God’s Challenge to Trinitarianism

You are here

God’s Challenge to Trinitarianism

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×
Downloads
MP3 Audio (29.34 MB)

Downloads

God’s Challenge to Trinitarianism

MP3 Audio (29.34 MB)
×

The belief that God is a trinity of three persons in one being is the hallmark of Christian Orthodoxy. But have you really examined the claim? It may shock you to learn that the so-called hallmark of Orthodoxy, Trinitarianism, the belief that God exists in His eternal being as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is not found in the Bible—and in fact the doctrine is one of Satan’s greatest deceptions!

Why would I make such a shocking statement? Simply stated, it is because classical Trinitarianism obscures the purpose of human existence and what human beings were created to become in the Kingdom of God.

Critically, insisting that all three persons fully participate in the being of the other means that God the Father died with Jesus the Son!

The very first article of faith is to believe that God exists: “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6, King James Version). In other words, a person must believe that God exists and that He always has our best interests at heart.

There are, of course, skeptics who don’t believe in the existence of God, but most people in the Western world profess some kind of belief in the God of the Christian Bible. God is said to be uncreated, eternal and invisible. Jesus states in John 4:24 that God is spirit.

But what about the origin of Jesus, the Son of God? How did He come into existence? Classical Trinitarianism holds that God the Father eternally generates the Son, and that the Father and Son eternally generate the Holy Spirit. Theologians refer to this closed system as the triune God—“triune” meaning “consisting of three in one.” They further assert that all three—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—mutually participate in the being and action of the other.

As you can see, the triune Godhead is a closed system—no one can enter into that “eternal model.” (To clarify, the word “Godhead” means Godhood—existence as God with divine nature—and has nothing to do with the modern word “head.”) If the Godhead is closed, how can human beings become children of God and members of His family, as stated in 2 Corinthians 6:18? And what about the incarnation of the Word—the Son of God being born in the flesh? Remember, classical Trinitarianism holds that the Father is eternally generating the Son in heaven.

The incarnation and resurrection shatters the Trinitarian paradigm.

One can readily see the dilemma this poses. How can there be a Son in heaven and one on the earth? How is the “essential nature” of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit preserved when the Word is made flesh? If any of the divine persons is altered or taken out of the model, the whole paradigm is shattered. Yet Trinitarians contend that the Father continued to generate the Son in heaven even while He was begotten in Mary’s womb and during all the time He lived on earth in the flesh.

If this classical model of the Godhead of eternal generation in the heavens were true, then the incarnation would introduce a second Son—one Son being eternally generated in heaven and another Son existing in the flesh on earth. Thus according to the Trinitarian model, the Son on earth is effectively a fourth being that enters the equation—three in heaven and one on the earth until later rising to heaven.

Theologians have vainly attempted to explain away their dilemma by appealing to the distinctions in the Godhead. That is, the Son as one of the persons in the Godhead was made flesh, suffered and died for the sins of the world.

But how can this be so since, by Trinitarian doctrine, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit each fully participate in the being of each other and the action of each, thus ensuring the oneness and indivisibility of the Godhead? Regardless of theologians’ attempts to get around this quandary by emphasizing distinctions in the Godhead, they are hopelessly entangled in a series of contradictions.

The logical outcome of insisting that all three persons fully participate in the being of the other is what is labeled patripassianism—that is, the notion that God the Father suffered and died with Jesus the Son for the sins of the world.

Explanations of ways of existing as God or emphasizing distinctions in the Godhead cannot negate the fact that according to this doctrine, if one of these three dies, they all die.

Sadly, this doctrine reduces Jesus Christ to mere human flesh that died for the sins of the world. Moreover, proponents of this doctrine are in essence saying that God gave a part of Himself to Himself, a mere mortal, since the eternally generated Son continues to be generated by the Father in heaven. Yet Christ cried out on the cross, “Father, into your hands I commend My spirit” (Luke 23:46).

How does Jesus’ resurrection fit the Trinitarian view of God?

The Trinitarian paradigm is further shattered by the glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Trinitarians insist on a body-only physical resurrection in an attempt to preserve the Trinitarian model of the Father eternally generating the Son.

Their insistence on a fleshly resurrection denies Christ’s resurrection as a life-giving spirit: “And so it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual” (1 Corinthians 15:45-46).

The Scriptures clearly reveal that the resurrected Christ is a separate and distinct entity from God the Father, as He now sits at the Father’s right hand. The apostle Peter said: “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul [His being] was not left in Hades [the grave], nor did His flesh see corruption.

“This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand . . .”’” (Acts 2:29-34).

Trinitarian theologians have recognized that the resurrection of Christ as a life-giving spirit would introduce a fourth person into the Godhead. So they insist that Jesus’ resurrection was a restoration of His human bodily life, now eternally preserved—implying that only Jesus as a human being died since, according to Trinitarianism, the Father is eternally generating the Son. 

This denies the death of the Son on the cross and implies that He resurrected Himself rather than being resurrected by the Father (Romans 8:11).

One can also readily discern the inherent contradictions contained in the doctrine of the trinity as proponents attempt to explain the origins and oneness of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Origin of the Word

What do the Scriptures reveal concerning the origin of the Son of God? Is the One who became the Son of God in the flesh a created being? If He is not a created being, how and when did He come into existence?

Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the apostle John clearly explains the origin of the Word or, in Greek, Logos, the Being who became Jesus Christ. John 1:1 states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The three simple clauses here serve to illustrate the eternal existence of the Logos as opposed to a created being:

• In the first clause, “In the beginning was the Word,” the Greek term translated “was” is a “to be” verb having the sense of “existed.” The Logos existed “in the beginning,” an obvious allusion to Genesis 1:1. At the very beginning of creation, the Logos already existed.

• In the second clause, the same word for “was” is used to describe manner of existence in terms of a relationship. That is, the Logos was with God, showing Him to be distinct from God and at the same time in fellowship with God.

• The same verb for “was” is used in the third clause to help define the character or essence of the Logos—“and the Word [Logos] was God [Theos]” (Joel Green, Scot McKnight, Howard Marshall, editors, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, “Logos,” 1992, p. 483).

John clearly identifies two entities, the Word (Logos) and God (Theos). Furthermore, John forcefully proclaims that the Word was God (Theos). Moreover, he asserts that the Logos had a personal relationship with God. The chronology is emphasized in verses 1 and 2. That is, the Word who was “in the beginning” was also “with God.” The repetition in verse 2 of the fact that the Word, and none other, was with God in the beginning emphasizes His existence and relationship with God in eternity. Since God created all things through the Word, the Word did not come into existence as a creation of God. The Word already existed—He was already in existence at “the beginning” of creation.

If no other scriptures were available, the simplicity and force of these words make it clear that the Word is uncreated—coeternal with God (Theos).

John repeats the Logos’ role in creation in John 1:10 by asserting, “He was in the world, and the world was made through Him . . .” The Greek word translated “was made” is egeneto, from the primary verb ginomai, meaning “to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament). Thus it was through the Word that the world came into existence.

But the most dramatic proof of the preexistence of the Logos is the declaration that the Logos was made flesh and dwelt with humankind (John 1:14). If the Logos had no preexistence, then God the Father merely created a new being to become the only begotten Son of God to die for the sins of the world. But as noted above in John 1:1, the Word who existed coeternally with the Father is the One who became flesh.

The Logos identified in the book of Revelation

The book of Revelation is declared in the first verse to be a revelation God the Father gave to Jesus Christ for His servants. Jesus then sent it by an angel to the apostle John (Revelation 1:1). John’s salutation that follows is from God the Father, who is and was and is to come, and from Jesus Christ, the firstborn from the dead (Revelation 1:4-5).

After the salutation, John is given a vision of the Son of Man walking among seven golden candlesticks. This One declares that He is “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last” (verses 10-17). Thus Jesus Christ equates His eternity with that of God the Father. These passages clearly parallel the “I AM” declaration of Jesus in John 8:58, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” Jesus thus irrefutably proclaims co-eternity with the Father.

Moreover, John is given a vision of Jesus Christ coming in glory as King of Kings and Lord of Lords: “Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God” (Revelation 19:11-13).

Here the Father reveals to all the world that Jesus Christ is “The Word of God,” the same Being who was with God the Father in eternity. He is the One who emptied Himself of His glory and took on the form of flesh as Immanuel, “God with us” (Matthew 1:23)—the incarnate Word who died for the sins of the world and who is now alive forevermore.

The Logos empties Himself of glory

The Father and the Logos determined that the Word would give up His glory so He could reconcile sinful humanity to God the Father and begin a new order of beings—that is, spirit-born sons of God through a resurrection from the dead.

As the apostle Paul proclaims, this plan of salvation existed before God created humankind. He writes of God “who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began” (2 Timothy 1:9).

Thus the Word had to empty Himself of His glory and take on the form of flesh so sinful humanity could be reconciled to the Father, the Word then being returned to glory as the firstborn from the dead (Hebrews 2:9-10; Revelation 1:5). His becoming the firstborn from the dead shows that others will obviously follow (see also Romans 8:29; Hebrews 2:10).

Paul makes it very clear that the eternal Logos gave up His glory and took on the form of a servant to act as our Savior. Paul writes of Him, as translated in the New King James Version: “who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:6-8). So it was through the Logos being willing to give up His glory that He could take on the form of a man.

But, the skeptic may ask, do the above verses prove that the Logos existed with the Father? The key word is found in verse 6: “. . . being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” The Greek word translated “being” is a form of huparcho, which means “to begin, to come forth, hence to be there, be ready, be at hand” (Thayer’s). Thus the Word was already in the form of God before taking on the form of a man.

Now, how could the Word exist in the form of God and not be God? If one accepts Paul’s assertion that He took on the form of a man, one must also accept that He existed in the form of God.

Furthermore, where some versions translate that He “did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,” the Greek for “robbery” is a form of harpagmos, meaning “a thing seized or to be seized” or, as some render it, “something to cling to” (New Living Translation). What this means is that He did not consider equality with God something to hold on to, but instead let it go—voluntarily relinquished it—when He emptied Himself of His former glory.

Clearly this means that equality with God was something the Word already had. And His giving up of His glory is the greatest act of servant leadership the world has ever witnessed. Moreover, His willingness to give up the glory He shared with God the Father is one of the principal reasons the Father has exalted Him and placed Him over all things (Ephesians 1:20-22).

Christ’s testimony of glory He shared with the Father

Before giving His life for the sins of the world, He asked the Father to restore to Him the glory He had with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5). The force of this request in the Greek language is undeniable. Before the “world” (a form of the Greek kosmos, meaning the arrangement of the universe) “was” (Greek einai, referring to existence), Christ shared this glory with the Father. Any attempt to dismiss this as only prophetic as to what would happen after Jesus’ resurrection is not in keeping with Christ’s clear words.

Why would Jesus Christ ask the Father to restore something He had with the Father before the world was if He never experienced it in the first place? If He had never experienced this glory, it seems He would have asked the Father to glorify Him with a different glory, rather than the glory He previously had with the Father.

Clearly the preexistence of Christ is affirmed in this verse. It is clear from the Scriptures that Christ came to the earth and gave up that glory He had with the Father. But following the end of His human life, Jesus, who died for the sins of the world, was raised from the dead—glorified—and now sits at the right hand of the Father, restored to His former glorious existence.

So the fact that Christ was glorified at the resurrection in no way contradicts the understanding that the Word previously existed in a glorious, divine state before He came to the earth. As Paul explained in Philippians 2, the Word had already existed in glory before He emptied himself of His glory and took on the form of a man. 

In the flesh He was divine in the sense that He was the same One who had always existed before His incarnation, still having His divine identity as the Word. He was also the monogenes—the unique Son of God (John 1:14; John 1:18; John 3:16; John 3:18), begotten of the Father and filled with the Holy Spirit, having the same perfect righteous character of God. In His humility He took on the form of a man so He could die for the sins of the world and usher in a new order of beings through becoming the firstborn of the dead when the Father raised Him from the dead.

So we see that through God’s love, grace and mercy the Trinitarian model of a closed system is shattered by God’s great purpose for creating humankind. God the Father and Jesus Christ offer us eternal life in the glorious Kingdom of God. We can share in the glory of the Father and Son in the Kingdom of God, transformed into glorious radiant spirit beings like them—being now, in the words of Romans 8:17, “heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.”

You might also be interested in...

Why is there so much controversy over one man? The simple answer is that He...

Comments

  • sanctified

    Hi Donald

    Is this article your personal view or those of UCoG? Whichever the case the correct position is that God has no challenge to Trinitarianism, it's your school of thought that has it.

    The Holy Spirit is a Person. That's why we are commissioned to baptize or work in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. You are also forgiven if you sin against Christ but not against the Holy Spirit. Also remember the Holy Spirit is addressed as "He" by God and also by Jesus Christ. Each Person of the Godhead has a role to play. However both the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ depend on God the Father for He sends them but they don't send Him. Non of them created the other for they exist this way from eternity past to eternity future.

  • dlward

    If the Holy Spirit were a person it would be separate from God. Is God separate from His Spirit? Scripture refers to the Holy Spirit as “he” because the Greek rules of grammar require referent pronouns to conform to the gender of its antecedent. Grammar does not a person make. God is spirit (John 4:24). The Holy Spirit is His essence. The Holy Spirit is divine—but not a person, since it is the essence of God. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). Through the Holy Spirit God does works of power. The Holy Spirit is under the direction of God and Christ. It does not free lance on its own. God sends forth his spirit and his spirit does the work. {Genesis 1:4; Zechariah 4:6). The same spirit that is in God is in Christ is in us (Ephesians 4:1-7; Hebrews 2:10-11). Upon repentance and obedience God the Father begets us with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38; 5:32). Jesus upon resurrection from the dead became the first born among many brethren and returned to the glory he had with the Father before the world began (John 17:5). God will also resurrect us from the dead and we will be of the same essence as God and Christ---heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ (Rom 8:11, 17)

  • dlward

    Dear Mr. Ndundu,
    I am sorry to say that scripturally and logically your assertions are in error. John 4:24 states that God is spirit. The resurrected Christ is a spirit being---the first born from the dead (Rev 1:5;; 1Cor 15:45) The Holy Spirit is the essence of God and Christ. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). The Holy Spirit operates under the direction of God and Christ ---it is not free lancing on its own volition. God sends forth His spirit and it does works of power. (Gen 1:2; Zech 4:6) God gives His spirit to those who repent and obey Him (Acts 2:38; 5:32) It is the Father who begets us with His spirit---with His very essence that is why we are His begotten children not begotten after the flesh but of the spirit of God the Father. There is one spirit essence. The same spirit that is in God-is in Christ and in each one of us. God, Christ and His begotten children are all of one-therefore, He, Christ, is not ashamed to call them brethren (Heb 2:11). All of this and much more is explained in the article. You are merely parroting what others say. You merely made statement with no scriptural or logical support for your assertions.

  • KARS

    I hope you don't mind BT panel here we go. "Mystery of the Ages" pg 40. "When the only conscious Life- Beings existed, God was leader--in authoritative command. Thus, even when the only conscious Life-Beings were God and the Word, there was GOVERNMENT, with God in supreme command." Pg 41. "It is referring to precisely the same Persons, making up or composing the one God, as we found in John1:1--the Word and God--and each of those TWO Persons is God. IN OTHER WORDS, GOD IS NOW A FAMILY OF Persons, composed so far of only the TWO--God the Father and Christ the Son."
    Merlo, I have nothing more to say. I know for a fact that there are 2 in the Godhead as Mr. Armstrong us to say.

  • SweethomeChicago

    This may be helpful to listen to help in the understanding already provided.

    https://www.ucg.org/sermons/deceptive-doctrines-the-doctrine-of-the-trinity

  • mikeyoung09

    The nature of God is a hot topic, and probably always will be. Whilst rejecting the trinity, the problem has always been what to replace it with.
    It appears to me that one word which has not always been fully defined and explored before conclusions are reached is the Greek word “logos” as it appears throughout the New Testament, and not just in John 1:1. This word is hardly ever used to refer to a personal being, but rather to what God spoke. It has also been defined in the past as God’s “revelatory thought or plan” (see Mystery of the Ages by Herbert Armstrong), and also to the “mind of God”. I John: 1-3 calls it “the Word of life”, and implies that it was originally manifested with the Father, but was then manifested to John through Jesus Christ. Hebrews 1:1 also says that the word was spoken in times past through “God” (the Father), and only in “these last days” by His Son. As John 1:1 refers to “the beginning”, the conclusion is now that “Logos” in John 1:1 is only referring to the Father in both uses of the word “God”, but the same Logos was then manifested as Jesus Christ when it “became flesh” in verse 14.

  • KARS

    Now see here Mr. Young (I posted once before) in the book you mentioned there is not enough space to quote the whole paragraph. Mr. Ward brought it to our attention the words "WAS" and "WITH" from John 1:1. So does the "Mystery of The Ages" on page 34. If you have truly read this book, then why the confusion? There are 2 distinct Beings not 3 making up the God family mentioned in the Book of John Chapter 1.

  • mikeyoung09

    I never implied that there were 3 Beings in the God Family, or even 2! The word “God” occurs twice in John 1:1, and it is not logical to assume that these two instances refer to 2 different Beings, but that they both refer to the One True God (John 17:3). If we define “logos” as God’s “revelatory thought” as Mr. Armstrong states in “Mystery of the Ages” (page 41), then this could have been both “with God” in terms of what was in His mind, and also “was God” in terms of who He is. It is our minds that makes us what we are! So John 1:1 cannot be used to prove that there were two distinct Beings in the God Family, without further evidence, at least not in the beginning.

  • KARS

    Funny you should mention "Mystery of the Ages" Mr. Young. Go back to page 34 under the heading "God In Prehistory" and read it again. ""The Word" in this passage is translated from the Greek logos, which means "spokesman," "word" or revelatory thought.""

  • dlward

    Dear Michael,

    Herbert Armstrong never taught that the "Logos" (Word) was the Father. Neither did he teach that the "Word" was the "mind" of God. As you note, John 1:14 states the "Word was made flesh." The Father was not made flesh---neither was the word "Logos" made flesh. "It" does not become flesh---neither is "mind" made flesh. That concept is a well worn heresy. The article explains the error of such notions. Thank you for reading the article. Donald Ward

  • mikeyoung09

    Thank you for replying to my comments. I thought your article was excellent in explaining the errors involved in the Trinity. "Eternal generation" is a completely illogical idea. However, I feel that we need to study the meaning of the word “logos” in the Bible before we jump to conclusions about John 1:1. Herbert Armstrong stated in “Mystery of the Ages” (page 41 hardback edition) that logos meant “spokesman”, “word” or “revelatory thought”. He then assumed in the next sentence without any further explanation or proof that it is the name there used for an individual Personage. Does “revelatory thought” not mean everything in the mind of God? Strong’s (3056) also defines it as “reasoning of the mental faculty, divine expression, communication, speech (i.e. what is spoken), etc., so the primary meaning of logos is “what is spoken or communicated” and not just the name for an individual Personage.

    I never intimated or implied that the Father became flesh, but just that God’s "revelatory thoughts" were originally with the Father. Hebrews 1:1 implies that it was God (the Father) who was the Spokesman “in times past”, then Christ became the Spokesman “in these last days”.

  • p.mullet

    Donald Ward, Sir it seems that you are mis informed about the "Word" "Logos" as well: Despite the conventional translation as LOGO (λόγος) "word", it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term lexis (λέξις) was used. However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb legō (λέγω), meaning "count, tell, say, speak".

  • dlward

    Dear Mr. Mullet, The article centers on theology---not technical grammatical usage.The Greek word “logos” is used by the apostle John as a noun in John 1:1; John 1:14. In fact, Revelation 19:13 sates: “And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and His name is called The Word of God.” If you read the article you would understand the theological conundrum if one attempts to use the Greek word “logos” as a verb in those verses. It would mean that the Father was made flesh and dwelt among men. Such a conclusion would mean that the Father was the One who died on the stake. Whereas, the often quoted John 3:16, states that the Father gave His only begotten Son to die for the sins of the world. The Jewish philosopher and theologian Philo tried to harmonize Greek philosophy with the Bible, and thus used many of the terms that the Greeks used in describing God. Thus the concept of the Logos or Memra of Yahweh appearing as an agent of God and speaking to human beings was a familiar concept among the learned Jews of the first century. John used terminology familiar to Jew and Gentile in explaining the incarnation of the "LOGOS," the Word, who exists in eternity. Heb. 7:1-3. Don Ward

  • mtserveyou13@gmail.com

    I can see you hold some trues of God, but you don't have all understanding of Gods word. Here's what I mean you having game the understanding of the difference between the old Covenant and the New Covenant you have red things in the Bible as I have seen but you haven't put it all together so I believe God hasn't given you the spirit to put it all together I like the good spirit you have but and all humbleness and knowing god knows all things you must understand you may not understand all things because I know I don't so you miss and this area you believe just as in the old Testament and the old Covenant which the New Covenant says is about to vanish that you are to keep the law to the letter which Paul distinguish two to the letter in the spirit of the law and to make this understood he pointed out where God says he will make a new covenant with Israel and the house of Judah not the one where he took them by the hand out of the land of Egypt because that Covenant was based on that written law God gave them the Ten Commandments this is the letter of the law written down so you read it which is the letters and you try to do it and which God says Israel did not keep my laws and I did

  • KARS

    Hi Merlo, it's you who do not understand. It has been stated that Jesus was the Word of John 1:1, did you even read it in your own bible? Did you not prove it to yourself? As far as the Law it's more than the Ten Commandments. The part of the LAW that was done away with is the sacrificial rituals of the Temple. The Temple was razed in 70 A. D.. Without a Temple the Levites have no job. No Temple, no animal sacrifices for sin. Jesus Christ our Savior represented every single animal sacrifice for sin. The New Covenant has the Passover ceremony changed (Unleavened Bread, Wine, and Foot Washing). The weekly Sabbaths(Friday sunset to Saturday sunset) are still the same and the 7 annual Holy Days are still kept because of a command by the God of the Old and New Testament. "forever throughout your generations"; found many times in the Book of Leviticus chapter 23. Are there not human babies still being born on this earth? Of course there are. Therefore the command still stands ; "forever throughout your generations". You do realize that the LAW is the first 5 Books of the Bible, right? So that also means we should follow the advice of the food and health laws don't you think?

  • Join the conversation!

    Log in or register to post comments