Exploring Trinitarian Logic

[ProDeo]

I sincerely pray you believe what stands written @ProDeo ans don't listen to "strange voices"

J.

No worries my friend

 

[ProDeo]

1. We know Jesus as only human (The Word (Logos) became Flesh)
2. We know the Father Created the Physical with Christ the Spiritual Creation in Mind (Logos)
3. We know Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end (Rev) i.e
and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore Re 1:18.

F2F

Yes, I know that you believe that, but actually (as indicated) I am more interested on what we can agree and what you can derive from the points I quoted, a few more -

1. We know Jesus as the ONLY human Who preexisted and knew His life with the Father when He was on Earth (John 17)
2. We know Jesus with the Father was involved in the creation story (Col 1)
3. We know Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end (Rev)
4. We know Jesus existed before creation, before humans were created and thus was a spiritual Being.
5. We know Jesus (as a spiritual Being) descended from heaven (John 3:13) and became (incarnated as) a human.

Are we in agreement so far?

 

[face2face]

Yes, I know that you believe that, but actually (as indicated) I am more interested on what we can agree and what you can derive from the points I quoted, a few more -

I will list what has been proven from Scripture and extra-biblical texts.

1. We know Jesus as the ONLY human

Correct

Who preexisted and knew His life with the Father when He was on Earth (John 17)

The Glory which God would Glorify His Son is the Same Glory God He has alway held - Also Romans 8:30 speaking of the Saints which is the same Glory.

You & @Johann continually write yourselves out of the Plan & Purpose of God through His Son Jesus?

Why do you both do this?

2. We know Jesus with the Father was involved in the creation story (Col 1)

Context demands New Creation language sorry!

3. We know Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end (Rev)

Correct - Jesus has a beginning and an end though Yahweh does not!

4. We know Jesus existed before creation, before humans were created and thus was a spiritual Being.

Only in the Mind of the Father - i.e lamb slain from the foundation of the world!

5. We know Jesus (as a spiritual Being) descended from heaven (John 3:13) and became (incarnated as) a human.

Are we in agreement so far?

We know the Word of God went forth in the same manner as it did in Creation "God said..." but through the Power of the Holy Spirit gave conception in Mary and Jesus was given life.

Maybe next time try not copying and pasting the same error, else you lose credibility like Lux!

F2F

 

[Johann]

Only in the Mind of the Father - i.e lamb slain from the foundation of the world!

Incorrect.
The Word

We must keep foremost in our thinking the purpose of John’s prologue. It can be summed up rather simply: Who is the Word? From verse 1 through verse 18, John is telling us about the Word. We dare not take our “eye off the ball,” so to speak, and miss the fact that throughout this passage, the identity of the Word is at issue. Right at the start we must ask why John would use such a term as “the Word.” What is he attempting to communicate?

The Greek term translated “Word” in this passage is logos. It is certainly not an unusual term. It appears three hundred and thirty times as a noun in the Greek New Testament alone. It has a wide range of meanings, from the basic “word” to merely a “matter” or a “thing.” So why would John choose such a word for such an important task?

The Greeks had used the term logos in their philosophical explanations regarding the functioning of the world. The logos was for them an impersonal ordering force, that which gave harmony to the universe. The logos was not personal in their philosophy, but it was very important.

In the Old Testament there are dim reflections upon a similar concept. The “Word of the Lord” came to have deep significance to the Jewish people. Such passages as Psalm 33:6, “By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host,” lent themselves to the idea that there was more to the “word” than one might see at first glance. During the few centuries prior to the coming of Christ, Jewish theologians and thinkers would see in such phrases as “word of the Lord” and in the “wisdom of God” references to a personal rather than an abstract concept.

But John went beyond everything that came before in his use of the term logos. In fact, as we proceed, we will see that it would be better to write Logos than logos, for John is using the word as a name, not merely a description. He fills the impersonal logos that came before him with personality and life, and presents to us the living and personal Logos, the Word who was in the beginning.

The Little Word “Was”

The English word “was” is about as bland a term as you can find. Yet in Greek, it is most expressive. The Greeks were quite concerned about being able to express subtleties in regard not only to when something happened, but how it happened as well. Our little word “was” is poorly suited to handle the depth of the Greek at this point. John’s choice of words is deliberate and, quite honestly, beautiful.

Throughout the prologue of the Gospel of John, the author balances between two verbs. When speaking of the Logos as He existed in eternity past, John uses the Greek word en (a form of eimi). The tense1 of the word expresses continuous action in the past. Compare this with the verb he chooses to use when speaking of everything else found, for example, in verse 3: “All things came into being through Him,” egeneto. This verb2 contains the very element missing from the other: a point of origin. The term, when used in contexts of creation and origin, speaks of a time when something came into existence. The first verb, en, does not. John is very careful to use only the first verb of the Logos throughout the first thirteen verses, and the second verb, egeneto, he uses for everything else (including John the Baptist in verse 6). Finally, in verse 14, he breaks this pattern, for a very specific reason, as we shall see.

Why emphasize the tense of a little verb? Because it tells us a great deal. When we speak of the Word, the Logos, we must ask ourselves: how long has the Logos existed? Did the Logos come into being at a point in time? Is the Logos a creature? John is very concerned that we get the right answer to such questions, and he provides the answers by the careful selection of the words he uses.

Above we noted that John gave us some very important information about the time frame he has in mind when he says “in the beginning.” That information is found in the tense of the verb en. You see, as far back as you wish to push “the beginning,” the Word is already in existence. The Word does not come into existence at the “beginning,” but is already in existence when the “beginning” takes place. If we take the beginning of John 1:1, the Word is already there. If we push it back further (if one can even do so!), say, a year, the Word is already there. A thousand years, the Word is there. A billion years, the Word is there.3 What is John’s point? The Word is eternal. The Word has always existed. The Word is not a creation. The New English Bible puts it quite nicely: “When all things began, the Word already was.”

Right from the start, then, John tells us something vital about the Word. Whatever else we will learn about the Word, the Word is eternal.4 With this John begins to lay the foundation for what will come.

THE UNCREATED WORD ENTERS CREATION

In this post I quote the section of Dr. James R. White’s book, The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heart of Christian Belief, Revised & Updated, published by Bethany House Publishers, Grand R…

answeringislamblog.wordpress.com

You are entirely mistaken to suggest that the Word/Memra was merely a concept in the mind of YHVH.

J.

 

[face2face]

You are entirely mistaken to suggest that the Word/Memra was merely a concept in the mind of YHVH.

J.

Where did Creation - Physical and Spiritual originate?

Are you suggesting the Mind of Yahweh is merely?

 

[face2face]

It's amazing how @Johann can downplay the mind of God as merely in comparison to his formulated creeds. It's as if he elevates the language of the creed above the very outward expression of Almighty God Himself.

Christ is the Word made flesh, the manifestation of Yahweh among men (1 Tim. 3:16).

1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV) states:

"Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated (justified) by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory."

All of these things are the Work of God in the Son of Man (firstfruits and first begotten of the Father)

The entire Plan & Purpose of God first took place in Yahwehs Logos which went forth and did not return to Him void.

"the word was God"...because it was "of God," and not because the Lord was God in the Trinitarian concept of his status. The title is appropriate to the Lord for he "confirmed the promises made unto the fathers" (Rom. 15:8).

For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, 9 and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written, “Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles, and sing to your name.” Ro 15:8–9.

Once again, @ProDeo, can you see how you and Johann are not part of Romans 15:8? The moment you recognize that you are included in the glory that the Logos has envisioned and brought into existence, you are united with Christ!!! The Bride and Groom, created in the image and likeness of God, are one with Him.

I understand Johann may choose not to identify with the Name, the Glory, or the Logos of God, but I urge you to seriously consider the invitation to be part of His coming Kingdom.

F2F

 

[Johann]

Where did Creation - Physical and Spiritual originate?

Are you suggesting the Mind of Yahweh is merely?

You are completely wrong to claim that the Logos/Memra was merely a concept in the mind of YHVH.

Your repeated errors-failing to take Scripture at face value and imposing ideas not present in the text-have led me to lose interest in your perspective.

J.

 

[face2face]

You are completely wrong to claim that the Logos/Memra was merely a concept in the mind of YHVH.

Your repeated errors-failing to take Scripture at face value and imposing ideas not present in the text-have led me to lose interest in your perspective.

J.

Again you state God's Logos is merely an expression of God's Mind.

It's also noted you did not answer the questions!

Where did Creation - Physical and Spiritual originate?

Are you suggesting the Mind of Yahweh is merely?

 

[Johann]

Christ is the Word made flesh, the manifestation of Yahweh among men (1 Tim. 3:16).

1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV) states:

"Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated (justified) by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory."

See how this backfires on you-

1Ti 3:16 and, confessedly, great is the secret of piety—God was manifested in flesh, declared righteous in spirit, seen by messengers, preached among nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory!

Whether it be God, Christ or Hos--

Transliteration: Hos
Morphology: RelPro-NMS
Personal / Relative Pronoun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's no.: G3739 (ὅς, ὅσγε)

Meaning: Who, which, what, that.---is the FACT that God is, not was, WITH God

How can God be manifest in flesh if He was a concept in the mind of God?!
How can Christ be manifest in flesh if He was a concept in the mind of God?!

Can you see your illogical reasoning?




NASB "He who was revealed in the flesh"
NKJV "God was manifested in the flesh"
NRSV "He was revealed in flesh"
TEV "He appeared in human form"
NJB "He was made visible in the flesh"

This speaks of the Incarnation (birth) of Jesus Christ at Bethlehem: His life, teachings, death, and resurrection, which fully reveal the Father (cf. Joh_1:14-18). There is also the strong inference of His pre-existence (cf. Joh_1:1-5; Joh_8:57-58; 2Co_8:4; Php_2:6; Col_1:17).

This is the central truth of the Gospels about Jesus Christ, that He was fully God and fully human (cf. Joh_1:14; Php_2:6-8; Col_1:14-16; 1Jn_4:1-6).
There is a later Greek manuscript variant in which the relative pronoun hos (MSS א, A, C, F, G; UBS4 gives this an "A" rating [certain]) is changed to theos. This later change may have occurred

1. with the confusion over OC (the abbreviations in uncial Greek for who) read as H C (the abbreviation in uncial Greek for "God") or

2. as a purposeful theological change by later scribes (cf. MSS אc, Ac, C2, and D2) wanting to make the text more specific against the adoptionist heresies (cf. Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, pp. 77-78)

Plain Scripture and you stumble. Why? Selective reading of the text.

J.

 

[face2face]

Johann has himself backed into a corner with his "merely" comment.

Back to School for this wayward disciple!

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Ge 1:1.

John 1:1, it is stated that "in the beginning" was the Word, or Logos.

In the beginning was the Word Jn 1:1.

The term Logos refers to the outward expression of inward thought or reason. It signifies more than just a spoken word; it embodies the thought behind the word expressed. Additionally, we learn that wisdom was present with God from the beginning and was manifested in His acts of creation...both Physical & Spiritual.

I will answer the question Johann is afraid to answer!

Everything, including Christ had it's origin in Yahweh (God), Father!

John was precise in starting his Gospel in the same manner as Gen 1:1 as he knew his readers / listeners would instantly equate Jesus with God's Work. All that was done, was done with His ultimate purpose in mind, and not as the result of blind force or chance.

So lets test this idea that Johann is rejecting!

"The word of Yahweh" Gen 15:1

This is the first instance of the remarkable phrase dabar Yahweh, which appears frequently throughout Scripture. It signifies the communication of Yahweh's will to mankind. The Ten Commandments are referred to as the "ten words," which are rendered as "commandments" in Deuteronomy 4:13. The Psalmist declares, "The sum of Thy word (dabar) is truth" (Psalm 119:160, R.V.). All of life's experiences, and the entirety of Scripture, serve to validate the declared Word, so that the Word is nothing but truth (John 14:6; Psalm 12:6). In the Septuagint, dabar is translated as logos.

Ironically the very Word Johann is trying to use against me is the same Word which originated in Yahweh's Mind - the Divine expression of His Will - Thought into Action!

@Wrangler @APAK @ProDeo

I just want to note that not only now does Johann not include himself in the Name but he rejects the idea that Logos "begins" in the Mind of God (NOT JESUS).

Jesus is the result of Yahweh's Logos in that Christ was obedient unto death! Christ allowed the Word to expound Yahweh to humanity, and therefore has been elevated above all His holy name (Psa. 138:2).

I bow down toward your holy temple and give thanks to your name for your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word Ps 138:2.

Yahweh is a family Name! Christ perfectly revealed that Name through his life and death. He was exalted by God, receiving an inheritance, a name, a position, and more — things He did not possess before his birth.

This is what makes the Lord the indescribable gift!

If Johann thinks the Mind of God is merely, and the Name holds not hope for him - why is he a believer?

F2F

 

[face2face]

NASB "He who was revealed in the flesh"
NKJV "God was manifested in the flesh"
NRSV "He was revealed in flesh"
TEV "He appeared in human form"
NJB "He was made visible in the flesh"

God was not in Sins Flesh BUT He revealed Himself through it in the Son of Man.
Well done for posting multiple versions with the same meaning!
F2F

 

[ProDeo]

I will list what has been proven from Scripture and extra-biblical texts.

Correct

The Glory which God would Glorify His Son is the Same Glory God He has alway held - Also Romans 8:30 speaking of the Saints which is the same Glory.

You & @Johann continually write yourselves out of the Plan & Purpose of God through His Son Jesus?

Why do you both do this?

You are sabotaging what I wrote, changing the subject.

1. We know Jesus was the ONLY human Who preexisted and knew His life with the Father when He was on Earth (John 17)

John 17:5 - And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Christ by His own words declared He preexisted with the Father before creation, thus Christ before creation wasn't a human but a spiritual Being.

Why can't you just say, I agree.

I leave the other 4 points what they are at the moment, let's agree on this one first.

 

[Johann]

Everything, including Christ had it's origin in Yahweh (God), Father!

Error. Plain and simple.

John 1:1–3 (Textus Receptus)
Greek Text:
1:1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
1:2 Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν.
1:3 Πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν.

Key Syntax Points:
ἦν (was):

The imperfect verb ἦν is used repeatedly to describe the Logos' existence in the beginning (ἐν ἀρχῇ).

This denotes continuous, eternal existence rather than an origin or point of creation.

Contrast this with ἐγένετο (came into being) in verse 3, used for created things, clearly distinguishing the Logos from created entities.

πρὸς τὸν Θεόν (with God):

The preposition πρὸς with the accusative implies a face-to-face relationship, signifying intimacy and distinction between the Logos and God (the Father). This relationship is eternal, not temporal.

Πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο (All things were made through Him):

The phrase δι’ αὐτοῦ (through Him) uses the genitive of agency, emphasizing the Logos as the instrumental Agent of creation, not part of creation.

The structure explicitly states that without Him, nothing came into being (χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν), precluding the Logos from being included in the category of created things.

2. Colossians 1:16–17 (Textus Receptus)
Greek Text:
1:16 ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα...
1:17 καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων, καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν.

Key Syntax Points:
ἐν αὐτῷ (in Him):

The preposition ἐν indicates that creation finds its origin "in Him" (Christ), implying His pre-existence and supremacy over all creation.
ἐκτίσθη (were created):

The verb ἐκτίσθη (aorist passive indicative) is used for "creation" and refers to all created things.

Christ is never described as being created; instead, He is the One through whom creation happened.

αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων (He is before all things):

The present tense ἐστιν emphasizes Christ's continuous, timeless existence.

The phrase πρὸ πάντων (before all things) explicitly asserts His pre-existence over all creation.

τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν (all things hold together in Him):

The perfect tense συνέστηκεν (have been held together) indicates Christ's ongoing, sustaining role in creation, a function that belongs to God alone.

3. Hebrews 1:3 (Textus Receptus)
Greek Text:
ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ...

Key Syntax Points:
ὢν (being):

The present participle ὢν denotes continuous existence, describing the Son as eternally the radiance (ἀπαύγασμα) of God's glory.
ἀπαύγασμα (radiance):

This noun refers to an inherent and eternal emanation of divine glory, not a created reflection.

The syntax establishes the Son’s co-eternity with the Father.

χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως (exact representation of His nature):

The genitive τῆς ὑποστάσεως emphasizes the Son's exact and eternal representation of the Father's essence, which precludes the idea of Him being a created being.

Using syntax, the Greek text consistently demonstrates that Christ (the Logos) is eternal, uncreated, and distinct from the created order. Phrases like ἦν (was) in John 1:1, ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων (is before all things) in Colossians 1:17, and ὢν (being) in Hebrews 1:3 all affirm Christ's timeless existence and divine nature.

Therefore, YOUR claim that Christ "had His origin in Yahweh" is incompatible with the grammatical and syntactical evidence of Scripture.

In order to make your point, you twist and pervert my words and the words of Scripture to fit your false narrative?

Have you become totally unhinged?

J.

 

[Johann]

God was not in Sins Flesh BUT He revealed Himself through it in the Son of Man.
Well done for posting multiple versions with the same meaning!
F2F

Answer @ProDeo's questions.

J.

 

[face2face]

You

Answer @ProDeo's questions.

J.

You speak on his behalf J?

 

[face2face]

You are sabotaging what I wrote, changing the subject.

As you well know "we" have well and truly refuted the Trinity from almost every angle!

1. We know Jesus was the ONLY human

Correct. The Apostle Paul mentions this twice x2 here:

I've shown you this before so lets look at it from a different angle?

14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. 16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For because he (Jesus) himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. Heb 2:14–18.

The Apostle wants you to understand that Jesus experienced suffering in the same human nature that you have, in every way (and more!). However, you and Johann cannot truly identify with the Lord as the Apostles did, because you follow the concept of a god-man, not the Son of Man as they believed.

Who preexisted and knew His life with the Father when He was on Earth (John 17)

I believe you are looking for Col 1:18

Colossians 1:18 – "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

You have a lot to deal with there Pro!

John 17:5 - And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Selective quoting now Pro?

The glory that you (Father) have given me (Jesus) I have given to them (those in Christ) , that they (those in Christ) may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them (those in Christ) and you in me, that they (those in Christ) may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them (those in Christ) even as you loved me Jn 17:22–23.

It's beautiful isn't how the elect have this shared oneness with God and His Son?

Christ by His own words declared He preexisted with the Father before creation, thus Christ before creation wasn't a human but a spiritual Being.

Why can't you just say, I agree.

I leave the other 4 points what they are at the moment, let's agree on this one first.

All I can agree with is your ignorance which appears to be growing stronger and stronger with each post - take care soon you may be like him who speaks on your behalf!

F2F

 

[face2face]

Post Exploring Trinitarian Logic

It will stand as an irrefutable argument against your cherished doctrine.

I'm still processing how Johann disbelieves the Logos begins with Thought!

F2F

 

[face2face]

Lets move onto to deeper lessons about the Lord and His Suffering in Sin's Flesh

"And he (Jesus) was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
Re 19:13.

@Wrangler @APAK

The term "vesture" is translated from himation, which refers to an outer garment.

The essence of this verse is saying he had been clothed with a garment that had been dipped in blood.

What is this Garment?

Well it's "human nature!" which the Lord once bore but has now been changed for divine nature 2 Peter 1:4 . The use of the word bapto, meaning "dipped," strengthens this explanation, suggesting that the entire vesture was immersed or dyed in blood.

The imagery is striking for the Trinitarian, as we are as far as the east is from the west from the Dogma!

In this context it implies that the Lord's sacrifice was not only for the salvation of others, but also for his own redemption. This idea is supported by Hebrews 13:20, which states that the Lord was brought again from the dead "through the blood of the everlasting covenant," referring to his own blood.

The symbolism fits the circumstances as portrayed in the passage, where the Lord is revealed as the one who will "execute the judgment written" (Psalm 149:9). Christ declared that the Father had "given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man" (John 5:27). Therefore, the one leading the heavenly armies in this vision is divine in nature but also one who had been clothed in human nature, from which he has been redeemed.

F2F

 

[face2face]

@Wrangler @APAK

Cont...(Interesting fact about the translation!)

Consequently, the image presented here differs from that in Isaiah 63:1-4, where the Victor over Edom is shown with blood-splattered garments due to many slain. However, to connect it with this Old Testament prophecy, a few manuscripts use "rhantizo" (sprinkled) instead of "bapto" (dipped) in Revelation.

The phrase "sprinkled with" instead of "dipped in" blood is noted, with a margin reference stating, "Some ancient authorities read 'dipped in'." The Authorized Version (AV) is supported by the most reliable Greek texts, which suggest that the scene here is distinct from that in Isaiah 63. (NET Dipped) The Septuagint, in particular, does not use either "bapto" or "rhantizo" but instead uses "Eruthros," meaning red. In Isaiah 63, the conqueror's garments are stained with the blood of those slain who will never rise again (Isa. 63:3). However, in Revelation, the garments are "baptized" in the Redeemer's blood, signifying that Christ benefited from his own sacrificial death.

This imagery is fitting for this moment of national victory! where the mighty conqueror's greatest triumph is highlighted: his personal victory over the sins flesh (Prov. 16:32). It was through this victory that a "change of raiment" (nature) was granted to him, a concept that was foreshadowed in the "change of raiment" given to Joshua the high priest in Zechariah 3:3-5.

Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. 4 And the angel said to those who were standing before him, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” And to him he said, “Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.” 5 And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the Lord was standing by. Zec 3:2–5.

Scripture speaking to Scripture!

F2F

 

[Johann]

In this context it implies that the Lord's sacrifice was not only for the salvation of others, but also for his own redemption.

You accuse others of veering off truth, but with each post you dig a hole for yourself-where did Messiah need redemption?

No, wait--I don't want to hear.

J.