Challenge: Produce a 4 word description of the cosmos?

[Neemai]

4 words for the Cosmos??

Dark, Spacious, Amazing & Illusory

I felt the 19 letter thing was a bit restrictive, sorry


... Neemai

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by dauer

Goodyman,

I reject supernaturalism, and tend to see all of our experiences and everything we know as at least partially painted by our subjectivity, so I don't really think, if there is such a thing as absolute truth, that it's possible to know that we know it. All systems of logic, all philosophies, maintain certain a priori assumptions without which they fall apart. And all personal experiences are exactly that: personal. Religions tend to try and justify their belief systems, but their justifications are only appealing to those who already believe and those looking for a reason to believe.

Greetings Dauer.

I respect your decision. Dauer, I did not already believe in the Al-Koran. The Koran is the only book on earth that has challenged me to produce a chapter similar. If I cannot create a similar verse, then I have to be honest with myself, and accept its a Divine book. The good thing about mathematics is that it's a language we all understand. I expect a book calling it self a word from God to have qualities which no human can compose. I think I've found that book.

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by Neemai

4 words for the Cosmos??

Dark, Spacious, Amazing & Illusory

I felt the 19 letter thing was a bit restrictive, sorry


... Neemai

Greetings Neemai.

Great attempt. Yes, it gets more and more restrictive when you have to mathematcally calculate each letter.

Regards goodyman.

[dauer]

goodyman,

How do you understand other mathematical claims like bible code?

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by dauer

goodyman,

How do you understand other mathematical claims like bible code?

Dauer- Which version of the bible would you be referring to?

[Muslimwoman]

Theres a verse in the Koran which begins every chapter, it translates as, ''In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.''

Forgive me but Sura 9 Al-Tawba, does not begin with bismillah ir rakman ir raheem.


Tao

I accept what you are saying, that most would disbelieve if you could produce such a thing. However the Quran is not simply an artistic piece, using clever prose. The mathematical equations cannot be denied, so if you could produce a similar verse then even the die hards would be unable to reject it, as it would be verifiable (as long it is produced in arabic and the maths adds up. ).

Salaam

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by Muslimwoman

Forgive me but Sura 9 Al-Tawba, does not begin with bismillah ir rakman ir raheem.

Greetings sister- Yes, thanks for the correction.

[Muslimwoman]

assalamaleykum Goodyman

The other problem I have with taking this challenge out of the arabic language is the problem with transliteration, which is only a representation and not universal. We are aware that arabic experts have spent centuries trying to take up this challenge and of course failing, so I doubt that anyone on this forum is going to find the key.

As Dauer mentioned the Bible does apparently contain a code, which I believe is in the form of cryptography rather than purely mathematical. It is my understanding that this was found in the original Hebrew, not a translation. Maybe Dauer can enlighten us on this?

Salaam

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by Muslimwoman

assalamaleykum Goodyman

The other problem I have with taking this challenge out of the arabic language is the problem with transliteration, which is only a representation and not universal. We are aware that arabic experts have spent centuries trying to take up this challenge and of course failing, so I doubt that anyone on this forum is going to find the key.

As Dauer mentioned the Bible does apparently contain a code, which I believe is in the form of cryptography rather than purely mathematical. It is my understanding that this was found in the original Hebrew, not a translation. Maybe Dauer can enlighten us on this?

Salaam

Walikum asslam wa rakmatullah he wa baraka tu hu.

I agree with you, it is not fair to take it out of the original language.

I came across an article which claimed it produced a similar verse as the Al-Koran Al-Kareem, but when I analyzed it, it fell apart, even though they used half of the Bismillah from the Koran.

The Koran informs us that the Torah is from God. So, I would not deny the existence of a mathematical pattern in the Torah. It would be crazy to look for a mathematical pattern in a translation. Peace.

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Neemai

4 words for the Cosmos??

Dark, Spacious, Amazing & Illusory

I felt the 19 letter thing was a bit restrictive, sorry


... Neemai

lolz... And the four word "thing" too huh? 30 letters five words.... That's not even close.

[dauer]

goodyman:

Dauer- Which version of the bible would you be referring to?

The masoretic text. Bible code was in the news a lot a number of years ago, based on the gematria of the Hebrew letters. I don't know a lot about it as that type of thing doesn't really interest me.

Other than that gematria has often been used instead to show the relationship between different words. Someone I know is working on a project to show a logic of language based around the 231 gates of sefer yetzirah and gematria: http://www.qlipoth.com/Members/WordGroups.aspx

Unfortunately he's been having some problems getting the calc working, but after a hiatus he's back at it again.

In both of these cases though, what I see is a willingness to seek and attribute supernatural involvement to natural occurances. I think that sometimes we devalue both chance, human potential, and our own willingness to be convinced.

This article by Paigham Mustafa is about Rashad Khalifa's claims to be a Messenger of G!d and on that authority removing a few words from the Quran in his translation because they didn't fit the pattern perfectly:

http://www.islamawareness.net/Devian...pretender.html

Rashad claims those verses were added at a later time by scribes. The article also examines some of his more megalomaniacal claims to authority and other ways he's acted on them in the way he translated the quran (like reading in allusions to himself as a messenger.)

The wikipedia article on Rashad Khalifa points out that a number of Muslim countries banned his books and branded him a heretic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashad_Khalifa

His followers believe that Islam, as well as Judaism and Christianity, are "severely corrupted and will simply die out."

Lastly, this article covers some of the issues mentioned previously as well as the inconsistency of the Rashad Khalifa's methodology, probability, similar number repetition in the bible, and examples of the results of arbitrarily looking for appearances of the number 19.

The numerology of Dr. Rashad Khalifa - scientist Skeptical Inquirer - Find Articles

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Muslimwoman

Tao

I accept what you are saying, that most would disbelieve if you could produce such a thing. However the Quran is not simply an artistic piece, using clever prose. The mathematical equations cannot be denied, so if you could produce a similar verse then even the die hards would be unable to reject it, as it would be verifiable (as long it is produced in arabic and the maths adds up. ).

Salaam

Ty MW,

Well after coming back to this thread today I cannot tell you how disappointed I was to see that yet again its another Muslim coming in deceitfully to propagate myths. I have been through this argument before on other forums and I will try to very briefly give my take on the truth.

First of all the Q'uran was not compiled by Muhammad himself. In his time it was a collection of writings on various mediums held in many places. And he left no instruction as to the order of compilation on the finished article.

Secondly the number 19 already had mathematical significance to the mathematicians of that era and region. It is clear that they were responsible for fitting the Q'uran around the numerical values we see today. We can prove this as there are several fragments of texts that have been found that do not support this so called divine rule and clearly indicate that the Q'uran was chopped to bits and reassembled several times to achieve what we see today. The mathematicians of that time and region were the greatest in the world and if it were not for them much of the classical science we have today would have been lost. But it is not a divine numerical code, its a clever human one.

Finding such deceit exposed to my mind is only further proof that the Q'uran to be a deliberate effort of artifice masquerading as divinity. Perhaps this deceit is at the root of what causes people to continue to behave in such a way as the misleading OP'r on this thread ?

Tao

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by dauer

goodyman:



The masoretic text. Bible code was in the news a lot a number of years ago, based on the gematria of the Hebrew letters. I don't know a lot about it as that type of thing doesn't really interest me.

Other than that gematria has often been used instead to show the relationship between different words. Someone I know is working on a project to show a logic of language based around the 231 gates of sefer yetzirah and gematria: Qlipoth.com | Word Groups

None of this can I verify. Can you help me verify it? My presentation is verifiable, I can answer any question you may have on it.

Unfortunately he's been having some problems getting the calc working, but after a hiatus he's back at it again.

In both of these cases though, what I see is a willingness to seek and attribute supernatural involvement to natural occurances. I think that sometimes we devalue both chance, human potential, and our own willingness to be convinced.

This article by Paigham Mustafa is about Rashad Khalifa's claims to be a Messenger of G!d and on that authority removing a few words from the Quran in his translation because they didn't fit the pattern perfectly:

Rashad Khalifa Purifier or Pretender?

Rashad claims those verses were added at a later time by scribes. The article also examines some of his more megalomaniacal claims to authority and other ways he's acted on them in the way he translated the quran (like reading in allusions to himself as a messenger.)

The wikipedia article on Rashad Khalifa points out that a number of Muslim countries banned his books and branded him a heretic:

Rashad Khalifa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

His followers believe that Islam, as well as Judaism and Christianity, are "severely corrupted and will simply die out."

Lastly, this article covers some of the issues mentioned previously as well as the inconsistency of the Rashad Khalifa's methodology, probability, similar number repetition in the bible, and examples of the results of arbitrarily looking for appearances of the number 19.

The numerology of Dr. Rashad Khalifa - scientist Skeptical Inquirer - Find Articles

All my sources are followers of the Al-Koran Al-Kareem and the Sunnah of Muhammad. Rashid Khalifa rejects the Hadith and the Sunnah. If you would like to discuss about Rashid Khalifa you'll be better off in the submitters forum.

[goodyman]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Ty MW,

Well after coming back to this thread today I cannot tell you how disappointed I was to see that yet again its another Muslim coming in deceitfully to propagate myths. I have been through this argument before on other forums and I will try to very briefly give my take on the truth.

May be all your arguments are based by guessing.

First of all the Q'uran was not compiled by Muhammad himself. In his time it was a collection of writings on various mediums held in many places. And he left no instruction as to the order of compilation on the finished article.

This thread was started to see if someone could produce a verse similar to the Al-Koran Al-Kareem, it seem's like No one will be able to. Especially not by you.

Secondly the number 19 already had mathematical significance to the mathematicians of that era and region. It is clear that they were responsible for fitting the Q'uran around the numerical values we see today. We can prove this as there are several fragments of texts that have been found that do not support this so called divine rule and clearly indicate that the Q'uran was chopped to bits and reassembled several times to achieve what we see today. The mathematicians of that time and region were the greatest in the world and if it were not for them much of the classical science we have today would have been lost. But it is not a divine numerical code, its a clever human one.

Produce a verse like it? If a man 1400 years ago could produce it, surely a man living in the modern 21st century can produce it.

Finding such deceit exposed to my mind is only further proof that the Q'uran to be a deliberate effort of artifice masquerading as divinity. Perhaps this deceit is at the root of what causes people to continue to behave in such a way as the misleading OP'r on this thread ?

Tao

It's funny that the previous generations did not even know that there was a mathematical structure in the Koran. Its thanks to the computer that its been realized.

[dauer]

Tao,

The mathematicians of that time and region were the greatest in the world and if it were not for them much of the classical science we have today would have been lost. But it is not a divine numerical code, its a clever human one.

That makes sense to me. I was aware of the mathematical genius that has sprung from the arab world (not to mention philosophical. Judaism would probably be quite different today were it not for the arabic translations of greek philosophers and the application and adaptation of the ideas in those texts to Islam. Christianity would probably be different too, as Aquinas cited Rambam who seems to have been directly influenced by the methods of the mutakalim.)




goodyman,

I don't know what you mean by verify. You mean to show that it's there or to show that it's True? I don't study these types of things. I've no interest in convincing myself that I've found Truth in a finite patriarchal text.

All my sources are followers of the Al-Koran Al-Kareem and the Sunnah of Muhammad.

So in other words, in a critical examination of a Muslim claim, you only accept those who believe the claim to begin with as valid sources?

One of the important things that comes up in a critical analysis of Rashid Khalifa's work is that he found a sura that doesn't go along with the pattern. But because he believed so strongly in the significance of the number 19 he altered it.

If you would like to discuss about Rashid Khalifa you'll be better off in the submitters forum.

There is no submitter's forum here, and you did not post this under Islam. It's under Abrahamic religion. Even if it were posted under Islam, the submitters are a group with some relationship to Islam. There's no reason I can see why that topic of inquiry is either invalid or irrelevant. If this truly has no bearing on the matter please demonstrate so.