Tanri 0 Şubat 10, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 10, 2010 gönderildi (düzenlendi) Ekmek parası saydırır adama. Daha neler sayıyorlar bir bilsen. Şubat 10, 2010 tarihinde Tanri tarafından düzenlendi Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Pante 0 Şubat 10, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 10, 2010 gönderildi "Günler" ifadesinin 30 defa geçmesi konusunda hem fikirsiniz."gün" ifadesini saymak ise nasip olmamış. Hemfikir olmuş sayılmayız. Fikirlerimi yazdığım mesajlar silinmişti, teknik sorundan dolayı ve geri de getiremediler. Yeniden ayrı bir başlık açacaktı Edip ama arada kaynadı. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Faramir 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi illegal nerede, kayıplara mı karıştı, açtığı başlığı öksüz bırakıp gitti mi??? Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
inevitable 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Güzel yakalamışsın. Tebrikler! Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
pisinge 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Ne günlere kaldik:)) Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
herakles79 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi (düzenlendi) rûm sûresi (2-5) Rumlar, yakın bir yerde yenilgiye uğratıldılar. Onlar yenilgilerinden sonra birkaç yıl içinde galip geleceklerdir. Önce de, sonra da emir Allah’ındır. O gün Allah’ın (Rumlara) zafer vermesiyle mü’minler sevinecektir. Allah, dilediğine yardım eder. O, mutlak güç sahibidir, çok merhametlidir. bunu kehanet olarak alabilir miyiz? bence alabiliriz. Bence alamayız.Rumlarım kime yenildiği kimi yeneceği artık meçhul.Sürekli olarak bu bölümler Bizans pers çekişmesine yorumlanıyor ama ben bu ayetlerin Bizans ve İnananlar arasındaki çatışmaya vurgu olduğunu ve müminleri motive etmek için kehanetten çok bir amaca iteklediğini düşünüyorum. Ahiret ve bunun gibi iyi ya da kötü yöndeki tahminler kehanet değil. Bu rakamcıların kehanet varvasyonu ayet numaralarını gelişi güzel toplayıp çarpıp bölüm neredeyse olayın tarihini vermeye çalışmak.Mesela 19cu Edip Yüksel kıyametin olacağı yılı söylemiştir.O bir kehanettir. Şubat 11, 2010 tarihinde herakles79 tarafından düzenlendi Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Migfer 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi (düzenlendi) Bu rakamcıların kehanet varvasyonu ayet numaralarını gelişi güzel toplayıp çarpıp bölüm neredeyse olayın tarihini vermeye çalışmak.Mesela 19cu Edip Yüksel kıyametin olacağı yılı söylemiştir.O bir kehanettir. inandıkları şeye ters gidiyorlar. kıyametin zamanını söylemeye çalışan adam müslüman mıdır? muhammed bile yalnız allah biliyor demiş. "Rumlar, yakın bir yerde yenilgiye uğratıldılar. Onlar yenilgilerinden sonra birkaç yıl içinde galip geleceklerdir." bunun neresi kehanet değil. diyanet böyle çevirmiş hata var mı bilmiyorum da bu bir kehanettir. şu cümleye tarafsız bir şekilde bakarsan bir kehanet olacağını göreceksin. ama burada başka bir şey kastedilmiş dersen onu bilemem. ilk anlamından kehanet olduğu ortada. kehanet : gelecekten haber verme Şubat 11, 2010 tarihinde Migfer tarafından düzenlendi Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
herakles79 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi (düzenlendi) inandıkları şeye ters gidiyorlar. kıyametin zamanını söylemeye çalışan adam müslüman mıdır? muhammed bile yalnız allah biliyor demiş. "Rumlar, yakın bir yerde yenilgiye uğratıldılar. Onlar yenilgilerinden sonra birkaç yıl içinde galip geleceklerdir." bunun neresi kehanet değil. diyanet böyle çevirmiş hata var mı bilmiyorum da bu bir kehanettir. şu cümleye tarafsız bir şekilde bakarsan bir kehanet olacağını göreceksin. ama burada başka bir şey kastedilmiş dersen onu bilemem. ilk anlamından kehanet olduğu ortada. kehanet : gelecekten haber verme Anladım böyle vurgulara kehanette denebilir diyorsun.İstanbul'un aynı hızda nüfus artışına devam ederse yaşanmaz bir kent olacaktır demek gibi benzeri öngörü ve tahminler kehanet değil kanımca.Gözlemlenebilir yorumlanabilir olgulara dair tahminde bulunmak kehanet değil kanımca.Hava durumu vs gibi.Her gelecek tahmini ve yorumu kehanet değildir. Benim bahsettiğim bu rakamcıların yeri zamanı rakamları çarpıp bölerek tam verme gayretleri.Yani şöyle diyeyim senin tanımını da kabul ederek(verdiğin ayet gibi ayetlere kehanet denebileceğini kabul ederek) Kuran'ın söylemediği kehanetleri kendi sayısal cambazlıkları ile iddia ediyorlar. Şubat 11, 2010 tarihinde herakles79 tarafından düzenlendi Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Engse Hohol 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Saymayı arzulayanlar openburhan'da sayabilir. İşte size Arapça gün sözcüğü; يَوْمَ Gün sözcüğünün Arapça çoğulu eyyam, günün çiftlisi yevmeyn ayrışımı yapıyor mu bilmiyorum çünkü fazla ilgilenesim yok. Tanrısını sınamayı arzulayan kişilere ilgilenmelerini öneririm. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
xislam 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Site yeni midir bilmiyorum.. Fakat Xislamın İmzasında yeni gördüm.Bilmiyorum başka üyelerde imzalarına koydumu.. Neyse.. Bu sitede mühim hatalar gözüme çarptı birini belirtmek istiyorum.. 1. Mucize İddiası Bu iddia, hem H hem Ömer Çelakıl’da geçmektedir: * A0’a ait sitelerden: Kuran’da “gün (yevm)” kelimesi 365 defa geçmektedir. Bildiğiniz gibi Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında dönüşü 365 gün sürer. Dünya, Güneş’in etrafında dönerken kendi etrafında da tam 365 defa döner. Kuran’da “gün” kelimesinin 365 defa geçiyor olması, Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermesi açısından çok önemli bir bulgudur. Kuran’da “gün” kelimesinin 365 defa tekrarlanması, Dünya ile Güneş arasındaki 365 günlük astronomik olaya işaret ediyor olabilir. Site editörünün verdiği cevapsa şu Öncelikle belirtmeliyiz ki ”yevm” sözcüğü Kuran’da -iddia edildiği gibi- 365 defa geçmez. >Buradaki arama< 380, >buradaki arama< 412 sonucunu vermektedir. Hangilerinin gün anlamına gelen ”yevm”den bağımsız olduğu, ve sonuç olarak “gün” anlamına gelen ”yevm”in tam olarak kaç kez geçtiği meraklılarınca incelenebilir. Fakat lütfen mucize iddiacılarının sayısız site ve forumlardaki iddialarını peşinen kabul etmeyip eğer ilgi duyuyor ve elzem buluyorsanız biraz vakit ayırın ve kendiniz inceleyin. Site editörü Kuranda araa motorunu kullanarak ''Yevm'' kelmesini aratıyor ve sonuç 365 çıkmıyor.. Sanırım bir kelimenin kuranda ne kadar geçtiğini bulmak için arama motoru kullanmak çok basit bir ve yanlış bir yöntem..Çünkü bu tip arama motorları bilgisayarınızda ctrl+f ile aynı şekilde çalışır. Mesela şöyle bir metnimiz olsun Örümcek ağları çok ince bir yapıya sahip olmasına rağmen çok dayanıklıdırlar.. Dileyen inceleyebilir.. Biz şu metinde ''İnce'' kaç defa geçiyor diye aratırsak 2 adet buluruz.Oysa farkettiniz umarım 1 defa geçer.. Böyle bir aratma metodunu kullanmak cahillikten mi kaynaklanır bilmiyorum.. Ediötürün kalan cevaplarına bir başka konuda değineceğim.. 1. Mucize İddiası Bu iddia, hem Harun Yahya hem Ömer Çelakıl’da geçmektedir: A0’a ait sitelerden:Kuran’da “gün (yevm)” kelimesi 365 defa geçmektedir. Bildiğiniz gibi Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında dönüşü 365 gün sürer. Dünya, Güneş’in etrafında dönerken kendi etrafında da tam 365 defa döner.Kuran’da “gün” kelimesinin 365 defa geçiyor olması, Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermesi açısından çok önemli bir bulgudur. Kuran’da “gün” kelimesinin 365 defa tekrarlanması, Dünya ile Güneş arasındaki 365 günlük astronomik olaya işaret ediyor olabilir. Ömer Çelakıl’a ait siteden:Kur’an-ı Kerim’de “Bir Gün (yevm)” kelimesi 365 defa geçmektedir. Bildiğiniz gibi Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında tam bir kez dönüşü 365 gün sürer. Kur’an’da 365 defa “bir gün (yevm)” kelimesinin geçiyor olması çok önemli bir bulgudur. Çünkü Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermektedir. Kısacası Dünya ile Güneş arasındaki 365 günlük astronomik döngü Kuran’da açık bir şekilde belirtilmektedir.2. Kuran’da ”yevm” sayısı Öncelikle belirtmeliyiz ki ”yevm” sözcüğü Kuran’da -iddia edildiği gibi- 365 defa geçmez. >Buradaki arama< 380, >buradaki arama< 412 sonucunu vermektedir. Hangilerinin gün anlamına gelen ”yevm”den bağımsız olduğu, ve sonuç olarak “gün” anlamına gelen ”yevm”in tam olarak kaç kez geçtiği meraklılarınca incelenebilir. Fakat lütfen mucize iddiacılarının sayısız site ve forumlardaki iddialarını peşinen kabul etmeyip eğer ilgi duyuyor ve elzem buluyorsanız biraz vakit ayırın ve kendiniz inceleyin. 3. Astronomi, Takvim ve 365 Gün Bu mucize iddiasındaki basit çarpıtmaları inceleyelim: Dikkat ediniz; her iki mucize yalanı metninde de herhangi bir takvim değil astronomik bir olgu olan “Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında dönmesi” referans alınmaktadır. Oysa takvimden bağımsız olarak salt astronomik olguyu ele alacak olursak bu süre 365 değil 365,25 gündür. Madem bir ”mucize” iddiasında bulunuluyor ve herşeyi bilen, herşeye gücü yeten mükemmel yaratıcının mucize olarak Kuran’a böyle bir rakam yerleştirdiği söyleniyor o halde bu mucizenin ”tam ve kesin” olmasını talep etmek hakkımız olmalı. Bugün kullandığımız Miladi Takvim’e (Gregoryen takvimine) göre bir yıl üç defa 365, dördüncü yılda ise 366 gün sürer. Yani bu takvimi esas alacak olursak mucizemiz yine eksiktir. Ama zaten mucize iddiasında esas alınan nokta herhangi bir takvim (yani insanların kararlaştırdığı zaman birimleri) değil astronomik olgunun kendisi. Yani Dünya’nın Güneş’in etrafında bir kez dönmesi esnasında kendi ekseninde kaç kez döndüğü… Bu rakam 365,25′tir. Keza mucize iddiasında esas alınan herhangi bir takvim olsa iddia zaten baştan suya düşmüş olurdu. Çünkü kullanılan takvim sistemine göre tanım gereği bir yıl içindeki gün sayısı da değişir. Örneğin İslam Dünya’sının kullandığı takvimde Hicri Yıl 354 gündür. Tarih boyunca kullanılmış olan farklı medeniyetlerin takvimlerinde de bir yıl farklı sayıda gün içermiştir. Yani bir yılın 365 gün olması mutlak değil sadece günümüzün çoğunluğu tarafından kullanılan Miladi Takvim’e göre (4 senede bir 366 gün çektiği için) kısmen doğrudur. Dolayısıyla mucizeciler mecburen ”yıl/sene” birimini değil astronomik olgunun kendisini esas almaktalar. İşte bu noktada da diğer bir çarpıtma su yüzüne çıkmakta: Farzedelim ki bugün Muhammed Peygamber’den beri İslam Dünyası’nda kullanılmakta olan Hicri Takvim’i kullanıyoruz. Yani bir yıl 354 gün çekmekte. Farzedelim ki Dünya bu takvimi kullanıyor. Bu durumda Kuran’da ”gün” kelimesinin 365 kere geçmesinin ilginç hiçbir yanı olur muydu? Olmazdı elbette… Söz konusu astronomik olguya işaret etmeleri de anlamsız olurdu. Çünkü konuyla ilgili ayetlerde Dünya’dan, Güneş’ten, astronomiden değil herhangi şeylerden bahsediliyor. Yani iddianın bütün ”büyüsü/çekiciliği” bizim bugün -hasbel kader- 365 gün çeken bir takvim kullanıyor olmamızda. Şundan emin olabiliriz ki eğer halâ Hicri Takvim kullanıyor olsaydık bu sefer de 354 rakamına uygun bir mucize yaratırlardı. 4. Kuran Öncesi Astronomi ve Takvim Dikkat ediniz her iki mucize iddiacısı da ayrıca ne diyor? Harun YahyaKuran’da “gün” kelimesinin 365 defa geçiyor olması, Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermesi açısından çok önemli bir bulgudur. Ömer Çelakıl’a ait siteden:Çünkü Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermektedir.Hangi bilgi ”yüzyıllar öncesinden” verilmekte burada? Dünya’nın 365(,25) günde Güneş etrafında döndüğü zaten Kuran’dan yüzyıllar önce de biliniyordu. Yunan Astronomu Meton milattan önce 432 yılında (yani Kuran’dan 1.000 yıl önce) Dünya’nın 365,25 günde Güneş etrafında döndüğünü hesaplamıştı. Ayrıca daha sonra Gregoryen reformuna uğrayan ama temel olarak bugün halâ kullanmakta olduğumuz takvim İskenderiyeli Sosigenes tarafından Kuran’dan yaklaşık 7 asır önce bir yılın günlerini 365,25 olarak hesaplanarak oluşturulmuş; bu takvim M.Ö. 46 yılında Jülyen Takvimi olarak kabul görmüş ve batı dünyasında Kuran’dan önce yüzyıllar boyunca kullanılmıştır. <A href="#">5. Sonuç Kuran’da “yevm” sözcüğü 365 kere geçmez. Ayrıca bir yılın 365 gün olduğu mutlak ve sabit bir gerçek değil esas alınan takvim sistemine göre değişken ve izafidir. Örneğin İslam Dünya’sının kullandığı Hicri Takvim’de bir yıl 354 gündür. Esas alınan takvim değil de Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında dönerken kendi ekseninde kaç kez dönüyor olduğu ise bu rakam 365,25′tir. Hepsinden önemlisi de bütün bunların Kuran’dan -zaten- yüzyıllar önce biliniyor olmasıdır. Bu bilgilere dayanan bugün kullanmakta olduğumuz takvim bile Kuran’dan yüzyıllar önce kabul edilmiştir. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
iLLeGaLTM 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Yazar Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi (düzenlendi) Aslında bir ara oturup saymak lazım geliyor.. Fakat öyle kuranda ara motoruyla değil.Öncelikle 365 sayısı hangi kaideye göre çıkarılmış onu bilmek lazım.. Bir yerde sadece tekil olarak geçen yevm kelimeleri 365 ediyor diye okumuştum.. oturup 1 2 saat zarfında sayılabilir.Ama yinede bu bu araştırma metodunu haklı çıkarmıyor.. Kuranda böyle kelime aratılmaz..Değil kuranda hiçbir metinde bu şeilde bir kelimenin ne kadar geçtiğini bulamazsınız yanlış çıkar.. Eğer bu şekilde 365 çıksa idi ben yine yanlış metod kontrol etmek lazım derdim.. Şubat 11, 2010 tarihinde iLLeGaLTM tarafından düzenlendi Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Tanri 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Kuranda böyle kelime aratılmaz..Değil kuranda hiçbir metinde bu şeilde bir kelimenin ne kadar geçtiğini bulamazsınız yanlış çıkar.. Şimdi de biz yazılımcıları angut ettin çıkardın, bu kadar basit bir algortimayı yazamıyorsak vay halimize. Belli bir kriteri olmazsa yazamazsın tabi,belli bir kriteri olmayan sayıma da mucize denmez. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Pante 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Öncelikle belirtmeliyiz ki ”yevm” sözcüğü Kuran’da -iddia edildiği gibi- 365 defa geçmez. >Buradaki arama< 380, >buradaki arama< 412 sonucunu vermektedir. Hangilerinin gün anlamına gelen ”yevm”den bağımsız olduğu, ve sonuç olarak “gün” anlamına gelen ”yevm”in tam olarak kaç kez geçtiği meraklılarınca incelenebilir. Fakat lütfen mucize iddiacılarının sayısız site ve forumlardaki iddialarını peşinen kabul etmeyip eğer ilgi duyuyor ve elzem buluyorsanız biraz vakit ayırın ve kendiniz inceleyin. Bu yanıt yanlış. Bu konuda İllegaltm haklı. Bu sayma işi arama motoruyla olmaz. Mucize iddiasını ben de doğru bulmuyorum ama benim sözcük seçimindeki mantığa itirazım var. Bence asıl bu alıntının sahibinin vakit ayırıp, inceleyip doğru yanıtı vermesi gerekir. Bu "Mucize yalanları" sitesi, sadece bir kişi oturup mucize iddialarını yanıtlasın diye kurulmadı. Her konu detaylı olarak tartışılıp, irdelenip değerlendirilmeli. Bu değerlendirmeye göre hazırlanan yazı siteye asılmalı. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Pante 0 Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 11, 2010 gönderildi Gün ve ay sözcükleri ile ilgili mucize iddialarına yanıt için: Kur'an'da Mucize Yoktur başlığının son bölümüne bakabilirsiniz. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
iLLeGaLTM 0 Şubat 12, 2010 gönderildi Yazar Raporla Share Şubat 12, 2010 gönderildi Sİtede ki mucize iddaalarına cevap yazan editör kim merak ettim doğrusu.. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
EdipYuksel 0 Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Doğmatik davranan, önyargı ile yaklaşan tüm inkarcılar ne kadar ayet gösterilse kör ve sağır davranacaklardır. İster ateist, ister sunni veya şii, ister hristiyan veya yahudi olsun. Daha önce bu konuyu neredeyse kitap boyu tartıştım bir Yahudi ve bir Sunni inkarcıyla... Her ikisi de Kuran'da gün ve ay kelimelerinin geçiş sayılarını inkar ettiler... Dalga geçtikleri konudaki cehaletleriyle orantılı kibir ve gurur ile sarhoş oldukları için maalesef günlerce onlarla tartışma durumunda kaldım. Aynı tartışmayı bu kez Türkçe konuşan klonları ile yapacak vaktim ve sabrım yok maalesef. Www.yuksel.org sitesine giriş kendini mehdi sanan bir şarlatan tarafından kapatıldığı için muhtemelen bazılarına açık değil. Bu yüzden ilgili tartışmayı buraya alacağım. Tartışma, en sonunda 365 gün'ü ve daha birkaç destekleyici sayımın doğrulanması ile sonuçlanmıştı. Liste en sonda... Listeyi incelemek için İnglizce bilmeye gerek yok. Alıntı çok uzun olduğu için birkaç bölüme ayırarak asacağım. Selam, Edip 365 Days: Literal Harmony and Astronomical Events This is n internet argument on the frequency of the word YaWM (Day) in the Quran. In the end of this lengthy argument, Daniel Lomax admitted that the frequency of the word YaWM (day) in singular form is indeed 365, its plural form is 30, and the total of all its derivatives is 475 (19x25). This is one of the rare arguments that both parties finally reach to the same conclusion. Edip Yuksel versus Daniel Lomax, at al In 1959, Abdurrazzaq Nawfal, an Egyptian scholar, noticed some mathematical relations between the frequency of certain words. While writing his book "Al-Islamu Deenun wa Dunya" (Islam: both Religion and World), he noticed that the frequency of the word "Dunya" (World) had exactly the same frequency as the word "Akhirah" (Hereafter), 115 times each, in the Quran. In 1968, while writing another book titled "Alemul Jinni wal Malayika" (Universe of Jinns and Angels), he noticed that the word "Shaytan" (Satan) had exactly the same frequency as the word "Malak" (Angel), 88 times each. These interesting literary symmetry in the frequency of certain words led him to make a more comprehensive study on the numerical structure of the Quran. Nawfal published his findings in 1983 in a book: "Al-I'cazul Adadiy LilQuranil Kareem" (Numerical Miracle Of the Holy Quran). The book was published by Darul Kitabil Arabiy, Beirut, Lebanon. Some of his findings are striking. Three examples, I believe, leaves no doubt that the Quran is a mathematically designed unique book. The word "month" (shahr) occurs 12 times. The word "days" (ayyam,yawmayn) occurs 30 times. The word "day" (yawm) occurs 365 times. When Ahmed ELNEWEIHI posted a brief article on SRI (Socio.Religion.Islam) informing the readers the frequency of these three words in the Quran, all the followers of medieval Arab fabrications (Hadith and Sunna) rushed to reject the claims. The ignorance and backwardness of the followers of Hadith and Sunna, unfortunately is reinforced by their arrogance. They can never see the miracle of the Quran. They only parrot their scholar's empty rhetoric that the Quran is a literary miracle without questioning its meaning and implications. They reduce the author of the Quran to the level of their simple-minded scholars. "How could God's word have a mathematical pattern in it? Mathematics? No way!" they exclaim. Then, they try all the tricks and deception to reject the obvious mathematical patterns exist in the Quran. If you are interested with the arguments on the mathematical structure of the Quran, please obtain my lengthy debate with Lomax, in "Running Like Zebras". The argument exposes the hypocrisy and deception of those who have traded God's word with medieval Arab fabrications, that is, Hadith and Sunnah. You can download the book from http://www.moslem.org/yuksel.htm. [Now, you can download the book from tihs site] In the end of this argument we will present the list of chapters and verses where these three words occur in the Quran. Ahmed ELNEWEIHI:The word "YAWM", or "day" is mentioned 365 times in the quraan. DEAN Ahmad: But there are 354 days in the Muslim year. ELNEWEIHI: But, who said the Quran is restricted to the muslim calender? The Quran is a message to all mankind and should reflect the more "accurate" count of the number of days in the year. Daniel LOMAX: Then should we expect there to be 365.2425 occurrences of the word "day" in the Qur'an? By the way, has anyone verified the count? This figure comes from the Khalifites, who are notorious for doctored counts. Many of them do not check out. Jochen KATZ: Well, shouldn't you expect more accuracy from the word of God, if it was indeed a thing planned by him to discover? It is more like 365.3 days. So, only a crude first approximation. And then, scientific research has shown that the earth is slowing down in its rotation. Comparison of some shells and the growth rings of very old trees that have been found, show that several thousand years ago the year had nearly 400 days. And we are loosing a number of seconds every year. So, the time will come it won't only have 364 days and each day a bit longer than today. That too will make the miracle disappear. Just wait long enough. ELNEWEIHI: If you have a word that makes sense and can be described as 0.3.... of a word, please let me know. This is not a "crude" approximation, this is a mathematically correct approximation. I thought from your e-mail address that you may have some mathematical background, but may be I am wrong. For your information, 365 is the proper mathematical rounding up of the number 365.3....... Having been so accurate as to request that the Quran should have repeated the word "Day" 365.3.... times (and even then, I am sure you would not have been convinced), I do not expect that you turn around and tell me that your reasons for believing in Jesus is that he was foretold in the Bible. I will then ask you to find from the bible a quote that describes all the details (including the height, the color, the era, the name of the king of the day, . so on..) that would show beyond any doubt that your beliefs are on sound basis. After all, the Bible should have made it so clear that no one would have any doubt that he was the Son of God. Edip YUKSEL: Katz is demonstrating a sophisticated degree of knowledge! Ironically, he flunks to see the clear and simple relation between the frequency of the word "yawm" (day) in the Quran, and the number of days in a year, that is 365. I wonder why he is resorting to fractions of a day to deny such a clear message. How hard he is trying to reject the clear mathematical relation! Watching the Muhammedan and Christian disbelievers rejecting the clear divine signs confirms the Quranic statement once more (6:25; 7:146). As for the slowing down... Well, the number of days won't go down 364 since the end of the world is not too far (42:17 ....). Quran gives the time of the "Hour" and it is less than a thousand year. The Hour will struck disbelievers. Just wait long enough. KATZ: By the way, some Christians employ the same silly reasoning to the Bible too. You are welcome to answer in the same revealing way. ELNEWEIHI: I will not turn down your invitation. I agree you with you that some christians employ silly reasoning to the bible, but I do not agree that it is the "same" silly reasoning. For the numberof days in a year is 365 is not silly, but how some christians quote from the bible to show that the bible had predicted the future is indeed silly. I heard and read some of them say the bible had predicted many events and wars when it said that people of the North will conquer people of the South and so on. KATZ: Counting exercises keep many a believer busy. But I don't think they will ever establish anything of great significance. Just my personal opinion. ELNEWEIHI: If you remember, I said to you in my first article that we can go on with these and similar discusions without producing any evidence that can be called "an evidence beyond any doubt". I invited you to debate with me the basis I cited before (and can cite again) for my belief and those that you can site for your belief. You have unfortunately declined. Your answer reminded me of the verse in the Quran where God says to Muhammed that even if He (God) sent down a ladder from the sky so that Muhammed can climb on it in front of the non-believer (as a proof of being a prophet of God) , they will only say: you musthave hypnotized us to see you doing this, but it was not actually true. KATZ: just head [sic] read this 'slowing down thing' a few days ago, so that was a new thought, but I had better adorned it with many smileys as to not be taken so seriously in this specific posting. ELNEWEIHI: It is too bad you are retracting that statement, because it just occured to me that if the "slowing down thing" was correct, it would have pointed to yet, another miracle in the Qur'an. Since the counting of the word "Yawm" or "day" and relating it to the number of days in a year was "discovered" only recently, one can say that the Qur'an has prophesized that when people will discover this count, the number of days in the time of this discovery will indeed be rounded to 365 days. In other words, we would have here the combination of a scientific fact and a prophecy in one. Would not that have been a more accurate prophecy than the statements in the bible that christians claim them to be prophecies, to try to prove that the bible is truly the word of God? I must add here that until I verify the count of the word "Yawm" in the Qur'an myself, I can not claim any miracle. I must also repeat that I am not in a hurry to do that, because this is not the basis of my belief. KATZ: For that I want to combine Mr. Lomax counting results with Ahmed Elneweihi's ingenious prophetic interpretation. Now, may I propose that this is a backward prophecy instead of a forward prophecy? And the scientific method (proof?) given by the Qur'an (or better: by those who have nothing better to do to make up proofs for ) (the divine origin of it by methods which were never intended to be read into ) (the text) for the real age of the earth is that we calculate back how many years from the creation of the earth it would have taken to slow down the rotation of the earth as to give the decrease from 475 days/year to 365 days/year, because clearly, this given number corresponds to the time of creation. Only humorous responses to this posting will be taken seriously. Asser HASSANAIN:You know, I don't understand what these arguments about the numeracity of the Quran is all about! The numeracity of the Quran (that is, the striking numerical pattern) should NOT be used as means to support an unrelated religious view or a religious discussion. LOMAX: I admire the brother for admitting his ignorance at the outset. What striking pattern? Aside from the utter lack of such a "pattern," I agree with the remainder. Whatever pattern exists, even if it is very, very striking, does not ipso facto prove much other than there is a pattern. When I did believe that there was a clear pattern, it did not lead me to conclude that Rashad Khalifa was a Messenger!, only that the book was beyond ordinary human origin. But I was depending on false data from Khalifa. Nevertheless, I remain grateful to him, for this false data increased my faith and led me to begin to seriously read the Qur'an in Arabic, where I found ample confirmation not dependent upon number tricks. LOMAX: Brother Behnam has noted the lack of independent confirmation of Khalifa's work. This is a little misleading. Many others have reported on numerical phenomena in the Qur'an; however, there is no coherent explanation of what it is nor any demonstration that what has been discovered is statistically significant. "Beyond Probability" by Arik does attempt a calculation of probability, but it is incorrect on its face, as will be seen by anyone who knows probability theory. It does not take an expert, by the way, just a basic knowledge. Further, Khalifa's work is so full of errors and undocumented methods that anyone who tries to verify it soon runs into serious difficulties. This is not obvious to English speakers, because our language is written very differently than Arabic. For example, Khalifa counts the letter alif, but there is, in fact, no consensus on how to write alif in the Qur'an, and Khalifa's counts correspond to no known ms. or system of writing. Certainly they do not correspond to the Tashkent mushaf, which Khalifa used when counting Sad (in one place; it is not clear that he used it consistently, in fact, it is clear that he did not.) Some time back, I wrote a "Draft FAQ" on this subject, detailing matters on which clarity is necessary before claims about these miracles can be objectively verified. Yuksel promised to respond to that, but so far, nothing but more bluster. I think I will repost that FAQ. LOMAX: It is the wont [sic] of Khalifites to claim this or that numerical phenomenon in the Qur'an as a "miracle." In spite of repeated invitations, they have never defined just what they mean by "miracle," but the apparent meaning is any striking congruity of numbers derived from the Qur'an, or sometimes from other sources like the numerical values of the letters in Rashad Khalifa's name. When word counts are involved, more often than not, I have found that the counts have been manipulated to produce the striking totals. This claim that the occurrence of the word "day" (yawm) in the Qur'an is 365 is a very good example. Edip Yuksel wrote: "Below is the frequency of the word "Yawm" day (in its singular form) in the Quran. I have copied from one of my Turkish books. Unfortunately, during the transfer it lost its format." Notice that Yuksel did qualify the statement, unlike the earlier mentions of this "miracle" in this newsgroup. He is only counting singular forms. Now, if it were necessary to count the dual and plural forms of the word to come up with the "miraculous" total, I am certain that they would have been included. Nevertheless, it would be interesting if all occurrences of the singular "day" in the Qur'an totalled 365. Do they? I have seen this claim before. Then, I looked up "yawm" in the Kassis concordance, and found 475 mentions. However, this included the dual and plural forms, and it is a piece of work to separate them out. But now Yuksel has presented us with a list, albeit mangled, of his claimed "singular forms." Further, I just obtained a copy of the Flugel concordance, which lists each unique form in superb detail. So, I was moved to check this claim out more precisely. I took Yuksel's list, formatted it, and imported it into a database program. Then I used the Kassis concordance to insert all mentions of the word, including the dual and plural. Since Kassis, conveniently, gives the verse numbers from Flugel's edition of the Qur'an in addition to the more standard numbers used by Khalifa, I was able to easily identify each form. In the process, I found several misprints in Yuksel's list, plus tabulation errors, as well as three occurrences missing from Flugel. I did not find any errors in Kassis. Note, however, that I do not have a validated Arabic Qur'an in machine-readable form. It is possible, but unlikely, that there are additional mentions not listed here. The finished database is appended below for anyone who wishes to examine the data. Of the 475 total occurrences of all forms of "yawm," 3 are in the dual and 27 are in the plural, leaving 445 in the singular. Flugel's concordance lists 34 different forms of this word, including variations caused by prefixes or suffixes. Here is a list of these forms, with the total count for each form, and Yuksel's inferred count. The "<" at the right shows counts which are in error, or which result from an unstated condition. The number at the beginning of each row is the sequence of the form in Flugel. Transliteration notes are at the end of this article. F. form total/Yuksel 20 !al-'ayya!mu 1 0 plural 16 !alyawma 38 38 24 !l-'ayya!mi 1 0 plural 9 !lyawmi 1 1 3 !lyawmu 2 2 26 -'ayya!ma~! 3 0 plural 21 -'ayya!mi 1 0 plural 23 -'ayya!mi~ 18 0 plural 25 -'yya!ma 1 0 plural 10 bi!lyawmi 2 2 22 bi-'ayya!mi 1 0 plural 5 biyawmi 5 5 17 fa!lyawma 8 6 < 33 fayawma^'i&i~ 4 0 < 6 liyawmi 4 4 8 liyawmi~ 4 4 18 wa!lyawma 2 2 12 wa!lyawmi 21 21 27 wa-'ayya!ma~! 1 0 plural 11 wabi!lyawmi 1 1 14 wayawma 44 44 34 wayawma^'i&i~ 1 0 < 13 yawma 132 131 32 yawma^'i&i~ 65 1 < 15 yawma~! 16 16 31 yawmahum 4 1 < 19 yawmayni 3 0 dual 4 yawmi 31 31 7 yawmi~ 28 28 30 yawmihim 2 1 < 29 yawmikum 4 0 < 1 yawmu 16 16 2 yawmu~ 9 9 28 yawmukum 1 0 < TOTALS 475 364 Yuksel's counts do not add up to 365 because he skipped his number 297. To summarize the discrepancies, besides plurals, Yuksel has not counted any of the forms ending with ^-i&i~, except for one single mention at 45:27. This accounts for 69 omissions. He counted 6 mentions of fa!lyawma out of 8 (2 omissions). He also inconsistently counted simple forms of yawm with suffixed pronouns: 1 out of 4 occurrences of yawmahum were counted (3 omissions), 1 out of 2 yawmihim (1 omissions), and yawmikum and yawmukum were not counted at all (5 omissions). Finally, he missed a mention of yawma at 45:17. With the 30 duals and plurals, this accounts for the difference of 111. I see no way to reconcile this data with the claim of 365 mentions. The sloppiness of the counting is typical of Khalifite claims; if the count works out, research and checking have a tendency to stop. I would appreciate notice of any substantive errors in this article... ALL MENTIONS OF ANY FORM OF "YAWIMA" IN THE QUR'AN "yseq" is the number given by Yuksel to the mention, or is his number for the most recent mention. "xseq" is the number of additional mentions I found. If "xseq" is 0, the mention is found in Yuksel's article. These numbers can be used to recover the verse order if the database has been resorted. "verse" is the standard verse number, prefixed with "y" if it is from Yuksel, and "x" if it is not in his article. "F#" is the verse number from Flugel's concordance and Qur'an. "form" gives my own transliteration of the Arabic form. This is non-standard, but standard transliteration does not fully convey Arabic writing, only pronunciation, more or less. Transliteration notes are at the end. "trans" is a rough translation of some words; also some mentions of "day" give a specific number, which is shown. yseq xseq verse F# form trans notes 1 1 0 y1:4 3 yawmi 2 2 0 y2:8 7 wabi!lyawmi 3 3 0 y2:48 45 yawma~! 4 4 0 y2:62 59 wa!lyawmi 5 4 1 x2:80 74 -'ayya!ma~! days 6 5 0 y2:85 79 wayawma 7 6 0 y2:113 107 yawma 8 7 0 y2:123 117 yawma~! 9 8 0 y2:126 120 wa!lyawmi 10 9 0 y2:174 169 yawma 11 10 0 y2:177 172 wa!lyawmi 12 10 2 x2:184 180 -'ayya!ma~! days 13 10 3 x2:184 180 -'ayya!mi~ days 14 10 4 x2:185 181 -'ayya!mi~ days 15 10 5 x2:196 192 -'ayya!mi~ 3 days 16 10 6 x2:203 199 -'ayya!mi~ days 17 10 7 x2:203 199 yawmayni 2 days 18 11 0 y2:212 208 yawma 19 12 0 y2:228 228 wa!lyawmi 20 13 0 y2:232 232 wa!lyawmi 21 14 0 y2:249 250 !alyawma 22 15 0 y2:254 255 yawmu~ 23 16 0 y2:259 261 yawma~! Y had 2:255 24 17 0 y2:259 261 yawmi~ part day 25 18 0 y2:264 266 wa!lyawmi 26 19 0 y2:281 281 yawma~! 27 20 0 y3:9 7 liyawmi~ 28 20 8 x3:24 23 -'ayya!ma~! days 29 21 0 y3:25 24 liyawmi~ 30 22 0 y3:30 28 yawma 31 22 9 x3:41 36 -'ayya!mi~ 3 days 32 23 0 y3:55 48 yawmi 33 24 0 y3:77 71 yawma 34 25 0 y3:106 102 yawma 35 26 0 y3:114 110 wa!lyawmi 36 26 10 x3:140 134 !al-'ayya!mu days 37 27 0 y3:155 149 yawma 38 28 0 y3:161 155 yawma 39 29 0 y3:166 160 yawma 40 29 11 x3:167 160 yawma^'i&i~ that day 41 30 0 y3:180 176 yawma 42 31 0 y3:185 182 yawma 43 32 0 y3:194 192 yawma 44 33 0 y4:38 42 bi!lyawmi 45 34 0 y4:39 43 wa!lyawmi 46 34 12 x4:42 45 yawma^'i&i~ that day 47 35 0 y4:59 62 wa!lyawmi 48 36 0 y4:87 89 yawmi 49 37 0 y4:109 109 yawma 50 38 0 y4:136 135 wa!lyawmi 51 39 0 y4:141 140 yawma 52 40 0 y4:159 157 wayawma 53 41 0 y4:162 160 wa!lyawmi 54 42 0 y5:3 4 !alyawma 55 43 0 y5:3 5 !alyawma 56 44 0 y5:5 7 !alyawma 57 45 0 y5:14 17 yawmi 58 46 0 y5:36 40 yawmi 59 47 0 y5:64 69 yawmi 60 48 0 y5:69 73 wa!lyawmi 61 48 13 x5:89 91 -'ayya!mi~ 3 days 62 49 0 y5:109 108 yawma 63 50 0 y5:119 119 yawmu 64 51 0 y6:12 12 yawmi 65 52 0 y6:15 15 yawmi~ 66 52 14 x6:16 16 yawma^'i&i~ that day 67 53 0 y6:22 22 wayawma 68 54 0 y6:73 72 wayawma 69 55 0 y6:73 73 yawma 70 56 0 y6:93 93 !alyawma 71 57 0 y6:128 128 wayawma 72 57 15 x6:130 130 yawmikum 73 58 0 y6:141 142 yawma 74 59 0 y6:158 159 yawma 75 59 16 x7:8 7 yawma^'i&i~ that day 76 60 0 y7:14 13 yawmi 77 61 0 y7:32 30 yawma 78 61 17 x7:51 49 fa!lyawma today 79 62 0 y7:51 49 yawmihim 80 63 0 y7:53 51 yawma 81 63 18 x7:54 52 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 82 64 0 y7:59 57 yawmi~ 83 65 0 y7:163 163 yawma 84 66 0 y7:163 163 wayawma 85 67 0 y7:167 166 yawmi 86 68 0 y7:172 171 yawma 87 68 19 x8:16 16 yawma^'i&i~ 88 69 0 y8:41 42 yawma 89 70 0 y8:41 42 yawma 90 71 0 y8:48 50 !alyawma 91 72 0 y9:3 3 yawma 92 73 0 y9:18 18 wa!lyawmi 93 74 0 y9:19 19 wa!lyawmi 94 75 0 y9:25 25 wayawma 95 76 0 y9:29 29 bi!lyawmi 96 77 0 y9:35 35 yawma 97 78 0 y9:36 36 yawma 98 79 0 y9:44 44 wa!lyawmi 99 80 0 y9:45 45 wa!lyawmi 100 81 0 y9:77 78 yawmi 101 82 0 y9:99 100 wa!lyawmi 102 83 0 y9:108 109 yawmi~ 103 83 20 x10:3 3 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 104 84 0 y10:15 16 yawmi~ 105 85 0 y10:28 29 wayawma 106 86 0 y10:45 46 wayawma 107 87 0 y10:60 61 yawma 108 88 0 y10:92 92 fa!lyawma 109 89 0 y10:93 93 yawma 110 89 21 x10:102 102 -'ayya!mi days 111 90 0 y11:3 3 yawmi~ 112 90 22 x11.07 9 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 113 91 0 y11:8 11 yawma 114 92 0 y11:26 28 yawmi~ 115 93 0 y11:43 45 !alyawma 116 94 0 y11:60 63 wayawma 117 94 23 x11:65 68 -'ayya!mi~ 3 days 118 94 24 x11:66 69 yawma^'i&i~ that day 119 95 0 y11:77 79 yawmu~ 120 96 0 y11:84 85 yawmi~ 121 97 0 y11:98 100 yawma 122 98 0 y11:99 101 wayawma 123 99 0 y11:103 105 yawmu~ 124 100 0 y11:103 105 yawmu~ 125 101 0 y11:105 107 yawma 126 102 0 y12:54 54 !alyawma 127 103 0 y12:92 92 !alyawma 128 103 25 x14.05 5 bi-'ayya!mi days 129 104 0 y14:18 21 yawmi~ 130 105 0 y14:31 36 yawmu~ 131 106 0 y14:41 42 yawma 132 107 0 y14:42 43 liyawmi~ 133 108 0 y14:44 44 yawma 134 109 0 y14:48 49 yawma 135 109 26 x14:49 50 yawma^'i&i~ that day 136 110 0 y15:35 35 yawmi 137 111 0 y15:36 36 yawmi 138 112 0 y15:38 38 yawmi 139 113 0 y16:25 27 yawma 140 114 0 y16:27 29 yawma 141 115 0 y16:27 29 !alyawma 142 116 0 y16:63 65 !alyawma 143 117 0 y16:80 82 yawma 144 118 0 y16:80 82 wayawma 145 119 0 y16:84 86 wayawma 146 119 27 x16:87 89 yawma^'i&i~ that day 147 120 0 y16:89 91 wayawma 148 121 0 y16:92 94 yawma 149 122 0 y16:111 112 yawma 150 123 0 y16:124 125 yawma 151 124 0 y17:13 14 yawma 152 125 0 y17:14 15 !alyawma 153 126 0 y17:52 54 yawma 154 127 0 y17:58 60 yawmi 155 128 0 y17:62 64 yawmi 156 129 0 y17:71 73 yawma 157 130 0 y17:97 99 yawma 158 131 0 y18:19 18 yawma~! 159 132 0 y18:19 18 yawmi~ part day 160 133 0 y18:47 45 wayawma 161 134 0 y18:52 50 wayawma 162 134 28 x18:99 99 yawma^'i&i~ that day 163 134 29 18:100 100 yawma^'i&i~ that day 164 135 0 y18:105 105 yawma 165 136 0 y19:15 15 yawma 166 137 0 y19:15 15 wayawma 167 138 0 y19:15 15 wayawma 168 139 0 y19:26 27 !alyawma 169 140 0 y19:33 34 yawma 170 141 0 y19:33 34 wayawma 171 142 0 y19:33 34 wayawma 172 143 0 y19:37 38 yawmi~ 173 144 0 y19:38 39 yawma 174 145 0 y19:38 39 !alyawma 175 146 0 y19:39 40 yawma 176 147 0 y19:85 88 yawma 177 148 0 y19:95 95 yawma 178 149 0 y20:59 61 yawmu 179 150 0 y20:64 67 !alyawma 180 151 0 y20:100 100 yawma 181 152 0 y20:101 101 yawma 182 153 0 y20:102 102 yawma 183 153 30 x20:102 102 yawma^'i&i~ that day 184 154 0 y20:104 104 yawma~! 185 154 31 x20:108 107 yawma^'i&i~ that day 186 154 32 x20:109 108 yawma^'i&i~ that day 187 155 0 y20:124 124 yawma 188 156 0 y20:126 126 !alyawma 189 157 0 y21:47 48 liyawmi 190 157 33 x21:103 103 yawmukum your day 191 158 0 y21:104 104 yawma 192 159 0 y22:2 2 yawma 193 160 0 y22:9 9 yawma 194 161 0 y22:17 17 yawma 195 161 34 x22:28 29 -'ayya!mi~ days 196 162 0 y22:47 46 yawma~! 197 163 0 y22:55 54 yawmi~ 198 163 35 x22:56 55 yawma^'i&i~ that day 199 164 0 y22:69 68 yawma 200 165 0 y23:16 16 yawma 201 166 0 y23:65 67 !alyawma 202 167 0 y23:100 102 yawmi 203 167 36 x23:101 103 yawma^'i&i~ that day 204 168 0 y23:111 113 !alyawma 205 169 0 y23:113 115 yawma~! 206 170 0 y23:113 115 yawmi~ part day 207 171 0 y24:2 2 wa!lyawmi 208 172 0 y24:24 24 yawma 209 172 37 x24:25 25 yawma^'i&i~ that day 210 173 0 y24:37 37 yawma~! 211 174 0 y24:64 64 wayawma 212 175 0 y25:14 15 !alyawma 213 176 0 y25:17 18 wayawma 214 177 0 y25:22 24 yawma 215 177 38 x25:22 24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 216 177 39 x25:24 26 yawma^'i&i~ that day 217 178 0 y25:25 27 wayawma 218 178 40 x25:26 28 yawma^'i&i~ that day 219 179 0 y25:26 28 yawma~! 220 180 0 y25:27 29 wayawma 221 180 41 x25:59 60 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 222 181 0 y25:69 69 yawma 223 182 0 y26:38 37 yawmi~ 224 183 0 y26:82 82 yawma 225 184 0 y26:87 87 yawma 226 185 0 y26:88 88 yawma 227 186 0 y26:135 135 yawmi~ 228 187 0 y26:155 155 yawmi~ 229 188 0 y26:156 156 yawmi~ 230 189 0 y26:189 189 yawmi 231 190 0 y26:189 189 yawmi~ 232 191 0 y27:83 85 wayawma 233 192 0 y27:87 89 wayawma 234 192 42 x27:89 91 yawma^'i&i~ that day 235 193 0 y28:41 41 wayawma 236 194 0 y28:42 42 wayawma 237 195 0 y28:61 61 yawma 238 196 0 y28:62 62 wayawma 239 197 0 y28:65 65 wayawma 240 197 43 x28:66 66 yawma^'i&i~ that day 241 198 0 y28:71 71 yawmi 242 199 0 y28:72 72 yawmi 243 200 0 y28:74 74 wayawma 244 201 0 y29:13 12 yawma 245 202 0 y29:25 24 yawma 246 203 0 y29:36 35 !alyawma 247 204 0 y29:55 55 yawma 248 204 44 x30:4 3 wayawma^'i&i~ that day 249 205 0 y30:12 11 wayawma 250 206 0 y30:14 13 wayawma 251 206 45 x30:14 13 yawma^'i&i~ that day 252 207 0 y30:43 42 yawmu~ 253 207 46 x30:43 42 yawma^'i&i~ that day 254 208 0 y30:55 54 wayawma 255 209 0 y30:56 56 yawmi 256 210 0 y30:56 56 yawmu 257 210 47 x30:57 57 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 258 211 0 y31:33 32 yawma~! 259 211 48 x32:4 3 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 260 212 0 y32:5 4 yawmi~ 261 212 49 x32:14 14 yawmikum your day 262 213 0 y32:25 25 yawma 263 214 0 y32:29 29 yawma 264 215 0 y33:21 21 wa!lyawma 265 216 0 y33:44 43 yawma 266 217 0 y33:66 66 yawma 267 217 50 x34:18 17 wa-'ayya!ma~! days 268 218 0 y34:30 29 yawmi~ 269 219 0 y34:40 39 wayawma 270 220 0 y34:42 41 fa!lyawma 271 221 0 y35:14 15 wayawma 272 222 0 y36:54 54 fa!lyawma 273 223 0 y36:55 55 !alyawma 274 224 0 y36:59 59 !alyawma 275 225 0 y36:64 64 !alyawma 276 226 0 y36:65 65 !alyawma 277 227 0 y37:20 20 yawmu 278 228 0 y37:21 21 yawmu 279 229 0 y37:26 26 !alyawma 280 229 51 x37:33 32 yawma^'i&i~ that day 281 230 0 y37:144 144 yawmi 282 231 0 y38:16 15 yawmi 283 232 0 y38:26 25 yawma 284 233 0 y38:53 53 liyawmi 285 234 0 y38:78 79 yawmi 286 235 0 y38:79 80 yawmi 287 236 0 y38:81 82 yawmi 288 237 0 y39:13 15 yawmi~ 289 238 0 y39:15 17 yawma 290 239 0 y39:24 25 yawma 291 240 0 y39:31 32 yawma 292 241 0 y39:47 48 yawma 293 242 0 y39:60 61 wayawma 294 243 0 y39:67 67 yawma 295 243 52 x39:71 71 yawmikum your day 296 243 53 x40:9 9 yawma^'i&i~ that day 297 244 0 y40:15 15 yawma 298 245 0 y40:16 16 yawmahum 299 246 0 y40:16 16 !alyawma 300 247 0 y40:17 17 !alyawma 301 248 0 y40:17 17 !alyawma 302 249 0 y40:18 18 yawma 303 250 0 y40:27 28 biyawmi 304 251 0 y40:29 30 !alyawma 305 252 0 y40:30 31 yawmi 306 253 0 y40:32 34 yawma 307 254 0 y40:33 35 yawma 308 255 0 y40:46 49 wayawma 309 256 0 y40:49 52 yawma~! 310 257 0 y40:51 54 wayawma 311 258 0 y40:52 55 yawma 312 258 54 x41:9 8 yawmayni 2 days 313 258 55 x41:10 9 -'ayya!mi~ 4 days 314 258 56 x41:12 11 yawmayni 2 days 315 258 57 x41:16 15 -'ayya!mi~ days 316 259 0 y41:19 18 wayawma 317 260 0 y41:40 40 yawma 318 261 0 y41:47 47 wayawma 319 262 0 y42:7 5 yawma 320 263 0 y42:45 44 yawma 321 264 0 y42:47 46 yawmu~ 322 264 58 x42:47 46 yawma^'i&i~ that day 323 265 0 y43:39 38 !alyawma 324 266 0 y43:65 65 yawmi~ 325 266 59 x43:67 67 yawma^'i&i~ that day 326 267 0 y43:68 68 !alyawma 327 267 60 x43:83 83 yawmahum 328 268 0 y44:10 9 yawma 329 269 0 y44:16 15 yawma 330 270 0 y44:40 40 yawma 331 271 0 y44:41 41 yawma 332 271 61 x45:14 13 -'yya!ma days 333 271 62 x45:17 16 yawma 334 272 0 y45:27 26 wayawma 335 273 0 y45:26 25 yawmi out of seq 336 274 0 y45:27 26 yawma^'i&i~ 337 275 0 y45:28 27 !alyawma 338 276 0 y45:34 33 !alyawma 339 276 63 x45:34 33 yawmikum your day 340 277 0 y45:35 34 fa!lyawma 341 278 0 y46:5 4 yawmi 342 279 0 y46:20 19 wayawma 343 279 64 x46:20 19 fa!lyawma today 344 280 0 y46:21 20 yawmi~ 345 281 0 y46:34 33 wayawma 346 282 0 y46:35 34 yawma 347 283 0 y50:20 19 yawmu 348 284 0 y50:22 21 !alyawma 349 285 0 y50:30 29 yawma 350 286 0 y50:34 33 yawmu 351 286 65 x50:38 37 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 352 287 0 y50:41 40 yawma 353 288 0 y50:42 41 yawma 354 289 0 y50:42 41 yawmu F missed 355 290 0 y50:44 43 yawma 356 291 0 y51:12 12 yawmu 357 292 0 y51:13 13 yawma 358 292 66 x51:60 60 yawmihim that day of theirs 359 293 0 y52:9 9 yawma 360 293 67 x52:11 11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 361 294 0 y52:13 13 yawma 362 294 68 x52:45 45 yawmahum 363 295 0 y52:46 46 yawma 364 296 0 y54:6 6 yawma 365 297 0 Y skipped 366 298 0 y54:8 8 yawmu~ Y had 54:7 367 299 0 y54:19 19 yawmi 368 300 0 y54:48 48 yawma 369 301 0 y55:29 29 yawmi~ 370 301 69 x55:39 39 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 371 302 0 y56:50 50 yawmi~ 372 303 0 y56:56 56 yawma 373 303 70 x57:4 4 -'ayya!mi~ 6 days 374 304 0 y57:12 12 yawma 375 305 0 y57:12 12 !alyawma 376 306 0 y57:13 13 yawma 377 307 0 y57:15 14 fa!lyawma 378 308 0 y58:6 7 yawma 379 309 0 y58:7 8 yawma 380 310 0 y58:18 19 yawma 381 311 0 y58:22 22 wa!lyawmi 382 312 0 y60:3 3 yawma 383 313 0 y60:6 6 wa!lyawma 384 314 0 y62:9 9 yawmi F missed 385 315 0 y64:9 9 yawmu 386 316 0 y64:9 9 liyawmi 387 317 0 y64:9 9 yawma 388 318 0 y65:2 2 wa!lyawmi 389 319 0 y66:7 7 !alyawma 390 320 0 y66:8 8 yawma 391 321 0 y68:24 24 !alyawma 392 322 0 y68:39 39 yawmi 393 323 0 y68:42 42 yawma 394 323 71 x69:7 7 -'ayya!mi~ 8 days 395 323 72 x69:15 15 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 396 323 73 x69:16 16 yawma^'i&i~ that day 397 323 74 x69:17 17 yawma^'i&i~ that day 398 323 75 x69:18 18 yawma^'i&i~ that day 399 323 76 x69:24 24 !l-'ayya!mi days 400 324 0 y69:35 35 !alyawma 401 325 0 y70:4 4 yawmi~ 402 326 0 y70:8 8 yawma 403 326 77 x70:11 11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 404 327 0 y70:26 26 biyawmi 405 327 78 x70:42 42 yawmahum that day of theirs 406 328 0 y70:43 43 yawma 407 329 0 y70:44 44 !lyawmu 408 330 0 y73:14 14 yawma 409 331 0 y73:17 17 yawma~! 410 331 79 x74:9 9 yawma^'i&i~ that day 411 332 0 y74:9 9 yawmu~ 412 333 0 y74:46 47 biyawmi 413 334 0 y75:1 1 biyawmi 414 335 0 y75:6 6 yawmu 415 335 80 x75:10 10 yawma^'i&i~ that day 416 335 81 x75:12 12 yawma^'i&i~ that day 417 335 82 x75:13 13 yawma^'i&i~ that day 418 335 83 x75:22 22 yawma^'i&i~ that day 419 335 84 x75:24 24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 420 335 85 x75:30 30 yawma^'i&i~ that day 421 336 0 y76:7 7 yawma~! 422 337 0 y76:10 10 yawma~! 423 338 0 y76:11 11 !lyawmi that day 424 339 0 y76:27 27 yawma~! 425 340 0 y77:12 12 yawmi~ 426 341 0 y77:13 13 liyawmi 427 342 0 y77:14 14 yawmu 428 342 86 x77:15 15 yawma^'i&i~ that day 429 342 87 x77:19 19 yawma^'i&i~ that day 430 342 88 x77:24 24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 431 342 89 x77:28 28 yawma^'i&i~ that day 432 342 90 x77:34 34 yawma^'i&i~ that day 433 343 0 y77:35 35 yawmu 434 343 91 x77:37 37 yawma^'i&i~ that day 435 344 0 y77:38 38 yawmu 436 344 92 x77:40 40 yawma^'i&i~ that day 437 344 93 x77:45 45 yawma^'i&i~ that day 438 344 94 x77:47 47 yawma^'i&i~ that day 439 344 95 x77:49 49 yawma^'i&i~ that day 440 345 0 y78:17 17 yawma 441 346 0 y78:18 18 yawma 442 347 0 y78:38 38 yawma 443 348 0 y78:39 39 !lyawmu 444 349 0 y78:40 41 yawma 445 350 0 y79:6 6 yawma 446 350 96 x79:8 8 yawma^'i&i~ that day 447 351 0 y79:35 35 yawma 448 352 0 y79:46 46 yawma 449 353 0 y80:34 34 yawma 450 353 97 x80:37 37 yawma^'i&i~ that day 451 353 98 x80:38 38 yawma^'i&i~ that day 452 353 99 x80:40 40 yawma^'i&i~ that day 453 354 0 y82:15 15 yawma 454 355 0 y82:17 17 yawmu F missed 455 356 0 y82:18 18 yawmu 456 357 0 y82:19 19 yawma 457 357 100 x82:19 19 yawma^'i&i~ that day 458 358 0 y83:5 5 liyawmi~ 459 359 0 y83:6 6 yawma 460 359 101 x83:10 10 yawma^'i&i~ that day 461 360 0 y83:11 11 biyawmi 462 360 102 x83:15 15 yawma^'i&i~ that day 463 361 0 y83:34 34 fa!lyawma 464 362 0 y85:2 2 wa!lyawmi 465 363 0 y86:9 9 yawma 466 363 103 x88:2 2 yawma^'i&i~ that day 467 363 104 x88:8 8 yawma^'i&i~ that day 468 363 105 x89:23 24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 469 363 106 x89:23 24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 470 363 107 x89:25 25 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 471 364 0 y90:14 14 yawmi~ 472 364 108 x99:4 4 yawma^'i&i~ that day 473 364 109 x99:6 6 yawma^'i&i~ that day 474 364 110 x100:11 11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 475 365 0 y101:4 3 yawma 476 365 111 x102:8 8 yawma^'i&i~ that day Notes: The total count is 476 instead of 475 because Yuksel's unused 297 is numbered. Interestingly, this is number 365 in my list! "F missed" indicates that this mention is not found in Flugel's concordance. One verse in Yuksel is slightly "out of sequence." Three mentions of "day" refer to "part of a day." Two of Yuksel's verse numbers were incorrect or nonstandard. Unusual transliteration symbols: ~ nunates the previous vowel ! is alif, and also hamzat-ul-wasl - is alif as a chair for hamza ' is hamza & is dhal ^ is a point (used with hamza). LOMAX: Edip Yuksel wrote: "Just now I saw Lomax' legthy answer which is trying to confuse the simple issue. I am, inshallah, going to expose his blindig prejudice, as I did before." It is my sincere hope that Yuksel can do what he claims. But I fear that he must first cast the beam out of his own eye before he will be able to help me with my own defects of vision. My answer was not "lengthy," rather it was short, in its summary, and lengthy only because the supporting data was appended. Yes, this issue is simple. How many times does the word "day" occur in the Qur'an? The short answer is zero, because "day" is an English word. One will note that zero is divisible by both 19 and 365 without any remainder. But, really, we are talking about an Arabic word. But what Arabic word? It turns out that this is not a simple a question as the Khalifites would pretend. If the word is "yawm" in all its forms, the answaer is 475 times, to the best of my knowledge, and I have made it easy to correct me by publishing my "lengthy" response. I actively invite and hope for correction. Eliminating the non-singular forms, we still have 445. To get 365, it is necessary to eliminate some singular forms. An obvious candidate is yawma'idh, which means, literally, "the day when," and 'idh is written connected with yawm, so one may be able to claim, by the perverse logic typical of Khalifites, that this is a different word (but Khalifa translates it using the word "day"). This will only account for 70 mentions; we still have 375 left. If we eliminate all forms with pronoun suffixes, there remain 364, or, instead, we can eliminate all forms with prefixes, in which case their remain 356. I haven't yet found a way to get 365. My guess is that either there is a missing occurrence in the list, in which case 364 becomes 365, or previous sources accidentally counted, like Yuksel, one of the yawma'idh occurrences. Edip Yuksel wrote: "For those who wonder our previous debate with Lomax on the code 19, please download a copy of "Running Like Zebras" from: http://www.moslem.org/yuksel.htm" I thank Yuksel for the link. . . . As for "running like zebras," I would rather run like a zebra, which is a honest creature meaning harm to no one, than bark like a hyena. Edip Yuksel wrote: "Wait Lomax. The candle of falsifiers cannot misguide people against the light of the truth." Satan has power only over those who follow him. Khalifa said, a false messenger is a messenger of Satan. This is the warning, as always there is a warning, like the warning of the angels at Babylon. With the work I did, and presuming that Yuksel had actually counted the words, it should be only a few minutes to make a preliminary comment on my paper. After all, all it talked about is a word count, and the differences between my count and Yuksels's count were thoroughly and clearly cited. I found numerous clear errors in Yuksel's count. I hope that he or anyone else can find any remaining errors in mine. But, true to form, Yuksel responds, not with facts, but with bluster. Instead of joining with others as seekers of truth, he blames me for "extreme skepticism." Yuksel, repent; your repentance will open for you the gates of paradise and ward off from you humiliation in this life and the next. I do not write all this but in the hope of guidance for myself and for others, including you and other brothers and sisters who, like Dr. Khalifa, were misled by this particular fitna. LOMAX: Edip Yuksel wrote: "Well, Lomax you are exposed many times of trying to confuse the issue by a wobbly extreme skepticism. Thank God it has been documented in "Running Like Zebras" for those who seek the truth." For me, the matter becomes more and more clear. Originally, the "numerical miracles" were presented by Dr. Khalifa as a proof that even the skeptical could examine and test. Supposedly it was "scientific" and "mathematical" proof. Now, when one of these claims is carefully examined, and the results of the investigation are published in a way that makes it easy for anyone to check the results, Yuksel can only refer to "skepticism" as if it were something hateful. This is the mark of religious fanaticism; more and more, I see his resemblance to the very religious scholars he hates. This is not surprising, that the son would resemble his father. Edip Yuksel wrote: "As for your recent posting on the frequency of the word "day", wait few days for its exposition. And do not forget that God is the only master of the day of judgment. The miracle of the Quran will continue to increase the faith of believers despite of falsifiers." A "falsifier" is someone who changes the truth. Yuksel is the man who, with his own hand, with white-out and pen, altered the text of the Qur'an, by his own admission. He is the man who published a list, supposedly of all occurrences of the word "day" in the Qur'an, and this list was false on its face, and even more false when examined in detail. If I have erred in my publication, I invite correction, something Yuksel does not do; in fact he hates it. My original work on the 19 contained a detailed discussion of the question of how many times the word "Allah" occurs in the Qur'an. That discussion, based on the work of Khalifa collated with the work of Phillips, and a direct examination of the Qur'an were these two sources differed, was in error as to its conclusions. The error proceeded from the fact that Phillips had not found all of Khalifa's errors, and the errors that remained were balancing errors; the result being that the count of "Allah", excluding the initial bismillahs, but including the first, was 2699; thus Khalifa, apparently, was correct in his later assertion that the count becomes 2698 if 9:128-129 are excluded. (Of course, it is also 2698 in Warsh without truncating sura 9, because Warsh does not include 1:1 as a verse of the Qur'an.) But I only was able to discover this once I obtained a copy of the Arabic/English edition of Khalifa's translation, which gives a runninig total. With that running total, I could compare it with the earlier verse-by-verse total from Visual Presentation of the Miracle, and find the remaining discrepancies. Khalifa's early work was full of errors. My point is that, even though I published clearly founded and verifiable (but wrong) evidence that the count was 2701, no Khalifite pointed out where I was wrong. this is because they do not actually count these things: they are people of the very taqlid they condemn. At one time, by his report, Yuksel actually did do quite a bit of counting. But he has settled into belief, and this 365 day question is the proof. When I started to count, I did not know whether or not the count would be 365 days or not. I merely thought it was absurd to debate the significance of a phenomenon that had not been shown to exist. The little boy who said that the emperor had no clothes was not a skeptic, he merely reported what he saw. However, so many times has this particular "emperor" appeared naked inpublic, I do now expect him to be unclothed, and I am not sure that I willcontinue to spend the dozen or so hours of work that it took, in thiscase, to carefully collate the data, every time another Khalifite claimappears. If there is a numerical miracle in the Qur'an, the Khaliftes are guilty, not of proclaiming it, but of concealing it by a confusion of false claims. I am still, from time to time, working with people who believe they have found statistically signficant phenomena; so far, no cigar, but, as Yuksel says, judgment is with Allah, and he guides to his path whom he wills. (Devamı: Edip Cevap veriyor) Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
EdipYuksel 0 Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi (Devam/Continued) 365 Days: Literal Harmony and Astronomical Events This is n internet argument on the frequency of the word YaWM (Day) in the Quran. In the end of this lengthy argument, Daniel Lomax admitted that the frequency of the word YaWM (day) in singular form is indeed 365, its plural form is 30, and the total of all its derivatives is 475 (19x25). This is one of the rare arguments that both parties finally reach to the same conclusion. Edip Yuksel versus Daniel Lomax, at al THERE ARE 365 OCCURRENCES OF THE WORD "YWM" (DAY) IN THE QURAN LOMAX: Of the 475 total occurrences of all forms of "yawm," 3 are in the dual and 27 are in the plural, leaving 445 in the singular. . . .Yuksel's counts do not add up to 365 because he skipped his number 297. To summarize the discrepancies, besides plurals, Yuksel has not counted any of the forms ending with ^-i&i~, except for one single mention at 45:27. This accounts for 69 omissions. He counted 6 mentions of fa!lyawma out of 8 (2 omissions). He also inconsistently counted simple forms of yawm with suffixed pronouns: 1 out of 4 occurrences of yawmahum were counted (3 omissions), 1 out of 2 yawmihim (1 omissions), and yawmikum and yawmukum were not counted at all (5 omissions). Finally, he missed a mention of yawma at 45:17. With the 30 duals and plurals, this accounts for the difference of 111. I see no way to reconcile this data with the claim of 365 mentions. The sloppiness of the counting is typical of Khalifite claims; if the count works out, research and checking have a tendency to stop. YUKSEL: Well, as you see, I did not stop. (It is another proof that I am not a Khalifite as projected by a confessed Muhammadan, Lomax). I would like to thank Lomax for his efforts. I Hope it will serve a good function to find the truth of this matter. Based on Lomax's tedious work, I have corrected several typo errors. As for his summary of "discrepancies," here are my answers: I did not count the word YWM (pronounced as yawm) with suffixes. I did not need to mention this, since the word (YWM) by itself was sufficient to express this point. In my earlier posting I wrote about "the frequency of the word "yawm" day (in its singular form) in the Quran." A non-hostile eye would easily notice that I did not mention "yawmahum" (their days), nor yawma-izin (that day), etc. In fact, the counting method we deduce from this word is used for all other computations. For instance, in the count of the word ALLAH (GOD) we did not count the ones with the suffix HUMMA. As we discussed in my book "Running Like Zebras," (available from http://www.moslem.com [and from www.yuksel.org]) a clear, sound and consistent counting method is employed in the mathematical structure of the Quran. The confusion here is superficially created by Lomax, whose skeptical confusion reaches a crescendo when it comes to the mathematical structure of the Quran, or monotheism. The 45:27 in my list was merely a typing error. It should have been 45:17. I also omitted one, only one count of "fa!lyawma." Lomax confused the word I have counted in 7:51 with the one I have not. He is right regarding the second omission. I have missed the word "fa!lyawma" in 46:20. This, by the way, makes my count 365. As I stated above, Lomax wrongly identified the word I have counted in 7:51. There, I did not count "yawmahum" (their days) as he claimed; I counted "fa!lyawma" which he wrongly accused me of its omission. Below is my correction of the list presented by Lomax. I have erased the notes regarding Flugel's concordance. It is irrelevant at this point and will complicate the simple counting of the word. Thanks to Lomax, he has already managed to create a non-friendly sceen by his "unusual transliteration symbols." Furthermore, in order to create consistency, I have translated the few words that he had forgotten to translate. I also want to remind the reader the fact that the three-letter root of the word in question is"YWM." The vowels used in English transliterations are not original letters. ALL MENTIONS OF ANY FORM OF "YWM" IN THE QURAN "YSEQ" is the number given by Yuksel to the mention, or is his number for the most recent mention. "XSEQ" is the number of additional mentions that Lomax found. If "xseq" is 0, the mention is found in Yuksel's article. These numbers can be used to recover the verse order if the database has been resorted. "VERSE" is the standard verse number, prefixed with "y" if it is from Yuksel, and "x" if it is not in his article. "FORM" gives my own transliteration of the Arabic form. This is non-standard, but standard transliteration does not fully convey Arabic writing, only pronunciation, more or less. Transliteration notes are at the end. "TRANS " is a rough translation of some words; also some mentions of "day" give a specific number, which is shown. YSEQ XSEQ VERSE FORM TRANS 1 1 0 y1:4 yawmi 2 2 0 y2:8 wabi!lyawmi 3 3 0 y2:48 yawma~! 4 4 0 y2:62 wa!lyawmi 5 4 1 x2:80 -'ayya!ma~! days 6 5 0 y2:85 wayawma 7 6 0 y2:113 yawma 8 7 0 y2:123 yawma~! 9 8 0 y2:126 wa!lyawmi 10 9 0 y2:174 yawma 11 10 0 y2:177 wa!lyawmi 12 10 2 x2:184 -'ayya!ma~! days 13 10 3 x2:184 -'ayya!mi~ days 14 10 4 x2:185 -'ayya!mi~ days 15 10 5 x2:196 -'ayya!mi~ days 16 10 6 x2:203 -'ayya!mi~ days 17 10 7 x2:203 yawmayni (2) days 18 11 0 y2:212 yawma 19 12 0 y2:228 wa!lyawmi 20 13 0 y2:232 wa!lyawmi 21 14 0 y2:249 !alyawma 22 15 0 y2:254 yawmu~ 23 16 0 y2:259 yawma~! 24 17 0 y2:259 yawmi~ 25 18 0 y2:264 wa!lyawmi 26 19 0 y2:281 yawma~! 27 20 0 y3:9 liyawmi~ 28 20 8 x3:24 -'ayya!ma~! days 29 21 0 y3:25 liyawmi~ 30 22 0 y3:30 yawma 31 22 9 x3:41 -'ayya!mi~ (3) days 32 23 0 y3:55 yawmi 33 24 0 y3:77 yawma 34 25 0 y3:106 yawma 35 26 0 y3:114 wa!lyawmi 36 26 10 x3:140 !al-'ayya!mu days 37 27 0 y3:155 yawma 38 28 0 y3:161 yawma 39 29 0 y3:166 yawma 40 29 11 x3:167 yawma^'i&i~ that day 41 30 0 y3:180 yawma 42 31 0 y3:185 yawma 43 32 0 y3:194 yawma 44 33 0 y4:38 bi!lyawmi 45 34 0 y4:39 wa!lyawmi 46 34 12 x4:42 yawma^'i&i~ that day 47 35 0 y4:59 wa!lyawmi 48 36 0 y4:87 yawmi 49 37 0 y4:109 yawma 50 38 0 y4:136 wa!lyawmi 51 39 0 y4:141 yawma 52 40 0 y4:159 wayawma 53 41 0 y4:162 wa!lyawmi 54 42 0 y5:3 !alyawma 55 43 0 y5:3 !alyawma 56 44 0 y5:5 !alyawma 57 45 0 y5:14 yawmi 58 46 0 y5:36 yawmi 59 47 0 y5:64 yawmi 60 48 0 y5:69 wa!lyawmi 61 48 13 x5:89 -'ayya!mi~ (3) days 62 49 0 y5:109 yawma 63 50 0 y5:119 yawmu 64 51 0 y6:12 yawmi 65 52 0 y6:15 yawmi~ 66 52 14 x6:16 yawma^'i&i~ that day 67 53 0 y6:22 wayawma 68 54 0 y6:73 wayawma 69 55 0 y6:73 yawma 70 56 0 y6:93 !alyawma 71 57 0 y6:128 wayawma 72 57 15 x6:130 yawmikum your day 73 58 0 y6:141 yawma 74 59 0 y6:158 yawma 75 59 16 x7:8 yawma^'i&i~ that day 76 60 0 y7:14 yawmi 77 61 0 y7:32 yawma 78 62 0 y7:51 fa!lyawma 79 62 17 x7:51 yawmihim their day 80 63 0 y7:53 yawma 81 63 18 x7:54 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 82 64 0 y7:59 yawmi~ 83 65 0 y7:163 yawma 84 66 0 y7:163 wayawma 85 67 0 y7:167 yawmi 86 68 0 y7:172 yawma 87 68 19 x8:16 yawma^'i&i~ that day 88 69 0 y8:41 yawma 89 70 0 y8:41 yawma 90 71 0 y8:48 !alyawma 91 72 0 y9:3 yawma 92 73 0 y9:18 wa!lyawmi 93 74 0 y9:19 wa!lyawmi 94 75 0 y9:25 wayawma 95 76 0 y9:29 bi!lyawmi 96 77 0 y9:35 yawma 97 78 0 y9:36 yawma 98 79 0 y9:44 wa!lyawmi 99 80 0 y9:45 wa!lyawmi 100 81 0 y9:77 yawmi 101 82 0 y9:99 wa!lyawmi 102 83 0 y9:108 yawmi~ 103 83 20 x10:3 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 104 84 0 y10:15 yawmi~ 105 85 0 y10:28 wayawma 106 86 0 y10:45 wayawma 107 87 0 y10:60 yawma 108 88 0 y10:92 fa!lyawma 109 89 0 y10:93 yawma 110 89 21 x10:102 -'ayya!mi days 111 90 0 y11:3 yawmi~ 112 90 22 x11.07 -'ayya!mi~ days 113 91 0 y11:8 yawma 114 92 0 y11:26 yawmi~ 115 93 0 y11:43 !alyawma 116 94 0 y11:60 wayawma 117 94 23 x11:65 -'ayya!mi~ (3) days 118 94 24 x11:66 yawma^'i&i~ that day 119 95 0 y11:77 yawmu~ 120 96 0 y11:84 yawmi~ 121 97 0 y11:98 yawma 122 98 0 y11:99 wayawma 123 99 0 y11:103 yawmu~ 124 100 0 y11:103 yawmu~ 125 101 0 y11:105 yawma 126 102 0 y12:54 !alyawma 127 103 0 y12:92 !alyawma 128 103 25 x14.05 bi-'ayya!mi days 129 104 0 y14:18 yawmi~ 130 105 0 y14:31 yawmu~ 131 106 0 y14:41 yawma 132 107 0 y14:42 liyawmi~ 133 108 0 y14:44 yawma 134 109 0 y14:48 yawma 135 109 26 x14:49 yawma^'i&i~ that day 136 110 0 y15:35 yawmi 137 111 0 y15:36 yawmi 138 112 0 y15:38 yawmi 139 113 0 y16:25 yawma 140 114 0 y16:27 yawma 141 115 0 y16:27 !alyawma 142 116 0 y16:63 !alyawma 143 117 0 y16:80 yawma 144 118 0 y16:80 wayawma 145 119 0 y16:84 wayawma 146 119 27 x16:87 yawma^'i&i~ that day 147 120 0 y16:89 wayawma 148 121 0 y16:92 yawma 149 122 0 y16:111 yawma 150 123 0 y16:124 yawma 151 124 0 y17:13 yawma 152 125 0 y17:14 !alyawma 153 126 0 y17:52 yawma 154 127 0 y17:58 yawmi 155 128 0 y17:62 yawmi 156 129 0 y17:71 yawma 157 130 0 y17:97 yawma 158 131 0 y18:19 yawma~! 159 132 0 y18:19 yawmi~ 160 133 0 y18:47 wayawma 161 134 0 y18:52 wayawma 162 134 28 x18:99 yawma^'i&i~ that day 163 134 29 18:100 yawma^'i&i~ that day 164 135 0 y18:105 yawma 165 136 0 y19:15 yawma 166 137 0 y19:15 wayawma 167 138 0 y19:15 wayawma 168 139 0 y19:26 !alyawma 169 140 0 y19:33 yawma 170 141 0 y19:33 wayawma 171 142 0 y19:33 wayawma 172 143 0 y19:37 yawmi~ 173 144 0 y19:38 yawma 174 145 0 y19:38 !alyawma 175 146 0 y19:39 40 yawma 176 147 0 y19:85 yawma 177 148 0 y19:95 yawma 178 149 0 y20:59 yawmu 179 150 0 y20:64 !alyawma 180 151 0 y20:100 yawma 181 152 0 y20:101 yawma 182 153 0 y20:102 yawma 183 153 30 x20:102 yawma^'i&i~ that day 184 154 0 y20:104 yawma~! 185 154 31 x20:108 yawma^'i&i~ that day 186 154 32 x20:109 yawma^'i&i~ that day 187 155 0 y20:124 yawma 188 156 0 y20:126 !alyawma 189 157 0 y21:47 liyawmi 190 157 33 x21:103 yawmukum your day 191 158 0 y21:104 yawma 192 159 0 y22:2 yawma 193 160 0 y22:9 yawma 194 161 0 y22:17 yawma 195 161 34 x22:28 -'ayya!mi~ days 196 162 0 y22:47 yawma~! 197 163 0 y22:55 yawmi~ 198 163 35 x22:56 yawma^'i&i~ that day 199 164 0 y22:69 yawma 200 165 0 y23:16 yawma 201 166 0 y23:65 !alyawma 202 167 0 y23:100 yawmi 203 167 36 x23:101 yawma^'i&i~ that day 204 168 0 y23:111 !alyawma 205 169 0 y23:113 yawma~! 206 170 0 y23:113 yawmi~ part day 207 171 0 y24:2 wa!lyawmi 208 172 0 y24:24 yawma 209 172 37 x24:25 yawma^'i&i~ that day 210 173 0 y24:37 yawma~! 211 174 0 y24:64 wayawma 212 175 0 y25:14 !alyawma 213 176 0 y25:17 wayawma 214 177 0 y25:22 yawma 215 177 38 x25:22 yawma^'i&i~ that day 216 177 39 x25:24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 217 178 0 y25:25 wayawma 218 178 40 x25:26 yawma^'i&i~ that day 219 179 0 y25:26 yawma~! 220 180 0 y25:27 wayawma 221 180 41 x25:59 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 222 181 0 y25:69 yawma 223 182 0 y26:38 yawmi~ 224 183 0 y26:82 yawma 225 184 0 y26:87 yawma 226 185 0 y26:88 yawma 227 186 0 y26:135 yawmi~ 228 187 0 y26:155 yawmi~ 229 188 0 y26:156 yawmi~ 230 189 0 y26:189 yawmi 231 190 0 y26:189 yawmi~ 232 191 0 y27:83 wayawma 233 192 0 y27:87 wayawma 234 192 42 x27:89 yawma^'i&i~ that day 235 193 0 y28:41 wayawma 236 194 0 y28:42 wayawma 237 195 0 y28:61 yawma 238 196 0 y28:62 wayawma 239 197 0 y28:65 wayawma 240 197 43 x28:66 yawma^'i&i~ that day 241 198 0 y28:71 yawmi 242 199 0 y28:72 yawmi 243 200 0 y28:74 wayawma 244 201 0 y29:13 yawma 245 202 0 y29:25 yawma 246 203 0 y29:36 !alyawma 247 204 0 y29:55 yawma 248 204 44 x30:4 wayawma^'i&i~ that day 249 205 0 y30:12 wayawma 250 206 0 y30:14 wayawma 251 206 45 x30:14 yawma^'i&i~ that day 252 207 0 y30:43 yawmu~ 253 207 46 x30:43 yawma^'i&i~ that day 254 208 0 y30:55 wayawma 255 209 0 y30:56 yawmi 256 210 0 y30:56 yawmu 257 210 47 x30:57 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 258 211 0 y31:33 yawma~! 259 211 48 x32:4 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 260 212 0 y32:5 4 yawmi~ 261 212 49 x32:14 yawmikum your day 262 213 0 y32:25 yawma 263 214 0 y32:29 yawma 264 215 0 y33:21 wa!lyawma 265 216 0 y33:44 yawma 266 217 0 y33:66 yawma 267 217 50 x34:18 wa-'ayya!ma~! days 268 218 0 y34:30 yawmi~ 269 219 0 y34:40 wayawma 270 220 0 y34:42 fa!lyawma 271 221 0 y35:14 wayawma 272 222 0 y36:54 fa!lyawma 273 223 0 y36:55 !alyawma 274 224 0 y36:59 !alyawma 275 225 0 y36:64 !alyawma 276 226 0 y36:65 !alyawma 277 227 0 y37:20 yawmu 278 228 0 y37:21 yawmu 279 229 0 y37:26 !alyawma 280 229 51 x37:33 yawma^'i&i~ that day 281 230 0 y37:144 yawmi 282 231 0 y38:16 yawmi 283 232 0 y38:26 yawma 284 233 0 y38:53 liyawmi 285 234 0 y38:78 yawmi 286 235 0 y38:79 yawmi 287 236 0 y38:81 yawmi 288 237 0 y39:13 yawmi~ 289 238 0 y39:15 yawma 290 239 0 y39:24 yawma 291 240 0 y39:31 yawma 292 241 0 y39:47 yawma 293 242 0 y39:60 wayawma 294 243 0 y39:67 yawma 295 243 52 x39:71 yawmikum your day 296 243 53 x40:9 yawma^'i&i~ that day 297 244 0 y40:15 yawma 298 245 0 y40:16 yawmahum 299 246 0 y40:16 !alyawma 300 247 0 y40:17 !alyawma 301 248 0 y40:17 !alyawma 302 249 0 y40:18 yawma 303 250 0 y40:27 biyawmi 304 251 0 y40:29 !alyawma 305 252 0 y40:30 yawmi 306 253 0 y40:32 yawma 307 254 0 y40:33 yawma 308 255 0 y40:46 wayawma 309 256 0 y40:49 yawma~! 310 257 0 y40:51 wayawma 311 258 0 y40:52 yawma 312 258 54 x41:9 yawmayni (2) days 313 258 55 x41:10 -'ayya!mi~ (4) days 314 258 56 x41:12 yawmayni (2) days 315 258 57 x41:16 -'ayya!mi~ days 316 259 0 y41:19 wayawma 317 260 0 y41:40 yawma 318 261 0 y41:47 wayawma 319 262 0 y42:7 yawma 320 263 0 y42:45 yawma 321 264 0 y42:47 yawmu~ 322 264 58 x42:47 yawma^'i&i~ that day 323 265 0 y43:39 !alyawma 324 266 0 y43:65 yawmi~ 325 266 59 x43:67 yawma^'i&i~ that day 326 267 0 y43:68 !alyawma 327 267 60 x43:83 yawmahum their day 328 268 0 y44:10 yawma 329 269 0 y44:16 yawma 330 270 0 y44:40 yawma 331 271 0 y44:41 yawma 332 271 61 x45:14 -'yya!ma days 333 272 0 x45:17 yawma 334 273 0 y45:26 yawmi 335 274 0 y45:27 wayawma 336 274 62 x45:27 yawma^'i&i~ that day 337 275 0 y45:28 !alyawma 338 276 0 y45:34 !alyawma 339 276 63 x45:34 yawmikum your day 340 277 0 y45:35 fa!lyawma 341 278 0 y46:5 yawmi 342 279 0 y46:20 wayawma 343 280 0 y46:20 fa!lyawma 344 281 0 y46:21 yawmi~ 345 282 0 y46:34 wayawma 346 283 0 y46:35 yawma 347 284 0 y50:20 yawmu 348 285 0 y50:22 !alyawma 349 286 0 y50:30 yawma 350 287 0 y50:34 yawmu 351 287 64 x50:38 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 352 288 0 y50:41 yawma 353 289 0 y50:42 yawma 354 290 0 y50:42 yawmu 355 291 0 y50:44 yawma 356 292 0 y51:12 yawmu 357 293 0 y51:13 yawma 358 293 66 x51:60 yawmihim their day 359 294 0 y52:9 yawma 360 294 67 x52:11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 361 295 0 y52:13 yawma 362 295 68 x52:45 yawmahum their day 363 296 0 y52:46 yawma 364 297 0 y54:6 yawma 365 298 0 y54:8 yawmu~ 366 299 0 y54:19 yawmi 367 300 0 y54:48 yawma 368 301 0 y55:29 yawmi~ 369 301 69 x55:39 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 370 302 0 y56:50 yawmi~ 371 303 0 y56:56 yawma 372 303 70 x57:4 -'ayya!mi~ (6) days 373 304 0 y57:12 yawma 374 305 0 y57:12 !alyawma 375 306 0 y57:13 yawma 376 307 0 y57:15 fa!lyawma 377 308 0 y58:6 yawma 378 309 0 y58:7 yawma 379 310 0 y58:18 yawma 380 311 0 y58:22 wa!lyawmi 381 312 0 y60:3 yawma 382 313 0 y60:6 wa!lyawma 383 314 0 y62:9 yawmi 384 315 0 y64:9 yawmu 385 316 0 y64:9 liyawmi 386 317 0 y64:9 yawma 387 318 0 y65:2 wa!lyawmi 388 319 0 y66:7 !alyawma 389 320 0 y66:8 yawma 390 321 0 y68:24 !alyawma 391 322 0 y68:39 yawmi 392 323 0 y68:42 yawma 393 323 71 x69:7 -'ayya!mi~ (8) days 394 323 72 x69:15 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 395 323 73 x69:16 yawma^'i&i~ that day 396 323 74 x69:17 yawma^'i&i~ that day 397 323 75 x69:18 yawma^'i&i~ that day 398 323 76 x69:24 !l-'ayya!mi days 399 324 0 y69:35 !alyawma 400 325 0 y70:4 yawmi~ 401 326 0 y70:8 yawma 402 326 77 x70:11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 403 327 0 y70:26 biyawmi 404 327 78 x70:42 yawmahum their day 405 328 0 y70:43 yawma 406 329 0 y70:44 !lyawmu 407 330 0 y73:14 yawma 408 331 0 y73:17 yawma~! 409 331 79 x74:9 yawma^'i&i~ that day 410 332 0 y74:9 yawmu~ 411 333 0 y74:46 biyawmi 412 334 0 y75:1 biyawmi 413 335 0 y75:6 yawmu 414 335 80 x75:10 yawma^'i&i~ that day 415 335 81 x75:12 yawma^'i&i~ that day 416 335 82 x75:13 yawma^'i&i~ that day 417 335 83 x75:22 yawma^'i&i~ that day 418 335 84 x75:24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 419 335 85 x75:30 yawma^'i&i~ that day 420 336 0 y76:7 yawma~! 421 337 0 y76:10 yawma~! 422 338 0 y76:11 !lyawmi 423 339 0 y76:27 yawma~! 424 340 0 y77:12 yawmi~ 425 341 0 y77:13 liyawmi 426 342 0 y77:14 yawmu 427 342 86 x77:15 yawma^'i&i~ that day 428 342 87 x77:19 yawma^'i&i~ that day 429 342 88 x77:24 yawma^'i&i~ that day 430 342 89 x77:28 yawma^'i&i~ that day 431 342 90 x77:34 yawma^'i&i~ that day 432 343 0 y77:35 yawmu 433 343 91 x77:37 yawma^'i&i~ that day 434 344 0 y77:38 yawmu 435 344 92 x77:40 yawma^'i&i~ that day 436 344 93 x77:45 yawma^'i&i~ that day 437 344 94 x77:47 yawma^'i&i~ that day 438 344 95 x77:49 yawma^'i&i~ that day 439 345 0 y78:17 yawma 440 346 0 y78:18 yawma 441 347 0 y78:38 yawma 442 348 0 y78:39 !lyawmu 443 349 0 y78:40 yawma 444 350 0 y79:6 yawma 445 350 96 x79:8 yawma^'i&i~ that day 446 351 0 y79:35 yawma 447 352 0 y79:46 yawma 448 353 0 y80:34 yawma 449 353 97 x80:37 yawma^'i&i~ that day 450 353 98 x80:38 yawma^'i&i~ that day 451 353 99 x80:40 yawma^'i&i~ that day 452 354 0 y82:15 yawma 453 355 0 y82:17 yawmu 454 356 0 y82:18 yawmu 455 357 0 y82:19 yawma 456 357 100 x82:19 yawma^'i&i~ that day 457 358 0 y83:5 liyawmi~ 458 359 0 y83:6 yawma 459 359 101 x83:10 yawma^'i&i~ that day 460 360 0 y83:11 biyawmi 461 360 102 x83:15 yawma^'i&i~ that day 462 361 0 y83:34 fa!lyawma 463 362 0 y85:2 wa!lyawmi 464 363 0 y86:9 yawma 465 363 103 x88:2 yawma^'i&i~ that day 466 363 104 x88:8 yawma^'i&i~ that day 467 363 105 x89:23 yawma^'i&i~ that day 468 363 106 x89:23 yawma^'i&i~ that day 469 363 107 x89:25 fayawma^'i&i~ that day 470 364 0 y90:14 yawmi~ 471 364 108 x99:4 yawma^'i&i~ that day 472 364 109 x99:6 yawma^'i&i~ that day 473 364 110 x100:11 yawma^'i&i~ that day 474 365 0 y101:4 yawma 475 365 111 x102:8 yawma^'i&i~ that day Unusual transliteration symbols: ~ nunates the previous vowel ! is alif, and also hamzat-ul-wasl - is alif as a chair for hamza ' is hamza & is dhal ^ is a point (used with hamza) CONCLUSIONS: I expect Lomax to reflect on this corrected table and acknowledge the following facts: 1. We both made errors in the counting. 2. After the corrections, the fact still remains intact: the frequency of the word "YWM" (in its singular form) is equal to the number of days in a solar year: 365. 3. As Lomax has acknowledged, the frequency of dual and plural forms is 30. Does it require too much imagination to see this number as indicator of average number of days in a month? 4. The total frequency of all forms of the word "YWM" as acknowledged by Lomax, is 475, that is, 19x25. (Congratulations for discovering this fact "by accident.") God always exposes those who rejects the truth (47:29). Here is how: First, in our previous arguments on the code 19, Lomax always tried to come up with different ways of count that were not divisible by the code. In other words, he always escaped from that number, fulfilling the prophetic description of 74:50. However, here, God Almighty trapped him with that number. In trying to escape from 365 he resorted to 475, a number divisible by 19. Observing his 19-phobic behavior, I am sure he would have rejected the total 475 had he noticed that it was divisible by 19 or had we introduced it as an evidence for the mathematical code of the Quran. Second, Lomax translated SOME of those forms in his list. Inadvertently, he demonstrated the truth since NONE of the forms he has translated were counted by us. If you count the frequency of UNtranslated form(s) you will have 365. Coincidence? Also there was a divine sign for Lomax to stop and reflect. He noticed it, but did not take heed. Lomax wrote: "The total count is 476 instead of 475 because Yuksel's unused 297 is numbered. Interestingly, this is number 365 in my list!" He does not know that God Almighty shows His signs to us even through sloppy work. 5. Fuad Abdulbaqy's concordance is much more accurate than the concordances used by Lomax. His concordance, Flugel, (1) misses three occurrences out of 475, (2) does not follow the standard verse numbering, and (3) divides words into fictional different forms, confusing irrelevant vowels with letters. On the other hand, Abdulbaqy's concordance, (1) misses only one occurrence out of 475 and makes the correction in its introduction. (2) follows the standard verse numbering, and (3) divides words according to a grammatically reasonable classification. Despite my previous suggestions, Lomax is still insisting on not using this most accurate and popular index. Abdulbaqi's concordance lists only 9 different forms of this word. Some of those forms should be combined, since the suffix "alif" does not add any extra meaning; except showing that the word is used as an object in the sentence. Therefore, we have only 6 different forms of this word mentioned in the Quran, not 34 diffirent forms as Lomax claims. Here are the different forms of "YWM" listed by "Mu'jam-ul Mufahras Lielfaz-il Quran-il Kareem," preceded by their frequency in the Quran: 365 ................ ywm, .................... day 5 ................ ywm-kum ............. your day 5 ................ ywm-hum ............. their day 3 ................ ywm-ayn .............. two days 27 ................ ayyaam ................ days 70 ................ ywm-ezen ............ that day ----------------------------------------------------- 475 (19x25) "Indeed, they have rejected this without studying and examining it, and before understanding it. Thus did those before them disbelieve. Therefore, note the consequences for the transgressors. Some of them believe, while others disbelieve in it. Your Lord is fully aware of the evildoers." (10:39-40) "The Hour has come closer, and the moon has split. Then they saw a miracle; but they turned away and said, "Old magic." They disbelieved, followed their own desires, and adhered to their old traditions. Sufficient warnings have been delivered to alert them. Great wisdom; but all the warnings have been in vain." (54:1-5). "Disregard them until they meet THEIR DAY in which they are struck. On that DAY, their schemes will not protect them, nor will they be helped." (52:45-46) "Read your own record. TODAY, you suffice as your own reckoner." (27:14) "Then, when the horn is blown. That will be a DIFFICULT DAY. For the disbelievers, not easy." (74:9-10). "God will judge among you on the DAY OF RESURRECTION regarding all your disputes." (22:69). "You shall respond to your Lord before a DAY comes which is decreed inevitable by God. There will be no refuge for you on THAT DAY, nor an advocate." (42:47). LOMAX: Edip Yuksel wrote: "There are 365 occurrences of the word "ywm" (day) in the quran" IF we exclude the phrase "the day when," and forms of YWM with attached pronouns, such as "their day," and all the dual and plural occurrences (for the phrase and the forms with attached pronouns are certainly singular), then this statement is true. It should also be noted that, to arrive at this count, one must also include all forms of "day" with prefixed prepositions and conjunctions, as well as with the suffixed alif of the indefinite accusative. Yuksel has consistently objected to specifying such detail, but it is important: what is being done here is to determine the method of counting words which allegedly leads to the "miracle." To discriminate words for counting purposes we need to know about these details. Yuksel did not indentify any counting errors in my paper. There is one, described below. But I did, apparently, incorrectly assign his counts in some cases. This was due to the fact that his original article did not specify which forms were being counted: I divided the occurrences in the Qur'an into two piles: his, on the one hand, and the others which he had not mentioned. Where there were two occurrences in one verse, and one had been counted and one had not, I assigned the first to Yuksel: until I did my study I had no way of knowing which forms he was counting and which ones he was not, and, once it was relatively clear, I forgot to go back and see if I could reassign these occurrences to show a more consistent pattern. Yuksel wrote: "I did not count the word YWM (pronounced as yawm) with suffixes. I did not need to mention this, since the word (YWM) by itself was sufficient to express this point. In my earlier posting I wrote about "the frequency of the word 'yawm' day (in its singular form) in the Quran." A non-hostile eye could have easily noticed that I did not mention "yawmahum" (their days), nor yawma-izin (that day), etc." I am very familiar with the arguments, and I did not know what Yuksel claims I would "easily notice" if I were not hostile. Of course, he can accuse me of lying, but the hostility would be his, not mine. I have never seen any mention of these distinctions in any of the writings on this subject. It was only after studying Yuksel's list that I even suspected that these forms were not being counted. Quite the contrary, I would have assumed that a count of all the occurences of the singular form of the word "day" in the Qur'an would include "their day" and "your day;" after all, these are clearly singular. But we are getting closer to a description of what the rules are for counting. It would be better if these rules were disclosed at the outset; unless, of course, one's purpose is to make the "miracle" look as impressive as possible. Yuksel wrote: "In fact, the counting method we deduce from this word is used for all other computations. For instance, in the count of the word ALLAH (GOD) we did not count the ones with the suffix HUMMA. Fascinating. I had not noticed this; this is the first mention of this fact I have seen anywhere. I was already aware that the count included the two orthographically distinct forms ALLAH and LILLAH, but not that it excluded the form with the suffix (which, in the original unmarked Arabic, consists of a single M appended to the end of the word, and which makes it mean "O Allah." Thus it is used in prayers where Allah is directly addressed by name.) The H is not part of the suffix; rather it is part of the name ALLAH. Yuksel wrote: "As we discussed in my book 'Running Like Zebras,' ... a clear, sound and consistent counting method is employed in the mathematical structure of the Quran. The confusion here is superficially created by Lomax, whose skeptical confusion reaches a crescendo when it comes to the mathematical structure of the Quran, or monotheism." "Running Like Zebras" is a fairly disorganized collection of arguments. It does not describe, at least as far as I have been able to find, any "clear, sound and consistent counting method." Yuksel is here claiming that the only confusion which exists on this subject is that which I have "created," but why is that simple facts like the omission of "Allahumma" from the count of "Allah" are not mentioned until now? Was this omission common knowledge? Again and again, the count of Allah has been described as "the frequency of occurrence of the word "God" (Allah) in the Qur'an." I would expect this to include "O God," (Allahumma) unless otherwise stated. So now I look up one of these five mentions in "The Final Testament," the one at 3:26. Sure enough, whereas Khalifa capitalizes the occurrences of Allah (translating them as GOD), here he translates Allahumma as "our god." But "our god" in Arabic would be "ilAhunaa", which does occur once in the Qur'an, at 29:46. No, Allah is the personal name of the one God in Arabic, and "Allahumma" means "O God," the one God, not merely "my God," or "our God, or "your God," but THE God. Or, to put it the way Allah has commanded us to put it, when speaking to the people of the Book, "Our god and your god are one GOD." So now we see how the meaning of the Qur'an was distorted in "Final Testament" to maintain this "miracle." One does not find this particular distortion in the earlier translation by Khalifa, "Qur'an: The Final Scripture." Yuksel wrote: "The 45:27 in my list was merely a typing error. It should have been 45:17. I also omitted one, only one count of "fa!lyawma." Lomax confused the word I have counted in 7:51 with the one I have not. He is right regarding the second omission. I have missed the word "fa!lyawma" in 46:20. This, by the way, makes my count 365." What Yuksel has not made plain is that my errors were in assigning his counts to specific forms of the word. Since I did not know at the outset what specific forms he was counting (in spite of his charge that only a hostile eye would not have known), I assigned the first form in a verse where there were two to his count and made the second form one that he had not counted. Then I forgot to go back and see if changing this would rectify his inconsistencies. This was my error. Yuksel wrote: "Below is my correction of the list presented by Lomax." Three days later, this correction still has not appeared. Perhaps it is lost in the net somewhere. But I will correct my list, found at http://www.crl.com/~marjan. BTW, if any reader has trouble accessing that site, please let me know. I have had two reports of Netscape crashing when trying to access it (but my copy reads it fine). I have refrained from posting it here because of its length. Yuksel wrote: "I expect Lomax to reflect on this corrected table and acknowledge the following facts: 1. We both made errors in the counting." I made one error in identifying the form of a count and several errors in allocating counts to Yuksel. I did not expect my work to be free of error. The error in identification, however, was not caught by Yuksel, at least not specifically. He only asserts that a total is different than what I reported, without pointing out the specific instance of the error. This was less than helpful. Yuksel wrote: "2. After the corrections, the fact still remain intact: the frequency of the word "YWM" (in its singular form) is equal to the number of days in a solar year: 365." I can now say with high certainty that, if the forms with attached pronouns and with the suffix 'idhin are excluded, it is true that there are 365 mentions. For some reason Yuksel is allergic to mentioning the exceptions; I suspect it is because it definitely dilutes the impact of the "miracle." He also does not mention inconvenient facts, such as that there are 365.25 days, not 365 days, in the solar year. Since "part of a day" is mentioned several times in the Qur'an (these have been included in the count of YAWM), perhaps there is some way to reconcile this fractional difference. Yuksel wrote: "3. As Lomax has acknowledged, the frequency of dual and plural forms is 30. Does it require too much imagination to see this number as indicator of average number of days in a month?" The average number of days in a month is, more accurately, 29.53. What Yuksel is doing is showing that cross-connections can be made between bodies of data. What he has not done is to show that these cross- connections are statistically signifigant. He has not even tried, unless one counts sheer verbal bluster as trying. One measure of effort in which I will probably never surpass Yuksel is in words per argument. Just look at "Running Like Zebras." Yuksel wrote: "4. The total frequency of all forms of the word "YWM" as acknowledged by Lomax, is 475, that is, 19x25. (Congratulations for discovering this fact "by accident.")" I have elsewhere stated the obvious: one out of nineteen statistics, collected at random, will be divisible by 19. This is not a "miracle." So the existence of 19-divisible statistics does not prove anything, unless it is shown that they occur substantially more often than one out of nineteen examinations. Of course, if one may manipulate counting criteria, one may make it appear that they occur much more often. This is why it is so important that the criteria for counting be clearly and specifically stated in a way that they cannot be manipulated. By selecting such criteria, knowing the effects in advance, one may make it appear that 19-divisible statistics are more common than one would expect by chance, but there is a limit to this effect. Essentially, if one has selected the criteria to make a certain group of counts come out 19-divisible, assuming that the original data is random and not ordered by 19-divisibility, this selection should not increase the occurrence of 19-divisibility in new counts done after the selection. But if the selection criteria can be nudged each time, because of the unique character of each word, for example, there is no limit to the number of "miraculous" statistics that could be created with diligent labor. Yuksel wrote: "God always exposes those who rejects the truth (47:29). Here is how: In our previous arguments on the code 19, Lomax always tried to come up with different ways of count that were not divisible by the code." What I have done is not to deny legitimate counts, but to show that there are alternate ways of counting. With a real "mathematical code," this will not deny a legitimate decoding; it only bears on the question of whether or not the counting may have been manipulated to produce the announced result. Yuksel wrote: "In other words, he always escaped from that number, fulfilling the prophetic description of 74:50. However, here, God Almighty trapped him with that number. In trying to escape from 365 he resorted to 475, a number divisible by 19. Observing his 19-phobic behavior, I am sure he would have rejected the total 475 had he noticed that it was divisible by 19 or had we introduced it as an evidence for the mathematical code of the Quran." I have never denied that there are many nineteen-divisible counts in the Qur'an. Yuksel has simply lost his mind in his polemic. Yuksel wrote: "Second, Lomax translated SOME of those forms in his list. Inadvertently, he demonstrated the truth since NONE of the forms he has translated were counted by us. If you count the frequency of UNtranslated form(s) you will have 365. Coincidence?" Not at all. I only translated forms which were apparently not included in Yuksel's list. Had Yuksel's list, proposed as proof, been correct, there would have been no problem, except for one word, which I still promise I will get to. Yuksel wrote: "Also there was a divine sign for Lomax to stop and reflect. He noticed it, but did not take heed: "The total count is 476 instead of 475 because Yuksel's unused 297 is numbered. Interestingly, this is number 365 in my list!" He does not know that God Almighty shows His signs to us even through sloppy work." But I did notice it, and commented on it. This number is an artifact of my work, combined with Yuksel's work. We might choose to consider that as a sign that Allah is guiding our work. I have no problem with that; certainly I ask him for that. But we might also choose to consider it a sign that statistics like this turn up in collections of numbers of all kinds, not just in Qur'an, and I am certain that this is true, and Allah has power over all things. Yuksel wrote: "5. Fuad Abdulbaqy's concordance is much more accurate than the concordances used by Lomax. His concordance, Flugel, (1) misses three occurrences out of 475, (2) does not follow the standard verse numbering, and (3) divides words into fictional different forms, confusing irrelevant vowels with letters. On the other hand, Abdulbaqy's concordance, (1) misses only one occurrence out of 475 and makes the correction in its introduction. (2) follows the standard verse numbering, and (3) divides words according to a grammatically reasonable classification. Despite my previous suggestions, Lomax is still insisting on not using this most accurate and popular index." I am flabbergasted that Yuksel somehow tries to turn the fact that I discovered three errors in Flugel (and now one more) into some kind of defect on my part. No errors were discovered in Kassis. I have only one reason for not using AbdulBaqi: I do not have a copy. I have ordered one. Since Yuksel has now asserted that Abdulbaqy "divides words according to a grammatically reasonable classification," will he now accept AbdulBaqi's classifications as legitimate for a preliminary investigation of word frequencies in the Qur'an? In other words, if AbdulBaqi lists two forms separately, we will not combine them, and if he combines them, we will not separate them? This does not mean that, if word frequencies in AbdulBaqi turn out to show a clear pattern in the Qur'an, we might not then look for ways in which AbdulBaqi's classifications might be adjusted, but only that we will not deviate from these classifications *before* we have shown such a pattern. Without *some* clear method of identifying words, it will remain possible that the "miraculous" counts are merely an artifact of the counting process. Yuksel wrote: "Abdulbaqi's concordance lists only 9 different forms of this word. Some of those forms should be combined, since the suffix "alif" does not add any extra meaning; except showing that the word is used as an object in the sentence. Therefore, we have only 6 different forms of this word mentioned in the Quran, not 34 diffirent forms as Lomax claims." That one classification is legitimate does not deny that other classifications are legitimate. In this discussion, an excess of information is necessary at the beginning; it appears that Yuksel would like to cover up the various differences. I did not claim that it was illegitimate to combine the alif-suffixed forms, for example, nor that there was anything wrong with combining the genetive with nominative and accusative forms. In fact, my piece was primarily investigational: to determine exactly what was being counted, in the absence of clear statements from Yuksel and other claimants. However, note the slipperiness of what Yuksel is saying: AbdulBaqi lists the alif-suffixed forms separately, but we will combine them because it "does not add any meaning;" i.e., the alif only indicates how the word is being used in the sentence (which often does add meaning), but does not make a variation in the meaning of the noun itself. But this could also be asserted about "yawmikum," etc., (that it is "your" day does not make it other than a "day") and it is even more true about "ALLHM"; for the M does not change the meaning of ALLH, any more than prefixing a YA to the sacred name changes its meaning (both forms would mean "O God!"). It is no wonder that the rules for counting words have not been stated. Yuksel, I suspect, knows that if he states clear rules, there will still be this exception and that exception. Yuksel wrote: "Here are the different forms of "YWM" listed by "Mu'jam-ul Mufahras Lielfaz-il Quran-il Kareem," preceded by their frequency in the Quran: 365 ywm day 5 ywm-kum your day 5 ywm-hum their day 3 ywm-ayn two days 27 ayyaam days 70 ywm-ezen that day --------------------------------- 475 (19x25)" It appears that this summary is accurate (except for a minor detail: the count for "ywm-hum" includes "ywm-him"). It matches my corrected database derived from Kassis and Flugel. Note that the occurrences of words do include all the forms with prefixes, but not those with suffixes other than alif. But, looking at this summary, I was able to find one more error in Flugel that I did not discover previously. Flugel counts 40:16 as an occurrence of yawmahum. However, the "hum" is not attached to "yawm." Instead, it is a separate pronoun. With the correction implied by this, my counts match the AbdulBaqi counts. Note that Yuksel did not catch this error, though he did assert, correctly, that I had missed a count (actually, the count was not missed, but rather misidentified). He did not specify the misidentified count, though the whole point of my publication of the detailed list and the summary totals by form was to make it easier to find discrepancies like this. It appears that Yuksel reasons from conclusions, not from primary evidence. The current database may be found at http://www.crl.com/~marjan, as 365day.doc. Yuksel wrote: "Indeed, they have rejected this without studying and examining it, and before understanding it. Thus did those before them disbelieve." I have probably studied and examined the "miracle of the nineteen" more closely than nearly every supporter or critic of it. Yuksel may be an exception, and I think there are a few others. As to "understanding," Allah knows best who is best in understanding. I continue to examine the claims of numerical coherency in the Qur'an. That the boy cried "wolf" falsely so many times does not prove that there is no wolf, only that the boy is not to be trusted. YUKSEL: Yes Lomax, the answer was attached. Thank you. I was expecting an acknowledgement of the fact that the singular form of the word "ywm" (day), (without suffixes) occurs in the Quran 365 times, its plural forms "yawmayn" and "ayyaam" occur 30 times, and all the forms of the word occur 475 (19x25) times. However, you chose not to acknowledge this simple fact. LOMAX: The day you learn to be fully accurate in what you say, that day will I acknowledge what you say as true without reservation. You still have not quite done it. I will say what I can say. If it is not enough for you, well, may Allah inform us as to the truth. The word "ywm" in all its forms occurs in the Qur'an, according to my research, 475 times. This is equal to 19x25, for those who consider such correspondences significant. The dual and plural forms together occur 30 times. If one excludes forms with any suffix other than the alif of the accusative, and the dual and plural forms, there remain 365 occurrences. All these facts are either explicitly stated in my corrected paper or are easily derived from it. Now, you have repeatedly stated that there is a clear and concise method for counting words in the Qur'an. (1) What is this method? Can you state it in a way such that it can be applied to any word, without knowing in advance what the word is? Can it be stated so clearly that a computer algorithm could be used to count words? (2) With the word "Yawm," all forms together occur an exact multiple of 19 times. This seems to be significant to you. If we count a series of words like "yawm" in the Qur'an, do you expect that the totals for all forms of the words (let us restrict ourselves to nouns, for simplicity) will be divisible by 19 more than would be expected from random variation? We already know that this is not true for "Allah." In this case, in the received text, there are 2816 occurrences. It is necessary to exclude the bismillahs other than 1:1, and 9:128, and the five "Allahumma" mentions, to come up with a multiple of 19. "Allahumma" is clearly a form of "Allah," even more than is "Lillah." This whole matter exposes only how slippery are word definitions and how you have been less than open about discussing all this. In all our discussion, knowing how important was the issue of how to count words, the exclusion of "Allahumma" was never mentioned. It was never mentioned in any publication of Khalifa, as far as I am aware. Khalifa has even distorted his translation of "Allahumma" to make it appear that it does not contain the word "Allah"! Yuksel, you know the Qur'an well enough to know what is the fate of those who know the truth and who conceal it. But then there is an exception: "illa ladhiyna taabuw wa aslahuw wa bayyanuw." (2:160). It is enough for me that I have reminded you of this. You are like the magicians of Pharaoh; and you object to anyone who shines light on your ropes and hidden wires. But there remains time for you to come forward and declare the truth, though it grows short. I fully understand how difficult this would be for you. Yet the reward from Allah would be tremendous. Yuksel, you are intelligent enough to know that there are methods for objectively weighing the significance of "coincidences." It would be enough, I think, if you would fully cooperate with applying these techniques to the study of the "miracle." They are statistical techniques, and their results are thus not fully certain, but they are far more reliable than an ad hoc "Gee whiz, that's amazing," and, with a large enough sample, statistical results can be *very* reliable. [YUKSEL: Years after this internet debate, I noticed that some other people are also raising the question about ALLAHUMMA (translated as 'our Lord'), which occurs 5 times in the Quran. They ask why this word is not included in the count of ALLAH (God), which is 2698 (19x142). Those who know basics of Arabic grammar will know the reason easily. Those who do not have this knowledge can learn the difference by checking the context of the usage of ALLAHUMMA and ALLAH. Here are few clues for those who do not know Arabic: 1. "UMMA" is not really a suffix. There is no such a suffix in Arabic. ALLAHUMMA is an abbrevated statement usually translated "o my/our Lord." 2. ALLAHUMMA differs from ALLAH since it cannot be the subject in a statement. Therefore, you cannot replace ALLAHUMMA in the statements where ALLAH is the subject. For instance, "ALLAH created the universe." In Arabic you cannot say "ALLAHUMMA created the universe." Thus, the word ALLAHUMMA is not the same as ALLAH. 3. ALLAHUMMA is also different than all other attributes of God, and it may not be considered an attribute at all. For instance you can say "ALLAH is Merciful," but you cannot say "ALLAH is ALLAHUMMA." 4. ALLAHUMMA, though it contains the word ALLAH, yet it is a different word. For instance, though the attributes HAKAM (Judge) and HAKYM (Wise) contain the root letters HKM, yet they are in different forms and have different meanings. Thus each is counted seperately. Another example is RAHMAN (Gracious) and RAHYM (Merciful). Though both contain the root letters RHM, yet they are in different forms and thus they are counted seperately.] Shawki HAMDAN: He also told you that if you follow him you would be wrong. He told you that unless you verify his statements, you do not have to believe him. Have you done that Hyder ? All I hear you saying is that some anonymous person improved your awareness. Who is this person ? Maybe I can improve his awareness. The proof of the falsehood of these verses can be verified by anyone, even you ! Farid ud-Dien RICE: To what extent have you verified it, Shawki? Br. Abdurrahman Lomax was himself once a follower of Khalifa, and even knew him personally. Br. Lomax tried to verify things for himself, and then found many mistakes in Khalifa's counts. He has even posted himself here the fallacy in the number of counts of the word "Day" in the Qur'an (which the Khalifites claim to be 365, if I remember right), posting every occurrence of the word "Day" which he found. It did not turn out to be the number the Khalifites claim it is. Have you checked things to the same extent Br. Lomax has? FINALLY YUKSEL: Farid ud-Dien Rice who was relying on Lomax did not know that Lomax in the end of our argument corrected his errors. Rice and other sectarian folks, while accusing others not having checked things extensively, followed our argument blindly. I did not answer Lomax's lengthy reply, since in his last reply he finally accepted the truth without hiding it under his usual elegant and verbose rhetoric, but only with little nagging. I do not want to dwell on his misguided and erroneous new allegations. Lomax and his ditto-heads have been exposed sufficiently in our Internet argument titled "Running Like Zebras." Indeed, the truth of the matter depends neither on me nor on Lomax. It is an objective fact that can easily be verified or falsified by others. I thank to Lomax for allowing us to demonstrate one of the mathematical patterns of the Quran for those who do not accept claims without verification (17:36). Below is the complete list of the frequency of the singular word "DAY" (YaWM) in the Quran: No -----> Sura:Verse 1 ------> 1 :4 2 ------> 2:8 3 ------> 2:48 4 ------> 2:62 5 ------> 2:85 6 ------> 2:113 7 ------> 2:123 8 ------> 2:126 9 ------> 2:174 10 ------> 2:177 11 ------> 2:212 12 ------> 2:228 13 ------> 2:232 14 ------> 2:249 15 ------> 2:254 16 ------> 2:259 17 ------> 2:259 18 ------> 2:264 19 ------> 2:281 20 ------> 3:9 21 ------> 3:25 22 ------> 3:30 23 ------> 3:55 24 ------> 3:77 25 ------> 3:106 26 ------> 3:114 27 ------> 3:155 28 ------> 3:161 29 ------> 3:166 30 ------> 3:180 31 ------> 3:185 32 ------> 3:194 33 ------> 4:38 34 ------> 4:39 35 ------> 4:59 36 ------> 4:87 37 ------> 4:109 38 ------> 4:136 39 ------> 4:141 40 ------> 4:159 41 ------> 4:162 42 ------> 5:3 43 ------> 5:3 44 ------> 5:5 45 ------> 5:14 46 ------> 5:36 47 ------> 5:64 48 ------> 5:69 49 ------> 5:109 50 ------> 5:119 51 ------> 6:12 52 ------> 6:15 53 ------> 6:22 54 ------> 6:73 55 ------> 6:73 56 ------> 6:93 57 ------> 6:128 58 ------> 6:141 59 ------> 6:158 60 ------> 7:14 61 ------> 7:32 62 ------> 7:51 63 ------> 7:53 64 ------> 7:59 65 ------> 7:163 66 ------> 7:163 67 ------> 7:167 68 ------> 7:172 69 ------> 8:41 70 ------> 8:41 71 ------> 8:48 72 ------> 9:3 73 ------> 9:18 74 ------> 9:19 75 ------> 9:25 76 ------> 9:29 77 ------> 9:35 78 ------> 9:36 79 ------> 9:44 80 ------> 9:45 81 ------> 9:77 82 ------> 9:99 83 ------> 9:108 84 ------> 10:15 85 ------> 10:28 86 ------> 10:45 87 ------> 10:60 88 ------> 10:92 89 ------> 10:93 90 ------> 11:3 91 ------> 11:8 92 ------> 11:26 93 ------> 11:43 94 ------> 11:60 95 ------> 11:77 96 ------> 11:84 97 ------> 11:98 98 ------> 11:99 99 ------> 11:103 100 ------> 11:103 101 ------> 11:105 102 ------> 12:54 103 ------> 12:92 104 ------> 14:18 105 ------> 14:31 106 ------> 14:41 107 ------> 14:42 108 ------> 14:44 109 ------> 14:48 110 ------> 15:35 111 ------> 15:36 112 ------> 15:38 113 ------> 16:25 114 ------> 16:27 115 ------> 16:27 116 ------> 16:63 117 ------> 16:80 118 ------> 16:80 119 ------> 16:84 120 ------> 16:89 121 ------> 16:92 122 ------> 16:111 123 ------> 16:124 124 ------> 17:13 125 ------> 17:14 126 ------> 17:52 127 ------> 17:58 128 ------> 17:62 129 ------> 17:71 130 ------> 17:97 131 ------> 18:19 132 ------> 18:19 133 ------> 18:47 134 ------> 18:52 135 ------> 18:105 136 ------> 19:15 137 ------> 19:15 138 ------> 19:15 139 ------> 19:26 140 ------> 19:33 141 ------> 19:33 142 ------> 19:33 143 ------> 19:37 144 ------> 19:38 145 ------> 19:38 146 ------> 19:39 147 ------> 19:85 148 ------> 19:95 149 ------> 20:59 150 ------> 20:64 151 ------> 20:100 152 ------> 20:101 153 ------> 20:102 154 ------> 20:104 155 ------> 20:124 156 ------> 20:126 157 ------> 21:47 158 ------> 21:104 159 ------> 22:2 160 ------> 22:9 161 ------> 22:17 162 ------> 22:47 163 ------> 22:55 164 ------> 22:69 165 ------> 23:16 166 ------> 23:65 167 ------> 23:100 168 ------> 23:111 169 ------> 23:113 170 ------> 23:113 171 ------> 24:2 172 ------> 24:24 173 ------> 24:37 174 ------> 24:64 175 ------> 25:14 176 ------> 25:17 177 ------> 25:22 178 ------> 25:25 179 ------> 25:26 180 ------> 25:27 181 ------> 25:69 182 ------> 26:38 183 ------> 26:82 184 ------> 26:87 185 ------> 26:88 186 ------> 26:135 187 ------> 26:155 188 ------> 26:156 189 ------> 26:189 190 ------> 26:189 191 ------> 27:83 192 ------> 27:87 193 ------> 28:41 194 ------> 28:42 195 ------> 28:61 196 ------> 28:62 197 ------> 28:65 198 ------> 28:71 199 ------> 28:72 200 ------> 28:74 201 ------> 29:13 202 ------> 29:25 203 ------> 29:36 204 ------> 29:55 205 ------> 30:12 206 ------> 30:14 207 ------> 30:43 208 ------> 30:55 209 ------> 30:56 210 ------> 30:56 211 ------> 31:33 212 ------> 32:5 213 ------> 32:25 214 ------> 32:29 215 ------> 33:21 216 ------> 33:44 217 ------> 33:66 218 ------> 34:30 219 ------> 34:40 220 ------> 34:42 221 ------> 35:14 222 ------> 36:54 223 ------> 36:55 224 ------> 36:59 225 ------> 36:64 226 ------> 36:65 227 ------> 37:20 228 ------> 37:21 229 ------> 37:26 230 ------> 37:144 231 ------> 38:16 232 ------> 38:26 233 ------> 38:53 234 ------> 38:78 235 ------> 38:79 236 ------> 38:81 237 ------> 39:13 238 ------> 39:15 239 ------> 39:24 240 ------> 39:31 241 ------> 39:47 242 ------> 39:60 243 ------> 39:67 244 ------> 40:15 245 ------> 40:16 246 ------> 40:16 247 ------> 40:17 248 ------> 40:17 249 ------> 40:18 250 ------> 40:27 251 ------> 40:29 252 ------> 40:30 253 ------> 40:32 254 ------> 40:33 255 ------> 40:46 256 ------> 40:49 257 ------> 40:51 258 ------> 40:52 259 ------> 41:19 260 ------> 41:40 261 ------> 41:47 262 ------> 42:7 263 ------> 42:45 264 ------> 42:47 265 ------> 43:39 266 ------> 43:65 267 ------> 43:68 268 ------> 44:10 269 ------> 44:16 270 ------> 44:40 271 ------> 44:41 272 ------> 45:17 273 ------> 45:26 274 ------> 45:27 275 ------> 45:28 276 ------> 45:34 277 ------> 45:35 278 ------> 46:5 279 ------> 46:20 280 ------> 46:20 281 ------> 46:21 282 ------> 46:34 283 ------> 46:35 284 ------> 50:20 285 ------> 50:22 286 ------> 50:30 287 ------> 50:34 288 ------> 50:41 289 ------> 50:42 290 ------> 50:42 291 ------> 50:44 292 ------> 51:12 293 ------> 51:13 294 ------> 52:9 295 ------> 52:13 296 ------> 52:46 297 ------> 54:6 298 ------> 54:8 299 ------> 54:19 300 ------> 54:48 301 ------> 55:29 302 ------> 56:50 303 ------> 56:56 304 ------> 57:12 305 ------> 57:12 306 ------> 57:13 307 ------> 57:15 308 ------> 58:6 309 ------> 58:7 310 ------> 58:18 311 ------> 58:22 312 ------> 60:3 313 ------> 60:6 314 ------> 62:9 315 ------> 64:9 316 ------> 64:9 317 ------> 64:9 318 ------> 65:2 319 ------> 66:7 320 ------> 66:8 321 ------> 68:24 322 ------> 68:39 323 ------> 68:42 324 ------> 69:35 325 ------> 70:4 326 ------> 70:8 327 ------> 70:26 328 ------> 70:43 329 ------> 70:44 330 ------> 73:14 331 ------> 73:17 332 ------> 74:9 333 ------> 74:46 334 ------> 75:1 335 ------> 75:6 336 ------> 76:7 337 ------> 76:10 338 ------> 76:11 339 ------> 76:27 340 ------> 77:12 341 ------> 77:13 342 ------> 77:14 343 ------> 77:35 344 ------> 77:38 345 ------> 78:17 346 ------> 78:18 347 ------> 78:38 348 ------> 78:39 349 ------> 78:40 350 ------> 79:6 351 ------> 79:35 352 ------> 79:46 353 ------> 80:34 354 ------> 82:15 355 ------> 82:17 356 ------> 82:18 357 ------> 82:19 358 ------> 83:5 359 ------> 83:6 360 ------> 83:11 361 ------> 83:34 362 ------> 85:2 363 ------> 86:9 364 ------> 90:14 365 ------> 101:4 Below is the complete list of the frequency of the plural forms of the word "DAY" (AYyAM, YaWMaYN): No -----> Sura:Verse 1 ------> 2:80 2 ------> 2:184 3 ------> 2:184 4 ------> 2:185 5 ------> 2:196 6 ------> 2:203 7 ------> 2:203 8 ------> 3:24 9 ------> 3:41 10 ------> 3:140 11 ------> 5:89 12 ------> 7:54 13 ------> 10:3 14 ------> 10:102 15 ------> 11:7 16 ------> 11:65 17 ------> 14:5 18 ------> 22:28 19 ------> 25:59 20 ------> 32:4 21 ------> 34:18 22 ------> 41:9 23 ------> 41:10 24 ------> 41:12 25 ------> 41:16 26 ------> 45:14 27 ------> 50:38 28 ------> 57:4 29 ------> 69:7 30 ------> 69:24 Below is the complete list of the frequency of the word "SHaHR" (Month): No -----> Sura:Verse 1 ------> 2:185 2 ------> 2:185 3 ------> 2:194 4 ------> 2:194 5 ------> 2:217 6 ------> 5:2 7 ------> 5:97 8 ------> 9:36 9 ------> 34:12 10 ------> 34:12 11 ------> 46:15 12 ------> 97:3 That's the END of the debate on 365 days and plus, finally! Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
EdipYuksel 0 Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Aşağıdaki iddiaları yapan kişi yazdığı konuda birşey bilmiyor maalesef. Hicri takvimi Kameri ile karıştırıyor, Miladi takvimi Şemsi ile karıştırıyor. Ne var ki cehaletine oranla öylesine atıyor ki, okuyan ve dinleyen bir şey bildiğini sanıyor. Böylesine düzeysiz bir eleştiriye nasıl cevap verilebilir ki? Selam, Edip Bu mucize iddiasındaki basit çarpıtmaları inceleyelim: Dikkat ediniz; her iki mucize yalanı metninde de herhangi bir takvim değil astronomik bir olgu olan Dünyanın Güneş etrafında dönmesi referans alınmaktadır. Oysa takvimden bağımsız olarak salt astronomik olguyu ele alacak olursak bu süre 365 değil 365,25 gündür. Madem bir mucize iddiasında bulunuluyor ve herşeyi bilen, herşeye gücü yeten mükemmel yaratıcının mucize olarak Kurana böyle bir rakam yerleştirdiği söyleniyor o halde bu mucizenin tam ve kesin olmasını talep etmek hakkımız olmalı. Bugün kullandığımız Miladi Takvime (Gregoryen takvimine) göre bir yıl üç defa 365, dördüncü yılda ise 366 gün sürer. Yani bu takvimi esas alacak olursak mucizemiz yine eksiktir. Ama zaten mucize iddiasında esas alınan nokta herhangi bir takvim (yani insanların kararlaştırdığı zaman birimleri) değil astronomik olgunun kendisi. Yani Dünyanın Güneşin etrafında bir kez dönmesi esnasında kendi ekseninde kaç kez döndüğü Bu rakam 365,25′tir. Keza mucize iddiasında esas alınan herhangi bir takvim olsa iddia zaten baştan suya düşmüş olurdu. Çünkü kullanılan takvim sistemine göre tanım gereği bir yıl içindeki gün sayısı da değişir. Örneğin İslam Dünyasının kullandığı takvimde Hicri Yıl 354 gündür. Tarih boyunca kullanılmış olan farklı medeniyetlerin takvimlerinde de bir yıl farklı sayıda gün içermiştir. Yani bir yılın 365 gün olması mutlak değil sadece günümüzün çoğunluğu tarafından kullanılan Miladi Takvime göre (4 senede bir 366 gün çektiği için) kısmen doğrudur. Dolayısıyla mucizeciler mecburen yıl/sene birimini değil astronomik olgunun kendisini esas almaktalar. İşte bu noktada da diğer bir çarpıtma su yüzüne çıkmakta: Farzedelim ki bugün Muhammed Peygamberden beri İslam Dünyasında kullanılmakta olan Hicri Takvimi kullanıyoruz. Yani bir yıl 354 gün çekmekte. Farzedelim ki Dünya bu takvimi kullanıyor. Bu durumda Kuranda gün kelimesinin 365 kere geçmesinin ilginç hiçbir yanı olur muydu? Olmazdı elbette Söz konusu astronomik olguya işaret etmeleri de anlamsız olurdu. Çünkü konuyla ilgili ayetlerde Dünyadan, Güneşten, astronomiden değil herhangi şeylerden bahsediliyor. Yani iddianın bütün büyüsü/çekiciliği bizim bugün -hasbel kader- 365 gün çeken bir takvim kullanıyor olmamızda. Şundan emin olabiliriz ki eğer halâ Hicri Takvim kullanıyor olsaydık bu sefer de 354 rakamına uygun bir mucize yaratırlardı. [/url]4. Kuran Öncesi Astronomi ve Takvim Dikkat ediniz her iki mucize iddiacısı da ayrıca ne diyor? Harun YahyaKuranda gün kelimesinin 365 defa geçiyor olması, Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermesi açısından çok önemli bir bulgudur. Ömer Çelakıla ait siteden:Çünkü Dünya yörüngesi hakkında bize yüzyıllar öncesinden bilgi vermektedir.Hangi bilgi yüzyıllar öncesinden verilmekte burada? Dünyanın 365(,25) günde Güneş etrafında döndüğü zaten Kurandan yüzyıllar önce de biliniyordu. Yunan Astronomu Meton milattan önce 432 yılında (yani Kurandan 1.000 yıl önce) Dünyanın 365,25 günde Güneş etrafında döndüğünü hesaplamıştı. Ayrıca daha sonra Gregoryen reformuna uğrayan ama temel olarak bugün halâ kullanmakta olduğumuz takvim İskenderiyeli Sosigenes tarafından Kurandan yaklaşık 7 asır önce bir yılın günlerini 365,25 olarak hesaplanarak oluşturulmuş; bu takvim M.Ö. 46 yılında Jülyen Takvimi olarak kabul görmüş ve batı dünyasında Kurandan önce yüzyıllar boyunca kullanılmıştır. Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
xislam 0 Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi 16 ------> 2:259 17 ------> 2:259 That's the END of the debate on 365 days and plus, finally! Edip Yüksel2:259 Yahut şu kimse gibisi de (dikkatini çekmedi mi?)... Altı üstüne gelmiş yıkıntı bir kasabaya uğrar ve "ALLAH bunu ölümünden sonra nasıl diriltebilir," der. Bunun üzerine ALLAH onu yüz sene ölü bıraktıktan sonra diriltti. "Burada ne kadar kaldın," dedi. "Bir gün yahut günün bir parçası kadar kaldım," dedi. "Hayır, sen yüz yıl kaldın. Yiyeceğine ve içeceğine bak hala bozulmamış. Eşeğine de bak. Seni halk için bir delil yaptık.69 Kemiklere dikkat et, onları nasıl üst üste koyuyor, sonra onlara nasıl da et giydiriyoruz." Durum kendisine aydınlanınca, "Artık ALLAH'ın her şeye gücü yettiğini biliyorum," dedi. Sen böyle kimlerle konuştun Edip? Sen böyle söylediğinde "That's the END of the debate on 365 days and plus, finally!" onlar birşeyler söylemedilermi? Yoksa onlar engellendimi, veya aaaa Edip'çiğim sen haklısın falanda demedilermi? Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
xislam 0 Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Raporla Share Şubat 13, 2010 gönderildi Aşağıdaki iddiaları yapan kişi yazdığı konuda birşey bilmiyor maalesef. Hicri takvimi Kameri ile karıştırıyor, Miladi takvimi Şemsi ile karıştırıyor. Ne var ki cehaletine oranla öylesine atıyor ki, okuyan ve dinleyen bir şey bildiğini sanıyor. Burada karışık olan ne var? Dikkat ediniz; her iki mucize yalanı metninde de herhangi bir takvim değil astronomik bir olgu olan "Dünya’nın Güneş etrafında dönmesi" referans alınmaktadır. Oysa takvimden bağımsız olarak salt astronomik olguyu ele alacak olursak bu süre 365 değil 365,25 gündür. Madem bir ”mucize” iddiasında bulunuluyor ve herşeyi bilen, herşeye gücü yeten mükemmel yaratıcının mucize olarak Kuran’a böyle bir rakam yerleştirdiği söyleniyor o halde bu mucizenin ”tam ve kesin” olmasını talep etmek hakkımız olmalı. Bugün kullandığımız Miladi Takvim'e (Gregoryen takvimine) göre bir yıl üç defa 365, dördüncü yılda ise 366 gün sürer. Yani bu takvimi esas alacak olursak mucizemiz yine eksiktir. Ama zaten mucize iddiasında esas alınan nokta herhangi bir takvim (yani insanların kararlaştırdığı zaman birimleri) değil astronomik olgunun kendisi. Yani Dünya’nın Güneş’in etrafında bir kez dönmesi esnasında kendi ekseninde kaç kez döndüğü... Bu rakam 365,25′tir. Keza mucize iddiasında esas alınan herhangi bir takvim olsa iddia zaten baştan suya düşmüş olurdu. Çünkü kullanılan takvim sistemine göre tanım gereği bir yıl içindeki gün sayısı da değişir. Örneğin İslam Dünya’sının kullandığı takvimde Hicri Yıl 354 gündür. Tarih boyunca kullanılmış olan farklı medeniyetlerin takvimlerinde de bir yıl farklı sayıda gün içermiştir. Yani bir yılın 365 gün olması mutlak değil sadece günümüzün çoğunluğu tarafından kullanılan Miladi Takvim'e göre (4 senede bir 366 gün çektiği için) kısmen doğrudur. Dolayısıyla mucizeciler mecburen ”yıl/sene” birimini değil astronomik olgunun kendisini esas almaktalar. İşte bu noktada da diğer bir çarpıtma su yüzüne çıkmakta: Farzedelim ki bugün Muhammed Peygamber’den beri İslam Dünyası'nda kullanılmakta olan Hicri Takvim'i kullanıyoruz. Yani bir yıl 354 gün çekmekte. Farzedelim ki Dünya bu takvimi kullanıyor. Bu durumda Kuran’da ”gün” kelimesinin 365 kere geçmesinin ilginç hiçbir yanı olur muydu? Olmazdı elbette... Söz konusu astronomik olguya işaret etmeleri de anlamsız olurdu. Çünkü konuyla ilgili ayetlerde Dünya’dan, Güneş’ten, astronomiden değil herhangi şeylerden bahsediliyor. Yani iddianın bütün ”büyüsü/çekiciliği” bizim bugün -hasbel kader- 365 gün çeken bir takvim kullanıyor olmamızda. Şundan emin olabiliriz ki eğer halâ Hicri Takvim kullanıyor olsaydık bu sefer de 354 rakamına uygun bir mucize yaratırlardı. Böylesine düzeysiz bir eleştiriye nasıl cevap verilebilir ki? Düzeyli bir cevap verilebilir. Mesela daha önce verdiğin gibi: "şimdi anlıyorum ki, Tanrı bir yıldaki 6 saatlik artık zamanı ikiyüzlülerin yaşaması için bırakmış." hatırlıyormusun? Link to post Sitelerde Paylaş
Recommended Posts