The Discussion Continues:
Between ‘Shubbiha Lahum’ and Trinity 2 (A)
By Jalal Abualrub
The Discussion Continues
Between ‘Shubbiha Lahum’ and Trinity 2 (A)
By Jalal Abualrub
Jalal Abualrub wrote: Here is the second round of discussions with a Christian man. His responses and questions are in green. Jalal’s answers are in dark blue.
Thanks for getting some help from others in answering my questions. That is greatly appreciated! My answers to your comments are found in green below. Please post them on your website too.
1) The word ‘kalima’ is the Muslim declaration of faith (see: http://www.geocities.com/fearallaah/kalimahs.htm the first one is the most important one in Islam: "There is no diety except Allaah. Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is the Messenger of Allaah." My point is simply that neither the first one, nor all the other Kalimas mentioned in the above site, are found in one verse in the Quran as such. They are made up of multiple verses, just like the Trinity. So why should the same principle, that a theological teaching is founded on multiple verses, only be acceptable in Islam but not in Christianity? This will answer you points 2. a-b.
Even though I am extremely busy, I have so far answered you as much as I can. Hopefully someone else will help me if there are more questions to come.
Answer 1:
I know what you meant. There is not a single word in the Quran which directly describes ‘La-ilaha illa-llah’ as being ‘al-Kalimah’. There are many ‘Kalimat (words)’ mentioned in the Quran, according to their respective context. What you read on the website you mentioned is not the word of Tau’heed divided between various Ayat where none of them alone describes the foundation of Islam. What you read is various words in various contexts, the choice of Kalimat that the people who run that website collected for the purpose of teaching. Allah did not call these words ‘Kalimat’; the website people did to make them easy to remember and classify.
The foundation of the Islamic creed is, ‘La-ilaha illa-llah’; this is the Islamic Creed as compared to Trinity and Idol-worshipping. This is the ‘word’ that makes one a Muslim if one declares it. This is the word that, if one refuses to declare it, one remains a disbeliever. When the Prophet’s uncle was dying, the Prophet offered this word to him, “Say ‘La ilaha illa-llah’, so that I may testify for you with Allah on its account’” (Bukhari: 1360).
The foundation of Tau’heed, Allah’s Islamic Monotheism, is found in just one sentence. This is the ‘Kalimah’ that Prophet Muhammad was sent with. It means, ‘There is no deity worthy of worship, except Allah’. This is the Islamic religion. This is what the Quran said every Prophet who came before Prophet Muhammad also came with. This is the word of Tau’heed. This is the ‘Shahadah (Testimony)’ that Allah made in the Quran, {18. Allâh bears witness that Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), and the angels, and those having knowledge (also give this witness); (He always) maintains His creation in justice. Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), the All‑Mighty, the All-Wise. 19. Truly, the religion with Allâh is Islâm. Those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) did not differ except, out of mutual jealousy, after knowledge had come to them. And whoever disbelieves in the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allâh, then surely, Allâh is Swift in calling to account.} [3:18-19] Note how the Kalimah of Tau’heed was mentioned twice in one Ayah, followed by Allah’s Statement that the religion with Him is Islam.
The Shahadah (Testimony) of Tau’heed (Monotheism) has always been the same no matter the prophet whom Allah sent. Here is what Prophets Moses and Jesus said about it, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” Thus, the OT and the NT have, in one sentence, what Trinity lacks in hundreds of pages contained in the OT and the NT. Every prophet who was sent came with this Kalimah, the foundation of Islam. Also, every prophet who was sent came with another Kalimah, the testimony that he is a Messenger from Allah.
For instance, ‘La ilaha illa-llah; Muhammadun Rasulullah’ are Two Kalimat. The first Kalimah establishes the religion of Tau’heed; the second Kalimah establishes the Prophet who was sent with it. The second of these two Kalimat changes according to the Messenger who was sent. ‘Muhammadun Rasulullah’, is a testimony that one makes, after accepting Tau’heed, asserting that one believes in Muhammad, the Prophet sent to him, and is dedicated to following Muhammad, the Messenger who was sent to him. During the time of Prophet Moses, the Two Kalimat would have been, ‘La ilaha illa-llah,’ followed by the statement that the Children of Israel were required to make, ‘Musa Rasulu-llah’, because at the time, Musa (Moses) was their Messenger from Allah.
This is why your answer is still false. I ask you for a clear testimony of your faith from the Bible through the words of Jesus, and you keep referring to TWO TESTIMONIES from the Quran thinking that they are the equivalent of what I asked you to produce. ‘La ilaha illa-llah, Muhammadun Rasulu-llah’, are called, ‘The Two Testimonials’, not the ‘One Testimonial,’ because they are two, not one.
What is the opposite/equivalent of Trinity, is it, ‘Muhammadun Rasulu-llah’, or is it, ‘La ilaha illa-llah’? What is the Islamic Creed in few words? The answer would not be, ‘Muhammadun Rasulu-llah’, but, ‘La ilaha illa-llah’. This is because, ‘La ilaha illa-llah’, is the foundation of Islam, the Creed on which Islam is built, while, ‘Muhammadun Rasulu-llah’, identifies the Messenger who was sent with it. Both of these Kalimat are required in Islam.
Here is the breakdown of these two words: Trinity is about the nature, and consequently, the rights of God. It competes NOT with, ‘Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, BUT with, ‘La ilaha illa-llah’. Again, ‘Muhammadun Rasulu-llah’, identifies the Prophet, while the word of Tau’heed, ‘La ilaha illa-llah’, identifies the Creed. Thus, the equivalent/competitor of Trinity is, ‘La Ilaha Illa-llah’, while the equivalent of, ‘Muhammadun Rasulullah’, is, ‘...as my Father hath sent me, even so I send you (the disciples of Jesus), And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive Ye The Holy Ghost’ (John 20:21–22).
I do not know how I can make this topic simpler than this. Thus, Jesus came to the Children of Israel with ‘La ilaha illa-llah’, and declared that Allah sent him as their Messenger (a hint: Jesus said, ‘...my Father sent me’, i.e., ‘Isa Rasulu-llah’). He then appointed the disciples as his emissaries. Note how they too received the Holy Ghost. Does this means that they too were mixed with the triune council?
2) ‘I Am’ is translated from the Greek in capital to emphasize the fact that it is a personal name, in this case the same name God uses about Himself in the Old Testament.
Answer 2: This is not proof at all. I wanted from you a clear statement where Jesus says, “I created you; I am God; Worship me as you worship God; I and the Holy Ghost are a Part of Trinity; Trinity is your creed; Worship all three of us, the son, the Holy Ghost and the Father, and these three are one.” You have not answered my question yet. Not in the least. I advised you against basing your faith on what could mean whatever; this is the deception that Christianity lives in and on. Allah did not deceive them, it is they who follow a faith that is based on ‘May be’ and vague statements that could mean a host of things.
What does a ‘personal name’ mean? It does not mean anything. You say Jesus is God, where did he say that? You say Jesus is one in Trinity, where did Jesus say that? Muslims say that Allah never had a son, and they can prove it from the Quran, {Allâh is (the only) One Ilâh (God), glory is to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allâh is All‑Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs} (4:171). Muslims say that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and they can prove it from the Quran in one word, {102. Such is Allâh, your Lord! Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), the Creator of all things. So worship Him (Alone), and He is the Wakîl (Trustee, Disposer of affairs or Guardian) over all things} (6:102). Muslims say that Trinity is false, and they can prove it from their Book in one ayah, {73. Surely, disbelievers are those who said: “Allâh is the third of the three (in a Trinity).” But there is no Ilâh (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilâh (God —Allâh). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them} (5:73).
Can you prove your Trinity from the words of Jesus? Even multiple words will do; words that speak of your creed IN CLEAR TERMS. Do not bring vague statements in Greek as answer to my question. Jesus never spoke Greek or English. ‘I AM’ is just like ‘I IS’ and ‘I ARE’, it does not mean one is God. Capital ‘AM’ is not a name, let alone being a ‘personal name’. As you said, ‘I AM’ is TRANSLATED in capital, not found originally in Capital; Jesus did not speak it in capital. Jesus never spoke Greek or English. Did I mention that before?
3) “Also, if Jesus and the Father are one, why did not the Father die when his son died, if they are in perfect harmony as Christians claim? The answer is found in the definition of the Trinity: 'We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding (mixing up) the Persons; nor dividing the Substance (Essence)' The word 'Person' is here used in the sense of 'self with a particular function.' ('The Illustrated Bible Dictionary' by F.F. Bruce, IVP Leicester, 1962, see 'person') It has to be stated emphatically that Christians do not worship three gods but one God because '...each member of the Godhead in some sense indwells the other, without diminishing the full person hood of each. The essential unity of the Godhead, then, is found both in their intrinsic equality of divine characteristics and also in the intensely personal unity that comes from mutual indwelling.' ('The self-giving triune God, the imago dei and the nature of the local church: an ontology of mission', paper by J. Scott Horrell, Th.D, professor of Systematic Theology at Dallas Theological Seminary) Thus when God the Son died at the cross, God did not cease to exist but was separated from himself regarding the relationship within the Trinity not regarding his essence. To think that God gave up a perfect relationship for a time shows how great his love towards us is! 'It is held that although the doctrine is beyond the grasp of human reason, it is, like many of the formulations of physical science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended though it may not be comprehended by the human mind.' (See, 'Encyclopedia Americana', 'Trinity', by F.C. Grant, Danbury, Con.: Americana Corp., 1980) The Trinity of God, like many other facts about him does not have to be understood fully, but to be believed in. Faith, the simple childlike trust that God is and acts as he revealed himself in the Bible, is sufficient for salvation. Similarly, one does not have to understand how a Television set works in order to enjoy a program about nature. A simple touch of the right button will bring about the blessing.
Answer 3:
So in summary, Trinity is a mystery! I agree. There is no sound explanation for Trinity no matter who the Christian believer in it is and how scholarly in the Bible he may be. The biggest problem with all of what you said above is that none of it was ever said by Jesus. You still cannot produce a single statement from Jesus CLEARLY establishing him as being God or one in Trinity, let alone him saying what you said here. What you said here is not found in the Bible, and no prophet ever said it. You came up with this explanation on your own; ‘You’, means, ‘Christians’.
a. Trinity is not confounding, so you say, but when Jesus died he ‘gave up’ the Holy Ghost, so we are told. However, he did not ‘give up’ the Father. Either the three were not mixed up or they were mixed up. Here it seems the two positions occurred at the same time!
Hopefully you will not answer by saying that when Jesus was a man, he was not divine. Because this means that either the three became two, until Jesus died and rejoined them. Or else, Jesus the divine separated himself from Jesus the man. But, the NT does not say that Jesus the man ‘gave up’ Jesus the divine. It seems that Jesus the divine did not indwell in Jesus the man either, because Jesus gave up only the Holy Ghost, not Jesus the divine, not even the Father.
b. To die, Jesus ‘gave up’ the Holy Ghost. Thus, the ‘Son-self’, was diminished by the departure of the Holy Ghost; he died as a result.
c. Trinity is not dividing, so you say, but one of the three died, i.e., lost the very ‘essence’ of eternal life, while the other two did not die.
Where are the perfect unity and the perfect harmony here? Obviously, division occurred, because one of the three got ‘separated’ from the other two. Earlier, another division occurred when one of the three became human. Later, another division occurred when one of the three was resurrected as a human, again.
d. I would love to see how you count the three days after which Jesus was resurrected. Make them three days please!
e. We are told that Trinity means that each of the three ‘indwells’ the other two. Yet, Jesus only gave up the Holy Ghost. What happened to the Father and why was He not ‘indwelled’ in His supposed son or at least in the Holy Ghost?
f. ‘Self with a particular function’, contradicts, ‘perfect harmony’, or in your words, ‘the intensely personal unity‘. This is because each of the three had ‘different functions’, such as, Jesus became a man, the other two did not; so where is the intensely personal unity which the three have? Jesus ate food, the other two didn’t; so where is the intensely personal unity? Jesus died, but God does not die. Jesus changed, but the Bible says that God does not change.
Jesus never said he is God, you, Christians, say that. Can I make a simple request? When you answer these questions, quote the Bible please. Justify your faith from the Bible, from the words of Jesus. Do not justify your faith by what other humans like you say, because their words are also unjustified by the Bible.
You said, ‘Thus when God the Son died at the cross, God did not cease to exist but was separated from himself regarding the relationship within the Trinity not regarding his essence. To think that God gave up a perfect relationship for a time shows how great his love towards us is!’ This statement is self-contradictory. When God supposedly temporarily ‘gave up’ his intensely personal unity with Jesus, they no longer were tied together with the so-called intensely personal unity, which as you said is in the essence of Trinity; the essence of God thus changed. In fact, all three of the triune council changed; one died while another, the Holy Ghost, gave up yet another, who died as a consequence; meanwhile, the Father separated Himself from the one who died, but not from the one who gave up the one who died. The essence of the relationship changed.
You are right: this is a mystery that no one can explain. Jesus never said this stuff. You, Christians, say this stuff without a shred of evidence other than your human conceptualization of what you say is a mystery that is beyond human comprehension. Then you say you do not worship three different gods? But you do. Trinity is about THREE DIFFERENT PERSONS with THREE DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS and THREE DIFFERENT ESSENCES: one is the Father, the other is a ghost, whatever that means, and the third is the son, who became a human, who then went back to being something after he died. Their essence is different in that one gave up life, while the other two remained alive. How can you explain all this unreasonable and unexplainable utter confusion as ‘not contrary to reason’?
4) ‘It is really interesting how you keep widening the subject. I am more than willing to talk about this allegation. But since you have no time what is the point of doing so?’ I just give you one thing to consider: 'Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.' (Surah 5, Al Ma'idah, verse 47) This command is given to Muhammad's contemporaries, it is written in the 'present' tense which in the Arabic language can also refer to the future! If the Gospel (Injil) was corrupted at that time then surely Allah would never have asked the people of the Gospel, the Christians, to believe in it! So the Gospel was OK in the sixth century according to the Quran. To find out whether it is OK in the 21st century existing copies from the two centuries under consideration have been compared and it was found that they are substantially the same! The main teaching of the Gospel, that Jesus died for our sins and rose again on the third day is still there in all Gospels whatever century the copies are from.
Answer 4:
No; in fact several No’s!
a. Where does Ayah 5:47 say that the Christian Creed is correct or that the Four Gospels are the Injil of Isa?
b. Where does Ayah 5:47 ask the People of the Book to believe in your Bible?
c. Have you noticed the word in the ayah, ‘Wal-Ya`hkum’, which means, ‘Let [them] judge’? Hukm is not creed, Hukm is judgment, i.e., it pertains to the Law.
d. Produce the Injil and we shall honour it. You seem to think, like many Christians and even some Muslims, that the Four Gospels that you have today is the Injil. Where is the Gospel of Isa that the NT says he preached? You do not have it.
e. Should I remind you that the Gospels that you have are ‘popularly’ thought to be written by Mark, Luke, Matthew and John?
f. We are not talking about the same book here. The Ayah does not refer to your Gospels; your Gospels are not the Injil of Isa. These Gospels were written AFTER Jesus was raised to heaven, alive and well, while the Injil is a Divinely Revealed Book sent down to Jesus, BEFORE he was raised to heaven.
g. Judaism and Christendom do not have a single exact replica of anything found in the Bible, whether OT or NT. Thousands of the oldest manuscripts of the NT are available, but no two are exactly the same. The oldest of these is generations after Jesus departed this earth, alive. No one knows exactly who wrote the Four Gospels or in which original language or time-frame they were written, or who translated them, or who edited them, or who testified to the news found in them. This is a mystery that rivals the mystery of Trinity itself.
h. The Injil is a revelation that came to Prophet Isa. Thus, where the reference to Injil is found in the Quran and Sunnah, it is made to the original copy of the Book that Allah revealed to His Prophet Isa. You do not have it.
What is the context of the Ayah under discussion? Read the Ayah before it and you will know. ‘Wal-Ya’hkum’, in Ayah 5:47, is a continuation of the Ayah before it, {46. And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Îsâ (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Taurât (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurât (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for al-Muttaqûn (the pious). 47. Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allâh has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fâsiqûn [the rebellious] to Allâh.}
These two Ayat state that Allah revealed the Injil to Prophet Isa, who was also sent with confirmation of the Torah such as affirming the law of stoning the adulterers (which Islam upheld, but the Jews and Christians suspended and abandoned it). In the Injil was guidance for the Children of Israel who were commanded to abide by it. Jesus, as he is reported to have said in the NT, was only sent to the Children of Israel. Thus, these sentences continue; they are not ‘divided’ from what’s before or after them. Allah says that He sent Jesus to the Children of Israel and revealed to him the Injil, saying, ‘Let the people to whom the Injil was sent rule (judge; wal-Ya’hkum) by the Injil.’ This commandment was given to the people who received the Injil ordering them to abide by its Law. The law of the Injil remained valid until the Quran was revealed; the proof is to come. These Ayat do not say to the Christians that they should believe in the NT. The NT is NOT the Injil. You are welcome to prove otherwise from the Quran or Sunnah.
The Ayat before these two also say the same to the Children of Israel with regards to the Torah: {44. Verily, We did send down the Taurât (Torah) [to Mûsâ (Moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allâh’s Will, judged for the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged for the Jews by the Taurât (Torah) after those Prophets], for to them was entrusted the protection of Allâh’s Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kâfirûn (i.e. disbelievers). 45. And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allâh has revealed, such are the Dhâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers).}
Again, Allah states here that He sent down the Torah to the Children of Israel, saying to them afterwards, ‘Let those who received the Torah act upon its law.’ This is the instruction that came to them in the Book that Allah revealed to them. This instruction is not about the future, it is not about the present; it was specifically said to those who received the Torah. Obviously, it was said to them in the present tense, because the Children of Israel were supposed to rule by the Book not in the past, not in the future, but as soon as they received it. The instruction in these Ayat is also about abiding by the LAW. A hint: ‘Life for life,’ is a law to act upon, it is not a creed. The Torah mostly remained valid until the Quran was revealed. I said, THE TORAH, not the OT, because the Torah does not exist anymore in its original form. No one knows who wrote the numerous books found in the OT. The five books of Moses were not written by Moses; he could not have possibly reported what age he was when he DIED; (Deuteronomy 34:5-10).
The Ayat continue, because they are still talking about the same topic, i.e., ruling by what Allah has revealed: {48. And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ) the Book (this Qur’ân) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures). So judge among them by what Allâh 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 Allâh had willed, He would have made you one nation, but that (He) may test you in what He has given you; so compete in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allâh; then He will inform you about that in which you used to differ. 49. And so judge (you O Muhammad صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ) among them by what Allâh has revealed and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you (O Muhammad صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ) far away from some of that which Allâh has sent down to you. And if they turn away, then know that Allâh’s Will is to punish them for some sins of theirs. And truly, most of men are Fâsiqûn (rebellious and disobedient to Allâh).}
Thus, the Ayat continue, by saying, ‘We sent Muhammad to you, O, Mankind, and revealed to him a Book that OVERRULES all the previous Books We revealed before it. So judge by Our Revelation to Muhammad, as the People of the Two Books WERE ordered to judge by their respective Books.’
a. You forgot to mention the next Ayat to 5:47 which declare that the law of previous prophets was overruled by the sending of the Quran.
b. Therefore, even if mankind still has access to the original copies of the Torah and the Injil, they are still required to rule by the Quran and its Law, {68. Say (O Muhammad صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ) “O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! You have nothing (as regards guidance) till you act according to the Taurât (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), and what has (now) been sent down to you from your Lord (the Qur’ân).” Verily, that which has been sent down to you (Muhammad صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ) from your Lord increases in most of them (their) obstinate rebellion and disbelief. So be not sorrowful over the people who disbelieve} (5:68).
c. Allah ordered the Children of Israel, the only recipients of the Torah and the Injil, to abide by their law; He warned them against not ruling by what He has revealed.
d. Muslims were also commanded to abide by the revelation that came to Muhammad, peace be upon him, and were warned against defying its law.
e. After the Quran was revealed, People of the Scriptures were commanded to abide by Quran’s Law. This is the meaning of, ‘Muhaimin’. They have in their Books the description of Muhammad, peace be upon him, and part of their law conforms to the Quran, such as the law of stoning the adulterers. If the People of the Scriptures seek guidance, let them refer to parts of their Books that conform to the Quran and rule by those parts, but only rule by the Quran where it overrules and adds to the original copies of the Torah and the Injil.
f. If People of the Scriptures truly rule by their Books, they will believe in the sending of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, which was mentioned in their Books. And then, if they are sincere, they will act upon the Quran and its Law, part of which they already have in their Books.
g. The Ayat DO NOT say that Christians should believe in the NT or Trinity. This is a fabrication you came up with.
Therefore, these Ayat speak about acting by the law, not about Trinity. Why would you use these Ayat as a reference that the Trinity could still be valid today? The Quran you are using as evidence clearly says this about Trinity, {171. O people of the Scripture (Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allâh aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Îsâ (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allâh and His Word, (“Be!” — and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rûh) created by Him; so believe in Allâh and His Messengers. Say not: “Three (trinity)!” Cease! (It is) better for you. For Allâh is (the only) One Ilâh (God), glory is to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allâh is All‑Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs} (4:171).
Trinity is not found in the Bible, whether OT or NT. You still have not come up with a single verse or even multiple verses that clearly justify your creed. Instead, you need to bring complex sentences made up by other Christians that are full of conflict and confusion to prove a creed that is not found in the Bible to begin with. Then, having complete knowledge that what you use as justification for Trinity does not make any sense, you do what other Christians do, by saying, ‘Trinity is a mystery after all.’ Yes it is a mystery. In comparison, Tau’heed, the foundation of Islam, is found throughout the Quran in one sentence, ‘La Ilaha-Illa-llah’, meaning, ‘None has the right to be worshipped, except Allah.’ It is not a mystery.
Read the next part.......
| Comments |
|
in Genral Islamic forum by Ayman22, 01-02-12 07:37