Archive for category: LivingEd – Online Learning

Author: Mr. Kenneth Frank | Faculty in Theology, Living Education

---

Estimated reading time: 7 min., 44 sec.

Did you know that many people of first-century Jerusalem demanded the release of an insurrectionist against the Roman Empire named Barabbas in exchange for the Son of God?

The Four Gospels describe Pilate’s attempt to set Jesus free from the charges brought against Him by the hysterical populace through a customary Passover release of one prisoner. Pilate offered the people the choice of Jesus or Barabbas. Without hesitation, the people chose Barabbas over Jesus. Only days before they had welcomed Jesus riding into Jerusalem with Hosanna (“save, we pray”) (John 12:12-16). This Digging Deeper explores this troubling account to illustrate an important spiritual lesson for Christians.

All four Gospel writers record this incident: Matthew 27:15-26; Mark 15:6-15; Luke 23:17-25; John 18:39-40. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia notes that “Matthew calls him ‘a notable (i.e. notorious) prisoner’ (Matthew 27:16). Mark says that he was ‘bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder’ (Mark 15:7). Luke states that he was cast into prison ‘for a certain insurrection made in the city, and for murder’ (Luke 23:19; compare Acts 3:14). John calls him a ‘robber’ or ‘brigand’” (John 18:40) (e-Sword 13.0).

Who was Barabbas?

John Lightfoot in his Commentary on the Gospels records that Barabbas was a common name in the Jewish Talmud (Bible Analyzer 5.4.1.22). The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, edited by Merrill C. Tenney, adds further: “The name Barabbas may simply be a conventional proper name. It is found as the surname of several rabbis” (Zondervan Publishing Company, 1976, p. 472).

The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary, edited by Joseph S. Exell, proposes a derivation of this criminal’s name: “Barabbas.—’Son of Abba,’ i.e. Son of Father (so-and-so). The name would originally be given to one who was the son of some Rabbi who had been known in his locality as Father (so-and-so). Not unlikely Barabbas would thus be a person of respectable parentage, though for long he had gravitated toward the lowest stratum of society (Morison)” (e-Sword 13.0). The respectful title “father” was sometimes applied to mentors and teachers (2 Kings 2:12; 5:13; 6:21; 13:14).

Barabbas’ description as “notable” in Matthew 27:16 means he was distinguished in either great virtues or great crimes; in his case, he was infamous. Daniel Whedon in his Commentary on the Old and New Testaments paints this picture: “As a fierce and brave Jewish patriot, he had become notable or famous among the populace. He was, perhaps, like Robin Hood among the old English, hateful to the government but popular with the masses” (e-Sword 13.0).

No ordinary villian

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, edited by Frank E. Gaebelein provides the Greek word used in our Gospels to describe Barabbas as: “…no ordinary villain but a lestes (cf. Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19; John 18:40). Although lestes can refer to a robber (as perhaps in John 10:1), it more probably refers to insurrectionists (cf. 26:55; John 18:40); and Josephus constantly uses it of the Zealots. Neither theft nor violent robbery was a capital offense, but insurrection was. Revolts and bloodshed fostered by guerrilla action were common (cf. Jos. Antiq. XVIII, 3-10 [i. 1], 60-62 [iii. 2]; Luke 13:1), and Barabbas had been caught. In the eyes of many of the people he would not be a ‘notorious’ villain but a hero” (Zondervan, 1984, p. 568-569).

Barabbas may have been a Zealot, as described by The Expositor’s Dictionary of Texts, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll and Jane T. Stoddart: “There was a fierce and defiant Home Rule party in Judea whose unresting aim was to drive the Roman garrison from the Holy Land. Their chosen name was that of Zealots, because of their unquenchable zeal for the restoration of the Jewish Dominion. Out of their ranks came one of Christ’s disciples, Simon Zelotes, whom Jesus taught a wider truth and, a better way than his fiery heart had at first conceived” (Bible Analyzer 5.4.1.22).

The Expository Notes of Dr. [Thomas L.] Constable describes Barabbas: “He was a famous prisoner but not necessarily one that the Jews regarded as an undesirable character. On the contrary, he had evidently been leading an insurrection against the Roman government as a freedom fighter (cf. Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19; John 18:40). His guerrilla actions were fairly common then. [Note: Josephus, Antiquities of . . ., 18:1:1.]  Many of the Jews would have viewed Barabbas as a hero rather than as a villain. He was more of a messianic figure, in the minds of most Jews, than Jesus was” (e-Sword 13.0).

Political rebel for the Son of God

The Fourfold Gospel by J. W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton provides a possible historical background to this insurrection: “Josephus tells us that there had been an insurrection against Pilate’s government about that time caused by his taking money from the temple treasury for the construction of an aqueduct (The Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.2). This may have been the affair here referred to, for in it many lost their lives” (BP Bible 0.5.3.1).

Insurrection was a serious crime against the state. The New Bible Dictionary, edited by J.D. Douglas notes that Barabbas was: “A bandit (John 18:40), arrested for homicidal political terrorism (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:18+)” (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965, p. 132). Barabbas was such an insurrectionist, yet Jesus was falsely accused of this crime by the Jews (Luke 23:2). Pilate later realized that Jesus was innocent (Luke 23:22) and that for envy the Jews had accused Him (Matthew 27:18). The chief priests and elders had persuaded the Jerusalem crowd to demand Barabbas’ release and Jesus’ death (Matthew 27:20).

When the overexcited Jews demanded Barabbas’ freedom instead of Jesus’ they preferred the political rebel and nationalist hero over the Son of God. Fausset’s Bible Dictionary explains that Barabbas (son of the father) was a ” … contrast to the true Son of the Father! The Jews asked the murderous taker of life to be given as a favor to them (it being customary to release one prisoner at the passover), and killed the Prince of life (Acts 3:14-15)” (e-Sword 13.0)!

The New Bible Dictionary, edited by J.D. Douglas offers an intriguing spiritual note to this story: “The priests, possibly taking up an initial demand from his [Barabbas’] supporters (cf. Mark 15:8), engineered a movement for his release to counter Pilate’s intended offer of that of Jesus (Matthew 27:20; Mark 15:11) – and Barabbas became an exemplification of the effects of substitutionary atonement” (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965, p. 132). The College Press Explanatory Notes by Rhoderick D. Ice explains further: “Some have made him a ‘symbol’ of the guilty human race which is set free from punishment by the substitution of the innocent Christ” (e-Sword 13.0).

Barabbas: A type for mankind

This takes our brief study to a deeper level. Barabbas committed treason against the Roman Empire and Pilate the governor. Each of us, in his or her way, has committed high treason against the Governor of the universe by our sins (Romans 3:23). Accordingly, we brought the death penalty down upon our heads (Romans 6:23). We are helpless and hopeless in ourselves to find deliverance from this undesirable fate.

In His love for humankind, God sent His only begotten Son to earth. As part of His preaching, Jesus announced His coming substitutionary death during His earthly ministry (John 12:32). He suffered vicariously for all humanity. His disciples did not understand what He meant. Only after His death, as the apostles and early Church of God began to digest this tragic account did they realize the full spiritual significance of His death (John 12:16). Jesus’ resurrection from the dead confirmed God’s redemptive plan to forgive humanity and instead offer them life – even life forevermore (1 Corinthians 15:22).

Jesus died in our place, as surely as He died in Barabbas’ place (Romans 5:7-8; Galatians 6:14). Each of us deserves the death penalty. Jesus became our substitutionary atonement to release us from our sins and enable us to be reconciled to God with the hopeful prospect of eternal life. In this way, Barabbas was a type of every sinner who has been redeemed by God’s Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

We do not know what happened to Barabbas after Jesus was exchanged for him. Nonetheless, Barabbas serves as a type of every sin-laden human who deserves death but through repentance and confession of sin has been released, rescued, and redeemed by the Savior of the world instead.

---

Kenneth Frank was born and raised in New Jersey, USA, and attended Ambassador College, graduating in 1973. He served in the Canadian ministry from 1973-1999, after which he returned to the USA to pastor churches in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 15 years. Having earned a BA degree from Ambassador College he later earned a MA degree from Grand Canyon University before being assigned to the Charlotte office to teach at Living University, now Living Education. Currently, he teaches the Survey of the Bible course to the on-campus students and writes the Digging Deeper column for our online Bible study program. He is married, has four children, and seven grandchildren.

Author: Mr. Kenneth Frank | Faculty in Theology, Living Education

---

Estimated reading time: 7 min.

Did you know that, when Jesus was nailed to a Roman cross, a placard called a superscription was placed over His head with the accusation laid against Him?

This sign is mentioned by all four Gospel writers and yet the words expressed differ one from another. You may wonder why they are different, how they can be reconciled, and what is the significance of this detail about Jesus’ crucifixion. This Digging Deeper will delve into this matter to reconcile our four accounts and explain the spiritual significance of this inscription.

Historical sources inform us that a placard naming the charge against a person to be crucified (who was called a cruciarius) was inscribed on a white tablet with red or black ink letters and hung around the person’s neck as they carried the cross beam to the crucifixion stake. According to John 19:19, Pilate wrote this superscription to be affixed to the cross. Matthew 27:37 says it was placed over Jesus’ head. Since the crucifixion was a public display, its purpose was to deter on-lookers from crimes against the state.

Historically, this sign above the cross has been called the superscription, inscription, or the title on the cross. Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines superscription as: “That which is written or engraved on the outside, or above something else” (e-Sword 13.0). The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, edited by James Orr, explains the various biblical terms for this inscription: “The fullest description is that of Mark, ‘the superscription of his accusation’ (ή ἐπιγραφὴ τῆς αἰτίας ἀυτοῦ, hē epigraphḗ tḗs aitı́as autoú) (Mark 15:26). Matthew calls it more briefly ‘his accusation’ (τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ, tḗn aitı́an autoú) (Matthew 27:37), while Luke styles it merely ‘a superscription’ (epigraphē) (Luke 23:38). In the Fourth Gospel it is called a ‘title’ (τίτλον, tı́tlon) (John 19:19)” (Ibid.).

The words of the superscription differ among the four Gospels:

“This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (Matthew 27:37)

“The King of the Jews” (Mark 15:26).

“This is the King of the Jews” (Luke 23:38).

“Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (John 19:19).

The Scofield Reference Bible Notes (1917 Edition) reconciles these differences simply: “These accounts supplement, but do not contradict one another. No one of the Evangelists quotes the entire inscription. All have ‘The King of the Jews.’ Luke adds to this the further words, ‘This is’; Matthew quotes the name, ‘Jesus’; whilst John gives the additional words ‘of Nazareth'” (e-Sword 13.0). Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words adds that: ” … the variation serves to authenticate the narratives, showing that there was no consultation [collusion] leading to an agreement as to the details” (Ibid.). Compiling the various Gospel accounts, this superscription read “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.”

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers explains these differences further: “But in part also they may reasonably be ascribed to the natural variations sure to arise even among eye-witnesses, and à fortiori among those who were not eye witnesses, as to the circumstantial details of events which they record in common. On grounds of ordinary likelihood St. John’s record, as that of the only disciple whom we know to have been present at the crucifixion (John 19:25), may claim to be the most accurate” (e-Sword 13.0).

A superscription in three languages

A display of the original language letters of these superscriptions is available to us. Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible illustrates the original languages:

In Hebrew – ΕβραΐϚι:

ישוע נצריא מלכא דיהודיא

In Greek – ΕλληνιϚι:

ΙΗΣΟΥΣ Ο ΝΑΖΩΡΑΙΟΣ Ο ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΕ ΤΩΝ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ

In Latin – ΡωμαΐϚι:

IESUS NAZARENUS REX IUDAEORUM (e-Sword 13.0).

The difference in phrasing may in part be due to the arrangement and translation of words from these three different languages. Necessarily, the superscription must have been sizeable to contain the total content. A Dictionary of Christ and the Apostles, edited by James Hastings, explains why it was displayed in more than one language: “The three languages of the τίτλος—Hebrew (i.e. Aramaic), Latin, and Greek—represent, as Westcott remarks, the national, the official, and the common dialects respectively. The true reading, therefore, preserves the more natural order. Bilingual and trilingual inscriptions such as this were naturally common in the East under the Roman Empire” (e-Sword 13.0). Another explanation declares the three languages were those of religion (Hebrew), of empire (Latin), and of intellect (Greek). Hebrew was the local language of the Jews, Greek was the universal tongue of the eastern Roman Empire, and Latin was the official language of the Roman government.

“I have written what I have written.”

The College Press Bible Study Textbook hypothesizes why Pilate directed these words to be affixed to Jesus’ cross (John 19:19-22): “Pilate may have ordered it nailed to His cross to clear his record with Caesar, since the basic charge of blasphemy for claiming to be the Son of God would not interest Roman jurisprudence” (e-Sword 13.0). The Jews condemned Jesus for blasphemy (Matthew 26:65). However, they did not have the authority to execute Jesus without Roman permission. They laid the political charge of insurrection on Jesus when they presented Him to Pilate. Being Roman governor, it was Pilate’s responsibility to investigate. He knew it was out of envy they falsely accused Jesus (Matthew 27:18). Pilate pronounced Jesus an innocent man (John 19:4, 6). The Jews in turn tricked Pilate into condemning this innocent man (John 19:12). Pilate had already been in trouble with the Roman emperor so he did what was expedient for his career by handing Jesus over for crucifixion.

The Jews wanted to change the superscription wording to state that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews (John 19:21). Jesus never made such a claim. From his earlier conversation with Jesus, Pilate learned that Jesus was not threatening the Roman Empire when He explained ” … My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence” (John 18:36 KJV). Others claimed Jesus’ kingship for Him (John 12:13). Inadvertently, Pilate formalized Matthew’s theme that Jesus was the King of Israel – i.e., He was the prophesied Messiah from the Hebrew Bible. Pilate publicized that the Jews had killed their King. Out of spite and revenge, he humiliated the Jews for their forcing him to concede to Jesus’ death. The Jews wanted Pilate to anathematize Jesus through the crucifixion. Instead, his inscription endorsed Jesus’ kingly office. Like Balaam, Pilate in effect blessed Jesus when the Jews wanted him to curse Him instead (Numbers 24:10).

Jesus of Nazareth: King

It is pertinent that when Jesus was born, Gentile wise men who traveled to the Holy Land to worship Him asked, “Where is He that is born king of the Jews?” (Matthew 2:2). During Jesus’ trials, Pilate, a Gentile Roman governor, proclaimed by this superscription “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” Pilate ennobled Jesus to the rank of King of the Jewish people. More broadly speaking, Jesus is not merely King of the Jews but the Lord of the universe and King over all humanity (Matthew 28:18; Revelation 17:14).

To bring our study to a close, a comment by J.M. Gibson in The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary, edited by Joseph S. Exell, summarizes the spiritual meaning of this superscription: “A better inscription for the cross the Apostles themselves could not have devised. ‘This is Jesus,’ the Saviour—the Name above every name. How it must have cheered the Saviour’s heart to know that it was there! ‘This is Jesus, the King,’ never more truly King than when this writing was His only crown. ‘This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,’ despised and rejected of them now, but Son of David none the less, and yet to be claimed and crowned and rejoiced in, when at last ‘all Israel shall be saved’” (e-Sword 13.0).

---

Kenneth Frank was born and raised in New Jersey, USA, and attended Ambassador College, graduating in 1973. He served in the Canadian ministry from 1973-1999, after which he returned to the USA to pastor churches in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 15 years. Having earned a BA degree from Ambassador College he later earned a MA degree from Grand Canyon University before being assigned to the Charlotte office to teach at Living University, now Living Education. Currently, he teaches the Survey of the Bible course to the on-campus students and writes the Digging Deeper column for our online Bible study program. He is married, has four children, and seven grandchildren.

Author: Mr. Kenneth Frank | Faculty in Theology, Living Education

---

Estimated Reading time: 8 min.

Did you know that when Jesus read a passage of Isaiah during a synagogue service He stopped his reading at a comma?

This was a most unusual preaching strategy but it was done deliberately. My last Digging Deeper article entitled “Jesus’ Sermon at His Hometown Synagogue” outlined the liturgy and custom of the first-century Jewish synagogue. In it, I explained that Jesus was recognized as a member of His Nazareth synagogue and was invited by custom to read a portion of either the Law or the Prophets. Jesus may have deliberately chosen the scroll of Isaiah for this sermon to His fellow worshipers. However, what He read and pointedly commented upon caused them to rise up and threaten His life.

Luke alone records this incident in Luke 4:16-30. Jesus quoted two passages from Isaiah He was beginning to fulfill: Isaiah 61:1-2 and Isaiah 58:6. Combining two texts with a similar theme was a common practice called a gezerah shava. If you read Isaiah’s original version, you will notice some rewording of the text in Luke’s account. This was common practice throughout our New Testament. God, the Author and Chief Editor of the Bible, is at liberty to revise and rephrase His word as necessary depending on the context in which it is cited.

Jesus First Came as a Prophet

When Jesus proclaimed that the Spirit was upon Him, He meant that he was moved to do some supernatural work. In Luke 4:18 He explained He was anointed by the Spirit, as Luke later explained in Acts 10:38, that authorized Him to preach. The Old Testament ceremony of anointing with oil inaugurated men into the offices of priest, prophet, or king. Jesus first came as the Prophet (Matthew 21:11; John 7:40), today He is our High Priest in heaven, and He will return as our King. He holds all three offices at once.

Jesus explained this anointing enabled Him to preach the gospel to the poor. He was a master preacher and teacher. One matter Luke emphasized about Jesus’ ministry was His concern for those materially poor. They were often at the mercy of unscrupulous officials and businessmen. It was generally thought that their suffering was due to God’s curse and was their fault. By contrast, those who relieved the poor were considered especially righteous since almsgiving was synonymous with righteousness in the minds of many at the time.

Jesus then proclaimed He was sent to heal the brokenhearted – those who were in despair of heart including those who mourn over their sins leading to repentance. He continued His sermon stating He came to preach deliverance to the captives – i.e., the forgiveness of sins and remission of its penalty. Those who are held in Satan’s snare as his captives in body, mind, or spirit Jesus will deliver.

Jesus added that He had come to recover sight to the blind – including those spiritually blind to God’s truth. During His ministry, Jesus healed many who were physically blind. He next declared that He came to set at liberty those who are bruised – i.e., oppressed, broken people. Jesus came to free people from heavy burdens of sin and oppressive rabbinical restrictions.

Jesus knew what it was like to be poor, brokenhearted, and bruised (Isaiah 53:3-5). The phrase “to set at liberty them that are bruised” in Luke 4:18 was Jesus’ insertion of a paraphrase from Isaiah 58:6. He was announcing a time when salvation was available to His audiences. The final phrase of Isaiah 61:2 states that throughout His ministry He came to comfort all that mourn: those who mourn over loss or sin. He still does today!

Stopping at a comma

In Luke 4:19, Jesus quoted only part of Isaiah 61:2. Notice the complete verse: Isaiah 61:2 KJV  “To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn.” “The acceptable year of the Lord” sometimes refers to the Jubilee year of Leviticus 25:8-17. However, Jesus applied it to His ministry then. He offered liberation from sin and its consequences. Those who accepted His salvation offer became His disciples.

As He quoted Isaiah 61:2 He stopped at the first comma (in the English Bible) and omitted “the day of vengeance of our God” and the rest of that verse (Luke 4:19). His reason seems to have been that the day of vengeance of our God is reserved for His second coming when He returns as conquering King and administers vengeance (justice) on those who willfully oppose Him.

Many Jews at the time believed that salvation was for them a matter of nationality rather than of submission to God. They considered vengeance and retribution to be reserved for the Gentiles. Some of the Jewish sects believed that Messiah would return as a powerful, conquering prince at the head of a mighty army to vanquish their enemies. When Jesus came instead as a suffering Servant Messiah who died for human sin, they rejected Him because He did not meet their messianic expectations. Their pride, prejudice, and preconceived opinion blinded them to their own spiritual need for repentance. What follows in this story is the result of this attitude.

Scripture fulfilled in a Man from Nazareth

In Luke 4:20 Jesus ended His reading, rolled up the scroll of Isaiah, and handed it back to the chazzan so He could sit down, as was customary, to deliver a sermon about these passages. The eyes of the congregation were fixed upon Him. There was an atmosphere of suspense building as they wondered what He would say next. He proclaimed that these texts were being fulfilled in their hearing (Luke 4:21). By contrast, they expected these passages to be fulfilled in a coming messianic age. Jesus said this phase of His ministry had already begun and they were being given an offer of repentance and discipleship.

The audience wondered at such gracious words coming from one they had known since He was a boy. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?”, they asked (Luke 4:22). “How could He be the Messiah?” Rather than respond favorably to His offer, in Luke 4:23 Jesus predicted they would recite to Him a proverb that questions a person’s power and authority: “Physician, heal thyself.” Instead of responding to His offer, they asked Him to perform a miracle such as those they had probably heard about from His earlier ministry in Judea and Capernaum. By this point, Jesus had already turned water into wine and healed the nobleman’s son. Out of mere curiosity, they wanted to see a miracle but not transform their lives through genuine spiritual responsiveness.

Not accepted at home

Jesus then explained that prophets are seldom fully trusted back home (Luke 4:24). Jesus recited a proverbial expression that placed Him in the long line of prophets who were rejected by their people. What led to their rejecting Him was His noting examples of two Old Testament prophets, Elijah and Elisha, who performed miracles for Gentiles during an age of Israelite apostasy (Luke 4:25-27).

This was more than they could stand so they arose in wrath (Luke 4:28). Their rage had been building as they sat listening to Him but now it boiled over. They were not slow to see how Jesus applied these Old Testament stories to them. He inferred they were just as apostate as Israelites in the time of Elijah and Elisha. Instead of accepting the message to repent of their sins, they chose to destroy the messenger. Familiarity had bred contempt for one of their own. 

To accept His words meant they would have to accept that God offered salvation to Gentiles whom they looked down upon as “dogs.” They were unwilling to humble their hearts. Their fierce, nationalistic pride and bigotry resented the thought of God’s blessing faith-filled Gentiles in the time of Elijah and Elisha. In effect, Jesus had compared his townsfolk to their unbelieving ancestors. Jesus even gave them another opportunity about a year later but instead they were offended in Him. As a result, He did not work many mighty miracles in his hometown (Matthew 13:53-58; Mark 6:5). At the time, even His siblings did not believe in Him (John 7:5).

In Luke 4:29, these congregants led Him to the brow of a hill overlooking Nazareth, intending to cast Him down headfirst and then stone Him to death for blasphemy. This was contrary to Jewish custom that forbad execution without trial and forbad it being conducted on the Sabbath. Not only that, but Roman law required the governor’s permission before executing one of their own. They were acting like a lynch mob. In Luke 4:30-32, Jesus miraculously passed through their midst and continued His ministry in Capernaum. His time of sacrificial death had not yet come (John 7:30). Many elsewhere became His disciples. Jesus lived this proverbial expression: “A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house”  (Matthew 13:57 KJV).

---

Kenneth Frank was born and raised in New Jersey, USA, and attended Ambassador College, graduating in 1973. He served in the Canadian ministry from 1973-1999, after which he returned to the USA to pastor churches in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 15 years. Having earned a BA degree from Ambassador College he later earned a MA degree from Grand Canyon University before being assigned to the Charlotte office to teach at Living University, now Living Education. Currently, he teaches the Survey of the Bible course to the on-campus students and writes the Digging Deeper column for our online Bible study program. He is married, has four children, and seven grandchildren.