 Okay, the recording is on. Welcome everyone back to BC212, our second lecture on Christian apologetics. So we are looking at this scenario where the baker or the owner of the bakery is in this dilemma. A gay couple has asked him to make a cake for their wedding and he has three options. I mean, we're just thinking, right? He could have thought that well, this is purely a commercial transaction. I don't care what you do with a cake. I'll make a cake, whatever you want to order. I'll write on it, write on the cake, whatever you want. It's your cake. I'm making it for you. You pay me the money, job is done. Or he could have looked at it as I don't agree with the gay marriage, but I love the people. I love to serve. I'll make a cake for you. I'll write on it, whatever you want. And that's it. I'm just doing it out of love, but I don't agree with the gay marriage. Or third, third option, third thought process would be I don't agree with it. I love you, but I can't get myself to make this cake for you, for your wedding, because I just don't agree with the whole, the gay marriage. I don't agree with that. So I won't do it. And it's not an easy, it's not an easy decision, right? Because there is your faith involved. There is business involved. People involved. It's not an easy decision. Faith in the truth of God's word. I know what God's word says, but I have to run a business. I have to make money. And on the other side, there are people. People have to be treated fairly, respectfully. And as a baker, we are not deciding on people's personal matters. We have nothing to do with that. We only make cakes and give cakes for people to eat. That's it. So all these questions. Now, what we have outlined, just go back to our PDF as a framework. So we tend to use this framework. How do we arrive at a decision on this? So I'm going to just go through the framework, try to see if we can apply it, and then I want to hear your thoughts. So first is we cannot overwrite human will. That means as a bakery owner, I don't have the right to tell those two people, you can't get married. We can't control that. That's their choice. We can express what's right and wrong and encourage them to choose right. Now, this is a bakery. This is not a church or this is not a moral center or anything. It's a bakery. We make cakes and we sell. So I have to be careful. As a bakery owner, I'm not here to be a moral police on people. I'm only here to make cakes and give to people. But now here's this little touchy situation where a moral issue has come connected to a cake, which is a gay couple is going to get married. The question is, is this the right place for me to express this opinion or express what I believe? Because they came to buy a cake. And this is not a church. This is not a, where people come to learn morality or even ask questions. They come to buy cakes. So is this the right platform for me to express my personal belief? So that's a very tricky question. And do I need to get into a reasoning on this? Is this the right time and place and platform to engage in conversation and discussion on this? That's the question. And if I were to express what I believe is right and wrong, I still can't force it on them. And maybe, you know, I should be willing to listen to what they have to say. Now, as God, my father, I must treat everyone love and fairness. So here's a couple. I don't agree with what they are doing. I don't, I mean, yes, to men. I don't agree with what they are doing. I have to treat them with love and fairness as I would treat any other customer. That means if I make a cake, I have to make the best cake I can for them. I have to do it the way they wanted it. You know, whatever they ask for, whatever they're paying for, I have to treat them fairly. But yeah, number five becomes a problem. Not a problem, but the challenge. I cannot compromise myself. That means there is certain truth I believe. And the truth is, I don't accept the gay marriage. I don't believe that's right. And I believe we have to be holy before God. And so I'm balancing truth and love, or holiness and love. So that number five becomes the challenge. I must not compromise myself. God doesn't compromise himself. I must not compromise myself. So this is a framework. So you're thinking through. You know, I have three options in front of me. This is a framework. What would be a decision I can make in this situation? I just want to listen to your thoughts here. I know there are two additional questions that are good questions that I've put up on the chat. Rauslin and Elisha, we'll get to it. But let's try to think through on this bakery question that was raised up earlier. The question is, in an attempt to express love, is it okay to make the cake and give it? Or would it be looked upon as not showing love to these people? What are your thoughts? What would be a decision you would want to make? So I see one response, you know, that Rauslin shares that the owner of the bakery could have shared God's word to show his position, that he believes what God's word, that it's against homosexuality, and he cannot go against it. So that's that reasoning part. We are expressing what's right and wrong. We are reasoning together. And at the same time, it's showing love. Like you can offer them free pastry and say, look, I can give this to you as an expression of love. So that's an interesting thought. I mean, what if the speaker said, hey, guys, you know what? I don't, personally, I'm a Christian. I don't, and this might be kind of, you know, if the baker had done this, right? He told these two guys. And guys, I don't, you know, I don't, I'm a Christian. And, you know, my faith teaches me that marriage was meant for a man and a woman. And so it really goes against my faith. But, you know, I'm happy to offer you a free cake or something. You know, what if you've done that? That means he has expressed his position. And at the same time, he's offering something for free. So he's also expressing love to them, but he's also expressed his position, you know? So that's, that's an interesting thought. He could have done that. Anyone else? Okay. All right. So, you know, so I thought, see, so when I think about this whole situation, and I think, I think where this, the baker and myself included, if I was in that place, I was a big, I was the owner of that bakery. The thing that I would have struggled with is, you see, I love the people, but it's going against my own conscience. It's going against, it's like I'm compromising myself by offering something that actually supports or it's going into something that I don't believe in. I don't stand for. That's where I would have struggled myself, you know, if I was the owner of the bakery, like, okay, I love the people. I know I cannot dictate their thoughts and their choices. I mean, you know, that's their personal choice. I love them. I want to serve them. But I don't believe, I can't get myself to support a gay marriage. So that's where I would have struggled and, you know, I would have had to, now I don't know exactly how the interactions all happened, you know, but if I was the baker there, I tried to say, hey, you know, I really love to serve you guys. I would, you know, but I don't, you know, personally because my faith, I don't believe in, you know, a gay marriage. I don't believe marriage was designed by God for that. And, you know, you'll have to excuse us or excuse us as a bakery from making a cake for this marriage, for your marriage. So that's kind of where, you know, to do that lovingly, to do that politely, I would have tried to do, you know, express it in loving, in a loving way, in a polite way and try to take that stand. Why? Because of that, you know, I cannot compromise myself. I cannot compromise on what I believe in this, in this particular situation. Because you're the owner, you're in charge of this, you do have a right to the decisions you make as how you want to function. To that extent, yeah, you have a right. You're not violating some, you're not violating their rights. They can always go and get a cake from somewhere else. You're not violating their rights. You're not enforcing your views on them. You're only expressing it in love. And at the same time, you're not, you know, you're willing to, you're not willing to compromise yourself. So that has to be done in love. Now, the whole issue is, could I have made a cake for them in love? And the answer is yes. If I was willing to tell them, say, you know, hey, in my thought process, if I could have said, yeah, I don't agree with that. But, you know, they are people. They're going to eat the cake. Anyway, they're going to go and get married. Nobody can stop them from doing that. And anyway, they're going to get a cake from some other shop. So, okay, I'll just make it and give it to them and let it go. Maybe I can express and say, hey, I don't believe in a gay marriage, but hey, God loves you guys. And, you know, maybe I could, but that's left to the individual, you know, a person, the baker, the owner of the bakery. If he is able to bring himself to do that, okay. But for me personally, I wouldn't be able to, you know, compromise myself in the sense that this is against my conviction. It's against what I believe. And so lovingly, I will express, and lovingly, I will decline, taking up the order. Another believer may have chose to handle it differently. He may have said, okay, I don't agree with it, but, you know, God loves these people. They're going to go get married anyway. They're going to go get a cake from anywhere else. So, you know, you can't stop them. So I will let them know what I stand and I'll just make the best cake I can give and give it to them. Some other believer may have made that choice. That is, you know, I won't, we won't judge that person. It's fine. Or a third believer may have made a purely commercial decision. He says, hey, I'm just making cakes and selling what they want. It's up to them. And again, we won't judge that believer as well. So, you know, a believer has these three options. Each individual may be fully convinced to take one of these options. And, you know, we don't judge them, okay. As a believer, you made that choice. But we need to understand the thought process behind it. And it's okay. You know, their conscience is before God and they're making their decision based on, you know, given the framework, they're arriving at a conclusion that keeps them that way. You know, gives them a conscience that way. That's fine. So I hope I answered. I mean, hope we helped think through that question. Yeah. I mean, it's not that we have to have a certain answer. Right. Yes, pastor. Thank you. Very helpful. Now let's take up Rosalind's question here. So the question here, again, a very interesting scenario is let's say there's a believer. They have a street eatery. Okay. That means they have this mobile eatery that could be put up anywhere on the street. And, you know, so the police comes and says, hey, you can't park here. You can't put up your stall here. Unless you give us some money, otherwise you'll have to move. The question is, should the couple pay or not? So here's my quick response to that. See, the police or no police as a believer, you know, we have to do what's permitted by law. So if the law permits me to have a stall on the roadside in that place, in certain places you can, certain places you cannot. So if it's a place where I should not put up a stall, the main reason, you know, of course, is for the obstruction of the flow of traffic. That's the reason why in certain parts of the city, they say you cannot put up a stall here. But as in other parts of the city, you're free to, you know, have these mobile trucks and whatever and nobody bothers. So if I'm in a place in a city where I'm putting up a stall or food stall, mobile food stall, and it's not permitted by law, then the police is a non-issue. I am violating the law and I shouldn't be putting it up there in the first place as a believer. So that would be my first response. Hey, are you allowed to put up a stall there in that part of the city? If you're not allowed to, then you have no business doing it there. So go to a place where you're permitted to have a mobile food stall on the roadside. And some streets are allowed to do that, you know, because there's a lot of people, there's a lot of space, and you're allowed to have a mobile food stall. You can get permission from the police. And we've done that. We've done that. We've got police permission to put up stalls for when we want to give out tracks and all that. So we go to the police, they give us a stab, say, yeah, you're allowed to. So we put up a stall and we give out tracks. We give out free books. So we can do that. So we get prior permission. We don't have to pay anything, you know. But if I'm doing something illegal, that is I'm putting up a stall in a place where I should not put up a stall, and then I'm paying the police, then I'm doing double wrong. I'm doing two wrongs. One is I'm breaking the law. I'm breaking the rule. Second is I'm paying off the people who are supposed to enforce the rule. So I end up doing two wrongs. So my advice to this couple would be very simple. Hey, put up your stall on the street where you have permission. Go get police permission. You usually have a letter saying we are having the stall on this link. And they give you a stamp when nobody's going to trouble you. So that would be my response in that situation. Okay. Now, another question here from Elisha. A Christian couple is confused about a decision whether to go ahead and process their permanent immigration visa to the United States. The wife thinks the opportunity is a result of their husband engaging in a lottery. So she won't be part of it. The question is, is it wrong for a Christian to be engaged in a lottery? So you see the lottery process in an immigration is different from a lottery where people have to engage in some form of gambling. These are two different things. The lottery process for a visa is, you can call it a legal process. Meaning they call it a lottery because they're just trying to be fair to everybody. They're saying it's a blind process, meaning we are not giving any preference to any individual. We are going to receive all the applications that come in and then there's going to be a random selection of, you know, so many numbers of visa that we are going to give out of order. So that is not an illegal process. It's not an illegal thing. It's just a way of fairness to all the applicants. So there's nothing wrong about that. So especially you're talking about a country's immigration process. Most of them do it like that. Why? They want to be fair to everybody. All who want to apply, please apply. But then in the end the selection is going to happen at a random, equally fair process. That's a lottery process. And there's nothing wrong in that. It's a legal way of doing things. It's just the government trying to be fair to all the applicants. The lottery thing that's wrong is where things might be a gambling thing. Now the government runs lotteries, which means it's again a legal thing. The government invites people to buy tickets and they say, okay, we want to give out or award whatever amount of money and as an award to people and you buy a ticket and think, okay. So that's again, it's a legal thing. It's the government doing it as a way to benefit people in their own area or region or whether it's a state or whatever. Usually it's run by the state government, at least here in India. That's what I'm aware of. It's a state government run thing. They want to give some benefits to people in their own state. So they have certain awards and they run these things. They invite people in the state to buy those tickets. Again, it's a legal thing. It's not an illegal thing. So I don't find anything wrong with that. It's the government doing something as a way of trying to benefit their citizens. But they want to do it in a very fair way. And so then they do this lottery system where there is no bias towards anybody. Everybody has an equal chance to win it. That's why they do the lottery. But I think where things can go wrong is in the gambling process where, and again, I don't know too much about it, in a gambling process, in a non-regulated environment, in some of these gaming centers or whatever, you keep buying tickets, you keep spending money. People gamble. They put in a lot of money. They spend a lot of their money. Hoping that you buy these tickets and you might get a lot of money. And I think that it's an unregulated process. It's more of a gambling process in the form of a lottery. I think that would be something a Christian should avoid because that becomes addictive. It's a waste of money. I don't know all the details how it works, but it's unregulated and sometimes maybe even illegal. So we need to avoid it. But Visa, awards from the government, these are government regulated way to be fair to everybody and those are fine. Okay. All right. Let's take up... Thank you. Thank you, Pastor. I think I largely share with you similar thoughts. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Elisha. All right. The last question here from Rosalind was... is a member of a... as a member of a resident's society during Hindi Fest was they come for contributions towards a celebration. Must a contributor refuse? What would be the right thing to do? Okay. A quick answer to that is, you know, I generally refuse because one is there is no compulsion to give and secondly, you give because you believe in what you're giving towards. And since we don't believe in whatever that celebration is, we don't give and there's no compulsion to give. Right? So, you know, it's not like a membership fee or anything. It's just an optional contribution and you give it... give if you believe in it. If you don't believe in it, don't give it. Don't give towards it. So, I just... I don't give. Yeah. Say sorry or I tell them I give for other things, but just to give to the church and give to Christian work. All right. So we've covered some interesting questions. Let's move forward. Let's see if we can cover some more ground on these social matters and, you know, feel free to bring up these additional topics maybe next week when we have some other things. So let's move now to another big area which is divorce. Now, this is a big issue, especially within the church. So we're not talking outside the church. We're talking about within the church. Now, how do we think about divorce? Or what do we think about divorce? We know that God doesn't approve this. It's very clear. Malachi 2.16, God says, I hate divorce. And we know that marriage was designed by God for a lifetime. Jesus said, whom God has joined together, let no man separate. So that's very clear. Two things are very clear. Divorce is not God's desire. Marriage is meant for a lifetime. That's very clear. But then in life, all kinds of things happen. Right? Things happen. So there can be moral failure. There could be financial and so on. And these are usually, usually, just working with people. These are two big causes for divorce. We're talking about from everything now, we're saying within the context of the church. These are two big things, where we usually see divorce happen. One is unfaithfulness, moral failure. The husband or the wife, somebody in the marriage, is unfaithful to their spouse. And that is very painful. It's very hard. And it usually ends up in divorce, usually. Now, there are cases where the spouse who has been wronged may be able to extend forgiveness and seek restoration. And we have seen that happen. I'm not saying every time there's unfaithfulness, it always ends in divorce. No. In some cases, the spouse forgives and accepts the husband or the wife who's been unfaithful, accepts them back. And they reconcile and then they live happily. They're able to journey forward. Of course, there's a process of healing that takes place and they go on. But in some cases, it's not like that. When there's unfaithfulness, the other person is so hurt and also there's no repentance on the other side, so that ends up there in divorce. The other thing we've seen also is in a case where there is financial problems, meaning especially the husband is not taking care of the family, you know, not providing for the house and neglecting the whole family. So then, of course, it begins with lots of problems, problems, problems. Then eventually things may come to a point where the marriage ends in a divorce. Other situations are where there's a lot of abuse. The husband may be ill-treating his wife, ill-treating the children and so on. I'm talking again, I'm talking about Christian homes in the church. And the wife may be patient, may be enduring it for a season, for some time, but then at some point it's just so hurtful and sometimes even harmful, very dangerous, especially when there's physical abuse and that's when things deteriorate and divorce happens. So how must we respond? What is our understanding? We must understand that there are these situations where divorce is permitted in the Bible, which Jesus mentioned in Matthew 532 when there is unfaithfulness on the part of either the husband or the wife. In Matthew 532, Jesus is specifically talking about a wife who's been unfaithful to the husband, but it also works the other way. Although it's not stated, it should be applied the other way as well. So although in Matthew 532 it's one way, a reference to a scenario, it should be applied to all related scenarios where if the husband is unfaithful, the wife has a right to divorce. The other scenario we see is in 1 Corinthians 715 when there is an unbelieving spouse and there is desertion and the other spouse is left with no choice that then to dissolve the marriage. But if it's applicable in that situation, then willful desertion also happens in the case of believers, when they may start out as believers, but one of them would just disappear and think of these cases, and these are real scenarios. There were two young people, worth of believers. One was from here in Bangalore, one was from another city. They got married, and I found it very strange because within a month, a month and a half liters maximum, there seemed to be some problems, very strange problems. I found it very strange because the mother of the lady came to me and said, you know, there are problems in the marriage, please pray. But neither the husband or the wife, they just got married, young couple. None of them came and told me that there's problems, and I was wondering, like, okay, why is the mother coming and saying all of this? And then, like let's say in about two months, maybe two and a half months, okay, they said, you know, they needed some counseling and they chose to go to the pastor of the church that the girl was from. And I said, okay, fine, you know, as long as you go and get help from somewhere. So they started one or two sessions and, again, I found something, I found something very strange and I did not express anything. But within that week, what happened was the wife, and this was unknown to anyone. She had gone and applied for a visa to the US and just got on a flight, disappeared to the US and never to be traced again, gone. And the, you know, so basically then the whole story came out that it appeared, appeared, and again, we can't prove this, but it appeared in this particular case and the whole intent of that woman wanting to get married or the young lady wanting to get married was for her to go get a visa to go to the US because if you say that you're married and you want to go to the US, you are more likely to get a visa. She was denied a visa earlier before her marriage, but now she used this as a way to say, I am coming back, I'm just got married, whatever, and disappeared. So it seemed like that was the whole setup. So then what do you do in a situation like this? Can you tell this? So this is that there is no unfaithfulness in the sense of there was no adultery or anything committed. There was no moral or financial failure, but there was this part of a willful desertion where in this particular case, the young lady was just got married and this was just within three months of getting married. Got on a flight, disappeared into the US. What do you tell this young man? Do you say, hey, God hates divorce. You have to stay like this for the rest of your life? Or do you say, fine, this has happened. It's outside your control. For whatever reason, that person chose to just abandon the marriage and maybe even use this marriage as a way to get a visa and disappear. And the girl's parents said, look, we don't know anything. She's an adult. She made her decision, whatever. You can't argue with the parents. They can't do anything. But this actually happened. It was such a shock. It was a shock to me also. No one saw this coming. And, well, what do you do? So that marriage was, you know, went through a divorce and then the young man got married again and he's happily married. He has his own family. Everything is going fine now. It's been many years, of course. But I'm just giving that as an example where this was between two believers and it turned out like this in a very strange situation. So while 1 Corinthians 17 specifically addresses willful desertion in the context of a believer and a believer, you can also apply it here in the context of two believers where somebody just abandons the marriage and disappears or just walks out of it. You cannot hold the other person responsible for the choice or the decision of that person. So that's one example. And there have been, at least, I can think of one other similar scenario. And even in that case, we had to help the man journey through the whole divorce and again he got remarried and he's fine. But that would come under this whole abandoning of the marriage. Then there is this whole issue of physical and emotional abuse and it's in that same passage of Malachi 2, 14 to 16 where God says he hates divorce in Malachi 2, 14 and 16. He makes it very clear that you don't deal treacherously. You don't deal treacherously. And if you look at the meaning of that word doing deal treacherously, it just talks about don't do evil undercover. So in English, we say deal treacherously, we say okay, don't be unfaithful. But the actual Hebrew there is don't do evil under hiding. So this hating divorce is given in this scenario saying man, you don't deal evil with your spouse in hiding because that's going to end up in divorce and I hate divorce. So God is addressing this whole build up towards divorce which is don't deal treacherously. Don't treat your spouse with evil. The person, the woman you've married in your youth. Don't do evil to her undercover. That is behind closed doors we would say like that because that is actually building up towards divorce and I hate divorce. So that's how we should correctly understand Malachi 2.14-16. But many times we only say God hates divorce, God hates divorce and that is true. But he's explaining the whole scenario there of dealing treacherously or don't do evil undercover because you're doing violence to the woman you've married and it's going to end up in divorce which is something God hates. But what if the man is doing evil that he's treating his wife with violence in that relationship? Can we just tell the lady you have to stay there and suffer the violence and suffer the evil and just take it just because God hates divorce? No, that's not the intent there. God is talking to the man saying don't do it because it's going to end up like this. So what I have run into many scenarios is that especially in this context of abuse is that when women are suffering abuse they go to a pastor and then a pastor says God hates divorce you have to stay in the marriage. That is I believe wrong counsel because you're telling somebody to stay in a place where there is evil and violence being done against them and they're being destroyed gradually and you're putting their life in danger just because you're saying God hates divorce and we are misunderstanding Malachi 14 through 16. So doesn't God love the woman who's being abused? Doesn't God want her safety, her well-being to move her to a place of safety and then shouldn't God treat the woman fairly in love and in goodness? Of course he will. So our counsel should come from that perspective and not just force somebody to stay in a situation where there's evil violence and danger to their lives. So we must understand that there will be situations in life where believers are going to end up in divorce. It's not the best, but it happens and what we must understand is that well let me put it, I think I wrote it down somewhere here. You know, okay, God hates the divorce but he still loves the people who have gone through it. So we should not look down upon them. So the divorce might happen, the event might happen for whatever reasons, we've mentioned a few. But we still need to love the people who have gone through it. But somehow in some churches and I've heard this firsthand from people that the church tends to look down on those who have gone through a divorce or going through it and they treat them as second-class citizens. They don't care for them so much. But we should in fact love them, we should be there for them and we should extend the heart of God of mercy and compassion to them and give them hope for the future that God can make all things new in their lives. Let me pause here and let's just take up and give some time for questions and discussion on this and let's see. Okay, any questions on this topic? I know it's a difficult topic but let's try to do what we can. Pastor, what about the marriages with suspicious partner due to psychiatric problems? If it is difficult to live together, could that be a reason for divorce? Yeah, that's a challenging question. So, could a spouse use a psychiatric problem as a reason for divorce? It's a challenging question because if it's compared to a physical illness, what could happen to people get married and one of them's after marriage faces a physical problem? So, a psychiatric problem could come up for whatever reason, maybe it was undetected before or whatever. And then it becomes a very difficult thing for the husband of the wife who was married to become the caregiver to the spouse. Personally, this is my personal thought again. We don't have a chapter and verse on this but personally, I think the right thing to do is for the husband or the wife to still love and to still care as much as possible for the spouse who has been affected by ill health either physically or mentally. That would be the right thing to do. But sometimes, and again, I've seen these situations where it just becomes unbearable, meaning the situation is so bad where the spouse is unable to provide the kind of care that is needed, especially if it gets, especially the case of a psychiatric illness where it's not just a physical condition, it's a very complex situation. It becomes unbearable. I think in a situation like that, the right thing would be to get outside help. Of course, one person cannot provide all the care so wherever possible, get additional help to provide care. So that would be the right thing to do. For that to end in a divorce, I don't want to be a judge in this matter. I would say it's left entirely to the person, to what their conscience permits them to do. We can't give a chapter in verse other than the fact that God brought man and woman together for life. God brought them together. But then things have gone out of hand, things are very difficult, unbearable. I would leave that decision to the spouse who is providing care and to their conscience before God, they need to make the decision. And now we need to just be supportive to both people in this decision. Because there is a legitimate thing if it's a psychotic problem and if it's very difficult to manage, to handle, then we also need to understand the other person's situation. Well, we cannot come with an answer to the situation. We could say, look, we are going to support both people through the decision that is made. And we're not going to judge because we're not in their shoes. And while we would definitely say to whatever extent possible, be together. But if it's not practically possible, then we would let the spouse make the decision and support them through it, stand with them through it. And I believe God will understand the decision that's made, the practicalities of it. So it would vary, the outcome would vary from marriage to marriage, scenario to scenario. I'm not saying everything will end in divorce, but some do. And we let the spouse make the decision. We don't do it for them. Thank you both. That's a difficult question. Difficult situation. Any other questions? Okay. So we've covered two areas, kind of both related to marriage. So we will have, I think we need one more hour to kind of touch upon the other topics. I haven't delved in depth into the other topics that I've listed in the notes, but I think we'll take another hour just to, you know, just share some way of thinking for other topics. So we'll do that next week. And we should wrap everything up next week. And then I'll just provide you the assessments to work on the rest of November as a full revision for this course. Okay. Thank you everyone for being on the class today. Can somebody close in prayer? And then we will dismiss. Go ahead. Thank you so much for giving us one more of course in law to know more about marriage law. All right. Thank you so much for faster. Thank you for your wisdom and spirit law to guide us, Lord. Thank you for helping us to understand some of the issues that we are facing. Helping us to understand some of the difficult questions. And Lord, I do believe the days to come, Lord, we all, those who are listening and hearing, we could able to be a good minister to many families, Lord. And I thank you so much for each one of us, Lord. And I pray for all the students who are married, Lord, I pray and bless their family. And I pray for the students who are going to marry, Lord. Also I pray and bless them for their future life, Lord. Once again, I thank you so much for faster, for giving and guiding us, Lord. Thank you, Jesus. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Roman. Have a good break and I'll see you all next week. Thanks. Bye now.