that.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

My problem with the Torah is first, it is based on faux history. The exodus, et al never happened. I am interested in the things missing from that work. Mention of an after life, heaven and hell, the existence of Satan and devils. Yet it goes on and on about ritual sacrifices, how they were to be done and what goodies the priests got to eat and what offal was burnt as an offering to God. And the long and minute instructions of how to build the tabernacle, how many rings the curtains were to have and how to use the badger skins. I am interested in the ridiculousness of it all. And why so few people notice that. I have no interest in what the learned rabbis have to say about any of this as they seem to have not noticed any of this and had no clue about the falseness of the whole tall tale as exposed by modern Near East archaeologists.

Here was God's chance to tell the world about the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, and God prattles on about inane sacrifices and magic hair ointment that if anybody unauthorized made some was a serious crime.

Exodus 30:30
³¹And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, This shall be an holy anointing oil unto me throughout your generations. ³²Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured, neither shall ye make any other like it, after the composition of it: it is holy, and it shall be holy unto you. ³³Whosoever compoundeth any like it, or whosoever putteth any of it upon a stranger, shall even be cut off from his people..

The Bible is a silly book. You do not have to be an expert in Biblical Hebrew to understand that.

That may all be true. But the subject of this thread is NOT is the Bible true. The post is about how to read the Bible.
If you want to know what the Rabbi's say about the Sacrificial cult pick the Plaut Commentary or read The Talmud. There is a ton of information about what Judaism says about it. From The Orthodox who pray daily for the restoration of the Temple and the scaricies to Reform who accept this is a primitive idea from an ancient time.

 

[steve_bank]

You will have to say what you mean by Torah. As I understands it the Jewish cannon or Torah was not formed until a conference after the fall of Jerusalem. The diaspora.

If Moses got it all on a mountain then it must have contained a future history?

By Torah do you mean Leviticus and its rules? There are a total of 613 rules, dictates', and commandments that can be pulled out of the Old Testament.

 

[Politesse]

You will have to say what you mean by Torah. As I understands it the Jewish cannon or Torah was not formed until a conference after the fall of Jerusalem. The diaspora.

If Moses got it all on a mountain then it must have contained a future history?

By Torah do you mean Leviticus and its rules? There are a total of 613 rules, dictates', and commandments that can be pulled out of the Old Testament.

I think you are confusing Torah (the first five books) with the Tanakh (the entire Jewish canon) and are also confused about the dates on that. While it is true that the Masoretic Text of the Jewish scriptures (ie the publication of the same that its most widely used today) was affirmed long after the fall of Jerusalem, that's not to say that the books contained within were unknown or unofficial; they were in use within Jewish communities in roughly their current form by the time of the Second Temple was completed, let alone destroyed. We know this for certain because aside from oral tradition, we have well-dated early scriptorial collections such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Translation of the scriptures known as the Septuagint that handily predate the fall of Israel, and they contain roughly the same collection of scrolls with relatively few derivations of text.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

You will have to say what you mean by Torah. As I understands it the Jewish cannon or Torah was not formed until a conference after the fall of Jerusalem. The diaspora.

The Orthodox or traditional view is God gave Moses both the written and oral Torah.

If Moses got it all on a mountain then it must have contained a future history?

Yes

By Torah do you mean Leviticus and its rules? There are a total of 613 rules, dictates', and commandments that can be pulled out of the Old Testament.

The commandments don't start in V'yakra (Leviticus) But in B'resheet (Genesis) "Be fruitful and multiply."

Torah is an elastic word. By definition Torah means teaching. When people say "THE TORAH" They usually mean the first 5 books of the Bible. When people say Torah they mean the totality of Jewish learning which encompasses:

• The TaNaKh
• The Talmud
• The Midrash
• The Kabbalah
• The Mishneh Torah
• The Shulchan Arukh

All of the above is not The Torah, but is Torah.

The tradition believes God Gave Moses both the Written and the Oral law on Sinai.

 

[steve_bank]

Just when I thought I could no longer be surprised.

It is mind boggling that today we are so embroiled in the somewhat ambiguous and disjointed writings of a small ancient group of people.

How far did Moses' vision go? Modern Israel?

 

[HaRaAYaH]

Just when I thought I could no longer be surprised.

It is mind boggling that today we are so embroiled in the somewhat ambiguous and disjointed writings of a small ancient group of people.

How far did Moses' vision go? Modern Israel?

Just so you know, I am not saying I believe it, I'm saying what the Orthodox say....

 

[steve_bank]

Just when I thought I could no longer be surprised.

It is mind boggling that today we are so embroiled in the somewhat ambiguous and disjointed writings of a small ancient group of people.

How far did Moses' vision go? Modern Israel?

Just so you know, I am not saying I believe it, I'm saying what the Orthodox say....

I am speaking generally not to you personally. You gave me a few talking points.

Personally whether someone believe or not is not an issue for me. It is what someone does with beliefs.

Is this you? There are many past interesting Jewish philosophers. I read Moses Maimonides Guide For The Perplexed, written centuries ago. When science and scripture conflict, interpretation of scripture must change. He crossed secular philosophy and religious boundaries, something we desperately need today.

https://www.thelehrhaus.com/jewish-thought-history/the-hasidism-of-rav-kook/

Translation of Text of Pinkesei Ha-Ra’ayah[16]
Kabbalah must bond with all the sciences; to live with them and through them. So did the great [sages] throughout the ages; and more than they achieved—it is obligatory upon us to achieve. The spiritual world that bestows its spirit upon the thinking man, was enhanced by constant appearances of the light of intellect. This enhancement dulls the oppositions between one science and another, and once the barriers have come down—the different sciences actually come to one another’s aid.

Science in all of its breadth, in all of its various aspects—spiritual and practical, societal and global—must find its place alongside the supernal wisdom [i.e. Kabbalah].

A shining example of this would be the book Sha‘ar ha-Shamayim by Rabbi Abraham Cohen Herrera, who was the second in a line extending from Rabbi Isaac Luria through Rabbi Israel Sarug, disciple of Rabbi Isaac Luria. Herrera was inspired to write his book in Spanish, in full view of the cultured world of the day. With a breadth of intellect and feelings of respect and affection, the author toured all the philosophical studies that represented the finest literature of his time. Rabbi Isaac Aboab [da Fonseca] who admired Herrera—translating the work into Hebrew for the benefit of Hebrews—followed in his spirit, which is the spirit of true culture worthy of Torah scholars who are truly “men of holiness.”

It is understood that according to the changes of the Zeitgeist, so must the synthesis (between the supernal, divine wisdom and all the human thoughts that proceed from the sciences) shift, but the principle remains the same. The preparedness of the thinker—pure of knowledge and holy of thought—to absorb into his midst the best thoughts of the finest writers, the thinkers, the sages of every people and language, of every subject of science; and to shine upon them, from them and through them, the divine light—this is the unchanging way of the world, upon which we are obligated to travel.

Only “if you have heard the old, will you hear the new” (b. Berakhot 40a) The old must be studied and researched, and it will bring the new, good, and fundamental.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

I am speaking generally not to you personally. You gave me a few talking points.

Personally whether someone believe or not is not an issue for me. It is what someone does with beliefs..

Just making sure. While I can articulate the Orthodox view, I don't always concur with it's teachings. And I heartily agree. I really don't care what you believe I care about the way you behave.

Is this you? There are many past interesting Jewish philosophers. I read Moses Maimonides Guide For The Perplexed, written centuries ago. When science and scripture conflict, interpretation of scripture must change. He crossed secular philosophy and religious boundaries, something we desperately need today.

https://www.thelehrhaus.com/jewish-thought-history/the-hasidism-of-rav-kook/

Translation of Text of Pinkesei Ha-Ra’ayah[16]
Kabbalah must bond with all the sciences; to live with them and through them. So did the great [sages] throughout the ages; and more than they achieved—it is obligatory upon us to achieve. The spiritual world that bestows its spirit upon the thinking man, was enhanced by constant appearances of the light of intellect. This enhancement dulls the oppositions between one science and another, and once the barriers have come down—the different sciences actually come to one another’s aid.

Science in all of its breadth, in all of its various aspects—spiritual and practical, societal and global—must find its place alongside the supernal wisdom [i.e. Kabbalah].

A shining example of this would be the book Sha‘ar ha-Shamayim by Rabbi Abraham Cohen Herrera, who was the second in a line extending from Rabbi Isaac Luria through Rabbi Israel Sarug, disciple of Rabbi Isaac Luria. Herrera was inspired to write his book in Spanish, in full view of the cultured world of the day. With a breadth of intellect and feelings of respect and affection, the author toured all the philosophical studies that represented the finest literature of his time. Rabbi Isaac Aboab [da Fonseca] who admired Herrera—translating the work into Hebrew for the benefit of Hebrews—followed in his spirit, which is the spirit of true culture worthy of Torah scholars who are truly “men of holiness.”

It is understood that according to the changes of the Zeitgeist, so must the synthesis (between the supernal, divine wisdom and all the human thoughts that proceed from the sciences) shift, but the principle remains the same. The preparedness of the thinker—pure of knowledge and holy of thought—to absorb into his midst the best thoughts of the finest writers, the thinkers, the sages of every people and language, of every subject of science; and to shine upon them, from them and through them, the divine light—this is the unchanging way of the world, upon which we are obligated to travel.

Only “if you have heard the old, will you hear the new” (b. Berakhot 40a) The old must be studied and researched, and it will bring the new, good, and fundamental.

Yes, you have uncovered my acronym, I love Kook and I have devoured just about every book about his writings. He was a giant in the 20th Century Jewish World. While I love is exalted view of life and humanity

Writings like this:

We are brought to recognition of the naturalness of education on the basis of the aspiration toward divine intimacy, since education is the sole legacy promised to humanity... for we do not hold education as the creator of new things in the soul of the pupil, but rather as a supervisor, drawing from obscurity to openness, from potentiality to actuality, what is hidden within the student, revealed as the universal and central character of humanity and its groups, both historical and national. And the correspondence between the individual and general culture at its most profound-this is the natural progression and the success of education.

All of Existence whispers to me a secret;
I have life to offer, take please, take,
If you have a heart and in your heart red blood courses,
not numbed by the poison of despair.

And if your heart is dulled
And beauty holds no spell to you-
Existence whispers-
Turn away from me, turn away,
I am forbidden to you.

If every gentle sound ,
every living beauty does not arouse within you
the splendor of a song of holiness,
but instead an alien fire,
Then turn away from me, turn away,
I am forbidden to you.

And a people returned to life shall hear
the wealth of life’s secrets,
And from the pleasure of song and beauty,
A holy light will abound.
And the whole of existence will whisper:
My beloved, I am permitted to you.

Mysticism says to us, you dwell in a world filled with life and light. Know the magnificence of being, the wealth of existence that you encounter. Contemplate its greatness, its splendor, its exactitude and its ramifications.
Associate yourself with the loving legions that constantly produce beauty and majesty. Wherever you may turn, you deal with things that live and endure; you are always acting decisively, in every utterance and gesture that reflects the aspiration of your soul and the dynamic focus of your life. In all your actions you encounter sparks of life and light that yearn and aspire to ascend to the loftiest heights. You help them and they help you.
The radiance of wisdom that you conceive is not the pale shadowy reflection of a kind of spiritual phosphorescence that does not really exist apart from human research and understanding. The objects of wisdom are denizens of a permanent world who are eager to make your acquaintance and send you good tidings from the distance, assurances of their peace and solidity. And in their peace, you too will find peace.

But, I am equally under the influence of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who was one of the most influential religious philosophers of the 20th century. I linked to his last interview before his death above.

Wonder rather than doubt is the root of all knowledge

In a free society, some are guilty, but all are responsible.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6q1puhkUNg[/YOUTUBE]

And Finally, though these are not his words they care based on his philosophy:

Prayer cannot bring water to parched fields, or mend a broken bridge, or rebuild a ruined city; but prayer can water an arid soul, mend a broken heart, and rebuild a weakened will

 

[steve_bank]

A Jew told me two Jews within the same issue can have e different interpretations, yet each is bound by the interoperations. There is no formal orthodoxy as in Catholicism.

Which makes Judaism seem like anarchy. A rabbi can publish a position paper but it is not binding. Similar to Islam.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

A Jew told me two Jews within the same issue can have e different interpretations, yet each is bound by the interoperations. There is no formal orthodoxy as in Catholicism.

Which makes Judaism seem like anarchy. A rabbi can publish a position paper but it is not binding. Similar to Islam.

So, your source is not accurate. It's really complicated. So for American purposes there are three denominations

Orthodox: The most observant. Based entirely on Halacha (Jewish Law). Jewish Law has been decided and written down in the Shulchan Aruch. You can't decide a case based on the Talmud. You have to base it on the Schulcan Aruch. So let's take driving on Shabbat. Absolutely forbidden. No women Rabbis

Conservative: Claims to be based on Jewish Law as long as it has the assent of the community. So driving on Shabbat, ok only if you are driving to synagogue. Women Rabbis ok

Reform: This is the largest denomination. Does not necessarily believe in divine revelation. You are supposed to exam Jewish Law and do what is meaningful to you. The members had individual autonomy. Drive where you want on Shabbat. even if it;s past the Synagogue to restaurant

Even that little blurb above is not totally accurate. It's really complicated. Since the Sanhedrin is no longer in existence, Jewish Law is frozen. There is no court to make new rulings.

The Orthodox can break down to the Hasidim (Think Black hats and coats) and Modern Orthodox (see Joe Lieberman). In the Hasidic sects there are Rebbes.. You don't do anything without talking to the Rebbe Someone once asked the Satmar Rebbe if her could come back to life as Gentile, who would he choose, The answer is the Lubavitcher Rebbe.

Jews spend a great deal of time trying to prove they are more religious or better Jews than other Jews.

 

[steve_bank]

I understand denominations. I see Judaism as similar to American Christianity. Ranges from ultra orthodox and conservative to liberal.

I am a Jew in NYC a diverse Jewish community. I have a moral issue related to scripture. If I were a Catholic I'd go to a priest who is given authority in the church to decide moral issues. Where and who in NYC do I turn to? As I understand it a rabbi does not have authority to impose moral interpretation's.

I know that in NYC in non criminal cases Jews can accept binding arbitration from a religious court on civil matters.

 

[HaRaAYaH]

I understand denominations. I see Judaism as similar to American Christianity. Ranges from ultra orthodox and conservative to liberal.

I am a Jew in NYC a diverse Jewish community. I have a moral issue related to scripture. If I were a Catholic I'd go to a priest who is given authority in the church to decide moral issues. Where and who in NYC do I turn to? As I understand it a rabbi does not have authority to impose moral interpretation's.

I know that in NYC in non criminal cases Jews can accept binding arbitration from a religious court on civil matters.

I don't understand the authority thing. Authority over who? In relation to what? If you want to PM me I might be able to offer some guidance. Going off line for the Holiday. Won't be back on line until late tomorrow night.
If you have a moral issue any Rabbi can gibe you guidance. The Torah is not the last word. It's what the Rabbi's say the Torah means. Just like the US Constitution. It's not the text it's what the Supreme Court says.....

 

[Fentoine Lum]

I understand denominations. I see Judaism as similar to American Christianity. Ranges from ultra orthodox and conservative to liberal.

I am a Jew in NYC a diverse Jewish community. I have a moral issue related to scripture. If I were a Catholic I'd go to a priest who is given authority in the church to decide moral issues. Where and who in NYC do I turn to? As I understand it a rabbi does not have authority to impose moral interpretation's.

I know that in NYC in non criminal cases Jews can accept binding arbitration from a religious court on civil matters.

Quite a conundrum. Who does one turn to if there are no authoritarian pedophiles to deal with such deep questions?

 

[steve_bank]

Who says pedophilia is exclusive to religion?

Statistically the RCC is below the national average for sexual abuse. With the RCC the issue was the cover up more than anything else.