Oral Debate between Ayman and Edip...
-
Salaam Afridi,
Thanks for sharing the link. The author tries to present an exclusive interpretation, meaning his context reading is the only true possible one, I am more careful on this. Also his interpretation of fitna is his own understanding. I do not agree with its totality, nor with understanding Saqar as 'hell' in the traditional sense.
When I observe certain interesting occurences of 19 multiples, as a scientist I can't dismiss them. I do dismiss all the superstition and religious nonsense that is created around it. Also the zeal people attacking or defending it is to me an emotional and religious approach to the whole debate, obscuring the scientific which is needed to get a real objective answer.
Dear Ayman, I always appreciated your comments and ideas, but when it comes to this subject, many times I notice there is more focussed on the persons involved and how they act and think, then to the real facts or observations made in the long run. Sadly this is also, because to many amateurs and frauds have been, and are involved on the '19-side' whom many approach it as a means to salvation.
I will observe the debates and hope emotions are left aside.
-
Peace Arnold,
What good an interlocking system can bring when the religion has been corrupted altogether? And if code19 purifies the whole quranic text would we then be able to get the same result for every matter we dispute? Does quran mention anything regarding how to purify quranic text using code19 or should we solve the puzzle according to our own liking, like we try to find the method of salat from quran?
Peace brother,
The 'religion' has been corrupted due to wrong approaches, not by the text itself. As for certain outcomes of 19 that could be reliable, the debate must be between scientists to review a logical and rational result wherein all results and ideas are reflected. I think WE, you and me shouldn't do anything. These matters should be for specialists, not for people who aren't qualified for this.
It is like a cow, the farmer is only interested in getting the best milk, meat and leather out of the animal. Only a scientist is interested in the DNA, and is the only one qualified to research it because of his/her training. Because we know the DNA of the cow, doesn't make the cow more or less cow, it remains as it is. I believe the same counts for the Qur'an. Sadly we had to many mad scientists with Wikipedia knowledge screwing around.
-
Peace Arnold,
Thank you for your comments and it is good to see you participate in this important discussion.
If making exclusive statements means excluding the possibility that the count of 19 talked about in 7431 is ONLY a ?fitna?, in other words an "ayat"/sign or anything else then you are right and I am making an exclusive statement. Now what ?fitna? means is another question for which I am not making any exclusive statements.
On the other hand, Edip is excluding that the count of 19 is only a ?fitna? and he is making an exclusive statement that it is instead a sign (?ayat?). He is essentially completely disregarding the word ?fitna? in 7431 and replacing it with ?sign?/?ayat?. Unlike my non-exclusive approach to what ?fitna? could mean, by choosing the title of the debate as ?Nineteen a Fitna or a Sign? and leaving ?fitna? untranslated Edip has exposed his dogmatic approach and has cornered himself in an untenable position. To him it doesn?t matter what ?fitna? means. So unlike me, he has excluded you from any logical discussion on the meaning of the word ?fitna?. He doesn?t read the word ?fitna? in 7431 and he has abrogated it with the word sign/?ayat?.
As for the meaning of "fitna", even in all your suggested far and wide meanings, the word ?fitna? is never said to mean ?sign?. More on the meaning of ?fitna? later. I got to go now.
Peace,
Ayman
Was it Bukhari or Khalifa who find extra versuse first i think khalif tried ti justified Bukhari hmm
http//www.quran.org/9128.htm
http//www.bahai-library.com/essays/nineteen.html
peace -
- The Christians and Jews whose doubts about the authenticity of the Quran is removed through the number 19.
Peace,
EdipPeace everyone
I want to clarify to Edip and all 19ers that most of us who reject the 19ers is because of the removing of 9-128 and 129; otherwise, I believe that one of the quarnic sign is Code 19.Thank you and may God Lead the real Truth Seekers to the Ultimate Truth.
-
Peace Arnold,
Sorry for the delayed continuation of my response.
For example, to make Fitna to mean only trial/temptation, while this a more later developed meaning to my knowledge. Fatana means to purify gold, to burn rubbish in a fire to clean up the encampment.
It is highly unlikely that the meanings you gave are older given how extremely specific they are. Usually, etymology has its root in a general meaning that then branches out later into more specific ones. Have you checked the occurrences of ?fitna? in the great reading to see if in any of them it means ?to purify gold, to burn rubbish in a fire to clean up the encampment?? I checked all the occurrences and none of the contexts suggest those specific meanings. If you disagree, then please point to even a single passage where the above specific meanings are suggested by the context.
For example, in 653 the past tense verb ?fatana? clearly means ?tested/tried? or ?tempted? and not ?purified gold? or ?burned rubbish in a fire to clean up the encampment? and not even ?purified? or ?burned?. In the few instances in the great reading where the term ?fitna? means punishment, one can see that even when punishment can be the meaning, undergoing a difficult trial is still the common concept. This is the same way when in English one says ?this is a trying event? to mean this is a difficult or painful event. On the other hand, burning or purifying is not the common concept in all the other occurrences.
An-Nar means Fire, but also meant to mark something as was done with cattle, which were marked using red-hot heated stamps.
Again, this is a very specialized meaning. It is highly unlikely that it is an older meaning than the more generalized one. Again going through all the occurrences of the word ?nar? in the great reading, none of them suggests the meaning of ?mark?. If you disagree, then please point to even a single passage where the meaning of ?mark? is suggested by the context (you can?t use 7431 as a circular argument).
Why for example can't the verse also says
7431. And we didn't make the owners/companions/as-haba of the (burned)marking/fire/alnnari except those that control/mala-ikatan ; and we didn't make their count EXCEPT AS A "FITNA/purification/purifying method for those who have been unappreciative...
So it can be said the verse can thus indicate the 19 is a purifying method and controls the purity of the Qur'anic text. From a scientific point of view, it is logical a sort of interlocking system is present within a text that makes the claim to come from the First Cause.You criticize exclusive statements but then you turn around and try to make the verse fit the idea of your exclusive statement that ?19 is a purifying method and controls the purity of the Qur'anic text?. You have essentially started out from this exclusive statement and worked backwards and spread your net wide to find any remote meanings such as ?purify? and ?mark? that would make 7431 fit this exclusive statement. Thus, you ignore the fact that the word ?quran? is not even mentioned at all in the entire chapter and what is mentioned are the unappreciative. So if you really believe that those are the correct meanings and you want to use them then you should say ?19 is a purifying method and controls the purity of those who have been unappreciative?. But this of course, doesn?t make any sense.
I agree with Ayman that the 19-code has become a religion on its own, but how people react to it isn't the touchstone, the only thing that counts if there is a proof for the claim or not. But to say all '19-ers' only care about 19 and loose focus on the Qur'an itself is a generalizing and thus wrong claim.
I disagree. 7431 is about how counting 19 is related to the people and there is no mention at all of the ?quran?/reading. So it is 100% about how people react. This is why Khalifa had to go all the way back to 744 and strain to make it appear that it is talking about the great reading being purified. Khalifa was not stupid and he probably tried 7431 but he knew that 7431 couldn?t be made to have anything to do with the great reading.
And Khalifa isn't also the real touchstone anymore. Can we obtain a sort of pattern with 19?
No, we absolutely can?t. Have you got a pattern yourself before asking such questions? I guarantee that the answer is no because you seem to me like an honest person. The only sort of pattern people claim is by conducting trial and error using various methods and hiding the failed trials and presenting the successful ones or copying the results of people who did so before them.
That is the question, leave the ' discoverer' out of this, since it almost the same method as how anti-islamists use the hadith-stories on the prophet Muhammed to discredit the Qur'an, saying; 'a murdering pedophile cannot be a prophet'.
There is no such thing as ?discoverer? because you and no one else have scientifically proven any discovery. Indeed as a person, I agree that we can leave Khalifa out. However, read my posts. I only bring Khalifa in and criticize him as a ?translator? because he messed up every single passage that he translated and where he claims that it is either about him or his invented Code 19. Are you saying that we shouldn?t criticize Yusufali and any translator in their capacity as professional translators?
What are Qur'anists claims on this? We say neglect the hadith and judge the Qur'an on the text itself. Same counts for 19, forget Khalifa and his methods, and just look at what evidence can be gained objectively, for or against.
But there is ZERO evidence for a Code 19 in the great reading. All the evidence is tied to the methods that Code 19 hunters use. Change the method and the code vanishes into thin air. So we certainly have to look at the methods. You are pushing for a scientific approach but you are ignoring the fact that ?method? is more important than ?result? in science. Take this advice from a real scientist METHOD IS IMPORTANT.
To say 19 is just a temptation is for me also a weird claim, since I cannot believe God plays tricks on people. There is no function in this and would create a philosophical contradiction with a rational God's image.
Look inside you and you will see that what you are saying is false. Are you saying that you have never been tempted your entire life? Who do you think gave you your wealth that is a temptation for you? Who do you think created beautiful women who are a temptation for you? Etc. The temptation is not a trick, it is a test and the test is rational. How we handle the test can be irrational but this irrationality is from us and has nothing to do with the god.
These discussions have lost their scientific objective merit. It is like watching Richard Dawkins and Alistair McGrath debating. Both representing the 2 extremes, wherein objectivity is lost due to emotions and attachement to the chosen side of the debate.
I think that you have to let go of your own emotional attachment to Code 19 first and present your own scientific evidence from an objective point of view before making any claims about scientific merit.
Al-Tabari gives the meaning how it is understood by classical theology to mean in the Qu'ran, not directly what the original meaning was before the Qur'an.
"The word Fitnah means originally smelting of gold to check its purity, also to throw things into the fire to purify it from its rubbish."
Page I-55. Qur?an translation and commentary by Muhammed Ali, 2004 2nd edition. Page 15,
?Its basic meaning is to melt silver or gold in fire so that it gets pure (Taj Ul-roos), so Fitna means to test or examine by heating, or by temptation, trials, affliction or disease. It also means, sedition or deviation. It further means to show the reality of a thing. Al-Fattana means the touchstone on which gold or silver is rubbed to test its quality.?
Exposition of the Holy Qur?an, Mafhum Al-Qur?an by G.A. Parwez. 1990.
And lie melted it with fire, (T,) or put it into the fire, (S, Msb,) namely, gold, (T, S, Msb,) and silver, in order to separate, or distinguish, (T, Msb,) the bad from the good, (T,) or the good fromn the bad, (Msb,) or to see what was its goodness. (.)
Volume 6, page 118 Arabic-English Lexicon by Edward William Lane 2003 2nd reprint.
See online
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume6/00000118.pdf
The original meaning of Fatana is to burn, to test silver/gold's purity and/or to make silver/gold pure from any impurities, from this later on the meaning of testing & affliction was created.But you are not reading the definition from the dictionary carefully. Even the quotes that you brought make it clear that the meaning is to ?test?. How the testing is done (heating, temptation, afflictions) or why it is done (to distinguish or separate the good from the bad) is another matter that doesn?t change the basic and more general and clearly older meaning of ?test/trial?.
The 'religion' has been corrupted due to wrong approaches, not by the text itself. As for certain outcomes of 19 that could be reliable, the debate must be between scientists to review a logical and rational result wherein all results and ideas are reflected. I think WE, you and me shouldn't do anything. These matters should be for specialists, not for people who aren't qualified for this.
This settles it then. I am a scientist and I am ready to debate any other real scientist on this numerology of Code 19. Until then, you shouldn?t base believe in Code 19 numerology on your unscientific approach which ignores the methods and focuses on the results.
It is like a cow, the farmer is only interested in getting the best milk, meat and leather out of the animal. Only a scientist is interested in the DNA, and is the only one qualified to research it because of his/her training. Because we know the DNA of the cow, doesn't make the cow more or less cow, it remains as it is. I believe the same counts for the Qur'an. Sadly we had to many mad scientists with Wikipedia knowledge screwing around.
Your analogy is not scientific because DNA is an inherent property of the cow and cows are built from their DNA blueprint. On the other hand, you have not proven that Code 19 is an inherent property of the great reading. Also, the great reading certainly cannot be built starting from Code 19. A more appropriate analogy for Code 19 is someone claiming that when cows relieve themselves cow manure comes in multiples of 19 grams. So they conduct trial and error of weighing the cow manure and only present the successful trials where they got a 19 divisible manure weight and hide the ones where they didn?t get a 19 divisible manure weight. They then present this as scientific evidence to some na?ve people. Those people then turn around and lecture real scientists on how they should forget about the method!
PS If anyone thinks that my example is blasphemous then congratulations you are idolizing Code 19.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace Ayman,
It is highly unlikely that the meanings you gave are older given how extremely specific they are. Usually, etymology has its root in a general meaning that then branches out later into more specific ones. Have you checked the occurrences of ?fitna? in the great reading to see if in any of them it means ?to purify gold, to burn rubbish in a fire to clean up the encampment?? I checked all the occurrences and none of the contexts suggest those specific meanings. If you disagree, then please point to even a single passage where the above specific meanings are suggested by the context.
For example, in 653 the past tense verb ?fatana? clearly means ?tested/tried? or ?tempted? and not ?purified gold? or ?burned rubbish in a fire to clean up the encampment? and not even ?purified? or ?burned?. In the few instances in the great reading where the term ?fitna? means punishment, one can see that even when punishment can be the meaning, undergoing a difficult trial is still the common concept. This is the same way when in English one says ?this is a trying event? to mean this is a difficult or painful event. On the other hand, burning or purifying is not the common concept in all the other occurrences.
There are mutliple passages where purifying fits as the testing is meant to purify the true intentions from the false. When I have time, we can check some verses.
Again, this is a very specialized meaning. It is highly unlikely that it is an older meaning than the more generalized one. Again going through all the occurrences of the word ?nar? in the great reading, none of them suggests the meaning of ?mark?. If you disagree, then please point to even a single passage where the meaning of ?mark? is suggested by the context (you can?t use 7431 as a circular argument).
Again there are mutliple verses that me refer to being marked with consequence, which is represented by fire burning away the potential for further development. But that discussion is for later.
You criticize exclusive statements but then you turn around and try to make the verse fit the idea of your exclusive statement that ?19 is a purifying method and controls the purity of the Qur'anic text?. You have essentially started out from this exclusive statement and worked backwards and spread your net wide to find any remote meanings such as ?purify? and ?mark? that would make 7431 fit this exclusive statement. Thus, you ignore the fact that the word ?quran? is not even mentioned at all in the entire chapter and what is mentioned are the unappreciative. So if you really believe that those are the correct meanings and you want to use them then you should say ?19 is a purifying method and controls the purity of those who have been unappreciative?. But this of course, doesn?t make any sense.
I brought it up in the discussion as there many possible meanings of the words in the verses involved, and I saw exclusive statements being made which only represented a limited view on the verses. As the post said, why for example can't it mean something like this? It is not an exclusive statement but a question. I hope you can see the difference and also the intention of the post instead of smelling a maybe 19 idea and then make accusations.
If my suggestion is correct or incorrect is something future reflection decides. Untill then I observe the discussion, but as always I take your comments seriously.
No, we absolutely can?t. Have you got a pattern yourself before asking such questions? I guarantee that the answer is no because you seem to me like an honest person. The only sort of pattern people claim is by conducting trial and error using various methods and hiding the failed trials and presenting the successful ones or copying the results of people who did so before them.
No, I haven't, I have only observed many claims and counter-arguments and deduce the best conclusion from there on. But I have seen that amateur-claims were used to refute the whole idea of a possibility of 19, which to me is a dishonest and unscientific way to debunk something.
There is no such thing as ?discoverer? because you and no one else have scientifically proven any discovery. Indeed as a person, I agree that we can leave Khalifa out. However, read my posts. I only bring Khalifa in and criticize him as a ?translator? because he messed up every single passage that he translated and where he claims that it is either about him or his invented Code 19. Are you saying that we shouldn?t criticize Yusufali and any translator in their capacity as professional translators?
Agreed.
But there is ZERO evidence for a Code 19 in the great reading. All the evidence is tied to the methods that Code 19 hunters use. Change the method and the code vanishes into thin air. So we certainly have to look at the methods. You are pushing for a scientific approach but you are ignoring the fact that ?method? is more important than ?result? in science. Take this advice from a real scientist METHOD IS IMPORTANT.
Hold your horses. I referred to Khalifa's methods as they are completely contradicting one another and he was a complete amateur. Till now I have only seen amateur claims being refuted and debunked. This was my point. I want to see a scientific test study where a main method could be created that give constant validate results. If this can't be produced, then it will be clear 19 is false. I never said method itself is not important. I have studied Biochemistry and Microbiology, so you aren't the only REAL scientist here.
So take the word from another real scientist To much emotion is involved here and amateur-claims used to debunk a whole concept. This is unscientific.
Look inside you and you will see that what you are saying is false. Are you saying that you have never been tempted your entire life? Who do you think gave you your wealth that is a temptation for you? Who do you think created beautiful women who are a temptation for you? Etc. The temptation is not a trick, it is a test and the test is rational. How we handle the test can be irrational but this irrationality is from us and has nothing to do with the god.
You translate the word as 'temptation', which I do not believe presents the term fatana correctly. Testing to purify the real intentions and potentials is a better rendition which also gives a different intention to the things involved. Wealth is a good and blessed thing when it is gained in the correct way and spend in the correct way. Easy roads to wealth using for example stealing is in reality a reflection of a lack of confidence and empathy and not having a faith in future results. It is a mix of pure survival instinct that directs a person into being dominant over others to be the strongest. It is a subconcious fear of shortage and to be low on the social scale.
My fiancee is breathtaking beautiful, but she is not a temptation for me. Other beautiful women are no real temptation as I am not interested in short gained results (dunya), I have learned to think in long term results (akhirat).
In both cases, the fitna is to learn to rise above the simple instincts of survival and direct them yourself instead of being directed by them.
Most people who believe in 19 believe it is a sort of path to salvation, thus it represents again a form of the inner desire of survival using the least amount of effort. This is always the main reason for people creating religion and the concept of salvation. This attracted all the loonies to it as they try to abuse it for their own inner need of being of importance, the so-called messenger/messiah syndrom. For them indeed it is a clear testing stone, as their lack of selfcontrol and confidence is showed by 19. On this agree with you.
I think that you have to let go of your own emotional attachment to Code 19 first and present your own scientific evidence from an objective point of view before making any claims about scientific merit.
I think I have shown the least amount of emotion in this discussion. You cannot deny the fact that no real specialist has been involved to give a real serious go to see if their is a scientific method to be created around 19. Only amateurs who are easy to debunk and attack.
I am no mathematician on a high level, so I'm careful to make any claims. This is why I am more focussed on the cosmology, philosophical and theological side of the Qur'an since I am trained in those professions as I have studied Biochemistry, Physics, Microbiology, Philosophy and Theology on college level.
This settles it then. I am a scientist and I am ready to debate any other real scientist on this numerology of Code 19. Until then, you shouldn?t base believe in Code 19 numerology on your unscientific approach which ignores the methods and focuses on the results.
Good, and I hope in the future we find another person with the same degrees in mathematics and Arabic language to investigate.
As for the rest, you do not know what I believe or what I base it on, so be more careful in your 'advices' as I never said results stand above method. This is what you believed after misreading my post due, what I believe is involved, your clear emotional bias to the whole subject. I have seen the same kneejerk responses with Edip on the opposite side.
If you dislike me sitting in the middle, this is not my problem. But do not try to twist it into being unscientific, since objectivity and openmindness with scepticism towards both sides is the scientific method.
-
Arnold said
So take the word from another real scientist To much emotion is involved here and amateur-claims used to debunk a whole concept. This is unscientific.You keep impressing upon others about you being a scientist.Why dont you produce something more for us to discern from Aymans post instead of making fanciful denial statments that doesnt sink .The analogy of your rebuttals are like composites that looks like a metal but floats on water.
-
what does 19 have to do wit numberology. Im a numberologist. From what I know is the number 19 is a karmic number.
What was Rashid full name and birthdate. Who knows, he may have the number 19 in his profile.
And again, if those two verses was removed, what harm would it really do, or what message will be missing from Quran?
And aymen said they use differnt methods, how many methods? How do you know that each method is not a key?
And also who is it for to protect the quran? Is it for us humans to protect it by removing them verses and the 19? Or is it for God to protect it?
-
what does 19 have to do wit numberology. Im a numberologist. From what I know is the number 19 is a karmic number.
What was Rashid full name and birthdate. Who knows, he may have the number 19 in his profile.
And again, if those two verses was removed, what harm would it really do, or what message will be missing from Quran?
And aymen said they use differnt methods, how many methods? How do you know that each method is not a key?
And also who is it for to protect the quran? Is it for us humans to protect it by removing them verses and the 19? Or is it for God to protect it?
Peace
It is protected by GODWe have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it It is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise
-
Peace Supernaut,
you saidBut what will help you determine if something is true or false? I suppose you ignore what you can't determine to be true or false. That approach will never satisfy me though.
You can determine most things to be true or false. You just have to verify them through yours or someone else's experiences.
People think that prostrating prevents us from doing bad deeds. I know that to be false because I know people who prostrate all the time but do bad deeds anyway.
You don't NEED to know where a certain piece of information comes from, because you are looking for the truth.
Since you pointed out a logical fallacy, you should be familiar with the one called "ad hominem." It's a fallacy because WHO says something doesn't matter. What matters is WHAT is said.You can't say something is true because God said it.
Which brings us back to my original point - it is the content that matters, not the source.
-
Peace Arnold,
There are mutliple passages where purifying fits as the testing is meant to purify the true intentions from the false. When I have time, we can check some verses.
Yes the effect of the test can be to purify but the effect doesn't change the meaning from "test" to "purify". The basic meaning is still to test.
Again there are mutliple verses that me refer to being marked with consequence, which is represented by fire burning away the potential for further development. But that discussion is for later.
A fire can scar a person but this doesn't mean that "fire" means "scar". You are again confusing the meaning of the cause with that of the effect.
I brought it up in the discussion as there many possible meanings of the words in the verses involved, and I saw exclusive statements being made which only represented a limited view on the verses. As the post said, why for example can't it mean something like this? It is not an exclusive statement but a question. I hope you can see the difference and also the intention of the post instead of smelling a maybe 19 idea and then make accusations.
Yes, I saw that this is a question and this is why I answered why it can't mean that. However, before hearing any answer, you jumped to the following preconceived conclusion
From a scientific point of view, it is logical a sort of interlocking system is present within a text that makes the claim to come from the First Cause.
I apologize if I sounded too critical but jumping to a preconceived fancy conclusion that doesn't really mean anything is not scientific.
If my suggestion is correct or incorrect is something future reflection decides. Untill then I observe the discussion, but as always I take your comments seriously.
I totally agree with suggesting questions to be considered but meanwhile we shouldn't jump or even suggest any baseless conclusions.
No, I haven't, I have only observed many claims and counter-arguments and deduce the best conclusion from there on. But I have seen that amateur-claims were used to refute the whole idea of a possibility of 19, which to me is a dishonest and unscientific way to debunk something.
The burden of proof is on those who want to prove a positive, the presence of a code. So amateur claims trying to prove a negative are irrelevant anyway. I told Code 19 hunters how they can easily prove the existence of the code. They simply have to document all their trials and share both the successful and failed trials and then we can see the ratio. This is all. It is not rocket science. All it requires is intellectual honesty. Unfortunately, NONE of them came forward.
Hold your horses. I referred to Khalifa's methods as they are completely contradicting one another and he was a complete amateur. Till now I have only seen amateur claims being refuted and debunked. This was my point. I want to see a scientific test study where a main method could be created that give constant validate results. If this can't be produced, then it will be clear 19 is false. I never said method itself is not important. I have studied Biochemistry and Microbiology, so you aren't the only REAL scientist here. So take the word from another real scientist To much emotion is involved here and amateur-claims used to debunk a whole concept. This is unscientific.
Great. So tell this to Code 19 hunters and good luck getting an answer. They will most likely give you the same answer that they gave me when I asked them to properly document their trials.
You translate the word as 'temptation', which I do not believe presents the term fatana correctly. Testing to purify the real intentions and potentials is a better rendition which also gives a different intention to the things involved. Wealth is a good and blessed thing when it is gained in the correct way and spend in the correct way. Easy roads to wealth using for example stealing is in reality a reflection of a lack of confidence and empathy and not having a faith in future results. It is a mix of pure survival instinct that directs a person into being dominant over others to be the strongest. It is a subconcious fear of shortage and to be low on the social scale.
My fiancee is breathtaking beautiful, but she is not a temptation for me. Other beautiful women are no real temptation as I am not interested in short gained results (dunya), I have learned to think in long term results (akhirat).
In both cases, the fitna is to learn to rise above the simple instincts of survival and direct them yourself instead of being directed by them.Of course a test by temptation as you describe above is temptation. What makes the test not a temptation for you is that you are rational. For those who are not rational, it becomes a temptation. So as I said it depends 100% on the person's reaction. This is why the passage singles out the unappreciative.
Most people who believe in 19 believe it is a sort of path to salvation, thus it represents again a form of the inner desire of survival using the least amount of effort. This is always the main reason for people creating religion and the concept of salvation. This attracted all the loonies to it as they try to abuse it for their own inner need of being of importance, the so-called messenger/messiah syndrom. For them indeed it is a clear testing stone, as their lack of selfcontrol and confidence is showed by 19. On this agree with you.
Exactly. I couldn't have put it any better. So now knowing this, you should know what the test is about. 7431 is about the people not about the great reading.
I think I have shown the least amount of emotion in this discussion. You cannot deny the fact that no real specialist has been involved to give a real serious go to see if their is a scientific method to be created around 19. Only amateurs who are easy to debunk and attack.
All numerology is inherently extremely easy to debunk. Why do you think no one ever asks the "experts" about their failed trials on those Discovery Channel or BBC documentaries about the Bible Code?
I am no mathematician on a high level, so I'm careful to make any claims. This is why I am more focussed on the cosmology, philosophical and theological side of the Qur'an since I am trained in those professions as I have studied Biochemistry, Physics, Microbiology, Philosophy and Theology on college level.
You are assuming that Code 19 is "mathematics" and this is an unfounded assumption. Have you ever investigated a pattern in any of those fields by using trial and error and hiding failed trials and then presenting only successful trials and claiming that there is a pattern? I think you have enough scientific background and common sense to know the answer.
Good, and I hope in the future we find another person with the same degrees in mathematics and Arabic language to investigate.
But I don't need to. The burden of proof is on those who make positive extra ordinary claims.
As for the rest, you do not know what I believe or what I base it on, so be more careful in your 'advices' as I never said results stand above method. This is what you believed after misreading my post due, what I believe is involved, your clear emotional bias to the whole subject. I have seen the same kneejerk responses with Edip on the opposite side.
If you dislike me sitting in the middle, this is not my problem. But do not try to twist it into being unscientific, since objectivity and openmindness with scepticism towards both sides is the scientific method.There is no middle. A positive extra ordinary claim is either proven or not proven. By default it is not proven until proven. On the other hand, I would not mind you being in the middle of the debate. Perhaps, you could be the moderator for the debate if this is something that you would be interested in.
Peace,
Ayman
-
No. Submission.org is using a Seen and a Saad, just as used in the qur'aan. If they "fix" them and make them both Seen's, a great part of the calculations will collapse.
Peace
Would you please explain the flaw in following;
No. Submission.org is using a Seen and a Saad, just as used in the qur'aan. If they "fix" them and make them both Seen's, a great part of the calculations will collapse.
This initial prefixes three suras,
7, 19, and 38, and the total occurrence
of the letter "S" (Saad) in these three
suras is 152, 19x8 (Table 2). It is
noteworthy that in 769, the word "Bastatan"
is written in some printings with a "Saad,"
instead of "Seen." This is an erroneous
distortion that violates the Quran's code.
By looking at the oldest available copy of
the Quran, the Tashkent Copy, it was found
that the word "Bastatan" is correctly written with a "Seenhttp//y19.net/q-tash.gif
Table 2 The Frequency of
Occurrence of the
Letter "S" in the
Saad-initialed Suras
Sura Frequency of "S"
7 97
19 26
38 29
152 (19x8
Would you explain more in detail with reference to above .
Peace. -
Salaam Bahman
Do I understand that the Tashkand copy is the basis for all your calculations?
salaam Samia
I personally do not do such checking for my own work as that one is copy and no matter how any copies exist.
Now we have very solid and prefect tool to check copies and purify GR not only for spelling but for any other manipulation may have entered the book.
This is the way that God has planned to reveal proof of book at this era when people are educated and have access to this screen as we can not examine and test works without using this creature.
Peace. -
Peace Ayman,
Yes the effect of the test can be to purify but the effect doesn't change the meaning from "test" to "purify". The basic meaning is still to test.
To test for example a purity of somethign through a certain method, so the concept still counts.
The burden of proof is on those who want to prove a positive, the presence of a code. So amateur claims trying to prove a negative are irrelevant anyway. I told Code 19 hunters how they can easily prove the existence of the code. They simply have to document all their trials and share both the successful and failed trials and then we can see the ratio. This is all. It is not rocket science. All it requires is intellectual honesty. Unfortunately, NONE of them came forward.
Agreed, the burden of the proof is always on the claimants. And i am also very dissapointed in the way they handle critism and adopting scientific methods in their research. I hope this improves in the future.
Exactly. I couldn't have put it any better. So now knowing this, you should know what the test is about. 7431 is about the people not about the great reading.
I agree this is one of the meanings of the verse, but I am not convinced this is the exclusive meaning of the verse.
On the other hand, I would not mind you being in the middle of the debate. Perhaps, you could be the moderator for the debate if this is something that you would be interested in.
I had thought of this also when Edip first posted the announcement of the debate, I will see if I can join or moderate it. But if i cannot, it is still important to have a moderator.
-
The 'religion' has been corrupted due to wrong approaches, not by the text itself. As for certain outcomes of 19 that could be reliable, the debate must be between scientists to review a logical and rational result wherein all results and ideas are reflected. I think WE, you and me shouldn't do anything. These matters should be for specialists, not for people who aren't qualified for this.
It is like a cow, the farmer is only interested in getting the best milk, meat and leather out of the animal. Only a scientist is interested in the DNA, and is the only one qualified to research it because of his/her training. Because we know the DNA of the cow, doesn't make the cow more or less cow, it remains as it is. I believe the same counts for the Qur'an. Sadly we had to many mad scientists with Wikipedia knowledge screwing around.
Peace Arnold.
That is not new, in older time and even now in Mohammedans territories are not allowed to interpret and understand GR without a Middle man called scholar, clergy, sheikh, imam, and highest position Ayatollah as Specialist. )
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=15142.msg142845#msg142845
Then
Who are does scientist?
Who proves their qualification?
Why you are encouraging such path for people to understand messages by specialist when you agreeSadly we had to many mad scientists with Wikipedia knowledge screwing around
And the God clearly authored these messages
The Most Gracious.
Teacher of the Quran
551-2
We made the Quran easy to learn. Does any of you wish to learn?
5412-22-32-40
Do not move your tongue to hasten it. It is we who will collect it into Quran. Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran Then it is we who will explain it.
7516-19
Peace. -
For those who would like to see the hadith-sunna-based distortions made on verses of chapter 74 in opposition to 20114, please see my exposition titled Which one do you see Hell or Miracle? at
http//www.19.org/index.php?id=14,175,0,0,1,0
No wonder Ayman cannot witness Quran's great signs His eyes and mind are clouded with the smoke of Hellfiire, "Nothing but Hellfire!"
Peace,
EdipI see Hell fire in 7430
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9596963.msg180496#msg180496
-
I see Hell fire in 7430
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9596963.msg180496#msg180496
Good for you.
Peace,
Edip -
Good for you.
Peace,
EdipYep, sure is good for me. All praises to God, the worlds Lord.
peace