tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post7512575872826277672..comments2024-03-28T00:32:20.743-07:00Comments on Through These Woods: The Sins of the Pharisees (Both the Ancient and Modern types)Dan Trabuehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-89857160759795443852019-08-21T23:26:21.982-07:002019-08-21T23:26:21.982-07:00"Hell, EVEN THE SCHOLARS you cite I suppose i...<i>"Hell, EVEN THE SCHOLARS you cite I suppose in an attempt to defend your point, whatever it is, recognize that the temple cheats were oppressing the poor."</i><br /><br />No one suggested that the poor weren't being abused. The point is that the abuse of the poor is not the reason for driving out the money changers. It was the manner in which they were conducting what had otherwise been normal, and how that manner defiled the House of God. The poor were in no way the only people being cheated. <br /><br /><i>"Matthew and John both specifically mention those selling doves AND NOT those selling sheep or larger sacrifices. The clear implication is that there was some SPECIFIC problem with overpricing doves."</i><br /><br />"The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. <b>In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep,</b> and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, “Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!”" ---John 2:13-16 New Revised Standard Version<br /><br />The clear implication was the defiling of the Temple by cheating all who depended upon those providing sacrificial animals and proper coinage.<br /><br /><i>"No, Marshall did not. He made that CLAIM, and he is welcome to his opinion, but it's not a rationally solid claim, as you appear to want to think."</i><br /><br />You have this totally reversed as there is NO rational interpretation of the Ligonier rendering that comes out as you need it to be. You're tickling your own ears by your imposing meaning (as usual) that doesn't exist.Marshal Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-60785923932766643362019-08-20T16:08:44.553-07:002019-08-20T16:08:44.553-07:00Craig has empty nonsense and zero answers for brav...Craig has empty nonsense and zero answers for bravado.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-77338777104495412022019-08-20T07:56:30.238-07:002019-08-20T07:56:30.238-07:00
He cannot answer the plucking out of the eye ques...<br />He cannot answer the plucking out of the eye question.<br /><br />He thought he had you with “plain sense” approach to scripture. He’s never paid attention to how people actually write and hear/read narrative.<br /><br />So, while he blames me elsewhere for not being to answer me, he cannot answer here.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-79784340820940001922019-08-20T07:50:53.199-07:002019-08-20T07:50:53.199-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-29509396478759630712019-08-19T21:10:28.927-07:002019-08-19T21:10:28.927-07:00* From my point earlier about Jesus and the sellin...* From my point earlier about Jesus and the selling of the doves being the specific problem pointed out by Matthew and John.<br /><br />As I said, the clear implication is that there was some SPECIFIC problem with overpricing doves. <br /><br />Why would I make that claim? What if the authors were merely citing one of the animals as a convenient short cut rather than spelling out all the animals? It could be... IF we were to lift this one line out of context of the whole Bible and all of Jesus' teachings. <br />IF we forget how all the prophets continually identified God as a defender of the poor, the marginalized, the immigrant, the orphan, the outcast (hereafter just referred to as "the poor");<br />if we forget that the oppression of the poor is a common thread throughout the Bible as one of the great wrongs;<br />if we forget the maltreatment of the poor was "the sin of Sodom," a town so evil it was destroyed;<br /><br />If we forget that this is a story about Jesus... <br />The very same Jesus who began his ministry by saying that he'd come to preach good news TO THE POOR: <br />the same Jesus whose mother celebrated his birth by singing a song about the oppression of the poor and how God would deliver the poor from the rich and powerful oppressors;<br />the same Jesus who repeatedly warned about the trappings of wealth;<br />the same Jesus whose brother warned about the wealthy oppressors repeatedly;<br />the same Jesus who, when John the Baptist was seeking verification that he was The One said, "Go tell John how I have helped the poor...";<br />the same Jesus who taught his followers to leave behind their money and comfort and come, join his shared wealth community;<br />the same Jesus who started a church that took care of the poor and lived simply to tend to the needs of the poor;<br />the same Jesus who warned that being wealthy made it nearly impossible to be part of the Kingdom of God;<br />the same Jesus who said that you could recognize his followers by the way they treated the poor...<br /><br />If you RIP that one verse out of all Biblical and Christian and historical and reasonable context... then maybe one could suggest that it was just a fluke that the authors cited the problem of specifically the cheating on the offering of the poor.<br /><br />But why would we rip that one verse out of context? In an attempt to defend treating the poor with no special concern?<br /><br />Craig, perhaps the worst, most biblically and rationally despicable thing that you have said in a while was when you suggested about Jesus, <i>"What <b>doesn’t</b> he get really worked up about? His personal safety. The poor and oppressed..."</i><br /><br />I don't know if you know this, but Jesus vomited a little bit in his mouth when you uttered that vulgarity.<br /><br />There are vulgar (culturally crude) words and there are vulgar (disgusting) words. Those words from you are just disgusting and loathsome.Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-56400476679872038252019-08-19T20:54:13.335-07:002019-08-19T20:54:13.335-07:00Very well, you finally DID answer the questions. N...Very well, you finally DID answer the questions. Not again, mind you, but finally.<br /><br /><b>A. You DO realize that this is the first time you've answered the questions, right?</b><br /><br />So, good, you did answer the questions, but you continue to miss the point. Your answers...<br /><br /><i>"1. Do you recognize that many scholars and groups (including the group I cited which is conservative) view it as obvious that the Traders were oppressing the poor and this specifically angered Jesus?"<br /><br />Yes, I recognize the fact that "many" people believe this. As you are so fond of saying, that doesn't make your hunch correct. This is an example of a logical fallacy.</i><br /><br />No, the answer is simply, Yes, you DO understand that this is a teaching from many scholars. Hell, EVEN THE SCHOLARS you cite I suppose in an attempt to defend your point, whatever it is, recognize that the temple cheats were oppressing the poor.<br /><br />So, your first word answer was correct. But THEN, you tried to turn it into an attack, as if I had said that "many scholars agree with me, so I am right..." But as even a third grader could tell you, that is NOT what I said. I never made the argument that many scholars agree with me, so I must be right. So, while getting the answer correct, your take away was idiotic and simply factually wrong. A false claim like your brainless leader regularly makes.<br /><br /><i>"2. What is your explanation for Matthew specifically siding the doves as opposed to the offerings that were purchased by wealthier people?"<br /><br />In actuality Matthew specifically mentioned the "money changers" and the people "selling doves", so he clearly didn't "single out" the dove people.</i><br /><br />Matthew and John both specifically mention those selling doves AND NOT those selling sheep or larger sacrifices. The clear implication is that there was some SPECIFIC problem with overpricing doves. More on that later.*<br /><br /><i>3. Do you recognize the reality that doves in that day and time where the sacrifice that specifically poor people were purchasing?<br /><br />Yes.</i><br /><br />Again, your direct answer is correct. But you can't let it lie there, you go on to say...<br /><br /><i>Do you realize the reality that in your question number 1 that you are engaging in the Bandwagon logical fallacy?</i> <br /><br />No, I'm not. You're simply factually and stupidly wrong.<br /><br /><b>B. Do you recognize the reality that I never made this appeal to a bandwagon as "proof" that I was right?</b><br /><br />You also went on to make this silly point...<br /><br /><i>Do you realize that Art pointed out that your Ligonier piece actually doesn't support your hunch as well as you think?</i><br /><br />No, Marshall did not. He made that CLAIM, and he is welcome to his opinion, but it's not a rationally solid claim, as you appear to want to think. Your own desire to have your own ears tickled has led you astray. <br /><br />More...Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-79428367638369981782019-08-19T18:48:39.660-07:002019-08-19T18:48:39.660-07:00Craig has answered in the negative: “no, I don’t h...Craig has answered in the negative: “no, I don’t have the decency.” He answered elsewhere, of course, given his instinct for avoidance and dodge. Oddly, he blames me for his fear and anxiety of answering.<br />Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-75196585924935434422019-08-19T10:59:22.012-07:002019-08-19T10:59:22.012-07:00Do you have the decency to answer my question, Cra...Do you have the decency to answer my question, Craig? Have you plucked out either or both of your eyes?<br /><br />Or was Jesus not speaking plain?Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-34534891356496080512019-08-19T09:35:25.964-07:002019-08-19T09:35:25.964-07:00I've answered your questions again. But it w...I've answered your questions again. But it won't matter.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-91359656539433171122019-08-18T17:09:42.660-07:002019-08-18T17:09:42.660-07:00Craig, in a deleted comment, said, "It’s int...Craig, in a deleted comment, said, "It’s interesting that in a desire to justify the judgmental, vitriol, we see aimed at those that disagree, we see a willingness to abandon the “pacifist Jesus” position. This isn’t about interpreting scripture, it’s about justification for hatful, vitriolic, the ends justify the means tactics to defeat the enemy."<br /><br />Part of the problem appears to be that Craig sees someone who strives to be a follower of the peacemaking Christ and he holds a hunch that this means they believe in a bland milquetoast christ.<br /><br />The Jesus that ana Baptist, progressive Christian types find to be biblical and rational is the fiery, steel-strong, crafty revolutionary Christ who, while he's a peacemaker and gentle with and for the marginalized and poor, can be tough as bricks and volatile with pharisees and oppressors.<br /><br />There has been NOTHING that I've said that suggests ANYTHING like an ends justifies means message. That's more of a type that fits with the Pharisees and oppressors.<br /><br />And it's about justice and grace. Embrace those.Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-36167070667931079022019-08-18T16:45:36.983-07:002019-08-18T16:45:36.983-07:00It’s nothing but interpretation of scripture.
You...It’s nothing but interpretation of scripture.<br /><br />You two, needing to justify brutality, find a brutal Jesus contained within a book.<br /><br />Dan and myself, needing a god of love, find a loving Jesus in the text, who is the figure of the loving Christ today.<br /><br />Re the poor not being at the top of the messianic agenda: I wouldn't read the prophets if I were either of you.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-30428659331762827942019-08-18T16:38:29.749-07:002019-08-18T16:38:29.749-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-35900061539055005722019-08-18T15:22:13.579-07:002019-08-18T15:22:13.579-07:00"1. Do you recognize that many scholars and g...<i>"1. Do you recognize that many scholars and groups (including the group I cited which is conservative) view it as obvious that the Traders were oppressing the poor and this specifically angered Jesus?"</i><br /><br />You're conflating again. You've not provided anything that suggests <i>any</i> scholars or groups (<i>specifically</i> those you cited as conservative) "view it as obvious that the Traders were oppressing the poor and <i>this specifically</i> angered Jesus?"<br /><br /><i>"2. What is your explanation for Matthew specifically siding the doves as opposed to the offerings that were purchased by wealthier people?"</i><br /><br />Nothing especially significant about it, but even if you can demonstrate the significance you wish to emphasize, you still can't ignore other renderings of the event, even if as some say, there were two such incidents recorded. It doesn't mean He was doing it because poor people were being screwed, but because crooked business was taking place in the House of God.<br /><br /><i>"3. Do you recognize the reality that doves in that day and time where the sacrifice that specifically poor people were purchasing?"</i><br /><br />Of course, but irrelevant with regard to the point of the story and Christ's intentions and motivations for driving out the money changers. It is YOU that is imposing this motivation upon Him without Scriptural evidence of that actually being the case.Marshal Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-5318551205894778982019-08-18T15:14:21.749-07:002019-08-18T15:14:21.749-07:00I don't know why my previous comments appear u...I don't know why my previous comments appear under "anonymous", unless I inadvertently clicked on the Anonymous identity option. In any case, we'll see if it happens after this.<br /><br />I read the Ligonier piece and it does not support your contention. The only mention of the poor is:<br /><br /><i>"Pilgrims paid exorbitant rates to change money, and <b>sellers exploited those in poverty, overcharging for the poor man’s offering</b> of pigeons and doves."</i><br /><br />But as we can see, it comes along with how the sellers exploited also "pilgrims", which refers to all who come from afar, rich and poor alike. So the mention of the poor is merely a matter of listing who was screwed by those running things at the Temple; how they were defiling the Temple. As such, this does not serve as evidence the piece supports the contention that the story is about Jesus' concern for the poor. Nothing else in the piece so much as hints at such a thing. <br /><br />The same is true with regards Wiki. It makes no effort to connect verses it adds regarding Temple corruption to Jesus' reasons for driving out the money changers. None whatsoever. Again, at best all one can honestly say is that those verses simply give more examples of the corruption of those who would otherwise be doing legitimate Temple business by providing animals and money exchanges. But none of it supports the contention that Christ's purpose driving out the jerks was about the poor. It wasn't. It was about the corruption of the money changers and their defiling the Temple, preventing worshipers from praying and heralding His impending death on our behalf.<br /><br />This is not to say that there exists no evidence of Christ's/God's concern for the poor. It's just that the story of Christ driving out the money changers isn't one of them. If it were, then you'd be saying that He <i>wasn't</i> concerned about other people being robbed, or that if the poor weren't being robbed then He wouldn't care about all the others who were. Your SJW interpretation doesn't work at all. <br /><br />Another false tactic of yours is to focus on one rendering of an event from Scripture and ignore renderings of other gospel writers that don't focus on the same point that strokes your socialist leanings. But to be consistent in even your own alleged style of Biblical study requires considering all of Scripture, in this case all references to this story in every gospel in which it appears, and then come to conclusions about Christ's mental state and intentions. So while you focus on doves appearing in one gospel, sheep and cattle are mentioned in another. THAT is what reality looks like and it is YOU who ignores it...not us. Thus...Marshal Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-41804851886250497922019-08-18T14:54:19.535-07:002019-08-18T14:54:19.535-07:00When Christians like Craig know they've taken ...When Christians like Craig know they've taken a gutter road in their faith and others point it out, they, as Craig has done here, stop and remain in place with inane stubbornness on a rigid, empty point.<br /><br />Craig says, "you haven’t explained how Jesus words mean something other than what they plainly say." Repeatedly now. It's his only strategy to cover for his shame. But it is, of course, an idiotic and very dangerous cover of biblical interpretation. Throughout history, mad zealots who have taken "Jesus words to mean only what they plainly say" have blinded themselves.<br /><br />Craig cannot, apparently see anything other than what Jesus plainly says. So, "If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell." I never knew Craig was blind.<br /><br />I'd rather he take Jesus plainly when Jesus follows the "plainly" directive eye-plucking statement with, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you."<br /><br />But I fear Craig is far too self-centered and sold to brutality to take that literally.Feodorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216659885831979653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-8720868636544680322019-08-18T14:34:42.534-07:002019-08-18T14:34:42.534-07:00In spite of Craig's false claims, he is not b...In spite of Craig's false claims, he is not banned from here. Rather, I simply expect answers to questions and the basic recognition of reality. If he answers questions and if he recognizes reality, he can comment here. But given his long history of failing on both points, I have little patience remaining for rants, false claims and a failure to recognize reality. Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-71508635991360697232019-08-18T14:16:19.449-07:002019-08-18T14:16:19.449-07:00Ah, I see you responded by NOT answering the quest...Ah, I see you responded by NOT answering the questions asked of you. Or rather, you didn't answer two of them and on the third, you did answer, but then erred in obfuscation.<br /><br /><br />In fact, John's version of the story has Jesus addressing the dove traders specifically. Yes, he chased the whole mess out because the whole system was corrupt, but that does not change that Jesus is clearly responding directly to the oppression of the poor.<br /><br />Don't bother commenting further unless you're going to answer the questions put to you.Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-10863052077809968242019-08-18T14:09:59.673-07:002019-08-18T14:09:59.673-07:00"it became a matter of convenience to have a ..."it became a matter of convenience to have a place where Roman coins could be exchanged for Jewish half shekels. The moneychangers provided this convenience, but, of course, required a small fee for the exchange. Because so many thousands came up for the great feasts in Jerusalem, changing money was a very profitable business — one that resulted in fraud and oppression of the poor."<br /><br />drivebyhistory.comDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-46738789935369120542019-08-18T14:04:25.804-07:002019-08-18T14:04:25.804-07:00Jesus confronting the religious leaders in their c...Jesus confronting the religious leaders in their cheating and oppression specifically of the poor is not, of course, limited to the cleansing of the temple...<br /><br />Jesus Denounces the Scribes<br /><br />38 As he taught, he said, “Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and to have the best seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets! <br /><br />40 They devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appearance say long prayers. <br /><br />They will receive the greater condemnation.”<br /><br />The Widow’s Offering<br /><br />41 He sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the crowd putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which are worth a penny. 43 Then he called his disciples and said to them, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. 44 For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-56202310904813160982019-08-18T14:04:07.455-07:002019-08-18T14:04:07.455-07:00I completely understand, why your closing the door...I completely understand, why your closing the door. I expected it sooner. Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-42355656907782939252019-08-18T14:03:33.099-07:002019-08-18T14:03:33.099-07:001. I realize that many scholars have multiple in...1. I realize that many scholars have multiple interpretations of Matthew 21. <br /><br />2. If you can’t explain why Jesus specifically avoided mentioning “the poor” in His one direct quote, what possible standing do you have to demand that I do what you won’t?<br /><br />3. Yes, do you recognize the reality that Jesus didn’t explicitly target the dove sellers? That he targeted everyone? That the only specific reason given for His violent rampage doesn’t mention “the poor”.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-14571579128206890932019-08-18T13:59:38.827-07:002019-08-18T13:59:38.827-07:00It's one thing to be ignorant of context. It&#...It's one thing to be ignorant of context. It's another thing to cling to your ignorance in lieu of opening your eyes.<br /><br />"A common interpretation is that Jesus was reacting to the practice of the money changers in routinely cheating the people, but Marvin L. Krier Mich observes that a good deal of money was stored at the temple, where it could be loaned by the wealthy to the poor who were in danger of losing their land to debt. The Temple establishment therefore co-operated with the aristocracy in the exploitation of the poor."Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-81274786216555268322019-08-18T13:25:40.183-07:002019-08-18T13:25:40.183-07:00Or, here, I'll give you a chance to least demo...Or, here, I'll give you a chance to least demonstrate you can see some reality. Just answer these questions.<br /><br />1. Do you recognize that many scholars and groups (including the group I cited which is conservative) view it as obvious that the Traders were oppressing the poor and this specifically angered Jesus?<br /><br />2. What is your explanation for Matthew specifically siding the doves as opposed to the offerings that were purchased by wealthier people? <br /><br />3. Do you recognize the reality that doves in that day and time where the sacrifice that specifically poor people were purchasing?Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-19821453595579084522019-08-18T13:14:05.394-07:002019-08-18T13:14:05.394-07:00So the conservatives and many other scholars are w...So the conservatives and many other scholars are wrong and you're right because you don't see it? Got it.<br /><br />I allowed a few comments from you two, but as you continue to miss the obvious, you're done.Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-78226375919321970262019-08-18T13:09:44.602-07:002019-08-18T13:09:44.602-07:00Dan,
Once again, you haven’t explained how Jesus ...Dan,<br /><br />Once again, you haven’t explained how Jesus words mean something other than what they plainly say.<br /><br />1. Exactly they sold all sorts of animals suitable for sacrifice primarily to those who had traveled to Jerusalem for Passover (a celebration of an event you deny happened), and some of those travelers were poor. They also changed coinage into that which was acceptable in the temple. Nowhere does the text explicitly indicate that the poor were specifically targeted or preyed on worse that anyone else. The only specific indicators of Jesus’ motivation is to look at the words He used, in the context of His arrival and purpose for coming to Jerusalem. One also could consider that the part of the temple being preempted by this commerce, was the only part of the temple where gentiles could worship and pray. Given Jesus’ more inclusive message, it’s reasonable to suspect that He had that in mind as well. But all we can say with relative certainty is that which He actually said.<br /><br />2. According to the text, He Healed “the blind and lame”. Granted, those conditions usually led to poverty, but poverty wasn’t a given. Again, you’ve added something that isn’t explicitly in the text in order to try to support your hunch. You’ve even ignored the context that doesn’t support your hunch while adding in context that you think helps you. <br /><br />I have looked, that’s why I’ve seen the context and the specific words of Jesus that you haven’t been able to twist or explain away, so you ignore them. Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.com