Error in Quran and hadiths about Thamud

[smaneck]

I think submission (blind submission of Koran) is new and not found in either Judaism or Christianity. The word submit is not found.

Blind submission in Arabic is taqlid not islam. As for submission in the Bible:

BIBLE VERSES ABOUT SUBMISSION TO GOD

 

[Masihi]

I don't see submission to Gd as known in islam. I see verses where brethren are to submit to other humans such as authorities, but not the blind submission to an unknown god. I see verse where wives should submit to husbands. I don't see submission to Gd. Where specifically do you see it?

 

[Masihi]

Do you see submit in the law? no
I do see "love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul"
Where does it say submit to God in Bible?

 

[smaneck]

Do you see submit in the law?

Islam means submission to God, not the law.

Where does it say submit to God in Bible?

<sigh>

James 4:7 - Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
Ephesians 5:24 - Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing.

 

[Masihi]

James 4.7 original greek has a word describing letting oneself be subject to Gd, which to me means to have faith in Gd. The verse from Ephesians is between individuals and not between man and Gd so that is not relevant here.

Show me where I can find submission to Gd in the Bible the way islam understands submission.

 

[smaneck]

James 4.7 original greek has a word describing letting oneself be subject to Gd, which to me means to have faith in Gd.

No, it does not mean to have faith in God. In fact the whole point of James' epistle is that faith along isn't enough. To be subject means to accept God as the ruler of your life, in other words to submit.

The verse from Ephesians is between individuals and not between man and Gd so that is not relevant here.

So you don't believe that the church being subject to Christ is the same thing as being subject to God?

Interesting.

Show me where I can find submission to Gd in the Bible the way islam understands submission.

Since you have absolutely no understanding of what submission means either in the Qur'an or the Bible, that would be hard to do.

 

[ContraMundum]

Hey, us Baha'is are the new kid on the block of Abrahamic religions.

I thought of that after I posted!

 

[sunrise0]

It's new. No one ever heard of it before Mohammed. No one kept the Five Pillars or read the Koran etc etc. It CLAIMS to be old, because it borrows from and reinterprets the older religions, that's all.

WRONG!
Every message from Allah to His prophets consisted of three parts:-

The creed, which was the same all prophets conveyed to their people as a message from Allah. It was the emphasis upon the Oneness of Allah, and the people's duty to believe and worship Him.

16: 36. And verily, We have sent among every Ummah (community, nation) a Messenger (proclaiming): "Worship Allâh (Alone), and avoid (or keep away from) Tâghût (all false deities, etc. i.e. do not worship Tâghût besides Allâh)."

The law which differed from one nation and time to another.
The religious instructions for applying the law
5: 48. And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad ) the Book (this Qur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures) . So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging away from the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so strive as in a race in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ.

Islam is not a new and different religion, it is the only religion ever assigned to humankind by our Creator. Allah does not change His mind, or deceive His bondsmen by sending to them different and contradictory messages.
The Holy Quran is Allah's final Testament. It contains the basics of the previous Books, and everything we need to know about our lives on earth and in the Hereafter.

Allah pledged to reserve It from any corruption or human interference. It is today a verbatim of what it was about fifteen centuries ago when Allah revealed it to His Final Prophet; Muhammad:

15: 9. Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption) .

A Muslim must believe in all the Prophets and other things as we see here:

2: 136. Say (O Muslims), "We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Isma'il (Ishmael), Ishaque (Isaac), Ya'qub (Jacob), and to Al-Asbat [the twelve sons of Ya'qub (Jacob)], and that which has been given to Musa (Moses) and 'Iesa (Jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islam)."

Even prophet Muhammad is included in the above:
82. And those who believe (in the Oneness of Allâh - Islâmic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, they are dwellers of Paradise, they will dwell therein forever.

2: 285. . The Messenger (Muhammad ) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. Each one believes in Allah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers. They say, "We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers" - and they say, "We hear, and we obey. (We seek) Your Forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the return (of all)."

3: 84. Say (O Muhammad ): "We believe in Allah and in what has been sent down to us, and what was sent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Isma'il (Ishmael), Ishaque (Isaac), Ya'qub (Jacob) and Al-Asbat [the twelve sons of Ya'qub (Jacob)] and what was given to Musa (Moses), 'Iesa (Jesus) and the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between one another among them and to Him (Allah) we have submitted (in Islam)."

Therefore, a person who does not accept Allah's Final message is exposing himself to great danger:

3: 85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.


There is an interesting Quranic verse which complements Christians and tells us that some priests embraced Islam. Nowadays this is still going on. Search for it to make sure:
5: 82. Verily, you will find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers (Muslims) the Jews and those who are Al-Mushrikun (see V.2:105), and you will find the nearest in love to the believers (Muslims) those who say: "We are Christians." That is because amongst them are priests and monks, and they are not proud.

By this we established the first way to go to paradise; believing in Allah, all His Prophets, angles, Day of Judgment and Books, anyone who does not accept this is exempt from going to paradise; he will go to Hell:

2: 39. But those who disbelieve and belie Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) such are the dwellers of the Fire, they shall abide therein forever.

47: 32. Verily, those who disbelieve, and hinder (men) from the Path of Allah (i.e. Islam), and oppose the Messenger (by standing against him and hurting him), after the guidance has been clearly shown to them, they will not hurt Allah in the least, but He will make their deeds fruitless,

57: 19. And those who believe in (the Oneness of) Allah and His Messengers, they are the Siddiqun (i.e. those followers of the Prophets who were first and foremost to believe in them), and the martyrs with their Lord, they shall have their reward and their light. But those who disbelieve (in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism) and deny Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.), they shall be the dwellers of the blazing Fire.
​

 

[sunrise0]

I think submission (blind submission of Koran) is new and not found in either Judaism or Christianity. The word submit is not found.

I already answered this in the above post. Islam is on the rise and will be the only religion as told by God Himself:
(9:33) He is Allah Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Right way so that He may make it prevail over all other ways, even though the mushriks be much averse to it.

 

[ContraMundum]

WRONG!
Every message from Allah to His prophets consisted of three parts:-​

Not buying it dude.

The facts: God gave us a covenant, and it doesn't need any additions.​

 

[LoAmmi]

Not buying it dude.

The facts: God gave us a covenant, and it doesn't need any additions.

That sounds familiar.

 

[smaneck]

The law which differed from one nation and time to another.
The religious instructions for applying the law

I'm glad you accept the premise that the Law must differ according to time and place. That is precisely why Baha'is insist on progressive revelation, that God will never leave us alone and will continue to send us guidance.

"The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements." Baha'u'llah

 

[smaneck]

Not buying it dude.

The facts: God gave us a covenant, and it doesn't need any additions.

Your a Messianic Jew? You don't believe Jesus brought a new covenant?

Is this not part of the Covenant?

"15 The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken"
Deut. 18

I find it interesting though, how each religion wants to be the last one.

 

[LoAmmi]

I find it interesting though, how each religion wants to be the last one.

We only claim to be the one for Jews.

 

[smaneck]

We only claim to be the one for Jews.

Except the person who made the statement is a Messianic Jew, so presumably he would accept the New Testament as well as the Old (Testament meaning Covenant.)

 

[LoAmmi]

Except the person who made the statement is a Messianic Jew, so presumably he would accept the New Testament as well as the Old (Testament meaning Covenant.)

Yes, I realize his situation. I was merely pointing out that Judaism only claims to be the religion for Jews. Yes, our prophets say that in the end everybody will recognize we were right, but I'm not sure that means we're the "last" of anything.

 

[smaneck]

Yes, I realize his situation. I was merely pointing out that Judaism only claims to be the religion for Jews. Yes, our prophets say that in the end everybody will recognize we were right, but I'm not sure that means we're the "last" of anything.

Since two thirds of the world population worship the same God as the Jews, I would say that prophecy has already been fulfilled by and large. But it is interesting how the Qur'an treats the Sinai event. It puts it outside of time, even before creation, involving the acceptance of God's Messengers whenever they appear. “And (remember) when thy Lord brought forth from the Children of Adam, from their reins, their seed, and made them testify of themselves, (saying): Am I not your Lord? They said: Yea, verily. We testify. (That was) lest ye should say at the Day of Resurrection: Lo! of this we were unaware; Or you should say: Only our fathers associated others (with Allah) before, and we were an offspring after them: Wilt Thou then destroy us for what the vain doers did?” (Qur'an 7:171)

This event that establishes the primordial Covenant is known in Islam as the Day of Alast, named after the question God asks, “Am I not your Lord?” alastu bi&#8209;rabbikam


A couple of things might be noted about this passage. First, it is an event that happens in the pre&#8209;existence, an event in which we are all said to be present. Because we all given answer to this question, we all become partners to the Covenant thus created. That Covenant consists of an acknowledgment of God’s lordship, and of our willingness to submit to it. In that primordial response, human responsibility is born. Thus the Day of Alast is intimately tied to the Day of Resurrection. If we fail to subsequently live our lives continuing to acknowledge His Lordship, we can neither claim ignorance or merely doing as our forefathers had taught us. The Covenant, thus conceived, is not so much about what we think or believe, as it is a matter of the directionality of our will. Does it acknowledge God’s Lordship or seek to do its own will?

I guess that brings us back to the topic of submission, which some people seem to think is such an anathema.

 

[ContraMundum]

Your a Messianic Jew? You don't believe Jesus brought a new covenant?

Is this not part of the Covenant?

"15 The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken"
Deut. 18

I find it interesting though, how each religion wants to be the last one.

I believe the NT Covenant is properly understood as the renewed covenant. There's been endless discussions on this over at the MJ forum, so I don't want to re-hash it now. Search or ask about it over there if that interests you.

But the issue pertaining to this thread is more to the point that the Covenant at Sinai, given to the Jewish people alone, looks toward a future Messiah to come for the whole world. After that, there will be no need for anything else. As a Messianic Jew I believe that Messiah has come so there is no need for more laws (not to get sidetracked on a second advent here). A Jew who does not believe in Jesus likewise is not expecting anyone after the Messiah, so ultimately we are on the same side of the fence on this matter- we don't need Islam. Our expectant beliefs are in the Jewish Messiah- we await only the Messiah.

 

[TG123]

From the UNESCO pdf:

"Amongst them, around thirty include inscriptions in the Nabataen language, which enables the dating of their construction."

So that's how they're dating the tombs.....by looking at the inscriptions. SO all they're doing is roughly estimating the time period people when people made inscriptions into the rocks (and this is done by observing the language) and proposing that this is when the rocks were also carved into the tombs they are now. Therefore, that's just a hypothesis. It's an educated guess on their part, but a guess nonetheless.

A &#8220;rough estimation&#8221; by UNESCO, who have highly qualified and educated archaeologists working for them. For the Quran and Muhammad to be correct on this matter, they would have had to have been off by at least a millennia.

According to Saudi-archaeology.com, which is a site ran by archaeologists, the tombs at Madain Saleh were built also by the Nabateans.

Mada&#8217;in Saleh, not far from al-Ula (22 km), was known as al-Hijr, or Hegra, by the Nabataean people who carved its magnificent tombs into the golden Quweira sandstone outcrops. The delicate details on the entrance portals and the smooth surfaces of its 111 tomb façades reflect the great skills of the masons of their time. The splendor of the natural setting here must have reminded the Nabataeans of their capital, Petra, hewn into the rosey sandstone cliffs to the north in modern-day Jordan. It is no wonder that they chose this very spot to build their second city, Hegra. Based on the many dated tomb inscriptions, Hegra thrived between 1 BCE -74 CE.
The Nabataeans began as pastoral nomads, raising their sheep, goats, and camels in the desert as so many other Arabian tribes have done through the millennia. They also practiced oasis agriculture, utilizing a set of wells dug into the rock. Their origin is uncertain, but there is a strong possibility that they came from the Hejaz region of northwest Saudi Arabia. The deities they worshipped were similar to those honored by ancient cultures in that area and the root consonants of their name &#8211; n, b, t, w &#8211; occur in the early Semitic of the Hejaz. From early in their history, they had connections with Mesopotamia and may have been the Nabatu Arabs mentioned by the Assyrians in the eighth century BCE. Alexander the Great&#8217;s officer Hieronymus of Cardia wrote of the Nabataeans as having an ascetic life with harsh laws. They were also known for their incredible familiarity with the desert and their ability to fade into it to evade enemy tribes. Their system of hidden cisterns dug deep in the interior provided water for their livestock and their people.
Arabian Rock Art Heritage : Mada&#8217;in Saleh

As you may have noticed, I am also making mention of the wells. I will show the reason for this below.

As they were passing through Al Hijr, Muhammad ordered his men not to collect water from the wells of the habitations of the Thamud, and instead had them draw water from the well where the she-camel drank.

(6) Abdullah b. 'Umar reported that the people encamped along with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) in the valley of Hijr, the habitations of thamud, and they quenched their thirst from the wells thereof and kneaded the flour with it. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded that the water collected for drinking should be spilt and the flour should be given to the camels and commanded them that the water for drinking should be taken from that well where the she-camel (of Hadrat Salih) used to come. (Book #042, Hadith #7105)

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHad...earch_word=all


These wells too were built not by the Thamud, but by the Nabateans.

Ancient writers have described how the Nabateans carved wells out of rocks, and in fact kept from their neighbours the secret of how they accomplished this.

The Nabataeans were experts at collecting water and storing it in underground cisterns. All along their caravan routes, secret water collection systems collected water and stored it for later use. The ancient historian Diodorus noted: "For in the waterless region, as it is called, they have dug wells at convenient intervals and have kept the knowledge of them from people of all other nations, and so they retreat in a body into this region out of danger. For since they themselves know about the places of hidden water and open them up, they have for their use drinking water in abundance." (II.48.2)
Diodorus also noted in another place: "They take refuge in the desert using this as a fortress; for it lacks water and cannot be crossed by others, but to them alone, since they have prepared subterranean reservoirs lined with stucco, it furnishes safety. As the earth in some places is clayey and in others is of soft stone, they make great excavations in it, the mouths of which they make very small, but by constantly increasing the width as they dig deeper, they finally make them of such size that each side has a length of about 100 feet. After filling these reservoirs with rain water, they close the openings, making them even with the rest of the ground, and they leave signs that are known to themselves but are unrecognizable to others. They water their flocks every other day, so that, if they flee, or wander through waterless places, they may not need a continuous supply of water." (XIX.94.6-9)
&#8230;
Herodotus, when writing about the Nabataeans tells us, that he believed they could find water anywhere in the desert. He mentions that Cambyses used an Arab to bring him water in the desert as he moved his army against Egypt. The Nabataeans refused to tell the army where water came from, but they showed up at regular intervals in the desert, with their camels loaded with water skins, enabling the army to pass across the desert into Egypt. The Nabataeans made up a story by explaining that there was a wonderful river in the desert and that they used a water duct made of sewn ox-hides to transport the water over many miles. Herodotus thought that the story was not very credible. (History III.5, 7-9) What probably happened was that the Nabataeans, in exchange for financial return, simply supplied the army with water from their secret cisterns that were scattered along the caravan route; which would most likely be the route that the army took. By telling stories, however, they could keep their water sources secret and at the same time, profit handsomely, a typical Nabataean trait.
Nabataea: Water Collection

Clearly, not only were the &#8220;houses&#8221; that Muhammad saw built by the Nabateans, but so were the wells.

Because Allaah is specifically referring to the people to whom Prophet Saleh (peace be upon him) was sent. Mada'in Saleh = the cities of Saleh. Also, Allaah is not restricted to our terminology.

But Al Hijr and Petra are nowhere close to each other. Was Salih in 2 cities at the same time? Of course not, only God is omnipresent. Yet these 2 cities were clearly built by the same civilization.

And I am arguing that lack of archaeological evidence of people before the a time period does not mean that people did not already exist there and carved their homes into the rocks.
Your whole argument rests on the assumption that the houses/tombs were carved at the same time as the inscriptions were made.

Yes, that is true. I am arguing that UNESCO as well as Saudi archaeologists and other archaeologists around the world are not so terrible at dating buildings that they would be off by a millennia. I am also now showing you historical evidence that shows that it was the Nabateans who carved wells out of rock&#8230; which would have meant that the wells Muhammad ordered his men to keep away from as well as the well from where the she-camel drank were made by the Nabateans almost if not more than 1,000 years after the event recorded in the Quran.

They're not "admitting" that the Nabataens are the ones who carved the tombs. In fact, they mention (and seem to agree with) the tribes of Thamud settling here by the 3rd millennium BCE. Then they go on to mention that the earliest evidence we have of human settlement (from the inscriptions) is of the 1st millennium BCE. This does not mean that they discount the Qur'aan narration. Unlike UNESCO, they do not interpret the dating of the inscriptions to mean that's when the tombs were carved.

They state that the Nabateans were the only ones who left behind them the remains of &#8220;a real city&#8221;, whereas those before them left inscriptions.

I scrolled more down the page and found where it is actually stated that the Nabateans were the ones who carved the tombs:

Jabal Ithlib
This toponym refers to two mountain rages which dominate the site to the northeast. These mountains, with their high peaks, seem to have been particularly important to the Nabataeans since they chose them to be their religious area. They thus carved inside the Jabal and on its outer face, various types of sanctuaries and other structures related to the cults or rituals that they practiced there. One of them, called the Diwan, appears to have been a room for banquets near which are carved several niches with betyls (sacred stones).
First International Conference For Urban Heritage In The Islamic Countries

I wasn't debating that. My point was that scientists have made an educated guess about evolution just like archaeologists and those who study inscriptions have made an educated guess about the tombs. I don't believe either of them are right, because it's just their interpretation of the data they have and that interpretation contradicts with the Qur'aan and sunnah (which I fully believe to be the truth).

If it is scientifically proven that human beings and monkeys have similar DNA, then that is the truth. It does not mean God did not create us, and it does not mean we and monkeys evolved from some other ape-like creature. But facts are facts.
Evidence presented by both modern archaeologists (including Saudi ones, who are most likely Muslim) and past historians show that
A) The rock tombs at Al Hijr were made by the Nabateans
B) The wells were made by the Nabateans.

All I know and care about is that God said mankind corrupted the previous scriptures by adding or subtracting from them. I know this is the truth and I will not be surprised with any evidence that comes up that shows this.

If I discounted any evidence that you could provide on the basis that the Bible teaches otherwise, how would you respond?

lol, did you remember all of the people/groups I have openly condemned on this forum (i.e. their beliefs)?

Just showing I&#8217;m paying attention, I guess. On a sidenote, I like how you don&#8217;t condemn other people but their beliefs only. It is something I respect about you.

Anyways, I disagree with your conclusion that they think the creation of the houses/tombs was at roughly the same time as the inscriptions. I got something else while reading from that same site.

Well, I obviously can&#8217;t (now would I ever try to) force you into accepting it. Archaeologists point out that the tombs we see on the site were carved by the Nabateans. Ancient historians of that time pointed out that the Nabeateans were the ones who carved out the wells, and even were able to detail how. The Quran and Muhammad attributed these things to the Thamud, although they neither carved homes or tombs or wells out of the stone.

In any case, their opinion is not binding. They could also be wrong if they actually said & meant what you claim they meant. Just because they said it does not mean that other Muslims MUST take their word and agree with them.

Of course. However, whether we like it or not, the evidence they and other archaeologists put forward extremely clearly is that the Nabateans, not the Thamud, carved the tombs and wells.

You too

Ramadan Mubarak. Blessed be the Name of the Lord.

May He bless the people of Egypt and provide them with the peace and justice they have been denied for so long.

 

[TG123]

There is No error in the Quran.

i) The Quran and hadith specifically mentioned the people of Thamud, not Nabateans. The Thamuds lived at al-Hijr much earlier then the Nabateans, as traces of their writings could still be found at al-Hijr.

ii) Neither the Quran or the hadith indicated that existing carvings of rocks were made by the Thamuds. The Quran specifically said the Thamuds built houses from rocks, not tombs, as TG123 correctly pointed out. The tombs, carved from rocks, were made by the Nabateans as verified by the First International Conference for Urban Heritage in the Islamic countries.

iii) The Quran indicated that the Thamuds were destroyed and their homes in ruins after God punished them for idol worshipping and not heeding the advise of Prophet Saleh. The Nabateans who moved in years later, probably built the tombs on the site where the Thamuds homes were destroyed.

iv) The hadith was referring to the people of Thamuds who used to live at the same site as the Nabateans. Again, how TG123 came to the conclusion that the Quran claimed the existing building was Nabateans is beyond me, as it was written in the Quran that the homes of the Thamuds were destroyed:

[FONT=tahoma, sans-serif]We sent aforetime, to the Thamud, their brother Saleh, saying, "Serve Allah" but beholds, they became two factions quarrelling with each other. He said, "Oh my people! Why ask ye to hasten on the evil in preference to the good? If only ye ask Allah for forgiveness, ye may hope to receive mercy." They said, "Ill omen do we augur from thee and those that are with thee." He said, "Your ill omen is with Allah, ye, ye are a people under trial. There were nine men in the city of a family who made mischief in the land, and would not reform. They said: "Swear a mutual oath by Allah that we shall make a secret night attack on him and his people, and that we shall then say to his heir when he seeks vengeance: “We were not present at the slaughter of his people, and we are positively telling the truth. They plotted and planned, but We too planned, even while they perceived it not. Then see what the end of their plot was! This, that We destroyed them and their people, all of them. Now such were their houses, - in utter ruin - because they practiced wrongdoing. Verily in this is a Sign for people of knowledge. And We saved those who believed and practiced righteousness. (Surah al-Naml 45-53)[/FONT]

Salaam Alaikum and thank you for your answer.

The verse states that the hourses were "in utter ruin", not that they were destroyed.

The verse refers to the houses in the present tense.

So those are their houses, desolate* because of the wrong they had done. Indeed in that is a sign for people who know.
Surat An-Naml [27:52] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم
The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran

* according to Corpus Quran, the word is "ruined".

So as we can see, the Quran claimed that the Thamud carved homes out of rocks, were killed by God for disobeying Him and His prophet Salih, and their homes were left in ruins. These ruins could be seen when the Quran was written, because the verb "are" is used, not "were".

(27:52:2)
buy&#363;tuhum
(are) their houses,

Muhammad claimed to have came across these houses as he and his men were traveling, as the hadith shows.

However, as we both know, the Nabateans were the ones who built the tombs, not the Thamud. The "houses" Muhammad and his men came across were actually tombs. Also as I have shown in my reply to LoveBeingAMuslimah, the wells they found were also not built by the Thamud, but the Nabateans.

The Quran's author attributed mistakenly to the Thamud something that the Nabateans built, long after the story of Salih allegedly took place.

Blessed be the Name of the Lord.