Getting Straight on Straight St. (Acts 9:11)

On which street in Damascus was Saul of Tarsus staying after his conversion? The Street called Straight (Acts 9:11)

Paul, at the time known as Saul, has a life changing encounter with the risen Christ while en route to Damascus to persecute Christians (Acts 9:1-19). Saul is stopped in his tracks when a “light from heaven” blinds him (Acts 9:3-9). This story is told three times in the book of Acts (Acts 9:1-19, 22:4-16, 26:9-18). In the first telling, a Christian named Ananias is given very specific directions in a vision as to Saul’s whereabouts in Damascus so that he might intercede on behalf of the blinded fanatic (Acts 9:11).

And the Lord said to him, “Get up and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying, (Acts 9:11 NASB)

With each detail the instructions become more explicit until God finally drops the bombshell of the name of the man whom Ananias is seeking (Acts 9:11). Saul is presumably the last person Ananias wishes to see. After all, before being blinded, Saul was bound to eliminate Christians, in this case Ananias and his church family (Acts 9:1-2). In supplying these specific instructions God leaves little room for doubt: Ananias is asked to track down the man hunting him.

In this vision, Ananias is given precise instructions. C.K. Barrett (1917-2011) informs:

In The Beginnings of Christianity 4.102 it is pointed out that if a vision of this kind is to be given at all it must be given with all the necessary detailed directions; they are required on both natural and supernatural grounds. It is inferred that the names of the street and of Paul’s host are not to be taken as conveying an old tradition. It is however fair to remark that Acts 9:9 required a continuation; Paul could hardly be left lying by the roadside. The narrative makes a connected whole. Colin J. Hemer [1930-1987] (226) refers to addresses, or directions, in papyrus letters. (Barrett, Acts 1-14 (International Critical Commentary), 153)

The physical locations in the book of Acts have often been neglected by scholars. Matthew L. Skinner (b. 1968) attends:

Although nearly all narrative critics note the potential for literary settings to shape readers’ understandings of a narrative, attention to particular settings in Luke’s two-volume work has been meager. The vast diversity of places in which events occur in Acts—both general (e.g., Jerusalem [Acts 1:12, 4:5, 8:25, 9:26, 28, 11:2, etc.], Iconium [Acts 13:51, 14:1, 21], Athens [Acts 17:15, 16], and Rome [Acts 28:14, 16]) and more specifically localized sites (e.g., a eunuch’s chariot [Acts 8:28], Judas’s house on Straight Street in Damascus [Acts 9:11], and the Jerusalem temple [Acts 2:46, 3:1, 3, 8, 10, 5:21, etc.]—brings this inattention into bold relief. On the one hand, the general lack of descriptive detail about places in biblical literature may explain why biblical scholars interested in narrative criticism emphasize plot and character at the expense of setting. On the other hand, some of this inattention derives from the fact that literary theory has not provided biblical scholars with the theoretical foundations and methodological models needed to analyze setting. Many eminent literary theorists give disproportionately little notice to setting in their work on narrative. None of this, however, must mean that the role of a setting in biblical narrative is minimal or rightly dismissed by narrative critics. (Skinner, Locating Paul: Places of Custody As Narrative Settings in Acts 21-28, 3-4)

In this scene, Saul is situated on the “street called straight” (ESV, HCSB, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, RSV), the “street which is called Straight” (ASV, KJV), “Straight Street” (CEV, NIV, NLT) or “Straight Avenue” (MSG). The Voice modernizes the text, reading “Straight Boulevard” (Chris Seay (b. 1971), The Dust Off Their Feet: Lessons from the First Church, 41).

J.A. Alexander (1809-1860) defines:

Street, a Greek word corresponding to the Latin vicus, and denoting properly a lane of alley, as opposed to a wide street or broad way...This is the only street named in the New Testament. (Alexander, Acts of the Apostles (Geneva Series of Commentaries), 362)

A.T. Robertson (1863-1934) adds:

To the street [epi tēn rhumēn]...A run way (from [rheō, to run) between the houses. So were the narrow lanes or alleys called streets and finally in later Greek the word is applied to streets even when broad. (Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament: Acts, 119)

Straight Street is an example of the famed Roman roads. Stephen Kyeyune (b. 1959) comments:

Most probably this was one of the highways that were constructed by the Romans in the empire. The Romans were the greatest road maker[s] in the world. In over five centuries they built 50,000 miles of high-quality roads and 320,000 miles of back roads. (Kyeyune, The Acts of the Apostles: The Acts of the Holy Spirit, 260)

“Straight” is not only descriptive but the name of the street (Acts 9:11). C.K. Barrett (1917-2011) discerns:

τὴν καλουμένην means that Εὐθειαν is a name, not a mere description. (Barrett, Acts 1-14 (International Critical Commentary), 153)

Though the street name is uncreative it is descriptive and distinctive. A straight road was a rarity in the ancient world. A.T. Robertson (1863-1934) remarks:

Most of the city lanes were crooked like the streets of Boston (old cow-paths, people say), but this one still runs “in a direct line from the eastern to the western gate of the city” (Marvin Vincent [1834-1922]). Since the ancients usually rebuilt on the same sites, it is probable that the line of the street of that name today is the same, though the actual level has been much raised. Hence the identification of the house of Ananias and the house of Judas are very precarious [Acts 9:11]. (Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament: Acts, 119)

Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) concurs:

Most streets in pre-Hellenistic cities would be winding, narrow, and easy to become lost in; such cities grew haphazardly, in contrast to the ideal of Hellenistic urban planning, where streets crossed the straight main street at right angles. Though Damascus was one of the empire’s oldest cities, its construction on relatively even ground facilitated its transformation to the newer standards of Greek and Roman design. The spacing of streets reflects this pattern: east-west streets lie more than “300 feet (100 meters) apart,” with north-south streets “about 150 feet (45 meters) apart.” (Keener, Acts, An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 2 (Acts 3:1-14:28))

Darrell L. Bock (b. 1953) envisions:

This street is still a major road in the city (F.F. Bruce [1910-1990] 1990:237). It runs east and west in the eastern portion of the old city and is known tody as Derb el-Mustaqim, although its direction has changed slightly since that time. It was known to have had major halls with colonnades and two great city gates at each end, making it a ‘fashionable” street (Ernst Haenchen [1894-1975] 1987:323). It was fifty feet wide (Hilary Le Cornu [b. 1959] and Joseph Shulam [b. 1946] 2003:497). (Bock, Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), 360)

Robert A. Schuller (b. 1954) depicts:

The ancient city of Damacus, in Syria, due north of Israel, had a central artery running through it called Straight Street. It was rare for an ancient city to have such a street. Most of the streets, especially in cities like Jerusalem that were razed and rebuilt scores of times throughout history, were narrow and crooked, not unlike the streets in some modern cities. But Damascus’ Straight Street ran from one side of the city to another, one hundred feet wide with the equivalent of a modern sidewalk along each side. ( Schuller, Walking in Your Own Shoes: Discover God’s Direction for Your Life, 71-72)

Damascus’ Straight Street is likely the result of advances in city planning. Paul Barnett (b. 1935) explains:

Damascus was located on the fringe between the fertile belt and the Arabian desert. An ancient settlement, Damascus passed through many hands before coming into the orbit of the Hellenistic kingdoms following Alexander [356-323 BCE]’s conquests. The city was refounded along Hellenistic lines, on a square grid according to the planning theories of Hippodamus of Miletus [498-408 BCE], which explains the reference to a “street called straight” (Acts 9:11). (Barnett, The Birth of Christianity: The First Twenty Years, 20)

Straight Street is typically presumed to be one of Damascus’ major thoroughfares. Stanley D. Toussaint (b. 1928) introduces:

It was one of the two parallel streets that ran from the western wall to the eastern wall. (John F. Walvoord [1910-2002] and Roy B. Zuck [1932-2013], The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, 376)

William J. Larkin (1945-2014) relates:

Ananias should proceed to the main east-west thoroughfare of Damascus, Straight Street. With great porches and gates at each end and colonnades for commerce running along each side, this fashionable address would be as well known in its day as Regent Street in London or Fifth Avenue in New York is today. (Larkin, Acts (IVP New Testament Commentary), 142)

The Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary locates:

This street, the only one identified by name in the New Testament (Acts 9:11), was located in Damascus, a city within the boundaries of Syria but belonging politically to the Decapolis. The city obtained its freedom from Rome shortly after Christ’s death and was under an Arabian ruler during the period covered by Acts 9:1-31...By current standards, Straight Street (also referred to as Via Recta) was probably a lane or alley. (J.D. Douglas [1922-2003], Merrill C. Tenney [1904-1985] and Moisés Silva [b. 1945], Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1397)

A Straight Street still exists in modern-day Damascus. Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) reveals:

This street remains today in the eastern section of Damascus’s Old City and is called Derb el-Mustaqim. Jack Finegan [1908-2000] surveys the remains: “The main east-west street, the Roman decumanus maximus and the “street called Straight” of Acts 9:11, is plainly recognizable in the present Midhat pasha and Bab Sharqi streets, which run directly through the Inner city, parallel to the Barada River, for a distance of nearly 1 mile (1,600 meters). In Roman times this street was 50 feet (15 meters) wide and bordered with colonnades, consisting of two rows of Corinthian columns on either side.” (Keener, Acts, An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 2 (Acts 3:1-14:28))

P.W.L. Walker (b. 1961) updates:

The main street within the Old City is still called “Straight” – just as it was when Paul lodged in the ‘house on Straight Street’ (Acts 9:11)...Damascus’ Straight Street (or the Via Recta was simply an example of the east-west street found in many ancient cities, built on what is known as the Hippodamian plan (named after the man who redesigned Athens’ harbour-town on Piracus in the 400s BC). Here in Damascus, this Straight Street had been recently refurbished as a splendid colonnaded thoroughfare, with a width of 27 yards (25 meters) – something hard to imagine as you pass through the confined and covered souks now constructed along this street at the western end. (Walker, In the Steps of Saint Paul: An Illustrated Guide to Paul’s Journeys, 26-27)

Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) details:

The eastern city gate (the Bab Sharqi, the Sun Gate or East Gate), which opens to the street, had three arches. Of the seven Roman gates, only this one, probably dating to the second century C.E. in its current form, remains. It has a large central entrance flanked by two smaller ones; the central entrance opened onto the street, 13.68 meters wide, and the other entrances led to sidewalks beside the street. Two arches to the west suggest a minor directional shift; if this was Straight Street, it was not really straight. One of the arches, about 2,000 feet (600 meters) west of the East Gate and roughly halfway along the street, probably commemorated Pompey’s conquest and hence was standing in Paul’s day. (Keener, Acts, An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 2 (Acts 3:1-14:28))

More specifically, Paul is convalescing at the house of a Judas on Straight Street (Acts 9:11). Nothing is known of this Judas. C.K. Barrett (1917-2011) remarks:

Judas (the name is a common one) is quite unknown. He was presumably a Jew; Paul’s residence with him may have been on a purely commercial basis, but he may possibly have been a local Christian. (Barrett, Acts 1-14 (International Critical Commentary), 153)

Some have suggested that Judas is the host of a house church. This is highly unlikely. Edward Adams (b. 1963) discusses:

Roger W. Gerhing [b. 1950] infers that Judas’s house is the meeting place of a ‘house church’ in Damascus. He writes, “Concrete memories of the conversion of Paul before Damascus, the disciple by the name of Ananias (Acts 9:10-19a), the explicit mention of the house of Judas on Straight Street (Acts 9:11), and the large number of disciples in Damascus (Acts 9:2, 12) are all reasons to believe that a fairly large congregation might have existed there that could have met in the house of Judas.”...But these data hardly provide support for such a conclusion. Luke gives no indication that Judas is a believer let alone a ‘house-church’ host. While Ananias is introduced as ‘a disciple’ [Acts 9:10], no such descriptor is applied to Judas. As C.K. Barrett [1917-2011] states, “Paul’s residence with him many have been on a purely commercial basis.” The manner in which Ananias is directed to Judas’s house suggests that the two are not known to each other. Were Judas the implied host of such a large congregation, one might expect Ananias to find reassurance in the fact that he is hosting Saul. But the information that Saul is to be found in Judas’s house does nothing to alleviate Ananias’s trepidation at the prospect of meeting the persecutor. Judas may have gone on to become a convert to ‘the Way’ and his house may have been a meeting place for believers in Damascus, but of such developments Luke tells us nothing. (Adams, The Earliest Christian Meeting Places: Almost Exclusively Houses?, 61-62)

Clinton E. Arnold (b. 1958) supposes:

Judas is presumably not a Christian, but Paul’s Jewish host with whom he has made arrangements prior to leaving Jerusalem. (Arnold, Acts (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), 77)

This would certainly challenge Ananias further: he would not only be visiting a persecutor, albeit an incapacitated one, but strolling right into enemy headquarters to do so.

Tradition has identified the site of Judas’ house. Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) relays:

The house where, traditionally, Paul stayed is close to the street’s western end. There were no signposts designating streets, but they had names and locals knew them; once one found the correct street, one asked for a particular house by the name of its owner. It is also possible that Luke or his source abbreviates the directions (since they were no longer relevant many years later). (Against the traditional identification of Straight Street, in late Greek ῥύμη was often a narrow street or ally; for a major street, we might expect πλατεια. But the distinction was not pervasive enough to count securely against the tradition. Would an alley monopolize such a prestigious title?) Traditions such as the site of the house may or may not have been preserved by the early Christian community there, but a street’s name might well persist. (Keener, Acts, An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 2 (Acts 3:1-14:28))

It is clear that God’s instructions serve their purpose in connecting Ananias and Saul (Acts 9:17). Ananias follows directions and Saul’s vision is restored before Ananias baptizes him into the community he recently persecuted (Acts 9:17-19). Ananias’ walk to Straight Street marks one of the first major steps in church history. Saul will become Paul and the world will never again be the same.

How does Saul find himself at Judas’ residence? What is your favorite street name? What is the most aptly named street with which you are familiar? What are the best directions you have received? The worst? Who would be the person you would least want God to send you to? Is God leading you in that direction?

It is fitting that Ananias discovers Saul on Straight Street (Acts 9:11). Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) responds:

Why does Luke specify the particular street in this case? Elsewhere, revelations might include sufficient directions for travelers to find their way (cf. Acts 10:6)—“Judas” was, after all, a common name and hence could hardly specify the house’s location in Damascus by itself. But the street’s name in this case may also have supplied Luke a fortuitous opportunity for a literary connection: those who twisted God’s “straight” road (Acts 13:10) must be blinded (Acts 13:11), but the kingdom mission of true prophets entailed straightening that road again (Luke 3:4-5). Saul has turned to the Lord’s right path, to “the Way” (Acts 9:2). (Keener, Acts, An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 2 (Acts 3:1-14:28))

Darrell L. Bock (b. 1953) concurs:

The locale of the meeting is a bit ironic, as usually in Acts the term used for “straight” (εὐθειαν, eutheian) means to be ethically straight (Acts 8:21, 13:10). (Bock, Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), 360)

Robert H. Gundry (b. 1932) supports:

The heart of Simon the magician wasn’t “straight” before God (Acts 8:21). So there may be some symbolism in Saul’s residing in a house on a lane called “Straight.” Certainly his “praying” shows his heart to be straight before God [Acts 9:11]. (Gundry, Commentary on Acts)

Rick Strelan (b. 1946) expounds:

Ananias is told that Paul is to be found in the house of Judas and that house was located in the street called Straight (Acts 9:11). Scholars take this to be a simple reference to the address of Judas’s house (for example, F.F. Bruce [1910-1990] 1988:186; Gerhard Schneider [1926-2004] 2002:28). And it might well be; but it seems too coincidental given that being ‘straight’ and ‘upright’ was almost an obsession in the Qumran community (1QS 8.13-15; 1QS 3.4-12), and given that it was important also for the Christians in preparing the way of the Lord (Luke 3:4; Acts 8:21, 13:10). In addition, did Luke also interpret Amos 5:1-27 as referring to the Christian group in Damascus? Was the group there because of the persecution by those in Jerusalem (Acts 9:1) in a way similar to the Covenant group that went to Damascus to escape the Wicked Priest of Jerusalem? (Strelan, Strange Acts: Studies in the Cultural World of the Acts of the Apostles, 167)

There may also be Old Testament allusions in play. Mikeal C. Parsons (b. 1957) connects:

Hearing echoes of Isaiah help clarify Luke’s point. In Isaiah, darkness/light and crooked/straight are used as images to describe the transformation of those opposing God: “I will lead the blind by a road they do not know, by paths they have not known I will guide them. I will turn the darkness before them into light, the rough places into level ground” (Isaiah 42:16; cf. Isaiah 26:7, 35:5). Throughout Isaiah, then, a cluster of images is employed to contrast those who are resisting God’s redemption with those who are following God’s plan: unrighteous/righteous; darkness/light; blind/seeing; crooked/straight; deaf/hearing (M. Dennis Hamm [b. 1936] 1990, 70). Saul’s blindness, and later the opening of his eyes, is an appropriate symbol for this “enemy of God” who has attempted to reverse the plan of God (Acts 5:38-39; cf. Hamm 1990, 70; Richard I. Pervo [b. 1942], 34). (Parsons, Acts (Paideia: Commentaries on the New Testament), 128)

F. Scott Spencer (b. 1956) concludes:

It is fitting that such a transformation takes place in a local residence on the road called ‘Straight’ (Eutheian) [Acts 9:11]. In the early chapters of Acts, the church has repeatedly gathered in private dwellings for prayer, fellowship and decision-making in the fullness of the Spirit (Acts 1:12-26, 2:1-4, 42-47, 4:23-31). Now, ironically, the same Saul who had infiltrated ‘house after house’ to arrest Christian disciples (Acts 8:3) finds himself ushered into Judas’ house as a fellow-disciple, a follower of the ‘Way’. We might even say that his rough and crooked path of persecution has been ‘made straight (eutheian)’ (cf. Luke 3:5-6). In contrast to Simon Magus who remained the enemy of the church because of a twisted heart ‘not right/straight’ (eutheia) before God (Acts 8:21), Saul is completely straightened out in his thinking about Jesus and his followers on an aptly named street in Damascus. (Spencer, Acts (Readings: A New Biblical Commentary), 98)

At the time of his encounter with Jesus, there were few men more reviled by the burgeoning Christian community than Saul. Yet it will be this man who leads the movement to new heights.

It is apropos that Saul gets straight on Straight Street. His past is a reminder that no one is beyond the redemption of God; there is a Straight Street available to all who desire one.

Where is your personal Straight Street; where have you experienced redemption? Is there anyone beyond the realm of straightening out? Is your personal trajectory straightening; are you heading in the right direction? Who can you be assisting on Straight Street?

“When peoples care for you and cry for you, they can straighten out your soul.” - Langston Hughes (1902-1967), Simply Heaven: A Comedy with Music, p. 26

Ananias: Not An Apostle (Acts 9:10-19)

Who prayed for Saul when he was healed from his blindness? Ananias (Acts 9:18)

Paul, still known as Saul, begins his journey from persecutor of the church to apostle when he is famously blinded on the Damascus road during an encounter with Jesus (Acts 9:1-9). God enlists Ananias, a disciple from Damascus, to intercede on the still blinded Saul’s behalf (Acts 9:10-19). The man who persecuted believers is now dependent upon one.

In a vision, God instructs Ananias that Saul will be awaiting him as he too has experienced a vision (Acts 9:10-12). Citing Saul’s notorious reputation, an apprehensive Ananias voices his concerns (Acts 9:13-14). God does not refute the reluctant disciple’s assessment but overrules his objection, confiding that Saul will play an important role in the church’s future (Acts 9:15-16). Ananias relents and does as he is commanded (Acts 9:17-19).

So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; and he took food and was strengthened. (Acts 9:17-19 NASB)

Ananias was a common name during the period. Harold S. Songer (1928-2005) observes:

Ananias is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Hannaniah (Hanni or Hanan) which means “God is gracious.” The name occurs frequently in the Apocrypha (cf. I Esdras 9:21, 43, 48; Judith 8:1; Tobit 5:12) and is used of three different persons in the New Testament [Acts 5:1, 9:10, 23:2]. (Watson E. Mills [b. 1939], Mercer Dictionary of the Bible, 28)

Rieuwerd Buitenwerf (b. 1973) researches:

See Tal Ilan [b. 1956], Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity Part I: Palestine 330 BCE-200 CE...On the list of most popular Jewish names...Hananiah (=Ananias) is seventh (pp. 56, 103-108). In Josephus [37-100]....are found...nine persons called Ananias. (Buitenwerf, Harm W. Hollander [b. 1949], Johannes Tromp [b. 1964], “Narrative History Based on the Letters of Paul”, Jesus, Paul, and Early Christianity: Studies in Honour of Henk Jan De Jonge [b. 1943] (Supplements to Novum Testamentum), 74)

Ananias proves to be the embodiment of his name. J. Bradley Chance (b. 1954) notes:

The name means “Yahweh is gracious.” Whereas the name is ironic when applied to the Ananias of Acts 5:1-11, it is fitting for this Ananias. Even more skeptical readers...acknowledge that Luke inherited this basic story from tradition, for he would not have “made up” a character with the same name as two other infamous characters in Acts (Acts 5:1-11, 23:2-5). (Chance, Acts (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary), 148)

Little biographical information is provided regarding Ananias but everything that is revealed is highly favorable. Tellingly, and unlike Saul in the preceding story (Acts 9:5), when Ananias is summoned he recognizes the voice (Acts 9:10). He answers the call with the stereotypical servant’s response (Genesis 22:1, 31:11; Exodus 3:10; I Samuel 3:4, 6, 8; Isaiah 6:8).

Ananias is deemed a “disciple” (Acts 9:10). Ben Witherington III (b. 1951) defines:

The term μαθητης is regularly used in Acts to refer to a Christian (cf. Acts 5:1, 8:9, 9:1, 10, 16:1), but it seems likely that Luke also uses the term of the followers of John the Baptist in Acts as he had in the Gospel (Acts 19:1; cf. Luke 5:33, 7:18). In this case it is clear enough that Ananias is a Christian disciple. (Witherington, The Acts of the Apostles : A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, 317-18)

Ananias is well-informed as his assessment of Saul’s behavior is accurate (Acts 8:3, 9:1-2). Because he has only heard of Saul’s dealings and not experienced them first hand many have concluded that he is a native of Damascus and not a refugee who has fled persecution in Jerusalem (Acts 9:13-14).

Later in Acts, when Paul recalls Ananias’ intercession, he describes him as “a man who was devout by the standard of the Law, and well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there” (Acts 22:12 NASB). From this commendation it can be deduced that Ananias is a Jewish believer held in high regard in the Christian community.

Prior to Saul’s blindness, as a prominent Damascan disciple, Ananias was likely high on the persecutor’s hit list. Ananias is beckoned in a vision, a common medium for divine communication in Acts, especially when the Lord is doing something new (Acts 2:17, 9:10, 12, 10:3, 17, 19, 11:5, 16:9, 10, 18:9). He is likely in terror when informed that the man hunting down he and his friends is in town much less that he is to seek him out.

Ananias receives an assignment he clearly does not want. R. Kent Hughes (b. 1942) compares:

The hunted do not usually minister to the hunter. Normally that would be as crazy as Peter Rabbit caring for Mr. McGregor or Golda Meir [1898-1978] nursing Adolf Eichmann [1906-1962]. But this is exactly what happened in Saul’s case. (Hughes, Acts: The Church Afire (Preaching the Word, 130)

For Ananias to entertain an idea this crazy, God had to be in it!

Being asked to intercede on Saul’s behalf is a severe test of Ananias’ faith. One of the ultimate measures of faith is how the believer responds to counterintuitive imperatives (Exodus 14:16; I Kings 17:3-14; II Kings 5:10; John 9:1-11). Ananias passes this test with flying colors.

Ananias goes to Saul and administers the laying on of hands (Acts 9:17). The ritual is commonly associated with healing in Luke-Acts (Luke 4:40, 13:13; Acts 9:17; 28:8).

Clinton E. Arnold (b. 1958) chronicles:

In the Old Testament, the laying on of hands is done in connection with a special commission (as Moses did when he conferred the leadership of the nation on Joshua; Numbers 27:23) or with the imparting of a blessing (as Jacob did on his sons just before he died; Genesis 48:14). Jesus often laid his hands on people as he healed them. (Arnold, John, Acts (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), 78)

Joseph A. Fitzmyer (b. 1920) adds:

The imposition of hands takes on a curative aspect...As a gesture of healing, it is unknown in the Old Testament or in rabbinical literature but has turned up in 1QapGen 29:28-20, where Abram prays, lays his hands on the head of Pharaoh, and exorcises the evil spirt afflicting him and his household for having carried off Sarai, Abram’s wife. (Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles (The Anchor Bible), 429)

Darrell L. Bock (b. 1953) differentiates:

Ananias will be the mediator of the restoration of Saul’s sight and of the Spirit’s filling. At Qumran, 1QapGen 20:28-29 mentions the laying on of hands to drive a demon away from Pharaoh, but this Qumranic text is not technically an exorcism, as there is no possession here, only oppression and demonic presence...What Ananias does is not designated to send a force away but to associate Saul with God...The purpose of laying on hands in this scene is obvious. The Spirit is connecting Saul to his brothers, as Ananias’s opening address affirms. He also is empowered for witness, a Pauline “Pentecost” (William J. Larkin, Jr. [b. 1945] 1995: 143 see Acts 9:15). (Bock, Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), 362)

C.K. Barrett (1917-2011) clarifies:

The laying on of hands is certainly not a rite subsequent to baptism; as usual in Acts, it is a sign of blessing, to be interpreted as the occasion suggests. Here it is an act of healing. (Barrett, Acts 1-14 (International Critical Commentary), 457)

Ananias’ intercession accomplishes its purpose as Saul regains his eyesight (Acts 9:18). This marks the only New Testament story outside of the gospels where a blind person’s sight is restored. The return of Saul’s sight is signaled by “something like scales” falling from his eyes (Acts 9:18 NASB). A similar film is removed from Tobit’s eyes in the Apocrypha (Tobit 3:17, 11:13).

The event marks Saul’s physical and spiritual healing. Saul is eventually filled with the Spirit though there is some debate as to when this occurs. I. Howard Marshall (b. 1934) rationalizes:

It is not clear whether in the present context it is also regarded as conveying the gift of the Spirit to Paul, and indeed this seems unlikely since here it precedes baptism, with which reception of the Spirit would normally be associated. At the same time Ananias indicated his commission from the same Lord who had already appeared to Paul to bring him healing and the gift of the Spirit. (Marshall, Acts (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries), 172)

Charles H. Talbert (b. 1934) counters:

The conjunction of regaining sight and being filled with the Spirit seem to be two sides of one coin here. Hence when Acts 9:18 says he sees, it can be inferred that he has been filled. The visible sign of his filling is his healing (cf. Galatians 3:5). If so, there is once again considerable variety in the arrangements associated with the reception of the Holy Spirit in Acts. (Talbert, Reading Acts: A Literary and Theological Commentary, 87)

Regardless of when he is filled with the Spirit, Saul is initiated into the Christian community.

Remarkably, the dutiful disciple not only follows orders but seemingly does so ungrudgingly. Ananias’ words match his actions as he not only touches Saul but establishes rapport by receiving him as a “brother” (Acts 1:16, 2:29, 2:37, 3:17, 6:3, 7:2, 9:17, 13:15, 26, 38, 15:7, 13, 21:20, 22:1, 22:13, 23:1, 5, 6, 28:17.) Often lost in translation, Ananias also greets Saul using the Hebrew or Aramaic transliteration Saoul. Taken collectively, these gestures add up to a warm welcome demonstrating genuine love and kindness and more importantly, acceptance as a member of the community.

What is absent is also meanningful: At no point does Ananias reproach Saul! Saul has been accepted by God and that is good enough for Ananias.

William H. Willimon (b. 1946) interprets:

No longer does Ananias speak about “this man” [Acts 9:13] but to “Brother Saul.” The despised enemy, the alien, has become a brother. Does Luke intend the phrase “on the road by which you came’...to remind us of Acts 9:2 where the “way” refers to the believers? On the way to do in the followers of “the Way,” Saul was turned around and set on the way. (Willimon, Acts (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 77)

Lloyd J. Ogilvie (b. 1930) praises:

One of the most moving scenes in all of Scripture is what happened when Ananias went to Saul. He found the feared persecutor alone, blind, and helpless. All the hurt and fright Ananias had felt for what this man had done to his brothers and sisters in Christ drained away. The same Lord who told him to go to Saul lived in him and had given to him His own character traits of love and forgiveness. It was with the Lord’s deep compassion and acceptance that Ananias could say, “Brother Saul.”...How we need people to enact His love in a daring way by calling us by a name we have not yet earned or accepted for ourselves! (Ogilvie, Acts (The Preacher’s Commentary), 166-67)

The truce between Ananias and Saul represents the forgiveness possible through Christ, a reconciliation the would shape Paul’s ministry. Charles L. Campbell (b. 1954) connects:

There are few more dramatic pictures of the reconciling power of the risen Christ. The persecuted Ananias, in the power of the risen Christ, calls his former persecutor “Brother.” In Jesus, that is the kind of reconciled community that is possible. And for the rest of his ministry Paul will emphasize this reconciliation between “Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female.” Not only Paul’s life is changed by his encounter with the risen Christ, but the very character of the community itself begins to undergo a transformation. (Roger E. Van Harn [b. 1932], The Lectionary Commentary, Theological Exegesis for Sunday’s Texts: The First Readings – The Old Testament and Acts, 561-62)

Ananias’ response to Saul serves as a model for all Christians to accept new believers regardless of past actions.

Though Ananias plays only a cameo role in the New Testament, the part he plays is significant. Robert C. Tannehill (b. 1934) proclaims:

Ananias is an important figure in Acts 9. He is more than a messenger. His reaction to events is important. The narrator takes time to present this reaction and the Lord’s corrective response. Therefore, this episode is more than the story of Saul; it is the story of Saul and Ananias, a story of how the Lord encountered both and brought them together. (Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Volume 2: The Acts of the Apostles, 115)

Behind every great Christian is another who instructed them along their way. Warren W. Wiersbe (b. 1929) correlates:

On April 21, 1855, Edward Kimball led one of the young men in his Sunday School to faith in Christ. Little did he realize that Dwight L. Moody [1837-1899] would one day become the world’s leading evangelist. The ministry of Norman B. Harrison in an obscure Bible conference was used of to bring Theodore Epp [1907-1985] to faith in Christ, and God used Theodore Epp to build the Back to the Bible ministry around the world. Our task is to lead men and women to Christ; God’s task is to use them for his glory; and every person is important to God. (Wiersbe, Be Dynamic (Acts 1-12): Experience the Power of God’s People, 137)

Christian history is filled with lesser known disciples who influenced influential followers. Other such examples are Johann von Staupitz (1460-1524) and Martin Luther (1483-1546), John Egglen and Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892) and Mordecai Ham (1877-1961) and Billy Graham (b. 1918).

Ananias leaves the Biblical text as abruptly as he enters it. His diminishing recognition begins in the Bible itself.

Mikeal C. Parsons (b. 1957) tracks:

In Saul’s autobiographical retellings Ananias’s role diminishes as Saul’s role expands (Ronald D. Witherup [b. 1950] 1992, 77). In Acts 22 Ananias tells Saul to receive his sight and that he will be a “witness” of all he has seen and heard. By Acts 26 Ananias drops out of the story completely. (Parsons, Acts (Paideia: Commentaries on the New Testament), 130)

Ananias is not referenced in any of the Pauline epistles. This is especially conspicuous when Paul writes the Galatians of his encounter with Christ and asserts that “I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood” (Galatians 1:16 NASB).

There is little doubt that Ananias is one the Bible’s unsung heroes.

How hard must it have been for Ananias to help Saul? Who would you recoil from assisting? When has God asked you to do something that seemed illogical? How would Paul’s story have changed without Ananias’ intervention? Why do you think that Ananias fades from the forefront? If God wishes Saul’s sight to be restored, why does he wait for Ananias’ arrival for the scales to fall? What is accomplished by Ananias’ involvement? Why is Ananias chosen for this task?

To complete his mission, Paul will need the acceptance of the church and Ananias is a credible witness to an incredibly important event.

Derek Carlsen remarks:

The Lord did not need to use Ananias, but the church needed Ananias’ testimony and it also shows that the Lord uses people in bringing about the accomplishment of His will. This should encourage us to faithfully minister where we are, knowing that our labor is not in vain (I Corinthians 15:58). (Carlsen, Faith and Courage: Commentary on Acts, 237)

On many levels, Ananias is an odd choice. Not only does enlisting Ananias break “apostolic succession”, he also has no official status within the church.

S. G. Wilson (b. 1942) discerns:

If the point of Acts 9 was primarily to show how Paul was absorbed into the Church’s tradition, or, as Ernst Haenchen [1894-1975] would have it, legitimised by the Twelve through their representative, then one might have expected Luke to have made a clearer line of contact between the Twelve or the Jerusalem Church and Ananias in Damascus. It is an oft-noted fact that Ananias, a Christian who apparently permanently resides in Damascus, suddenly appears in Acts 9 without any clue being offered how Christianity had spread from Jerusalem to Damascus. We are not told that the Twelve preached or legitimised preaching there as, for example, they did in Antioch and Samaria. (Wilson, The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series), 64)

Loveday Alexander characterizes:

Formally speaking, the laying on of hands here (Acts 9:17) is not apostolic. Ananias was not one of the Twelve, and there is no record that he himself was ever commissioned by the Jerusalem apostles. He acts simply as a believer, responding directly to the vision out of the conviction that he too has been sent...by the same Lord Jesus who appeared to Saul on the road. For Luke...Paul’s apostolic commission came not from Jerusalem but direct from the Lord himself. So Saul’s Damascus road experience leads him into a transformative encounter with the risen Christ. Its results are vision restored, rising to new life, baptism and filling with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17-18), and renewed strength (Acts 9:19). (Alexander, Acts: A Guide for Reflection and Prayer (Daily Bible Commentary), 79)

F.F. Bruce (1910-1990) concludes:

The commissioning of Saul, and the part played in it by Ananias, must ever remain a stumbling block in the path of those whose conception of the apostolic ministry is too tightly bound to one particular line of transmission or form of ordination. If the risen Lord commissioned such an illustrious servant in so “irregular” a way, may he not have done so again, and may he not yet do so again, when the occasion requires it? (Bruce, The Book of Acts (New International Commentary on the New Testament), 189)

Apostle or not, Ananias is a believer, a representative of God. And clergy or not, that is all he needs to be commissioned to do great things by God.

Why did God choose Ananias and not an apostle for the task of interceding for Saul? Do you believe that “apostolic succession” is a requirement for clergy? Who was instrumental in your spiritual development? Who have you interceded for? Who can you be interceding for?

“God will not look you over for medals, degrees or diplomas but for scars.” - Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915), The Note Book

A Horse of a Different Color (Zechariah 6)

In Zechariah, what colors were the horses that pulled the four chariots of divine judgment? Red, black, white and gray (Zechariah 6:2)

The biblical image of four horses of disparate colors did not originate with the famed four horsemen of the apocalypse (Revelation 6:1-8) but rather the book of Zechariah (Zechariah 6:1-8). Zechariah, the eleventh of twelve minor prophets, was written during the time that the Jerusalem temple was being rebuilt (520-518 BCE).

Zechariah begins with a succession of eight visions (Zechariah 1:7-6:8). The final oracle proves the most obscure and climactic and of the lot (Zechariah 6:1-8). In it, the prophet sees four chariots emerging from bronze mountains (Zechariah 6:1-3). Each chariot is powered by a horse of a different color: red, black, white, and gray or dappled (Zechariah 6:2-3).

With the first chariot were red horses, with the second chariot black horses, with the third chariot white horses, and with the fourth chariot strong dappled horses. (Zechariah 6:2-3 NASB)

The first three horses’ pigments are relatively straightforward while the last has generated discussion (Zechariah 6:3). The steed is described by the Hebrew barod (Genesis 31:10, 12; Zechariah 6:3, 6). This word is translated variously as “dappled” (ESV, HCSB, MSG, NASB, NIV, NKJV), “gray” (CEV), the combination “dappled-gray” (NLT, NRSV, RSV) and “grizzled strong” (ASV, KJV).

J. Carl Laney (b. 1948) presents the dominant interpretation:

Zechariah..observes that each of the four chariots were drawn by a team of horses—the first chariot by red horses, the second by black horses, the third by white horses, and the fourth by a team of strong, dappled horses. “Dappled” suggests white spots on a dark background. (Laney, Zechariah (Everyman’s Bible Commentaries), 70)

Marvin A. Sweeney (b. 1953) analyzes:

This last term is problematic as the Hebrew texts reads sûsîm běruddîm ’amuşşîm. The term běruddîm apparently refers to “spotted” horses as the root brd is related to the term for “hail” which suggests the general shape of stones or spots. The term ’amuşşîm, however, creates difficulties because it is derived from the root ’ms, “to be strong,” and appears in Zechariah 6:7 as an apparent reference to the “strong steeds” that pull the chariots. Although some scholars maintain that the term has been misplaced here from Zechariah 6:7 by scribal error or that it is a textual corruption for ’adummîm, “red” (cf. Zechariah 6:2) that is designed to suggest spotted red horses, the term can be read as a reference to the “spotted strong horses” of the fourth chariot. (Sweeney, The Twelve Prophets, Volume Two (Berit Olam: Studies In Hebrew Narrative And Poetry), 625)

The horses are differentiated and defined by their colors. Many have tried to find further significance in their hues. George L. Klein (b. 1955) acknowledges:

Zechariah never explained the symbolism of the colored horses. Consequently, any conclusion one might reach concerning the horses’ colors remains tentative. One approach holds that the colors function solely to distinguish the horses, having no further importance. Alternatively, others attempt to determine precisely what the colors might signify. A particularly popular view associates the horses’ colors in Zechariah 6 with the colors of the horses in Revelation 6:1-8. Following this approach, Merrill F. Unger [1909-1980] suggests that white indicates victory (Revelation 6:2; also Revelation 19:11, 14), red stands for bloodshed (Revelation 6:4), black represents judgment (Revelation 6:5-6), and the dappled color signifies death (Revelation 6:8). Unger fails to demonstrate the accuracy of his association with the diverse colors of horses and concepts such as judgment. Neither does Unger prove that the colors of the horses in Revelation 6 rest on that of the horses in Zechariah 6...The interpretation that the colors signify geographical regions might have merit, but it also lacks certainty. Much like the symbolism in the prophecy in Daniel 7, the ancient rabbis believed that the colors of the horses symbolized world kingdoms. Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome represented probable candidates. However, any association between the colors and world kingdoms must remain tentative at best. (Klein, Zechariah (New American Commentary), 186-187)

Some have tried to link the horses in Zechariah’s final vision (Zechariah 6:1-8) with the steeds in his first oracle (Zechariah 1:8). David L. Petersen (b. 1943) examines:

The horses of the first chariot are bay; those of the second, black; those of the third, white; and those of the fourth, dappled. Only two of these four colors, bay and white, occurred in the description of the horses in Zechariah 1:8...Much ink has been devoted to a comparison of the first and last of Zechariah’s visions, since they both include detailed descriptions of horse colors. Most instructive, however, are the contrasts within this similarity. In the first vision, there are an indefinite number of horses of each color. In the final vision, there are almost certainly eight horses, two per chariot. In the first version one horse has a rider. In the final version all belong with chariots. In the first version we see the horses rest in the divine corral; in the final version we see the horses at an opening that leads into the domain of human affairs. In the first vision the horses have just come from surveying the cosmos, whereas in the second they are about to set out to roam over the earth. In the first vision the colors seem to have no rationale, i.e., there are three colors, two of which are almost identical. In the final vision there are four distinct colors and/or patterns, which, so the interpretation goes, point to the four major points of the compass. The distinctive colors provide the basis for the interpretation of the final vision. Such was not the case in the initial vision. (Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 268-269)

Petersen evaluates another theory as well:

Perhaps the most comprehensive explanation of the colors of the horses is that used most recently by Gerhard von Rad [1901-1971], Friedrich Horst [1896-1962], Joyce G. Baldwin [1921-1995], and others. They maintain that the colors of the first vision are those of the sunset, those of the end of a period, and those of the eighth vision are those of the early morning, those of a new dawn and day. Intriguing and apt as this suggestion is, it is difficult to see how the “dappled” designation is more appropriate for dawn than sunset. Further, I suspect that though this suggestion might explain the origin of the colors, i.e., signifying the temporal frame of Zechariah’s night vision, it does not function importantly as a statement about the interpreted significance of the visions. (Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1-8: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 269)

There many be no symbolism entailed. Mark J. Boda (b. 1962) notes that each of the horses’ displays a naturally occurring pigmentation:

The colors identified for the horses are the normal range of colors found in nature. The Hebrew tern for “red” (,adom) can be used for a deep brown horse or a chestnut horse, for the chromatic range of this word includes brown (animals), yellowish-brown (lentils), deep red (blood), wine color (wine) and pink (flesh). The Hebrew term behind “brown (saa roq) should be translated “sorrel,” a color combining red and white that produces a pinkish tone and is found among horses. The final color, “white” (laban), regularly occurs among horses. There is no need then to attach symbolic meanings to the colors of the horses in this scene. (Boda, Haggai, Zechariah (The NIV Application Commentary))

Pamela J. Scalise (b. 1950) speculates that the colors say more about their owner than of the horses themselves:

The variety of colors emphasizes the owner’s wealth. In the ancient world, kings and emperor’s owned chariots and used them to exert their military power in war and their authority over conquered territory. These horses and chariots suited their purpose, for all of them were powerful. Israel’s most powerful enemies had used chariots against them—Egypt (Exodus 14:25, 15:4) and the Canaanites at Hazor (Joshua 11:6, 9) and Tabor (Judges 4:5, 5:28). Kings of Israel and Judah had owned chariots, but in postexilic Yehud the only chariots belonged to the Persian emperors. (John Goldingay [b. 1942] and Scalise, Minor Prophets II (New International Biblical Commentary), 239)

Have you ever experienced a vision? What meaning, if any, do you attach to the horses’ colors? Why are these horses, unlike those in other oracles (Zechariah 1:8; Revelation 6:1-8), pulling chariots? What is the meaning of the vision?

The horses are sent in directions as different as their colors. Barry G. Webb (b. 1945) notices that none goes east:

The chariots with the black horses go north; those with the white ones go west, and those with the dappled horses go south. Only three points of the compass are represented, and only three colours (of horses) instead of the four of Zechariah 6:2-3. Furthermore, Zechariah 6:6 opens (in Hebrew) with a connecting word which normally occurs only in mid-sentence. All this taken together seems to indicate that the opening part of Zechariah 6:6 has been accidentally lost in transmission, and that in the original form of the text all four points of the compass were covered. In any case, Zechariah 6:8 makes it clear that the chariots went everywhere, to enforce God’s kingship in every place. (Webb, The Message of Zechariah: Your Kingdom Come (Bible Speaks Today), 104)

The narrative concludes by focusing on the black horse traveling to the north (Zechariah 6:8). Mark Allen Hahlen (b. 1959) and Clay Alan Ham (b. 1962) comment:

Of the three directions depicted, the movement of the black horses to the north is emphasized; these horses are named first and again in Zechariah 6:8. North is a place with ominous connotations for the Hebrews (Jeremiah 1:14, 4:6, 6:22; Ezekiel 1:4). From there, enemies of Israel and Judah have entered the land (Jeremiah 10:22), and to the north is the land of the exile (Jeremiah 3:18, 6:22, 16:15, 23:8). Although other nations besides Babylon may be included in the designation “the north” (Isaiah 41:25; Jeremiah 1:15, 46:10, 50:9), Babylon is surely the focus here. (Hahlen and Ham, Minor Prophets, Volume 2: Nahum-Malachi (College Press NIV Commentary), 394)

William P. Brown (b. 1958) delineates:

Between the bronze mountains come four chariots, drawn by different colored horses. Their mission is identical to that of the horses found in the first vision, namely to “patrol the earth” (cf. Zechariah 1:10-11). The two bronze mountains, nowhere else mentioned in scripture, likely mark off the boundary between heaven and earth. The image of the chariot represents the presence of God (Habakkuk 3:8). Indeed, a common title for God was “rider of the clouds” (Psalm 68:4). As the four winds, the chariots are commanded to scatter in all directions (cf. Jeremiah 4:13). The winds were traditionally conceived as messengers of God (Psalm 104:4)...Since it is not mentioned in the list of directions (Zechariah 6:6), the first chariot, with red or bay horses, is the one, presumably to fly eastward. Yet it is the second chariot (with black horses), which heads towards the north, that gains the spotlight. It is through the black horses that God’s spirit is set at rest. The land that lay to the north, which included the land of Shinar (Zechariah 5:11), was traditionally regarded as the land of the enemy of Israel. To claim that God’s spirit is at rest in the north is tantamount to claiming that the superpowers that have plagued Israel throughout its history have been subjugated once and for all. (Brown, Obadiah through Malachi (Westminster Bible Companion), 156)

James E. Smith (b. 1939) summarizes:

The cycle of visions comes to a close with a symbolic portrayal of worldwide judgment. In the first vision the angelic reconnaissance force found the world to be at ease and the people of God humiliated. Now divine wrath is unleashed against those oppressors. The security of Zion, the people of God, is thus achieved. (Smith, The Minor Prophets (Old Testament Survey), 553)

Zechariah’s message is one of hope. Elizabeth Achtemeier (1926-2002) interprets:

Various colored horses...pulling war chariots symbolic of God’s sovereign might, come forth from the entrance to heaven, which is here symbolized by the two impregnable mountains of bronze (cf. Jeremiah 1:18). The horses and chariots are said to represent the four winds of heaven (Zechariah 6:5, contra RSV; cf. Jeremiah 49:36; Daniel 7:2). That is, they are the messengers of God (cf. Psalm 104:4). Impatient to leave on their mission, they are dispatched by God all over the earth, symbolizing that his sovereignty is worldwide. This is explicitly stated in the oracle of the Lord in Zechariah 6:8: God’s spirit is at rest in the north country; nothing further needs to be done before the Lord can bring his Kingdom. (Achtemeier, Nahum--Malachi (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 129-130)

Peter C. Craigie (1938-1985) adds:

The vision of the departure of horses and chariots on worldwide missions of military intervention establishes not only a central part of the meaning of all eight visions, but also a chronological perspective within which to interpret the prophet’s words. The restoration of the temple and of leadership in Judah presupposed a renewal of the Kingdom of God in the world; it intimated that more lay in the future than simply a refurbished temple and a rejuvenated government. Only when foreign nations were overthrown could the chosen people be truly free once again...Although the words are concerned with Zechariah’s immediate present, with the temple and government in Jerusalem, time is collapsed in the vision to join the present to what was a more remote future. What was happening anticipated in a mysterious fashion what was yet to happen. And though we may find the visionary words as difficult to grasp in detail as did the prophet’s first audience, we may share with them the absolute conviction of the prophet’s central message. God was and is sovereign in human history. (Craigie, Twelve Prophets, Volume 2 (Daily Study Bible Series), 186)

Israel’s enemies assume that Yahweh is another god they had vanquished like all the others. Zechariah’s final vision (Zechariah 6:1-8) affirms that Yahweh is a horse of a different color.

Why do you think none of the horses is explicitly said to travel east? How does your perception of God’s sovereignty affect your life? How active is God in history? In your life?

“There’s only one of him and he’s it. He’s the Horse of a Different Color, you’ve heard tell about.” - Guardian of the Emerald City Gates (Frank Morgan, 1890-1949), The Wizard of Oz (1939)