Why Remove 9:127&129?

[Layth]

Dear Jonny,

JK- Oh so now the tashkant Quran is a distorted copy whilst your warsh is the correct one? Did GOD tell you that yours is the correct one and the other is distorted? ALSO remeber the count of the word "allah" is not the only pt. If you dont include 1:1 then the count of the word "rahman" goes to 56. And dont tell me it still remains significant because it does since there is one attribute of GOD whos GV is exactly equal to 57 amongst three others being 2698,19 and 114 correpsonding exactly to the count given by RK BEFORE HE EVEN KNEW abt those new findings. All of this is violated if we accept your warsh version.

My Warsh?

Please be objective in your discussion. We are discussing Hafs and Warsh. You decided to throw in a distorted copy of the Quran and then, falsly, claimed it was Warsh! In-fact, had you ever bothered to study th Tashkent you would know it is a discredeted copy of the Quran laden with textual errors and mistakes.

And yes, the count of `Allah` is the only point here because that was the driving force behind Rashad doing a u-turn and deleting the 2 verses so as to make the data fit.

Finally, on your comment about `Rahman` the answer is neither 56 nor 57, but 169 occurances.

JK- But bro Edip has made it clear that there were spaces which justify the verse numbering. AND if those verse numberings are arbitrary then how do you explain their extreme significance which lead one of my bros from Germany, Mohamed Almart(momo) believe that indeed code-19 is amazing. Here check this out:
http://19.org/forum/index.php/m/19526/222/#msg_19526

There are `marks` (not spaces) which can be argued to justify the numbering. And converting the marks to numbers yeilds the following structure:

1:1 Basmalah
2:1 Basmallah
3:1 Basmallah
etc.

I think you really need to define what the Quran is to you as it is clear we do not agree on this point (I believe the 113 Basmalla`s are part and parcel of the revelaed Quran while you seem to believe you can ignore 112 of these and treat them as if they were a seperate revelation!).

 

JK- You dont count "allahumma", the sufficed form, a rule applied by Abdul Baqi in his "allah" count long before RK and also applied elsewhere such as in the count of the word "yaum" and "ayaam" which also only give signifcant results shld the sufficed forms be excluded. So the method is completely consitent.

?! I am counting the 112 occurances of `Allah` that you and other 19 proponents convientntly ignore.

You want to talk `Allah` numbers with me: it will have to be 2811 or 2810 (neither of which works as a 19 multiple).

JK- No they dont. At least not bro Edip and momo whove thoroughly analysed this. Momo is a professinal in IT and bro Edip has worked together with RK and he knows exactly the procedure more than any of us. BUT i myself also verified everything and found that it was true. GOD Bless!

I do my own analysis (see 17:36). And my analysis shows the methods used by those who remove the 2 verses to be extremely flawed.

[Hati]

?! I am counting the 112 occurances of `Allah` that you and other 19 proponents convientntly ignore.

You want to talk `Allah` numbers with me: it will have to be 2811 or 2810 (neither of which works as a 19 multiple).

Salam,

       I agree not 2698:

                 2699 + 112 = 2811 times repeated in AQ

           Hati

[jonny_k]

Peace "layth",

Dear Jonny,

My Warsh?

Please be objective in your discussion. We are discussing Hafs and Warsh. You decided to throw in a distorted copy of the Quran and then, falsly, claimed it was Warsh! In-fact, had you ever bothered to study th Tashkent you would know it is a discredeted copy of the Quran laden with textual errors and mistakes.

JK- Who declared it so, sunni and shia?

And yes, the count of `Allah` is the only point here because that was the driving force behind Rashad doing a u-turn and deleting the 2 verses so as to make the data fit.

JK- RK didnt count using warsh. Abdul Baqi also didnt count using warsh. He included the 1:1 in his count, as bro Edip mentioned clearly and youc an ask him again if you want, but then he forgot to include it in his final count so it became 2698. RK made the same mistake in another verse where he missed counting a word "allah". AGAIN AND AGAIN rbo Edip has mentioned this and again and again you wont listen.

Finally, on your comment about `Rahman` the answer is neither 56 nor 57, but 169 occurances.

JK- How come now you suddenly included all 112 unnumbered Bismillahs plus even 1:1 whilst for the word "allah" you didnt? What is this now? ARE YOU PLAYING AROUND WITH ME?

There are `marks` (not spaces) which can be argued to justify the numbering. And converting the marks to numbers yeilds the following structure:

1:1 Basmalah
2:1 Basmallah
3:1 Basmallah
etc.

I think you really need to define what the Quran is to you as it is clear we do not agree on this point (I believe the 113 Basmalla`s are part and parcel of the revelaed Quran while you seem to believe you can ignore 112 of these and treat them as if they were a seperate revelation!).

JK- i believe the Quran to be the one almost like hafs  minus 9:128-129 i.e. with 6346 verses, a "siin" in bastatan instead of "saad" and the noon spelled out "noon waw noon" at the beginning of Chapter 60. THIS is also what i predict the oldest Quran would look like especially the lack of 9:128&129 whilst all other hafs verses there.

?! I am counting the 112 occurances of `Allah` that you and other 19 proponents convientntly ignore.

JK- Wernt you the one who boasted we could get 2698 "allah" counts with warsh? ALSO we excluded 112 Bismillahs FOR ALL THREE ATTRIBUTES CONSITENTLY. If we counted "allah" excluding those 112 and then again counted "rahman" including them ONLY THEN WLD YOU HAVE A POINT. HOW many times do i have to mention this?

You want to talk `Allah` numbers with me: it will have to be 2811 or 2810 (neither of which works as a 19 multiple).

JK- As i said all three words in the Bism were counted consistently excluding 112. By this GOD is indicating that although those 112 Bismillahs are part of the Quran, as known by the initial count where they are included, they are unnumbered and hence the words in the are not counted.

I do my own analysis (see 17:36). And my analysis shows the methods used by those who remove the 2 verses to be extremely flawed.

JK- It's been three years now and always youve shied away from discusiing this with bro Edip. I wonder why? Everything is crystal clear as ive shown over and over. GOD Bless!

[Nun de plume]

and the noon spelled out "noon waw noon" at the beginning of Chapter 60.

You can write it however you like -- this is the real Qur'an (the recital) written in people's heads...

http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/arabicscript/Ayat/68/RA101_68.ram

The dots/marks in the older books were the pauses/stops during recitation -- these became verse numbers to aid quick lookups same as a book marker. They also caused harm taking things out of context and other imaginative innovations like code 19 stuff which doesn't preserve anything for one can easily switch letters and still preserve the code.

A L M ---> A M L

Although, that and other recital blunders would immediately be tagged as an error by those who memorized the Qur'an.

Peace

[ayman]

Peace Layth,

This is why I say that people who remove 128 & 129 lack basic arithmetic. They play a game of `pick & chose` to get the desired results rather than presenting all the evidence as it is.

This is the same approach they use with ALL their claims. For example, they pick and choose different inconsistent methods for counting the initials to get the desired preconceived results.

The count of 19 is nothing except an attractive temptation "fitna" for the disbelievers. See who is attracted to the count of 19 and you will see a disbeliever who believes in Code 19 more than he believes in the god's promise that no falsehood would enter the great reading.

The last nails in the coffin of Code 19 are being hammered here:

http://19.org/forum/index.php/t/7191/759/

Peace,

Ayman

[jonny_k]

Peace "nun de plume",
No one said that code-19 has revealed the complete Quran till now but it do so to a certain extent and defined it's boundaries via the verses. BUT i predict that one day code-19 will prove how every letter of every word of the Quran will be spelled out and i also predict that onec we find the oldest copy of the Quran during Muhammad's time when he was alive, we wont find the content of 9:128&129 in them. INFACT no one today can claim the Quran has been fully revealed to them down to every letter and word since this is just not the case yet and it has to be if GOD's promise of protection be true which id say wld be paradoxial if it isnt." GOD Bless!

[Bahman]

Dear Jonny,

My Warsh?

Please be objective in your discussion. We are discussing Hafs and Warsh. You decided to throw in a distorted copy of the Quran and then, falsly, claimed it was Warsh! In-fact, had you ever bothered to study th Tashkent you would know it is a discredeted copy of the Quran laden with textual errors and mistakes.

And yes, the count of `Allah` is the only point here because that was the driving force behind Rashad doing a u-turn and deleting the 2 verses so as to make the data fit.

Finally, on your comment about `Rahman` the answer is neither 56 nor 57, but 169 occurances.

There are `marks` (not spaces) which can be argued to justify the numbering. And converting the marks to numbers yeilds the following structure:

1:1 Basmalah
2:1 Basmallah
3:1 Basmallah
etc.

I think you really need to define what the Quran is to you as it is clear we do not agree on this point (I believe the 113 Basmalla`s are part and parcel of the revelaed Quran while you seem to believe you can ignore 112 of these and treat them as if they were a seperate revelation!).

 
?! I am counting the 112 occurances of `Allah` that you and other 19 proponents convientntly ignore.

You want to talk `Allah` numbers with me: it will have to be 2811 or 2810 (neither of which works as a 19 multiple).

I do my own analysis (see 17:36). And my analysis shows the methods used by those who remove the 2 verses to be extremely flawed.

Peace Layth and everybody:

I would like to participate your discussion with brother Khizer but my Arabic knowledge is not enough to do so.   Majority of internet users searching for truth and fact are in same situation and can not follow your Arabic based discussion.  Such transferring your knowledge is useful for Sunnis and Shia well educated one  and GW may remove the doubts.
Majority of earth habitants  able to use +-/x can understand this simply.  How about you and those that insist 9:128-129 is not man made?
Are those 16 cases coincident ?
Can any one of you take help from all world mathematician produce one like those. ?
Why these questions never answered clearly ?
I appreciate your straight response .
Peace.

[jonny_k]

Peace "nun de plume",

Forgot to address this pt of yours:

You can write it however you like -- this is the real Qur'an (the recital) written in people's heads...

JK- Are you seriously suggesting that the real Quran IS INSIDE THE SUNNIS/SHIAS HEADS???!!!! This claim is absolutely ridiculous. What if a former sunni/shia qaari becomes a submitter accepting code-19 and leaves out 9:128&129 in his recitation? What if some submitters also made their children memorize the Quran without 9:128&129? Memorizing something and calling it Quran does not make it so especially not if sectarians say so. GOD Bless!

[Nun de plume]

Peace jonny_k,

JK- Are you seriously suggesting that the real Quran IS INSIDE THE SUNNIS/SHIAS HEADS???!!!!

Yes, I’m serious that the real Qur’an is inside the Muslims heads!

This claim is absolutely ridiculous.

No, the 19 stuff is absolutely ridiculous; takes only a little knowledge of math to see this.

What if a former sunni/shia qaari becomes a submitter accepting code-19 and leaves out 9:128&129 in his recitation? What if some submitters also made their children memorize the Quran without 9:128&129?

They did that already – that RK guy, it went to his head and he became delusional looking for 19 patterns.

Memorizing something and calling it Quran does not make it so

Qur’an says it makes it so, read surah 54…

Walaqad yassarna alqur-ana lilththikri fahal min muddakirin
And We have indeed made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember?

To solve any problem/issue, it’s best to break it up into its simplest elements.

Tell exactly why the below verse does not belong – is it the word Allâh?

Fa-in tawallaw faqul hasbiya Allahu la ilaha illa huwa AAalayhi tawakkaltu wahuwa rabbu alAAarshi alAAatheemi
But if they turn away, say: "Allâh is sufficient for me. Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), in Him I put my trust and He is the Lord of the Mighty Throne." (9:129)

[belH]

Peace "nun de plume",

What if a former sunni/shia qaari becomes a submitter accepting code-19 and leaves out 9:128&129 in his recitation?

He is not a submitter any more; He becomes a Disbliever.