Do we need scholars in order to understand the Bible?

[@Dalekzilla]

We DESPERATELY need biblical scholars like Dan. Look at the massive problems we have to this day from people who have little to no real understanding of biblical context and the original meaning of various scriptures, insisting that their narrow and INCORRECT interpretation of scripture should be taken literally by everyone.

[@bskec2177]

If you want the Bible to say what you want it to say, you don't need people with degrees.

[@waitstill7091]

This is not a Pastor with a M.Div. degree. If Christians want to learn about the Jewish Semitic text, or what Christians like to call the "Old Testament," they should seek out Semitic scholars or those fluent in the Semitic-speaking world.

[@thescoobymike]

Even then you still do. As Dan pointed out, we wouldn’t even have any translations into modern languages without the work of scholars.

[@langreeves6419]

There are seminaries that teach apologetics....where you can get a degree in learning how to interpret the Bible in a way that agrees with the school's theological beliefs.

[@bskec2177]

@@waitstill7091 Sure. But that's not what a lot of Christians want. They want the Bible to tell them that they are right in what they already think it says. Evangelicals like Ken Hamm are really clear that they don't care at all about the ancient hebrew, they just follow the inspired writings of the KJV. I think he justifies this by claiming that no one really understands ancient hebrew anymore, so any modern translations of it can't be trusted, but his version of the Bible is a divinely inspired translation, so it counts more than the older texts. It's kind of nuts - but that's my point, you can make the Bible say whatever you want it to say, as long as you don't care about context, accuracy or honesty.

[@kvjackal7980]

Well said.

[@GreatBigBore]

At age 13 I read Jesus telling me to gouge out my eyes and chop off my hands or go to hell (Matt 5:29-30). I lived in terror for all of my teen years and many of my adult years, begging God to let me live long enough to get up the courage to mutilate myself. I'm nearly 60 now and I am still emotionally scarred by my relationship with Jesus. I wish I'd had scholars for parents rather than hillbillies

[@pwnagraphic690]

I love tins channel. I’m no atheist and it doesn’t mKe me believe less just helps me understand everything better. Everything I doubted as a kid is now being answered for me. and I feel like a higher power has directed me towards that for whatever reason

[@QuinnPrice]

Wise people always stay open to insights from scholars and others. Emotionally driven people look for agreement with their beliefs.

[@waitstill7091]

This is not a Pastor with a M.Div. degree. If Christians want to learn about the Jewish Semitic text, or what Christians like to call the "Old Testament," they should seek out Semitic scholars or those fluent in the Semitic-speaking world.

[@EarlofSedgewick]

Everyone is emotionally driven, that's a main idea within Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. If people are not having their emotional needs met from interpersonal relationships, they will either find a way to control those emotions or they will keep searching for a "tribe". Plenty of the traffic on KZbin/social media is precisely this. Businesses understand this perfectly, and it would seem that many business-minded Christians are combining the two, just as they have done throughout the history of the USA. So I will ask you this: how can secularism (or even non-p9litical interpretations of The Bible) provide a similar sense of belonging? Is there a way for secular thinking to provide structure for those people who crave emotional nourishment? Is refutation of half-truths effective?

[@DoloresLehmann]

@@EarlofSedgewick "how can secularism (or even non-p9litical interpretations of The Bible) provide a similar sense of belonging?" It doesn't have to. What it can provide is a liberation from unhealthy tribalism, which then frees up energy to search for more meaningful forms of emotional nourishment.

[@LewisCoxIII]

We also need more biblical scholar popularizers. Thank you for doing this!

[@GodManCan]

Glad I found you Dan. I’ve learned so much from your content. Your analysis & insight of all the dogma out there is intriguing & fascinating. Keep up the great work!

[@JuanMPalacio]

I think what they’re arguing is about finding meaning in the Bible after it has been translated to their language by people with degrees.

[@ApPersonaNonGrata]

I was just about to say basically this.

[@mccsnackin]

There’s still an argument to be had that merely reading the words translated into your common tongue (in most cases english) does not provide you with accurate meaning of the text. Majority of Dan’s channel is predicated on people’s misrepresenting of the meaning of biblical passages.

[@JuanMPalacio]

@@mccsnackin Yes. That’s largely what Dan’s channel is about: correcting people who find some meaning in a Biblical passage that is incorrect.

[@ApPersonaNonGrata]

@@mccsnackin True. But I think it's possible that Dan misunderstood the comment. It might have been better to first address the accusation about wanting to make more atheists. Get that out of the way. And then say "it depends on what you mean by (the other part of that comment)". And then address the ways it would be true and ways it would be untrue.

[@JuanMPalacio]

I’m sort of being devil’s advocate because Dan didn’t really address the person’s argument. I think that anybody can find meaning in the Bible, but to understand the meaning intended by the Biblical authors they probably do need a college education.

[@vomeronasal]

The modern war on expertise continues unabated. Let the Great Endarkenment begin!

[@rainbowkrampus]

Modern? Anti-intellectualism runs throughout human history unabated. There have always been people who eschew progress and learning in favor of dogma.

[@vomeronasal]

@@rainbowkrampus I meant the modern "I did my own Facebook research" strain.

[@markb3786]

@@vomeronasal amen

[@toomanymoose]

We don't need people with degrees to do dentistry. We can just figure out root canals in our own homes.

[@billtomson5791]

And legalized drugs!

[@carlosvejar3938]

It's like you are in love with truth and facts

[@Fire-Toolz]

my answer to this title is yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes x100000 which is why i feel really sorry for most christians who are misunderstanding like...EVERYTHING

[@germanboy14]

Apologists: You need the holy spirt to understand the bible. That's why Christians now and in the past can't/couldnt agree on basic fundamentals like who God is, salvation etc

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

What do you mean those are pretty agreed-upon in the early church I don’t really know what you’re talking about?

[@germanboy14]

​@please the "early church" is not very early, when we see that even in Paul's letters he is arguing with other Christians who believed in justification by keeping the law or when he says that Peter wanted Gentiles to keep the law. Ignatius shows similar experiences, we have Jewish Christians who did not believe Jesus to be God. We even see different christologies within the Gospels or letters in the Nt. Mark has a low christology, the letter of James too, while the books attributed to John have a high christology. So what we today call "early church" is not early and does not include all Christians, Jewish Christians are not part of it. Even today we have unitarians and Trinitarians.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@MrMortal_Ra I agree. Not sure I ever said you did to begin with though.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@MrMortal_Ra oh OK I was a bit confused since I got notification for your reply. It’s pretty strange that KZbin will sometimes notify you for replies that aren’t target towards you but then it won’t notify you for actual people who reply to you. It’s pretty broken.

[@germanboy14]

@Mrmortal my comment was sarcasm. I once debated a Christian and he asked me if I prayed to God in order to really understand the bible. He was really serious about that because I challenged major fundamentals of todays Christianity and said that in my opinion they are all wrong when we start with the Torah/OT and apply its understanding on the Nt. Because they do it the other way around and also pre assume concepts like the trinity and read them into the Ot. And my point just is, if they are allegedly guided by the holy spirit, then why can't they agree on basic stuff...

[@ronjones1414]

If the King James Bible was good enough for St. Peter, it's good enough for me!

[@waitstill7091]

If the New Testament canon was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for Christians!

[@waitstill7091]

@@MrMortal_Ra You made my point. Good job! If Christians want to be like Jesus, they should consider converting to Judaism.

[@JuanMPalacio]

@@MrMortal_Ra I think they’re joking. Like saying “If Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer was good enough for J. Robert Oppenheimer, it’s good enough for me!”

[@jon4574]

@@MrMortal_Ra I think they're both being sarcastic. Only ignoramuses, idiots and liars believe Peter had the KJV or the NT canon existed within Jesus' lifetime.

[@germanboy14]

​​If Paul saw and met Jesus, got revelations by God, ascended to heaven and even says many times that he does not lie, we all should trust and follow him. 😂

[@minaguta4147]

That kind of comment exhibits only fear. The truth shall set you free. I think Dan is setting many people free, though where they land is up to them.

[@20quid]

Do we really need medical doctors in order to understand the affects of certain medicines on the human anatomy? Do we really need qualified meteorologists in order to know what the weather will be tomorrow? Do we really need trained architects in order to ensure that my 12th floor apartment doesn't end up in the basement one day?

[@waitstill7091]

This is not a Pastor with a M.Div. degree. If Christians want to learn about the Jewish Semitic text, or what Christians like to call the "Old Testament," they should seek out Semitic scholars or those fluent in the Semitic-speaking world.

[@Fire-Toolz]

these are all false equivalents. we're talking about something that was written thousands of years ago in languages people don't even speak anymore, that were spread around in cultures that the average person knows nothing about.

[@dhobonov]

@@Fire-Toolz Aren't you agreeing with @20quid? Pharmacology, anatomy, meterology, architecture and engineering are disciplines that the average person knows little about. How is it a false equivalency? Asking for a friend...

[@silverlightsinaugust2756]

No.

[@squiddwizzard8850]

If you're going to be prescribing medicine, doing surgery; which is what apologetics claim to be doing. Yes.

[@azurejester]

Technically correct, the very best kind of correct

[@NielMalan]

I've found great value in people with degrees in ancient languages explaining to me where apologists get things wrong.

[@sabretooth7819]

💯

[@exhumus]

"Dan wants to make more atheists" So better to misrepresent the Bible to suit what your want it to mean than to reconcile your faith with a historical/cultural intent of the text? Why read your Bible at all? Why not just go to church on Sunday and think what your pastor wants you to think. Oh wait...

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

I think what these people are talking about is the Bible in its current form already translated into English.

[@20quid]

But how do we know we have the most correct and accurate translation without continued scholarship and research?

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@20quid that’s a good point. And it’s the same for pretty much any field of expertise like do you have to rely on scientists to understand science and etc. you’re always relying on some type of expert for something.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@MrMortal_Ra that is true.

[@Dalekzilla]

​@@MrMortal_RaTotally agree with your statement overall, but please don't say 99 percent of Christians feel that way about homosexuality. Virtually NO progressive/liberal Christians feel that way, and we are a much bigger percentage than one percent.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@MrMortal_Ra well I would disagree there are some scholars who do suggest that that is the case. But there’s also a case to be made at the Bible does condemn all forms of homosexuality. And this distinction doesn’t really seem that clear in the text. I am a evangelical Christian however i’m a bit undecided when it comes to this issue.

[@thebook1889]

I know a few people that study both ancient Greek and Hebrew with out going to University, anyone that studies Torah learns Hebrew, but yeah a degree is a good thing but some people are just dedicated to learning with out official education.

[@pgbollwerk]

The scholarly requirement seems like a pretty good case for the Bible not being a great way for a god to communicate clearly to his human creations.

[@shgysk8zer0]

I was hoping for a more nuanced response about the Bible as it exists today, which is what I'd guess the thing was supposed to be addressing. I have to assume that it was about the "authority" of scripture and whether or not it has inherent meaning and how the educated and uneducated approach the text differently.

[@kvjackal7980]

♥️

[@redstatesaint]

If you do not need people with expertise in Biblical literature to mediate between you and god, if you think that having a mediator between god and yourself is a problem, then, truth be told, you don't need the Bible either to mediate between god and yourself. And, honestly, scholars such as Dan are not mediators. They are educators, teachers. They are here to contextualize what one takes for granted in one's everyday life as commonsensical. We need as many of them as possible. And a healthy, sustainable academic community so as to provide checks and balances.

[@j.prt.979]

I don’t think that’s what they were saying. They were saying that since we *do* have good translations of the Bible now, we do not need someone with a degree to get meaning from it.

[@KaiHenningsen]

Well ... I suspect speakers of modern Greek or Hebrew can actually understand some of those syllables. Likely not enough in Greek; I have no idea with modern Hebrew, but its very existence would have been impossible without scholars _(cough_ Eliezer Ben-Yehuda _cough),_ so ...

[@lde-m8688]

As an historian I agree 100%. Not that all history needs someone to know an ancient language, but the process of infestigation on primary sources, reading other critical works and putting that together in meaningful ways is important. We are doomed to repete history when we do not study it. I found that in the US, there has always been this kind of distrust toward academia. We grew up hearing stories about the guy who didn’t even finish 6th grade but created some huge business. We stopped seeing this as maybe the wide opportunities available to seeing it as education being unnecessary. No, intelligence and education are not the same and you can have one without the other. But it is this kind of thinking that leads to denial of science, climate change, vaccines and the rise of conspiracy theories. It is these thing that lead directly to these videos of misinformation that Dan does his videos in response to every day.

[@MrD92684]

As my late mother used to say: God did not fax the bible.

[@k98killer]

The Information Age is doing a lot of damage to the traditional academic hierarchy, though, so the statement is likely to be true in the future.

[@tim57243]

But does Dan want more atheists? I enjoy Dan's explanations regardless of what Dan's agenda about atheists might be, and I agree that bringing in relevant formal education helps enormously.

[@SimonDaumMusic]

Not just did the Bible fell from heaven ex nihilo in English, but also did God bless only those with a inerrant understanting of the Bible, who, in unanimity with themselves, have decided to define it this way, which also makes the Bible univocal according to their self-vocality.

[@interloc1290]

“Life doesn’t require bibles to parse or find meaning within. OP just wants more Christians” There are better arguments then “NO YOU” like I just childishly did but kinda need degrees to understand them.

[@thescoobymike]

The good part is that we don’t have to take a scholar’s word for it. As long as they cite all their sources then we can look at those and examine it ourselves. Learning about what methods they use to parse through that data is also quite helpful.

[@Nessa2Bea]

Not them thinking Moses spoke New International Version 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@allanp3065]

I'm constantly told you need the Holy Spirit to understand the Bible. Human thinking cannot understand it... I agree with Dan though

[@omaralonsolopez2593]

I'm curious if Dan has ever answered this, but does he speak all three of those languages? How and where did he learn them?

[@ihatemacs9]

in previous videos he has addressed his background, qualifications, and fields of study. i also appreciate that he is not an evangelist or apologist, who will try to defend doctrine. But instead someone who is trying to explain history

[@gufu21]

I think Dan badly missed the point of the comment. It wasn't about whether one can read ancient Hebrew and Greek; it's about whether one can find meaning in the Bible (that has already been translated in a language you can read) without a degree. And really, I think the answer isn't black-and-white, yes-or-no. It's both, depending on what you mean. If one wishes to understand as closely as possible the intent of the texts' original authors, then yes, extratextual scholarship is required. But on the other hand, ordinary and unschooled people have been finding personal meaning and comfort in the Bible for hundreds of years. And even if they don't fully understand all of an author's original meaning, they sure understand some of it: it doesn't require a degree to find meaning in "do unto others what you would have them do unto you." In Dan's own religious tradition, Joseph Smith was able to find profound personal meaning in James 1:5, despite never having met someone we'd consider a biblical scholar. Also, the question isn't whether people can unerringly find what we consider the "correct" meaning according to modern historical-critical methods (and scholars don't all agree on what those "correct" meanings are). It's whether they can find meaning at all, which is undoubtably true.

[@roarblast7332]

I would agree except for the comment about wanting more atheists. Theism is a position of belief. If you are using a text that isn't reliable to come to conclusions about the nature of reality, you do so on extremely shakey ground. And you could easily end up with good answers to bad questions, which is the worst possible thing that can happen.

[@kevinwells9751]

If learning about your thing makes fewer people believe it then what you believe is wrong. I would think believers would want to know as much as possible about the history and context of the book that they believe to be the literal Word of God. On the other hand that's what made me an atheist so they aren't actually wrong about this

[@sigma1328]

Please do a collab with religion for breakfast.

[@ericlipton7640]

That comment is never about “understanding” the Bible. That comment is about not questioning their interpretation of the Bible. I don’t trust people afraid of questions

[@tawneenielsen4080]

But wait... schooling is of the devil. Kidding! I appreciate Dan's degree and willingness "to understand scripture on its own terms."

[@matthewparsons9407]

Technically, you don't need degrees, but you do need the education.

[@Sweatrgodd.]

I want to say they probably meant dogma and not linguistics.

[@sydneylamb2944]

Sir, do you believe the unintelligent person has no value when interpreting the word of God?

[@EricMcLuen]

Unfortunately translation is as much an art form as an exact science. This can be seen in translations of modern texts. The meanings and usages of wordsmcan change in a few years let alone millenia.

[@Fire-Toolz]

true, & scholars understand this, & compensate for it. half of what dan talks about is what words meant anciently vs. now.

[@DrWiki-po1hk]

I think that's a case more so on linguistics but valid point nonetheless.

[@chrispysaid]

What a silly thing to say, it's almost as if this commenter didn't bother thinking through their stance before beliving in it all the way. Like it's a pattern of behavior.

[@AKASquared]

Translations were made before the modern system of degrees existed.

[@DrWiki-po1hk]

Yeah, and all of them are wrong or outdated. Good job buddy.

[@probablynotmyname8521]

I think you are wilfully missing the point of the comment Dan.

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

Nothing against Biblical scholars, but any modern Hebrew speaker can read the Bible relatively fluently, and better than 95% of scholars, those who aren't also fluent in modern Hebrew. Fluency is an incredible tool, and while it is misleading in about 1 in 10 cases, where modern usage is different than ancient, it provides hidden insights 9 times out of 10.

[@rainbowkrampus]

A proper reading requires context though, not just an ability to comprehend the words on the page. You're not going to get that merely from language proficiency.

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

@@rainbowkrampus You get that by reading the text all the way though once, which gives enough context to figure out nearly all ambiguities. The one that remain are indeed clarified by looking at the scholarship, but there are a handful of places where the entire scholarship gets it wrong with as close to 100% certainty as this type of endeavor can reach, and this is infuriating.

[@rainbowkrampus]

@@annaclarafenyo8185 I'm not sure you're fully appreciating what I mean when I say context here. We're talking about people who believed bathroom demons would cling to you after relieving yourself and that, to prevent the demon from jumping to your sexual partner, you needed to walk around for at least a half hour before intercourse. Reading the books gives you very little insight into the culture of the authors and so you cannot possibly claim to have understood what they wrote from merely reading. You need historical and cultural understanding and you cannot get that from the books.

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

@@rainbowkrampus The scholars got it from the books. The differences in mindset between ancient and modern cultures is WAY overblown, especially after the enlightenment created this fetishistic idea that we've advanced so much. You can intuit nearly all the ancient ridiculous beliefs from the text itself. The notions of contamination after using the toilet is perfectly natural, considering you can easily give a UTI to your sexual partner after relieving yourself and not washing up properly, and many of the bacteria do migrate or die after a half-hour. Actually, we also believe in demons that jump around today, we just call the demons "bacteria". The more ridiculous ancient idea is that the blood is the substance of the soul, which leads to ritual impurity without a charitable modern interpretation. And you don't need a scholar to point it out, the blood thing is explicitly written in Leviticus.

[@QURAN-GOD-Guidance]

Nup, we dont need any scholar to understand the Verses of GOD. He knows what is in our hearts and He guides whom he wills to the straight path.

[@DrWiki-po1hk]

Press play to watch the video that I know you haven't watched and stop fooling yourself.

[@stephenleblanc4677]

and, you might also need to know what ex nihilo means.

[@bonnieberger7175]

Or, he wants well educated people who choose Christianity, choose to understand our faith and choose to look for wisdom rather than answers.

[@waitstill7091]

This is not a Pastor with a M.Div. degree. If Christians want to learn about the Jewish Semitic text, or what Christians like to call the "Old Testament," they should seek out Semitic scholars or those fluent in the Semitic-speaking world.

[@jimmythompson1979]

​@@waitstill7091dude, we get it already! You're very good at copying and pasting. Try an original thought.

[@waitstill7091]

@@jimmythompson1979 Glad to hear you get it!

[@roqsteady5290]

Yeah, but that poster almost certainly didn't mean that. S/he meant that after it has been translated you don't need scholars to interpret what it says, much the same as other books.

[@dhobonov]

Your assertion says something completely different than what the OP clearly states in clear, simple language. Just sayin...

[@Shake0615]

No, you very much need the work of scholars to understand and interpret what it says. 2000+ years of scientific, cultural, linguistic, and social development separate us from the text. To assume that the translated words carry the same meaning across that many centuries is not just naive - it’s arrogant.

[@roqsteady5290]

@@Shake0615 Humans haven't changed much: “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” (KJV) doesn't need much interpretation, does it? Incidentally, Thucydides writing about the Peloponnesian war at around the same time as many bible passages were written is perfectly comprehensible to (educated) modern readers. The only reason the bible has this reputation of needing clarifying is because apologists are trying to conceal what it actually says (which is horrible) and pretend it is allegorical or whatever.

[@kimberlyh2842]

Wrong. We need faith, honesty, sincerity toward God and The Holy Spirit to understand The Bible.

[@DrWiki-po1hk]

"Nuh-uh wrong" Press play and learn something today, Kimberly.

[@Darisiabgal7573]

But somehow, Dan, you bought a windbreaker from someone does not know how to Write "UNIVERSITY".😂

[@Fire-Toolz]

??? it's spelled correctly

[@Darisiabgal7573]

@@Fire-Toolz If you watch the video reflected off of a mirror😎

[@jasonanderson_PA]

fine, you need expertise to translate the languages, but do you need a degree to interpret its meaning? translation ≠ interpretation

[@DanLink9000]

Well, cultural and historical context would help with that interpretation, right?

[@jasonanderson_PA]

@@DanLink9000 of course, but it's not the only skill needed. i see the translation as more of a science and interpretation as more of an art or talent. and some people are born with that natural talent.

[@Fire-Toolz]

pretty much, yea

[@dhobonov]

That's what i thought until Dan taught my grandchildren and me about paronomastic infinitives. It seems that translation + linguistics better facilitates interpretation.

[@rainbowkrampus]

He was pretty specific about using the word scholar here. He's referring to the people who made this information accessible in the first place. That includes piecing together the proper historical context from which to derive interpretive meaning. These thongs go hand in hand. You can't just have one or the other.

[@chumpchangechamp3643]

The truth of the meaning of the book, (which Dan has not a clue what the meaning of this work is explaining) is that it is an explanation of how we evolved thru nature. So therefore the meaning can always be rediscovered and you don't need a scholar, only a hunger to learn about nature. A person could do his own independent study of nature today and render the same conclusions that the Bible is explaining. Most people have not come to understand a single line of this book, starting with "in the beginning", from there Dan completely misreads the text like everyone else, so Dan is actually just as lost as the people he thinks he is correcting.

[@thundercatt5265]

Spiritual leaders are much better than scholars, the spirit or study of dark energy consciousness which is a field of science often neglected,they have no openings for a degree to be earned..but for instance consciousness is a part of evolution that requires millions of years to develop, something Civilized man was denied thru a foreign intervention ,not of this earth, disrupting the evolutionary timeline as far as modern human beings ,"of the dirt" = neanderthal/denisovan a creature of the earth converted into modern man ,in less than 500,000 years old is not a natural creation of the earth''s evolutionary timeline science is the language of the infinite all ... like splinting Adam's/Atoms = proton/neutron/electron or State of matter solid/liquid/gas or (state of being/Conscious) = dark energy consciousness is a state of being life is sacred and divine not religious in nature, religion is a principality that man wrestles against his brother with, that slows down evolution, while Universal law, = love thy neighbors promotes evolution of a species as a whole ,and all the religion humanity needs ,our missing link is celestial not terrestrial in nature that is why we are so different than all the other animals , that was not the infinite all's image we were made in

[@QURAN-GOD-Guidance]

QURAN 87:17 While the Hereafter is better and more enduring. QURAN 2:136 Say, ˹O believers,˺ “We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us; and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and his descendants; and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and other prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them. And to Allah we all submit.” QURAN 3:64 Say, "O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you - that we will not worship except Allah and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of Allah ." But if they turn away, then say, "Bear witness that we are Muslims." QURAN 3:199 And indeed, among the People of the Scripture are those who believe in Allah and what was revealed to you and what was revealed to them, humbly submissive to Allah. They do not exchange the verses of Allah for a small price. Those will have their reward with their Lord. Indeed, Allah is swift in account