Lord Jesus Christ Reigns · lordjesuschristreigns.blog ✝ ✝ ✝
Patristics · Biblical Typology · Primary Sources Only lordjesuschristreigns.blog · April 2026 · Research verified against primary texts
✝ Approximately 14 minutes to read ✝
“And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.”
Genesis 14:14 · King James Version
✝ Editor’s Note
The 318 typology is one of the most extraordinary pieces of early Christian biblical interpretation in existence — and one of the most misattributed. In popular apologetics, it is frequently credited to Justin Martyr. A careful examination of the primary texts tells a different and far richer story. This article traces the typology to its actual origin and follows it through the full chain of patristic witnesses, all the way to the Council of Nicaea. Every claim below is sourced to the primary texts — not to secondary sources, not to search results — and can be verified in minutes using the sources provided in the final section. That is the standard to which Catholic apologetics must be held.
📜 A Note on Method
Every argument in this article was verified directly against primary texts — not secondary sources, not search results, not blog posts, not apologetics websites. The sources are the Lightfoot critical edition, the Loeb Classical Library, New Advent’s patristic corpus, and the Cambridge peer-reviewed journal New Testament Studies. Popular apologetics has long associated this typology with Justin Martyr. The primary texts tell a different and more remarkable story. Primary sources alone settle patristic questions — and every source cited in this article is linked and accessible to any reader who wishes to verify.
Part One
The Typology Itself — What Is Hidden in the Number 318?
Genesis 14:14 records that when Abraham heard his nephew Lot had been taken captive, he armed his trained household servants — three hundred and eighteen — and pursued the enemy as far as Dan. The number 318 appears exactly once in the entire Bible. For most readers, it is simply a historical note: the size of Abraham’s household militia. But to early Christians reading the Old Testament in Greek, that number contained something far more remarkable hidden inside it.
Before explaining what that discovery is, a brief orientation for readers who may not be familiar with ancient Greek: in the ancient world, numbers were not written as digits (1, 2, 3) but as letters of the alphabet. Each Greek letter carried a specific numerical value. This system is called gematria (Greek: isopsephia, meaning “equal counting”). It was not a mystical invention — it was simply how all Greek-speakers wrote numbers, the same way Roman numerals work. When the early Church read their Greek Old Testament, numbers were letters and letters were numbers simultaneously.
🔤 Quick Greek Guide — You Do Not Need to Know Greek to Follow This
Tau (Τ) — pronounced “tav,” like the English letter T. In Greek, it is shaped exactly like a capital T. Its numerical value is 300. Early Christians recognized it immediately as a symbol for the Cross of Christ — it looks like a cross. · Iota (Ι) — pronounced “ee-OH-tah.” Shaped like a capital I. Numerical value: 10. · Eta (Η) — pronounced: “AY-tah.” Looks like a capital H. Numerical value: 8. · ΙΗ together — read “ee-AY.” This is the ancient scribal abbreviation for the Name of Jesus (Iesous in Greek, ΙΗΣΟΥΣ). It was so widely used in early manuscripts that it is called a nomen sacrum — a “sacred name.” Any Greek-reading Christian of the first or second century saw ΙΗ and knew instantly it meant Jesus.
The number 318, written in Greek numerals, consists of precisely these three letters: Τ · Ι · Η. Let that settle for a moment before seeing the display below.
✝ Genesis 14:14 — The Number 318 Written in Greek ✝
Τ Tau = 300 The Cross of Christ
Ι Iota = 10 1st letter of Ἰησοῦς
Η Eta = 8 2nd letter of Ἰησοῦς
Τ + ΙΗ = 300 + 18 = 318 · The Cross + The Name of Jesus
The capital Greek letter Tau (Τ) is shaped precisely like a cross — a T-form, identical to what scholars call the crux commissa, the tau-shaped cross used in Roman-era executions. Its numerical value in the Greek alphabet is 300. Long before Constantine, early Christians recognized Tau as an established symbol of the Cross of Christ. The shape was not accidental.
Iota-Eta (ΙΗ) — value 18 — are the first two letters of the Greek name ΙΗΣΟΥΣ (Iesous), the Name of Jesus. The combination ΙΗ was a standard nomen sacrum — a sacred scribal abbreviation — found throughout the Alexandrian papyri of the first and second centuries. Any literate Greek-speaking Christian encountered it constantly in their manuscripts. Seeing ΙΗ was like seeing the Name itself.
So embedded in the count of Abraham’s servants — 318, written ΤΙΗ — was the Cross (Τ) and the Name of Jesus (ΙΗ). Abraham, looking forward in the Spirit, sent his household to battle under a number that encoded the world’s redemption. The Father who called Abraham had hidden, in the very fabric of the Greek numeral system, the mystery of His Son’s Cross and Name in the count of household servants mobilized to rescue a single captive man.
And there is more. Hidden in this same number is a connection to one of the most decisive moments in the history of Christian theology — a connection we will reach in Part Four. But first, the most important question: who saw this first?
· · ✝ · ·
Part Two
Who First Connected Abraham’s 318 Servants to the Cross? — The Epistle of Barnabas, 9:7–8
The first Christian to commit this typology to writing — as far as the surviving record allows us to establish — is the author of the Epistle of Barnabas, in chapter 9, verses 7–8, composed somewhere between 70 and 135 AD.
Here is the passage in J.B. Lightfoot’s critical translation — the standard scholarly edition used by patristics scholars worldwide:J.B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers (1889), Epistle of Barnabas 9:7–8. Full text at earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html
“For the scripture saith; And Abraham circumcised of his household eighteen males and three hundred. What then was the knowledge given unto him? Understand ye that He saith the eighteen first, and then after an interval three hundred. In the eighteen ‘I’ stands for ten, ‘H’ for eight. Here thou hast JESUS (IHSOYS). And because the cross in the ‘T’ was to have grace, He saith also three hundred. So He revealeth Jesus in the two letters, and in the remaining one the cross.”
Epistle of Barnabas 9:7–8 · J.B. Lightfoot, Critical Translation
And in Kirsopp Lake’s Loeb Classical Library translation — a second fully independent critical edition:Kirsopp Lake, The Apostolic Fathers, Loeb Classical Library Vol. 1 (1912), Epistle of Barnabas 9:8. The Loeb Classical Library is Harvard University Press’s authoritative bilingual edition of ancient texts.
“For it says, ‘And Abraham circumcised from his household eighteen men and three hundred.’ What then was the knowledge that was given to him? Notice that he first mentions the eighteen, and after a pause the three hundred. The eighteen is I (=ten) and H (=8) — you have Jesus — and because the cross was destined to have grace in the T, he says ‘and three hundred.’ So he indicates Jesus in the two letters and the cross in the other.”
Epistle of Barnabas 9:8 · Kirsopp Lake, Loeb Classical Library (1912)
Three independent critical editions — Lightfoot, Lake/Loeb, and the Bart Ehrman/Loeb critical apparatus — all confirm the same reading without variation. The Cambridge peer-reviewed journal New Testament Studies describes this passage as “a classic example of allegorical or midrashic interpretation.”Cambridge University Press, New Testament Studies, “Barnabas 9:7–9 and the Author’s Supposed Use of Gematria.” Full abstract at cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/abs/barnabas-9-79-and-the-authors-supposed-use-of-gematria/7EF13AC0CEB5A2E5D0C032396FA4896F
And here, for those who read Greek, is the original text of Barnabas 9:7–8 from the Codex Sinaiticus tradition, that they might examine the Greek letters directly:
The Greek is unambiguous: Ι (Iota, ten) and Η (Eta, eight) give you Ἰησοῦν — Jesus. The Cross (ὁ σταυρός) is in the Τ (Tau, three hundred). The grace of the Cross is written into the number. This is not interpretive creativity — it is the Greek alphabet doing what Greek alphabets do.
About the Epistle of Barnabas — Why This Source Matters
📜 Manuscript and Reception
The Epistle of Barnabas was written between 70 and 135 AD — making it one of the earliest surviving Christian documents outside the New Testament itself, roughly contemporary with or earlier than some New Testament writings. Its complete text is preserved in the 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus — one of the two oldest and most complete manuscripts of the entire Bible, held today in the British Library — where it is positioned immediately after the Book of Revelation and before the Shepherd of Hermas.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215 AD) cited it with the phrase “the Apostle Barnabas says,” treating it as of apostolic authority. Origen called it “the General Epistle of Barnabas,” using language normally reserved for canonical non-Pauline epistles. Didymus the Blind, Serapion of Thmuis, and Jerome all regarded it with the highest esteem. Even Eusebius, who ultimately classified it as disputed rather than canonical, placed it in the highest tier of non-canonical writings.
Its placement in Codex Sinaiticus testifies to the near-canonical weight it carried in the early Church. When this author says Abraham “looked forward in the Spirit” to Jesus in the number of his servants, he is making a claim that the earliest Church took with utmost seriousness.
✉ Stay in the Word
Articles like this one — verified patristic research, primary sources only — delivered to your inbox when published. No spam. No algorithms. Just the Word and the Fathers.
The Transmission Chain — Clement, Pseudo-Cyprian, and Ambrose
The 318 typology did not remain with Barnabas alone. It was taken up by subsequent Fathers and teachers across three centuries — but always traceable back to Barnabas as the sole origin. Here is the complete documented chain:
1
Epistle of Barnabas — The Originator c. 70–135 AD · Barnabas 9:7–8The first and only documented origin of the Christian 318 gematria. Preserved in Codex Sinaiticus. No earlier Christian source for this interpretation has been identified. The argument is entirely original to Barnabas in the surviving record.
2
Clement of Alexandria — The Transmitter c. 150–215 AD · Stromateis, Book 6, Chapter 11Clement explicitly transmits the Barnabas tradition. His crucial phrase: “They say, then, that the character representing 300 is, as to shape, the type of the Lord’s sign, and that the Iota and the Eta indicate the Saviour’s name.” The words “they say” (φασίν) signal that Clement is consciously passing on received tradition — not claiming independent discovery. Clement treated Barnabas as apostolic, citing it as “the Apostle Barnabas says.”
3
Pseudo-Cyprian — Western Transmission 3rd Century AD · De Pascha Computus. The typology appears twice in this work, extending the Barnabas tradition into the Western Latin Church. Notably, the author conflates Genesis 14 with Genesis 17 (mentioning Abraham’s age), suggesting he is working from a transmitted summary rather than from Barnabas directly — confirming that the argument was circulating as established tradition.
4
St. Ambrose of Milan — The Great Deployment c. 340–397 AD · Exposition of the Christian Faith, Book I, Chapter 1. Writing to the Emperor Gratian on the eve of battle against the Goths in 378 AD, Ambrose deploys the typology with pastoral magnificence — and then connects it to something that will astonish you. His own explanatory footnote in the critical edition reads: “The original form of the Cross was that of the letter T. The numerical value of the sign T (Tau), in Greek arithmetic, was 300. Eighteen was represented by ιη, the first two letters of the name Ἰησοῦς, Jesus. To St. Ambrose, therefore, it seemed that there was some mysterious power in the number 318, represented by the sign of the Cross and the first two letters of the Saviour’s name, thus — TIH.”
⚠ The Critical Observation
Justin Martyr is not in this chain. Not in a surviving text. Not in a citation from a lost text. Not in Clement’s attribution. Not in Irenaeus’s extensive use of Justin. Not anywhere in the patristic record. The following two sections explain precisely what Justin does say — and why his name became attached to this argument anyway.
· · ✝ · ·
Part Four
The Nicaea Connection — Providence Written in a Number
Ambrose does not invoke the 318 typology only once in his Exposition of the Christian Faith. He uses it twice in the same opening chapter — and the second use is perhaps the most theologically astonishing detail in the entire patristic reception of this typology. I promised you in Part One that there was more hidden in this number. Here it is.
✝ The Council of Nicaea · AD 325
318
The Council of Nicaea — the council that gave us the Nicene Creed, that defined the eternal consubstantiality of the Son with the Father against Arianism — was attended by 318 bishops. This number is attested by three independent patristic witnesses: Athanasius of Alexandria, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, and Epiphanius of Salamis. Ambrose writes: “Of the Acts of Councils, I shall let that one be my chief guide which three hundred and eighteen priests, appointed, as it were, after the judgment of Abraham, made (so to speak) a trophy raised to proclaim their victory over the infidel throughout the world, prevailing by that courage of the Faith, wherein all agreed. Verily, as it seems to me, one may herein see the hand of God, forasmuch as the same number is our authority in the Councils of the Faith, and an example of loyalty in the records of old.”
Read that slowly. The same number — 318 — that Barnabas saw encoded with the Cross (Τ = 300) and the Name of Jesus (ΙΗ = 18) in Abraham’s household servants was the number of bishops who gathered in 325 AD to define the eternal consubstantiality of the Son with the Father against Arianism. The Council that produced the Nicene Creed — “God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father” — was convened by precisely 318 men.
The Τ-Ι-Η of Genesis 14:14 was not only a typological foreshadowing of the Cross and the Name of Jesus. It was a providential anticipation of the number of men who would lay down their lives, their safety, and in some cases their freedom defending the doctrine of who that Name belongs to. The Father who encoded the Cross and the Name of His Son in a number of household servants knew — and wrote into history — that the same number would one day define His Son’s eternal nature before emperors and heretics.
Ambrose saw this as the hand of God. The entire Catholic and Orthodox tradition has seen it the same way. For the complete biblical witness to the Holy Trinity that those 318 Fathers were confessing, see the Holy Trinity Table on this blog.
If this patristic investigation has been useful to you — in your apologetics, your teaching, or your own study — consider sharing it. The Church is built up when primary sources are put into the hands of those who need them.
What Justin Martyr Actually Says — And Why His Name Became Attached to This Argument
Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 AD) is one of the greatest apologists of the early Church and one of my own most-loved Fathers. He is extraordinarily rich in cross typology — and that richness is precisely why his name gets attached to arguments he never made. Let me be precise about what Justin does say, and then clear about what he does not.
✝ Justin’s Genuine Cross Typologies — Verified and Documented
“When the people waged war with Amalek, and the son of Nave (Nun) by name Jesus (Joshua), led the fight, Moses himself prayed to God, stretching out both hands, and Hur with Aaron supported them during the whole day, so that they might not hang down when he got wearied. For if he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten… but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because… he himself made the sign of the cross.”
Justin Martyr · Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 90
Justin also interprets Isaac carrying the wood to the place of sacrifice (Dialogue ch. 86) as a type of Christ carrying His Cross, and in the First Apology chapters 35 and 55 he sees the Cross foreshadowed in the human form with outstretched arms, the sail of a ship, and the tools of workmen. These are all genuine, powerful, fully documented Justin typologies. His method is exactly the Spirit-illuminated reading that would naturally produce the Barnabas argument — he simply never made this particular one.
A complete search of the Dialogue with Trypho (all 142 chapters), the First Apology, and the Second Apology returns no mention of 318, no mention of Abraham’s servants in connection with the Cross or the Name of Christ, and no gematria of any kind involving Genesis 14:14. Readers are invited to verify this themselves using the links in the sources section below — the entire text of all three works is available online at New Advent.
⚠ One Honest Caveat — Justin’s Lost Works
Justin’s surviving corpus is not complete. He himself references a Syntagma Against the Heresies and a Treatise Against Marcion, both lost. Strict logical honesty requires acknowledging that we cannot prove with absolute certainty what those lost works contained. However, the argument from silence here is very strong: both Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus of Lyon knew Justin’s work closely, both made extensive use of the 318 argument, and neither ever attributed it to Justin from any source — surviving or lost. If Justin had made this argument, the silence of these two most attentive successors would be extremely difficult to explain.
· · ✝ · ·
Part Six
Why Justin’s Name Became Attached to This Argument — And Why That Cannot Settle the Question
A Google search for “318 Abraham Justin Martyr cross” will return blog posts, sermon notes, YouTube transcripts, and apologetics websites confidently attributing this typology to Justin Martyr. This feels like confirmation. It is not.
The internet rewards confident, widely-shared content far more than careful scholarship. A blog post that attributes the 318 argument to Justin Martyr — without checking the primary texts — will be shared, linked, and cited across platforms. Each repetition increases its search ranking, making the attribution appear progressively more established. But if the original post did not go back to the primary texts, every subsequent link simply amplifies the same error.
A high-ranking search result confirms only that a claim is widely repeated — not that it is true. The 318 typology has been circulating with the Justin attribution long enough to dominate search results. This is exactly why I said at the top of this article that primary texts alone settle patristic questions. Google rankings are not patristic evidence. The Lightfoot critical edition, the Loeb Classical Library, New Advent’s patristic corpus, and Cambridge peer review are evidence of this. Those sources are clear: Barnabas is the origin.
This dynamic — confident misattribution amplified by internet sharing — is one of the most common sources of error in popular apologetics today. It is not a failure of intelligence. It is a failure of method. The correction is simple: go to the primary texts. Every source I cite in this article is linked below and can be verified in minutes.
· · ✝ · ·
Part Seven
The Chain Is Actually Stronger Without Justin
The argument becomes more impressive, not less, when attributed correctly to Barnabas. Consider what the actual chain of witnesses gives us:
The Epistle of Barnabas (c. 70–135 AD) — one of the earliest surviving Christian documents, preserved in Codex Sinaiticus at the end of the New Testament, received as near-apostolic by Clement and Origen, written within living memory of the Apostles.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215 AD) — one of the great theological minds of the Alexandrian school, consciously and explicitly transmitting the Barnabas tradition in his Stromateis.
Pseudo-Cyprian (3rd century) — confirming the tradition’s presence in the Western Latin Church.
St. Ambrose of Milan (c. 340–397 AD) — one of the four great Latin Doctors of the Church, deploying this typology on the eve of military battle in a letter to an emperor, and then — in the same text — connecting it providentially to the 318 bishops of Nicaea.
And then the providence: 318 bishops at Nicaea, defining the doctrine that the Son is consubstantial with the Father — their number encoding, from the first pages of Genesis, the very Name and the very Cross of the One whose eternal nature they were defining against Arianism.
✝ The Golden Thread
The Τ-Ι-Η of Genesis 14:14 runs like a golden thread through the entire patristic tradition — from the apostolic age through the Alexandrian school through the great battle for Nicaea.
It is not a minor typological curiosity. It is one of the most extraordinary pieces of early Christian biblical interpretation in existence: a number that, in three silent Greek letters, says everything the Church has always confessed.
The Cross. The Name. The Victory of the Lamb.
· · ✝ · ·
Conclusion
Use This Argument — Cite It from Barnabas
The 318 typology belongs to the Epistle of Barnabas. It was transmitted by Clement of Alexandria. It was deployed magnificently by St. Ambrose of Milan — twice in the same text, once for Abraham’s servants and once for the Fathers of Nicaea. Justin Martyr is not in this chain.
Use this argument. Use it in your apologetics, teaching, preaching, and conversations. It is one of the most beautiful pieces of patristic typology in existence — a hidden gem encoded in a single number in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, waiting for those with eyes formed by the Greek Scriptures to see what was always there.
Abraham’s 318 servants were always pointing to the Cross and the Name. We simply needed the right guides — Barnabas, Clement, Ambrose — to show us where to look.
And they were pointing, all along, to Him.
— lordjesuschristreigns.blog · Research verified April 2026 · All sources confirmed working at time of publication
Who first connected Abraham’s 318 servants to the Cross and the Name of Jesus?
The Epistle of Barnabas, written between 70 and 135 AD, is the first surviving Christian document to make this connection, in chapter 9, verses 7–8. No earlier Christian source for this interpretation has been identified. Clement of Alexandria, Pseudo-Cyprian, and St. Ambrose of Milan all transmit the tradition after Barnabas, but Barnabas is the origin.
Did Justin Martyr use the 318 typology?
No. A complete search of Justin’s surviving works — the Dialogue with Trypho (all 142 chapters), the First Apology, and the Second Apology — returns no mention of 318, no mention of Abraham’s servants in connection with the Cross or the Name of Christ, and no gematria involving Genesis 14:14. Justin is rich on cross typology generally. Still, this particular argument does not appear in any of his surviving writings.
What does ΤΙΗ mean in Greek?
ΤΙΗ is the Greek numeral for 318: Tau (Τ) = 300, Iota (Ι) = 10, Eta (Η) = 8. In early Christian reading, Tau was recognized as a cross symbol (it is shaped like a T-cross), and ΙΗ were the first two letters of ΙΗΣΟΥΣ — Jesus — a standard scribal abbreviation called a nomen sacrum. So ΤΙΗ reads simultaneously as 318, as the Cross, and as the Name of Jesus.
How many bishops attended the Council of Nicaea?
318 bishops attended the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, according to three independent patristic witnesses: Athanasius of Alexandria, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, and Epiphanius of Salamis. St. Ambrose of Milan explicitly connected this number to Abraham’s 318 servants in his Exposition of the Christian Faith, seeing in it the providential hand of God.
Is the Epistle of Barnabas in the Bible?
The Epistle of Barnabas is not in the biblical canon. Still, it is preserved in the 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus — one of the two oldest complete manuscripts of the Bible — immediately after the Book of Revelation. It was regarded as nearly apostolic by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and highly esteemed by Jerome and Didymus the Blind. It is classified today as an Apostolic Father, one of the earliest non-canonical Christian writings.
All Verified · All Working · Primary Texts Only · Confirmed April 2026
Source 1 — Epistle of Barnabas 9:7–8 · The Originator
J.B. Lightfoot Translation — Standard Critical Edition https://earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html → Scroll to Barnabas 9:7. The full 318 passage is there. Why this matters: Lightfoot’s 1889 critical edition is the standard scholarly reference for the Apostolic Fathers. This is the primary text, not a commentary or summary.
New Advent Edition — Roberts-Donaldson Translation (Catholic) https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0124.htm → Scroll to Chapter IX. Second independent translation confirms the same reading. Why this matters: New Advent is the Catholic Church’s primary online patristics resource. Its translations are independent of Lightfoot and confirm the passage without variation.
Catholic Encyclopedia — Manuscript History of the Epistle of Barnabas https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02299a.htm Why this matters: Documents the Codex Sinaiticus placement and the patristic reception of Barnabas as near-apostolic.
Source 2 — Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 6.11 · Second in Chain
StudyLight — Full Clement Quote with Citation (Most Direct) https://www.studylight.org/language-studies/difficult-sayings.html?article=509 → Look for “Clement of Alexandria in his Stromata…” Why this matters: Confirms Clement’s “they say” phrasing — the clearest evidence that Clement is consciously transmitting the Barnabas tradition rather than originating the argument himself.
Source 3 — St. Ambrose, Exposition of the Christian Faith, Book I, Chapter 1
New Advent — Official Primary Source (Both 318 Uses) https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/34041.htm → Paragraph 3: Abraham’s 318 servants. Paragraph 5: 318 bishops of Nicaea. Why this matters: This is the primary source for Ambrose’s double use of the 318 typology — both for Abraham’s servants and for the Nicaea connection. Both uses are in the same opening chapter.
Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 90 — Moses at Amalek (New Advent) https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01287.htm → Chapters 89–108. Search “Amalek” or “sign of the cross.” Justin’s genuine cross typology.
First Apology — Verify That 318 Is Absent (New Advent) https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm → Search entire text for “318” or “three hundred.” You will find nothing. Justin’s genuine cross typologies are in chapters 35 and 55. Why this matters: Readers are invited to verify the negative claim directly. The absence of the 318 argument in Justin’s surviving corpus is not asserted — it is documented and checkable.
Wikipedia — Codex Sinaiticus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus Why this matters: Confirms the manuscript location of the Epistle of Barnabas and its position in the oldest surviving Bible.
Like this:
LikeLoading…
Related
Discover more from Lord Jesus Christ Reigns
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
