#STRask - What Evidence in Scripture Identifies the Holy Spirit as a Person?

Episode Date: April 6, 2026

Questions about evidence in Scripture that identifies the Holy Spirit as a person rather than the transforming power of God, whether Mark 13:33 means that the Holy Spirit doesn’t know the day of Christ’s return, and thoughts on contemplative prayer and other popular spiritual formation practices.   Aside from translators’ use of the male pronoun, what evidence in Scripture identifies the Holy Spirit as a “person” as opposed to the transforming power of God? Does Mark 13:33 mean that the Holy Spirit does not know the day of Christ’s return? Can you comment on popular spiritual formation practices such as contemplative prayer, lectio divina, and the need to explore our past in order for the Spirit to work in us to remove sin?

This is Amy Hall, and I am here today with Greg Kokel. We welcome you to hashtag STR-ask. And we're going to start today with a question from Christopher. Okay. Aside from the use of a male pronoun by translators, what evidence in Scripture identifies the Holy Spirit as a person as opposed to the transforming power of God? Well, there's a number of things I could think of just right off the top of my head. So you have Acts 4, 5, right in there somewhere where Ananiasis, Sapphira are struck down. Five. Yeah.

And Peter says to them, you have not, why are you deceiving the Holy Spirit? You have not lied to men but to God. Something to that effect. Now, you can't deceive a power, a mere force. Okay. Also, the spirit is the comforter. and I guess if you're really stressed out and someone gives you a back rub, the back rub is comforting, but it is the person who's giving you the back rub that is the comforter, okay?

And I just, it's also an advocate for us. It says in Romans 8 that the Holy Spirit intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. the act of intercession or praying is, is it an act of an individual, not a force? And you can go through all kinds of passages where it talks about the spirit, the spirit convicts of sin and righteousness and judgment. That's what John 15 or 16. And the act of convicting is a personal action. So what I suggest for people to do when they have questions like this. It's actually quite simple. Get your concordance out, and if you're a serious Christian and you do not have a real concordance, not just the one in the back of your Bible, that's helpful, but it's very modest. Get a real

concordance and have a concordance that's geared to your translation. So Strong's concordance is a great concordance. It's been around for a long time. It's geared to the King James. If you're not reading King James, I have that for word study purposes, but I also have a New American Standard Concordance. The point here is you want to go to every reference in the New Testament to the Spirit, and you can just look them up. Just go down the line, make a list of the verses, then go and look them up, and then make a list of the characteristics that are manifest by the Spirit, given those verses. And then you'll have a complete list like I've just begun to give you that make it clear

that the spirit is a person, not a force, because they are involved in activities that persons have, not just forces have. And you don't even have to buy a concordance. Just go online. I have, right now, I have Bible Gateway up. You just choose your translation. you can enter any word you want, you see every single reference to that word. So that's – and I'm sure there's other options online also.

Yeah, that's a great idea. I mean, I'm still kind of old school in terms of my activity. That's the great way to do it. I should be doing that more often, but that's the way to do it. You just do your own analysis and inductive analysis from inside the text, and it's amazing what you will find. In fact, in light of our concern with people – thinking that having a so-called conversational relationship with God is a standard for every believer.

Every believer gets revelation from God on this view. The Holy Spirit speaks to them is the idea, when we take exception with that, say, that's not biblical. Then they say, well, what's the point of the Holy Spirit then? And what that tells me is people's entire pneumatology, in other words, doctrine of the Holy Spirit, is restricted to one thing. the Holy Spirit speaking of them, which the way they characterize it is not in Scripture. So now what? But what's the point of the Holy Spirit?

Well, just go back and do what we just described. Find the verses that talk about the work of the Spirit and what the Spirit does and then make a list of characteristics or functions or maybe functions is not the right word or responsibilities. or what, in the economic trinity, each Father's Son and the Spirit do different things. So what does the Holy Spirit do? That's how you find out. Well, because I have these questions, I do have these questions ahead of time.

I have a list of them, but I'll just give some of the things that I found. And this isn't everything, but I wanted to get kind of a representative collection here. And this first section, you'll especially see that. The Holy Spirit is, there's a distinction made between the persons of the Trinity. So he's not just the Father or he's not just Jesus. This is John 1526. When the helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of Truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will testify about me. There you go.

So he's testifying, he comes from the Father, he's testifying about Jesus. So you see all Jesus. Jesus is sending him. Yes. John 16, 7, and 8, if I do not go away, the helper will not come to you, but if I go, I will send him to you. And he, when he comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment. So he's convicting, he's testifying. You already mentioned Romans 8, 26, and 27, where it says the spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.

And he who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the spirit is because he intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. So now we see a distinction between the Father and the Spirit, right? Yes, and the Spirit has a mind. Yes, yes. Luke 12. I hadn't really thought of that in the light of this kind of question, which comes up at different times because Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, reject not only the Trinity, but the personality of the Spirit. And so the mind of the Spirit. And Luke 1210, everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him, but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him. And let's just leave aside the question of what that's referring to. But again, you see

the two of the persons of the Trinity there. And then there are all sorts of places where all three are together. This is from 1 Peter 1, 1, 1, and 2, to those who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with his blood. So you see all three persons of the Trinity. being mentioned there. And of course, the most famous one, Matthew 2819, Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. That does not make sense at all if the Holy Spirit is just a transforming power. Why would you include him in there if it's just a power?

Yeah. And by the way, well, I won't get to this other thing. Yeah, that's good. There is the distinction, and that's the point we want to make right now. And then there are a few more. Just, just, say in. Ephesians 430 talks about grieving the Holy Spirit of God. Luke 1212 talks about the Holy Spirit teaching you. John 16, 13 through 15 says, whatever he hears, he will speak, and he will disclose to you what is to come. He will glorify me, for he will take of mine and will disclose it to you. All things that the Father has are mine.

Therefore, I said that he takes of mine and will disclose it to you. So he's talking about the Father giving to Jesus and the Holy Spirit taking from Jesus and giving to us. So again, you see all three persons of the Trinity working together, and a power doesn't glorify, hear, speak, disclose all of these different things. Acts 829, the Spirit said to Philip, transforming power doesn't say things to people. And then the last one I had was Acts 1528, for it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater birth. burns in these essentials. These are all language of personhood, not language of power. Of powerhood. Yes.

Of powerhood. Okay. So let's stick with the Holy Spirit right now. And this question comes from Abby. Does Mark 1333 mean that the Holy Spirit does not know the day of Christ's return? Mark of 1333 says, let me start in 32. But of that day, he's talking, Mark 13 is the parallel to Luke 21 and Matthew 24, which is the Olive it discourse, the second to the last of the four great discourses Jesus gave. Servant in the Mount, Bread of Life, Olivet, and then the upper room discourse we've referred to in the past. And he is talking about the return of Christ, of course, in the Elevate discourse. And he says, but of that day and hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the

son, but the father alone. Take heed, keep on the alert, for you do not know when the appointed time will come. Actually, probably the operative verse is 32. I think in Jesus' statement there, he is not even, the spirit is not a matter of consideration. He had been asked, I'm not sure if this shows up in Mark 13 or certainly in Matthew 24, when will these things be and what will be the sign of your coming? These are two questions. the disciples asked when Jesus was talking about the destruction of Jerusalem. And so he answers both of those questions, but in a way that doesn't place the timing, the sign of his coming will be him appearing in the clouds with great glory. And that's described there, I think,

pretty vividly in Matthew 24. And so what we see is that Jesus' return is a powerful, visible and conclusive kind of event. And there are signs before that that lead up to that event and wars and rumors of wars, et cetera, and earthquakes and all that's in Matthew 24, the whole all of a discourse. But as to the exact timing next week, next month, next year, whatever that is, Jesus says, he just simply says, I don't know. The father knows, but I don't. Now, the reason that Jesus didn't know is because of the connosis, the humbling. So he steps out of heaven, takes on a human form. So he is one person, that is the second person of the Trinity, but he has two natures,

his divine nature as a member of the Trinity and now a human nature joined to him. And there are times when he talks with reference to his divine nature, I and the Father are one. for example. Other times, he's talking from the perspective of his human nature, and it's clear from his words, the father is greater than I. Well, the son or the spirit is not greater than the father, or the father greater than any of the others, because they all share this of divine nature. This is Jesus, the man now, in his humbled sense, and Matthew, Philippians chapter three, talks about this towards the beginning, that he humbled himself, and he basically, like a king, who removes his crown and sets aside his scepter,

and takes off his royal robes, and dons the garb of a slave or a beggar or something, and walks among his people. Now, this king is no less the king, but he has surrendered the privileges of his office so he could be with his people and do what he wanted to do. And the same way Jesus is like that, but only Jesus, not the spirit.

The spirit didn't humble himself. The spirit didn't lay aside. any divine authority or privileges, I should say. This is called the canosis because the word means the emptying. But what's important to keep in mind is that Jesus did not empty himself of his divinity. He emptied himself of his privileges, his prerogatives to take on the human form and be a servant. So since there's no distinction or no qualification, like that regarding the spirit, and the spirit didn't come down in the way that the sun came down and took on humanity, and in virtue of taking on humanity, but the nature of it,

it seemed to me, would entail this kind of kinosus, this emptying, this humbling. Then there's no reason to think that the spirit was restrained in any way like the son was in this particular case with his knowledge. And so I just think that the Spirit is not even in view in this discussion here. He's just saying the Father knows I don't. That's all. He's not saying anything about the Spirit. And I would say the Spirit knows because the Spirit's God and not humbled in a kinetic kind of way.

The other thing I want to just point out just as an observation, and this is missed by almost everyone that talks about this, they misquoted. Jesus said, no one will ever know. He would never know. No one would ever know. That isn't what he said. He was speaking about a question in the present tense, and he answered in the present tense. He said, when will this happen? He said, I don't know. Now, I think Jesus knows now because he's not in his chaotic state, so to speak. He is now glorified. And there is no restriction or restraint in virtue of his incarnation, he's in a glorified body. So I think he knows now. So the limitations regarding that verse do not apply like on infinitum into the future, you know, but that's the way people take it. Now, I'm not encouraged people to set dates. I'm just simply saying Jesus isn't saying no one could know. He's saying, I don't know at the moment. That's all. Is this, do you happen to know if this is before or after Jesus was even talking to them about the Holy Spirit coming? This is before. So it's before? Because this is the Olivet discourse. Oh, okay. Yeah. The upper room

discourse comes in his last night with the disciples. So I wouldn't expect him to bring up the Holy Spirit before he starts talking about him in more specific terms. Yeah, I'm wondering if there, well, in John 3, he does make reference to the Spirit being born of the Spirit. There are references to the Spirit at different times, but nothing like the robust characterization that we get in the upper room discourse where Jesus is describing an exchange. He's with them now. Now, he's going to be leaving, and the Spirit will be with them and in them. And that's going to create a whole new set of affairs that would not be possible. that doesn't bear the same limitations as one individual, the God man Jesus, has in terms of influence and impact.

Now, everyone will have the spirit abiding in them and filling them in virtue of the New Covenant, a provision of the New Covenant, and accomplishing the things that with the multitudes now operating in the Spirit that Jesus, greater than Jesus ever did. And notice he didn't exclude the Holy Spirit either. I think he would have had to, before you could say that that's what he meant, I think he would have had to specifically exclude. Yeah, I don't think. A lot of times when you are reading a passage, I got this from J.P. Morlin many years ago, but you have to consider the frame of reference, the frame of reference. So when we say everybody was at the party, oh, yeah, it was a great party.

Everyone was there. Well, there wasn't 8 billion people there. The frame of reference might be the circle of friends that are around you. And so you understand that term in that way. Now, the frame of reference is just Jesus' knowledge. And he's saying, no, Father knows, but I don't know. He's not making a reference about the nature of the Trinity and the knowledge the full Trinity has. It's not part of the discussion.

Okay, let's go to a question from Ted. And this is going to take a little bit of explanation. But here's the question first. Your post on January 26, and this is a, I don't know if it was Facebook or Instagram, is probably both, that our social media person put up, is shared four tips for developing spiritual formation. Your list is different from what Talbot, Biola, is teaching for spiritual formation. Can you comment on contemplative listening prayer, lectio devena, and the need to explore our past in order for the spirit to work in us to remove. send. So just to be clear, that post was, it was a summary of a response we gave to the question about resources that would be helpful for spiritual formation and developing the non-cerebral side of living a Christian life. It was that date, the January 26th episode. And so the post summarized four things that we said in that episode. And here's what they were. make a habit of reflecting on how the philosophy, apologetics, and theology books you read, reveal who God is, and respond and praise, prayer, and worship.

Be intentional. Keep in mind, I just want to say again, keep in mind, this is for, specifically for people who are more... Left-brain. Yes, they're more caught up in academic pursuits. That was the background for this question. So the first one was you use that academic background and you turn that into worship. Secondly, be intentional about creating a system within which you are doing simple things like reading your Bible, praying and thinking of God as a person you are coming to know. Third, listen to and sing hymns, begin and end your devotions with music. And fourth, memorize scripture for deeper meditation on God's Word. So I just want to start off by saying this was a specific question we were responding to. We weren't trying to say every single thing that's good for a spiritual formation. But anyway, go ahead, Greg.

I just want to look an observation about that. Obviously, I'm in favor of all the things you've mentioned. But I think you use the word, or maybe somebody was asking about the non-cerebral side. But all of these things entail the cerebral side. And I'm very uncomfortable. And I don't think it's just because I'm more left brain. I'm just uncomfortable after 50 years of seeing crazy things, all sorts. I'm uncomfortable with the idea of let's just kind of disconnect from the cerebral side so we get into this mystical side.

And it's interesting the way you characterize those four things. First was reflect. Second one was have a system of reading. Okay. And praying. And praying. Those are thoughtful things. And then you said, and thinking, and then, oh, you talk about worship.

Okay. Now, singing, that border, I mean, that has to be thoughtful, too, because you're using words, usually, and the words have to be theologically informed, properly theologically informed, and memorizing scripture, well, that's cerebral. So it isn't as if what we've suggested is somehow divorcing the affective, the thoughtful side for. from the affective, but the two are interconnected. Right. So we're saying the goal is not to pursue the experience. The goal is to pursue the knowledge and from the knowledge and understanding of God. And that's where the experience happens. That's where the feelings happen.

But if you, I don't think it's a good idea to pursue those feelings directly. Yeah. If that makes sense. Yeah. And I don't know exactly. I don't know how one would do that, actually. I mean, what do you do? Do you kind of, you know, go into a breathing thing, like a physical thing that causes a feeling to happen?

I think in worship, feelings do happen, but they don't always happen. And the songs that I like the most, they usually take me back. We were talking about this recently, Amy, and privately that I go back to the Jesus movement, I'm sorry, era, the 70s and the 80s. in the early 80s, there were so many songs that were so sweet that I still sing them now, and many of them were scripture put to music, and I still sing them now, and they have a sweetness to them because I like the melody and the memory, and so there is an affective response, but I'm still singing the music, you know, the simple little song this morning.

I'm not going to sing it, but the lyrics were, make me more. more like you. Jesus, make me more like you. Give me a heart that's filled with love and make me more like you. Very simple. It's a prayer, but the melody is very touching for me. And so what did I do? I'm saying a prayer, but I'm using music to create a bit of an emotional connection right there. And sometimes, and I know this is true of you, Amy, because you've talked about it. I mean, you were reading the book on the Trinity, Was it rejoicing in the Trinity? Delighting in the Trinity. And I bought the book, and I bought it because you were saying sometimes I was so carried away,

I just had to put the book down. And I read the book. I never got carried away. I did put the book down a bunch of times. I just didn't get into it. My point is, though, is that different people respond to different things. And here it's just a matter of getting for you, getting a deeper understanding of Christ and actually of God. God's nature that just opened up something else in you that emotionally responded to it.

And this is kind of what we're saying here, all of the things that we're mentioning, that they all have to do with, there's a cognitive role that's being played. The goal is to know God. The goal is to know God. And the way you know God is through the truth about God. And through that, the worship comes and experiences come. But if you're using God to get experiences, now your God is your experience. Okay.

So let's look at some of the things. Let's talk about the Biola approach. This started when I was still in the MA program. I graduated 2006. It took me like 13 years to finish. It started that. It wasn't a requirement. But then they added in it as a requirement.

And this was deeply influenced by J.P. Moreland, who is a self-percent. professed mystic. And there were a number of things. I don't know that JP had a hand in all of the elements of this program, but there were a number of things that troubled me and Melinda. Now, Melinda actually, I was able to dodge the course. I got grandfathered in somehow, and I said, look, I don't want to do this.

But Melinda had to take the course, and she was troubled by virtually every single step. And part of it, let's just say there's nothing wrong with contemplation. All contemplation is, at least that it's bare minimum, is thinking about something. You're contemplating, you're thinking, you're chewing on it. And that's great. And having a passage that you think about and chew on, I was thinking about Psalm 51 this morning, in your innermost being, you desire truth in your inmost being, and our innermost being. And in our heart, hidden parts, you will make us to know wisdom.

Now, since that's the Psalm that talks about David's repentance, I'm thinking it's really talking about truth in our heart about sin. But see, that then becomes, as I'm thinking about chewing, it becomes a prayer that I'm trying to apply to my life or maybe to other people that I know. And I'm contemplating that and thinking about the substance. I'm not just going inert. And some of these things, some of these practices, I didn't take the course. I don't know all the details now, but when I hear back about some of this stuff, I'm nervous. And there it is, listening prayer, contemplative and listening prayer. I will just say this.

I had a discipleship group in the late 80s. There were about seven or eight of us. We went through as part of the enterprise exercise. is each of us took a section of the New Testament, read it very carefully, and isolated all the verses that had to do with prayer. And then we put it in an outline. You can find this outline on our website under the heading New Testament on prayer. So just do the search, NT or New Testament on prayer. You'll get every single characterization of prayer that is every reference to prayer, either direct or indirect, and every prayer that was prayed.

and then I have in an outline form as to how it all falls together so you can see that. And I guarantee there is not a single verse that even hints at the idea of listening prayer. It is not biblical. Now, it doesn't, because it's not biblical, doesn't mean it's wrong. There's a difference between being non-biblical and un-biblical. Un-biblical. You're doing something contrary to Scripture. Non-biblical means the scripture doesn't address it.

However, if the scripture doesn't address it, why are we teaching it as a spiritual discipline? You know, and this is the way – and I think there are lots of problems, because if we're taught that if we pray and then this is it, two-way conversation, this is the way it's characterized and justified. We talk to God. God talks to us. Prayer is conversation. Well, prayer is conversational from our side, but it isn't conversation in that. sense, given the Scripture. Scripture doesn't say prayer as conversation in that way. The word of God that we are supposed to pay attention to is the written word, not the words

that we think God is giving us while we're praying and then listening. That is really dangerous. And the reason it's dangerous is because people who are told that if they pray and then stop and listen, God will speak to them if they do it right or whatever. they're going to hear something. I guarantee you. It may be the thoughts of their own mind. Okay. The problem is what they hear, they have been told, is going to be God. And now they're applying divine authority to probably their own thoughts. Could God still speak? Yes, but why are we doing this? Why are we inviting? Why are we stealing our mind and inviting thoughts to come into our

head that we are there going to interpret as God speaking to us. Nobody did that in the Bible. Nobody did that in the Bible ever. Why are we teaching people to do this when all these dangers are at the doorstep? Okay, so when, if that's part of it, or is it lectio devena? Yes. Okay, so this is another, this is another discipline where you're using scripture at a certain way. But it depends on how you're doing, like Deo devena, and there's a couple of different ways. You can take portions of scripture and meditate on portions of scripture. You can say them over and over. The Lord is my shepherd. I shall not want. The Lord is my shepherd. I shall not want.

The Lord is my shepherd. I shall not, whatever. Notice how I'm just emphasizing different words there because it suggests a different element that's a little bit more tangible because of the emphasis. The Lord is my shepherd. Nobody else. He's the one that keeps me from wanting. Now, that's a way of meditating on a piece of text. On the meaning of the text that's there.

Exactly. On the meaning of the text. We are not looking for hidden meanings. We're not trying to read between the lines. It's interesting when Paul talks to Timothy and 2 Timothy chapter 2 about discipleship. He says, make disciples essentially, and the things that you've heard from me, he's told him, in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men. In other words, everything you need to know to be a solid, good, functioning, godly Christian is public.

You don't need to read between the lines. You don't need to get special revelation. And this is so dangerous. and people don't realize how danger it is because they're taught stuff like this. At places that they trust, it's going to give them good information. This is not good. Now, I'm not seeing every single thing taught in that program is suspect, but this kind of stuff is not just suspect in my view.

It's just wrong. It's, in other words, wrong and mistaken, and it's misleading, and I think this causes more difficulty. Now, am I against people having a deeper affective relationship with God? No, I pursue that myself. I was singing hymns this morning on the way, stuck in traffic on the 405. But I think that's great. And I think some of us have to work harder at it than others.

Now, others who don't have to work at it, they've got to work on something else. They've got to make sure that their thoughts and their emotions are theologically informed. And they have to be careful. They're not going off in some tangent because they're having this grand experience. So I've said this so many times. but God can do anything he wants. You're putting God in a box. No, I'm not.

God can do whatever he wants. But God can put himself in a box, you know, and what Scripture describes you are the parameters that we work with. So God can do whatever he wants, but we cannot teach and instruct with whatever we want. It's got to be justified by the text. Yeah. There's a book called Centers in the Hands of a Loving God, by Brian Zond. And I think this book illustrates exactly the problem. I was reading through this book,

and he's making this case. I don't even remember what it was now. He's a progressive, isn't? Yeah, he's progressive. And he kept, I think he was making a case for, I didn't even want to say, but it was something I kept saying, well, this, how does this match with this passage? How does this match with that passage? I don't understand. All the way through, I had all these ideas. But when I get to the end, the very end of the book, you find out that the reason why you, you know, the reason why has these views is that he sat before Jesus in a mystical way and received revelation from Jesus. I'm like, okay. So that is, it just, it leads you astray. It leads you astray. You, you, we have this objective revelation that God has given us of himself, and that's what we need to measure everything by.

Yeah. What are these series of books by the Serrakel? Young, maybe? Yeah. But what's the books there? You know, these Jesus speak. I can't even think of the name of it right now. I mean, it's a social movement in churches. One church in our community. Oh, Jesus Calling. Jesus Calling.

Had a whole rack of all her different iterations of Jesus' calling, but this is what it amounts to. Same thing, what Jesus is telling her, and she's putting all this in Jesus' words. I think it's very dangerous. Do you have anything to say about this last part, exploring our past? past in order for the spirit to work in us to remove. Well, yeah, I certainly think there is merit in finding, being aware of, and kind of working through injury or false ideas that are a result of maybe trauma in the past, back to Psalm 51. You desire truth in the innermost being and in our hidden parts, you will make us no wisdom.

Now, that's a New American standard characterization, but I do think, and having been, and lots of counseling sessions over the years with different people, I think there are things that are part of our past that do influence the way we look at God and the way we look at each other. And that may be, I don't know, a stronghold or a foothold. One of the biblical writers, New Testament writers talking about a root of bitterness, and if you have a root of bitterness that this can give the devil an opportunity or something like that, So these are things that kind of are down in there.

We don't even know why we're bitter, but by finding more about it, we can bring that before the Lord. And if there's a healing and insight and the light is brought into that, then that kind of helps free us up, helps free us up from the sin that follows that, say, in this case, root of bitterness. Yeah, I'm not, and I just urge people to take that as Greg described it, because I don't really know what practice he's referring to specifically. and it may be that we're not addressing the actual thing that's going on. But just in terms of what Greg said, then take that and apply it if it applies. Yeah, exactly. So this isn't a critique of the entire program, but those things that were mentioned, and my general thing is I've been uncomfortable because there is this encouragement

to get into a mystical experience that seems to leave the protective thought process behind and also engage in practices that are simply non-biblical that are dangerous and that is listening prayer, as if it were biblical or as if it were vital. And this is an example of Christians expecting to get private revelation from God. That's what it amounts to. Well, everybody who got a double episode today. We went way over, but that's okay. Thank you so much, Christopher and Abby and Ted.

We appreciate hearing from you. And we would love to hear your questions. So make sure you send that to us on X with hashtag SDRS. This is Amy Hall and Greg Kokel for Stand to Reason.