A Clarification on the Trinity for a Muslim/Brannon Howse on the Hagmann Report

And greetings. Welcome to the dividing line. It is a unusual day for us to be doing this. It's a wednesday uh i actually have the services this evening. That's why i'm a little fancier dressed than normal.

But um welcome to the program we have a lot to get to today. I'd like to start off with something uh edifying before going to uh other strangely not edifying things but uh hopefully useful and somewhat necessary to address anyways.

Responding to a Muslim Question About the Trinity

And um so i was i saw a video posted and i listened to it and since it invites a christian response i thought well this is exactly why we do what we're doing. There's there's different levels of understanding on the part of our muslim friends in regards to what it is we actually believe.

And i honestly think that one of the reasons that that some people again the the refusal to recognize that there are different kinds of muslims there are different muslims with different levels of understanding of of other world religions or their own religion for that matter uh leads a lot of christians to attempt to compare muslims to religions in the west.

And so yeah there are times when you can talk with a muslim and it sounds like you're dealing with a standard jehovah's witness standard jehovah's witness argumentation against the deity of christ something like that.

But then all of a sudden it'll take a hard right turn or left turn or all of a sudden it'll change and you realize that yeah. Well okay the only thing they really had in common is they were denying the deity of christ.

And a lot of people are just afraid to engage in these topics because of all the complications and things like that. This is a video from a muslim. Now i know muslims with significantly greater understanding of christian theology than this gentleman has.

But they're the unusual muslims especially muslims from other countries rarely have had meaningful in-depth conversations with articulate well-trained christians and especially christians who recognize the need to be able to express christian theology in a way it's understandable to someone on the other side.

Now obviously christians who live in a majority muslim country they recognize the need of being able to communicate uh to the muslim people much of for example what we're going to be listening to from steve camp uh demonstrates steve camp is an american and doesn't go anyplace else uh because the apologetics of ignorance you don't need to know what anybody else believes.

Just you just gotta know the gospel. That sounds great. It has a tiny modicum of truth to it if you're talking about brand new christians but it has nothing to do with what it's like to live as a christian in a muslim majority country because they recognize being in the minority that if they want to reach out to the other side that it's going to be up to them to build the bridges of communication.

And that requires them to have the materials to build the bridges. And the only way to get the materials to build the bridges is to do study is to is to understand what the other side is saying to actually interact not just read christian books about the other side to actually interact with the other side.

I remember i i was 19 years of age when i started studying mormonism and i read a bunch of christian books on mormonism. But at 19 years of age i recognized that that wasn't enough that if i was gonna be talking to mormons i needed to understand what mormons actually believed from mormons.

Now did i learn stuff from reading what christians had learned from talking to mormons. Yeah but that's a that's a that's a step removed. I did. But that automatically introduces an element of reinterpretation and sometimes not all that accurate reinterpretation.

I remember man it was uh it it woke me up when i first uh realized uh remember the dj nelson uh stuff uh you know one of the first books i read on mormonism was maze of mormonism by walter martin. Well there were problems in the book.

And so if your primary sources are just christian sources all you're doing is moving things one one step back. If you if you somehow feel like you're going to get your hands dirtied or something uh by engaging and talking with these folks firsthand.

Well if you just read christian books about those subjects somewhere down the line somebody still had to do the original research somebody still had to do. Uh you know the talking and the witnessing and and things like that.

Are you really accomplishing anything by just keeping it doesn't make any sense. So anyway uh people in muslim majority nations recognize the need to understand so as to be able to communicate with clarity.

If you don't understand what the other person's thinking then you are increasing the probability that you're going to end up well going down blind alleys how many times i've spoken with christians down through the decades and their biggest complaint was well i i thought i was prepared but man i got into this conversation i thought things were going well and then all of a sudden we i just discovered we hadn't really been communicating all along and it's like well yeah that's that's because you didn't understand what they were saying here at this point at this point at this point by the time you realized that they were over here and you were over here you're out of time and you weren't able to accomplish anything so you will encounter different kinds of muslims with differing levels of understanding and hence the questions that they will ask about your faith.

Now here is a muslim and he's going hey uh in light of what you all say about the trinity what about this verse. What about that verse. How does this make any sense. This is street level in the taxi cab uh if you go overseas get out of america uh type every day need to be ready christianity.

And so saw this video i thought hey let's start off with this and uh i know people who watch this program they'll contact this guy he'll watch it uh i don't know him individually i don't know personally but but he'll he'll see this.

So we're gonna we're gonna respond. Because he asked we'd like to hear what the christians have to say about this. We'd like to understand what the christians how the christians can understand this and so cool let's uh let's actually do what we're criticized for doing uh before we talk more about that criticism.

So here's um are you getting you got everything over there. Okay and i'm plugged in sound wise so we're good there all righty we're professional around here ready set go in this short.

Video. We want to discuss as i mentioned a very touchy topic a very touchy version of bible and i'm being um full of pun when i say that because this event actually lends to uh a very physical experience that occurred uh as relates to the triune god in the bible this event is when the conception of jesus was announced to marry peace be upon her.

When the conception of jesus peace be upon him was announced to marry peace be upon her. Now i'm going to read the story that's found in luke the first chapter of luke but i want us to keep in mind throughout the story the doctrine of the trinity and what the christians believe as it relates to it.

Then i will pose a question hoping that any christian can come and clarify and explain this to us. Because remember this is.

For the sake of clarity. So there you go i think for the sake of clarity. We will respond. That's uh.

That's exactly how we should do it and the christians are famous for telling us that we're always getting the trinity wrong and that we are misrepresenting their faith or their doctrine. So.

Well yeah because that happens a lot um and and it goes both ways there there's a lot of misrepresentation of islam as well. No question about it. Uh so yeah there's there needs to be clarification on both sides.

But may i just suggest that there is one important thing that i think muslims need to keep in mind and that is um your ultimate authority. The quran comes after our scriptures. I know you believe it's eternal all the rest of that stuff.

But historically speaking uh nobody ever quoted from the quran until after you know the late 7th century um our 7th century. Uh this historically speaking and so there is a necessary relationship because the quran acknowledges the previous existence of the tarah in the injeel.

And so there is a necessary relationship that exists because the nature of the quran and the content of the quran to the hebrew and greek scriptures that make up the christian scriptures. And so the the question that it that simply cannot be ignored but is almost never addressed by my muslim friends is what solid evidence do you have.

Not assumption but solid evidence do you have that the author of your sacred text actually understood the sacred text which your text says were sacred. They were nuts. All they were sent down. They contain light and guidance.

Right. What evidence do you have that the author of your text accurately understood our text and especially what it teaches concerning this doctrine of the trinity. Um did the author of the quran understand that our scriptures teach there's only one true and eternal god creator of all things yahweh is his name in the old testament.

That there are three divine persons spoken of in the new testament scriptures the father son the spirit. They're not confused with one another. They are distinguished from one another. And the spirit is not an angel.

The spirit is not jabril. Uh three divine persons. And then that the new testament scriptures identify father son and spirit as yahweh while distinguishing between them define specifically identify each as yahweh.

Did the author of the quran understand that i have never seen in the years now of studying islam i've never seen anyone even try to mount an argument that the author of the quran understood that not once um the best islamic that i know i think recognize can't do it.

It's not possible there the the the sources are insufficient to to demonstrate that. And i think that's important. I've met almost no muslims that have ever thought about why that would even be important.

One of the reasons that we do what we do is because we want to raise the really important issues. And one of the reasons that i don't use a lot of the standard argumentation that's used out there is because i don't want to fog the issue with stuff that's you know might have relevance over here you know but doesn't really help us get any closer to the real issues of the truth claims of christianity and islam.

So that's a question i would have is you know you say we keep saying you misunderstand it. Could it possibly be that there is a systemic foundational definitional misrepresentation of christian theology and christian belief within the quran itself.

That creates this misunderstanding of the part of muslims. Because you're looking backwards at what we believe through the lens of the quran. If that lens is distorted in any way wouldn't that explain it.

Could that be. Why this issue exists. I i'd invite you to consider uh whether that would be the case.

Out of that we're going to pose a question and instead of us trying to tell us or tell people what this means we want to ask the question and want the christians to come explain to us what this means in light of their doctrine.

That way you won't accuse us of misrepresenting your doctrine or getting it wrong. Rather we are seeking clarity of it and we're hoping that you can explain it to us. Now the event that took place as mentioned is found in the book of luke the first chapter of luke.

Starting at verse 28 to verse 35 i'll read. I'll explain. I will ask a question. And then we leave it to our christian friends to come and clarify this for us. Starting at verse 28 it reads. The angel went to her meaning married and said greetings you who are highly favored.

The lord is with you. Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her do not be afraid mary you have found favor with god. You will conceive and give birth to a son and you are to call him jesus.

He will be great and will be called the son of the most high. The lord. God will give him the throne of his father david and he will reign over jacob's descendants forever. His kingdom will never end now.

Although this never happened during the time of jesus. This is a discussion that can be saved. Uh for another topic another talk later on. Okay now i i let me let me pause.

There and i think a lot of christians wouldn't understand what was just said. There are a lot of who believe that the new testament is an error in the prophetic passages that it quotes in regards to jesus.

Because again the quran does not understand the nature of jesus's kingship. They don't understand jesus is ruling and reigning over his kingdom right now. Um his kingdom extends all around this world.

It is found and seen in the reality that men from every tribe tongue people and nation bow the knee in obedience and faith to him. It is a spiritual kingdom as jesus explained pilot if if my king was in this world my servants would be fighting to keep me from being delivered into your hands.

But my kingdom's not this world. And so muslims not deriving their interpretation of the new testament from the new testament but instead interpreting passages separate from one another in light of the quran look at a text like this.

And well this this didn't happen. Well actually he was called the son of god over against your own teachings. Um he was called the son of god and he was identified as the son of god. And this is found throughout the synoptic gospels.

And john. And his kingdom was established and has not ceased to grow since that point in time. So the muslim reads those those verses and doesn't read them in a new testament context and comes up with this idea.

This hasn't happened. Well it has. And every christian if they want you know it depends on whether the christian wants to be effective a useful sharp instrument in the lord's hands to be used to reach these precious people.

Or whether you just want to keep them you know as far away as possible. Then that'll depend on whether you want to understand these things and hence be able to give response to this kind of thing. But this impacts the interpretation.

Because if you think that the beginning of the of the passage contains errors things that never happen false prophecies and things like that you're never really going to be looking to be overly fair and and seeing the entirety of the text.

And that's unfortunately what what happens.

But it's interesting to note that this prophecy as described didn't fulfill its full description. Let's carry on mary answered. How would this be mary asked the angel. Since i am a virgin how can i have a son since i am a virgin.

Meaning no man has ever touched me the angel answered. Now listen very closely because this is what i meant by. This is a very touchy.

Topic now keep something in mind. Many muslims have been impacted by the teaching and ideas of akhmed didat. Akhmed didat clearly understood the quran to teach that the relationship between father and son describing the quran was a sexual one.

Remember how many times. Well maybe you don't but we have a lot of people watching and listening that didn't in years past. But in years past we have it's very difficult to do because often the recordings aren't very good and a lot of people struggle to understand akhmed didat's language and his pronunciation things like that.

But we've spent hours playing akhmed didat videos audios and responding to his presentations here on the dividing line and strange thing back when we were doing that years ago no one seemed to have any problem with it at all.

I the very odd that we were spending all that time anyway. Um and i think didat was just reflecting on what is pretty clearly the author of the quran's understanding. There are a number of texts in the quran that seem to indicate that sonship the idea of being a son of god is a marital sexual relationship which is not of course what christians believed or certainly not what they believed in 620 ad or 632 ad.

Um that's not what they believed then it's not what they had believed for centuries before that. And again i i just don't find any evidence in my reading of the quran or in any of the tafsir literature that i've looked at and i am a student of islam.

But i've read a lot of tafsir literature i read i've read a lot more tafsir literature than most most muslims i know to be perfectly honest with you and i see no evidence in any of that of an understanding on the part of the author of the quran of the very nature of sonship in christian theology.

Instead there are a number of texts where you have very plainly you know if allah had wanted to take uh a son he could have he would have had to have taken a a a companion from what he had created a wife.

He can't have a son because he doesn't have a wife. Well okay that makes sense as an apologetic in regards to the idols in the khabah where we are told that many of the idols in the khaba at the beginning of muhammad's ministry uh it was you know a male god with a female consort and they have offspring.

It's pretty common in pagan religion. It makes sense if it's focused at that. It makes zero sense if it's focused upon christianity. And so this really is a key key issue uh in understanding the argumentation that's being made uh and the understanding that the muslims have of the text they're reading.

The angel answered the holy spirit will come on you now again. This is this is akhmed didot.

In the background i think i don't know the gentleman but i've talked to enough people that i've heard this argument many many times before. As we'll see and i'll bring up the i'll bring up the text. We'll take a look at it uh when he's done but serious exegesis.

What i would suggest to my to this muslim friend and to my other muslim friends who watch this program. If you are going to seriously engage the text here there are plenty of programs available. I wish you all had as good quran programs as we have bible programs.

There's that one. There's there's one my quran program on ipad man i wish i had it for mac. Um i wish they'd port that over so so i could have it for for mac it it's still not as good as as a bible works in accordance the log offs whatever else might be.

We've got the good bible programs. Get yourself a good bible program. And look these terms up. Look up what episcopal means which is what we're going to be seeing is the primary term being focused upon here.

Um look at its old testament backgrounds. Look at what it meant. It's literally to cast a shadow over episcopal. It's rather transparent actually to cast a shadow over to overshadow something. It's used the glory of god in the tabernacle.

So see that that there's a tremendous amount to be learned by looking at how the new testament writers use language. It's found in the old testament and especially in the greek translation the old testament called the septuagint.

It look these things up rather than assuming what you're hearing here is this sounds like some type of physical sexual thing. No it's not. And nobody reading it originally would ever have come to that conclusion.

And here's one of the problems. If if you've not again if you embrace the apologetics of ignorance which we're going to see is steve camp's position. Um if you embrace the apologetics of ignorance the first time you hear this yours could be going what what what are you talking about.

No what. Oh come on. No. And and there's never going to be any meaningful communication. But if you've actually taken the time to actually you know be prepared. Uh because you want to be used as an as an instrument of god's peace in these people's lives.

Even right now watching this once you've heard this let's say you're talking to the cab driver. You're talking to the student at the university. You're talking to whoever. And they say well i'll be perfectly honest with you i never really understood what the trinity was about.

And and you know for example the thing about the birth of jesus. Because this is going to come up a lot because the quran addresses it. The author of the quran was confused about it. So that's going to come up over and over again.

And if you've heard it then your response doesn't have to be shock. I've never heard anything like that before in my life. I can't believe anybody would think something like that. Because it's never crossed your mind mind that there was something sexual about it.

Unless you read brigham young. Uh then then then that's a whole other mess. Uh from a different perspective. Um but you and i have never given that a second thought. It's it's in. And so once you've heard it and realize okay because of the quran because of the nature of the author of the quran's misunderstanding of sonship here's a situation where i'm going to be able to go into the text.

I'm going to be able to provide the context. Maybe if you're really wanting to be prepared mention some of the texts we'll look at later on the old testament as to what episcopal means. And then i'm going to be able to transition directly into the fact that the angel and angels don't lie.

Do they in talking about the birth of someone you believe to be a great prophet said he'd be called the son of the most high. So now i can talk about what the truth about jesus as the son of god actually means.

And so i can take a misunderstanding and use it as an open door to the proclamation of the truth. If i'm prepared. If i'm not prepared because i've been listening to steve camp then i won't be able to do that.

And some of you going what are you talking. We'll get to it. We steve camp was on janet mefford show two days ago and they presented the apologetic of ignorance. Uh you don't need to study that stuff.

All you got to do is preach the gospel. Sounds great. It's utterly foolish but sounds great. And and we're we're demonstrating that. That's not why i chose to do this. It just happens to that if you're actually going to do apologetics you actually get out there in the world and do something.

Um the argumentation that was presented will just fall apart. Uh and it did fall. If the inconsistencies would be interesting to show once we get into that interview. But anyways so here's your example living example.

Right here right now.

The holy spirit will come on you and the power of the most high will overshadow you the power of the most high will overshadow you. So therefore because of this touching or because of this coming on you and overshadowing you overshadowing you because of that so the holy one to be born will be called the son of god.

Now let me just just for this this gentleman's.

Edification especially please note that in these earliest sources there is no way to separate out the biblical concept of sonship. This is the idea that somehow the new testament documents have been changed or altered.

This is added in a later point. Indefensible. The earliest manuscripts. We have all the manuscripts up to the time of the quran. Remember the quran says the people of the gospel judge by what's contained therein.

You've got a real problem here in having to recognize that the angel was using language that you find to be untrue. You have to reject it. Why do you have to reject it. Because the author of your book had a different understanding than author of matthew.

But why did he have a different understanding. Did he even understand what the nature of sonship was. Because you don't understand the nature of sonship. Was he's called the son of god because of a supernatural birth.

There's nothing sexual about it. I mean was there something sexual when allah made adam and eve. I mean wasn't that personal. No of course not. So if god can make the human being then god can create a perfect human being in the womb of a woman.

Can't he is allah not able to do that. Now i realize this takes us back fundamentally to the real issue between us. And that is on a presuppositional level. You do not believe that allah would be this intimately involved with his own creation.

Let alone the idea that the second person of the trinity would take on a perfect human nature. That's that's really the fundamental presuppositional rejection. That again begs the question did the author of the quran even understand that.

That's what christians were teaching. And i have never seen any evidence that the author of the quran did understand that at all. That's why i keep pointing out to uh my my muslim friends today. You know much more about the trinity than the author of the quran did.

Much more. How can that be. If this is a divine book how can you have significantly better arguments than the quran does on this subject. It's because you've done far more reading. You're just far more aware.

Than the author of the quran what does that tell you. Because of the holy spirit coming up on you and because of the power of the lord are overshadowing you. Thus the son you to have will be called the son of god.

Now. It is indicative of these words whether you accept my understanding of it or not. But what i understand from this is that something physical occurred to marry and because of that because of that action the child that she gave birth to that was conceived at this moment is to be called the son of god because of the power of the lord overshadowing her and because of the holy spirit coming on her.

This is what is indicative from reading it. Whether it means that or not is not the issue here. No no no it it is the issue here.

That is the issue here. Um and again such in this situation uh i remember i forget who he was debating but i i remember years and years ago shabir ali raised a similar issue in in one of debates one of the people and i forgot who who.

Now it was that he was he was interacting with. But the argument was well it can be read that way. Well the quran can be read many different ways can't it. And yet you would insist that there are certain proper ways of reading the quran.

You would demand that there's that context be taken into consideration all the rest of this kind of stuff. And in so doing you have to be you have to be consistent. Now once once we're done here i'm i'm going to go to luke chapter one and we're going to look at what the text is actually saying to answer the question.

But the question has to be what did the text communicate to the original audience. What did the original author intend to communicate. What did his original audience what would they have understood. So the original languages not arabic but koine greek.

This is luke. I've never well i suppose there are some there's somebody out there that probably suggests luke was written in something other than greek but not very many. Um it's written in greek and so you need to look at what the terms meant in their own context.

And the idea this is some type of indication of physical sexual reproduction would never have suggested itself to the original audience any more than there was something physical or sexual about the glory of god overshadowing the tabernacle or something.

Um just doesn't. It doesn't make any sense there. It is a supernatural action that's going to result in the beginning of a human life. But it is only looking at that from the underside of of physicality that gives you any idea of the conclusions you're coming to if you allow the text to define itself.

God is bringing his son into the world through this virgin woman in holiness and purity and without the utilization of physical means of normal regeneration. I .e joseph that's. That's what the text is about.

Uh as we'll see when we when we dig into it a little bit more carefully but i want us to hear the trinitarian aspect here so let's listen up. But this is what's.

To be understood from it on face value. But this is not my question i just want us to keep in mind and and and understand that these are some of the reasons why we misunderstand the bible in the christian doctrine because of verses like this.

So christians please explain this to us in light of this verbiage in light of this expression. Now the question i have in relation to the trinity doctrine is that when mary was in a state of conception when the angel came and told her that she would be given a child when she was in a state of conception of jesus was all of the members of the trinity of the godhead.

Responsible for this was all of the members of the trinity of the godhead responsible for this conception of jesus in the womb of mary including jesus himself. The bible tells us that the holy spirit will come upon her and the power of the most high the power of the lord will overshadow her.

So we have here two entities at least the holy spirit and the power of the lord. Taking part in something that will relate just just very very quickly. Uh no you.

Do not have two separate entities. Um you're misunderstanding. A standard uh hebraic uh means of expression. Um it's called hebrew parallelism. It's found all through the psalter and it's just it's a renaming.

Uh it's um so you don't have two different persons here. This is something that the holy spirit of god accomplishes not the son. Uh it's not the father that does this. It's the spirit of god that does this.

The spirit third person in the trinity. So it's not the son. This is the son is the one who becomes incarnate. It's not the father. He doesn't become incarnate at all. Um so there's there's. That's pretty much the answer to your question.

But we'll we'll let you finish it.

All result in mary being pregnant and therefore because of that action the baby that she has should be called the son of god directly relating this to the action of the holy spirit and the power of the lord.

But according to christian doctrine of the trinity because they are all one being if one being does some if one of the persons of the trinity does something then all of them are equally responsible because they're one being.

Why do you say that. I i just again i just have.

Challenges. What when you say equally responsible. Responsible before whom. I mean there's there's one will of god that's being accomplished. But. But the father does takes one role and the son another and the spirit another.

So uh it you're trying to conflate the persons rather than recognizing that in divine revelation the roles that they take are distinguished from one another. And just because the infinite timeless being of yahweh is fully shared by father son spirit doesn't mean that every action of the father is the same action of the son the same action of the spirit.

That that doesn't make any sense. There's. What what ground do you have for for making that kind of assertion. All you're assuming is. Well you can't make a distinction. You you're assuming there really isn't any difference between being in person.

Well there is. Um this is an example of it. The baptism narrative was an example of it. Um and so it's a. It's not an overly good argument to simply say well i'm just going to deny that you can differentiate between being in person.

Well the text right here is is is differentiating between those two things.

Very clearly. So if the father done something then also the holy spirit and the son is inclusive in that action. Why. Because they're one being the one being god did something and that included the father the son and the holy ghost.

So to conclude if this is the case and if this is true does this mean that jesus who is part of the godhead who is part of the trinity. Does this mean that jesus was equally responsible for impregnating his mother with his own self.

If jesus is part of the godhead and the godhead is one being that consists of three persons father son and holy ghost. And we read clearly in the verse in luke that the holy spirit came on mary and the power of the lord overshadowed her.

It didn't mention jesus. But are we to assume and assert that because jesus is part of the godhead part of the trinity that he was equally responsible for this action that gave conception to himself. Did jesus partake and impregnating his own mother to give birth to his own self.

These are the questions that we have and we would like for the christians to come and try to answer for us for the sake of clarity. Okay.

And so we'll that's what we're doing. And i appreciate appreciate the question. Um we've probably already given the answer. But uh each of the divine persons takes a different role. You're assuming um that since father son spirit and eternity past chose to bring about their own glorification through creation and the redemption of a particular people which includes the incarnation of the son his dying for that people their union with him their glorification etc etc.

That there are not real differences because there's only one divine will overarching divine will that somehow because there's one overarching divine will that there cannot be specific uh issues uh specific realms of activity.

So the father does certain things the son does certain things the spirit does certain things. It was the spirit who was the supernatural agency by which the beginning of the human life of the messiah was brought about.

And it was the son who joined to himself that perfect human nature and was born of the virgin mary. And it was the father that decreed that this is how it would all be done. They take different roles.

Um it would be similar to saying that since there is one will of allah that that means that everything that happens the actions of the jinn the shaitan everything it's all just the will of allah and he's equally responsible for everything.

Well you hopefully you recognize that that would not make any sense that that leads to a something called monism all is one one is all uh etc etc. It doesn't make any sense. Uh classical theists whether christian muslim or jewish um are not monists.

And so we recognize that god can act in time and create other actors who likewise act in time and they just don't simply cease to exist just because they're part of god's will. So there's a fundamental assumption error in your in your argumentation that ignores the fact that the text specifically identifies it's the spirit that brings about the beginning of this life.

And then if you take the bible as a whole john 1 14 tells us that the word was made flesh. Yes. Yeah uh great. I'm sure that was probably very interesting. So uh for the sake of clarity um and by the way just for clarification i've just noticed this in looking at the title of the video it says for the sake of clarity.

Part two immaculate conception of jesus. Immaculate conception. I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you confusing that with the immaculate conception of mary in roman catholic theology. It comes much much later.

Uh i'm not. I'm not sure. But uh you gotta keep keep those things uh separate. So there you go there's uh there's that. And i hope that that is of use to everyone. Um let me change over here all right.