Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - CyberAnthro

Pages: [1] 2 3
They don't seem nearly that cool to me.

Hey Freedom Stands,

Quite the mixed metaphor you have there. Can you ruthlessly elaborate on what you mean by that, while I try to answer your question.

Cheers dawg.

Zakir Naik is a Lovecraftian demon straight from the bubbling jizz pits of Satan's private spa, the same goes for Mufti Menk and Nouman Ali Khan.

It's ridiculous that these uber-mainstream so called religious leaders like Mufti Menk, Nouman Ali Khan, Yasir Qadhi, Khalid Yasin, and the Islam Channel clergy are not receiving ANY resistance whatsoever! Like NO intellectual resistance, no inquiries, no questioning, NOTHING. Does this not creep you out? The only reason it would not creep anybody out is because they are not aware of the massive large-scale seismic effects they have on the mass population and what function they serve on a manipulative psychological level. I have yet to hear the demigod Mufti Menk talk about those who respect the Quran more than anything else. You probably won't hear him talk about it, too much vested interest.


I accept the debate. Let me know whether Zakir accepts it. Then let determine the time and place of the debate.

You can reach me via


Why hasn't this happened yet? :brickwall:

I see you chose not to explore this forum and waste forum space by starting a new thread when there's sticky threads on the very thing you're talking about.

Are you new to internet? See Sticky/pinned threads.


I'm not trying to reveal contradictions in what you say.  I reject the code 19 numerology Rashad/Yuksel have been promoting.  I do think however there is something remarkable about the 19 in that verse - as Quran states it as proof for the believers.  I tried to briefly touch upon what proof that is.  It has nothing to do with numerology but shows how Quran managed to accurately describe the potassium in human ashes - while the semantics to denote potassium in every human language has shifted over the centuries (Kalium -> Potassium).  Which is very relevant to the OP, it's a supreme example of how Quran transcends any shift in semantics over time.  God is all knowing.

To boil this down.  God knows at the time when Quran was revealed man had no idea about what potassium is.  There was not even a word available for it to describe it accurately.  At the time Quran was revealed God knew at some point in the future we would discover potassium as a different substance from sodium based on it's unique proton/electron count, being 19.

To me this is one of the biggest proofs inside Quran of its divine origin.  I must be doing a very poor job explaining this discovery, since it has been mostly ignored ever since I posted on my findings.  I can't understand how this linguistic miracle hasn't sparked a much larger debate. 

When I see Yuksel debating with an atheist and trying to use some failed numerologic argument, I really feel ashamed in his place.  He would be much wiser to use the real evidence of divine origin that Quran is offering, without requiring some unscientific numerologic superstition.

When you point out to any physicist Quran describes creation starting with pairs (deuterium) fully in lign with big bang model and modern understanding of physics, it will definitely draw their curiosity.  When you point out to someone with a physics degree that Quran remarkably states the proton count of the potassium in human ashes, they will be intrigued.

When you start using arguments showing you are so irrational to confuse numerology with mathematics, any rational, scientifically thinking mind is already ignoring you and no longer taking you seriously.

The potassium connection is interesting. Send us the link to the relevant articles. Before I comment on the ubiquitous yet infinitely refuted claims about the number nineteen in the tablet being numerology, are you aware of the linkage (not semantic) between the number of segments in the tablet to super-heavy elements?

I'm paraphrasing from the Yuksels book about nineteen here. Basically elements with an atomic number equal to 104 and higher are called super-heavy elements.  They're not found naturally on earth and can only be synthesized in special laboratories. They're also radioactive, so they tend to decay and turn into other atoms. You seem well-read so wont go into the details.

So Element 114 had long been predicted by theoretical calculations to be the highest stable element, and correct me if I'm mistaken, (I will attempt to find the source) experiments show that it is the highest producible element with a notably high half-life. If you research it you'll find articles saying scientists have managed to synthesize elements with a higher atomic number 114, deeper research will reveal the controversy and that they have not been verified/peer reviewed. I actually tweed the article a few months back:

Back to the Yuksel/khalifa thing, indeed much of what Khalifa published in his works are numerology, no question about it. Just gonna clarify here, that I don't agree 100% with anybody, it's not possible. True communication is only possible between equals, and the tragedy is that we're not all equals. So when it comes to the Yukselian tendencies to quote verses from the tablet to the famous skeptics etc, it worries me because he is a good logician to a certain extent, but when it comes to the semantics I feel as though he is quoting them without mentioning their low degree of objectivity in terms of their intended. When he corresponded with Carl Sagan though, I differ. Because the debate wasn't about the semantic dimensions, it was primarily the mathematical and statistical analysis.

I suggest you spend a little bit of time to correct any of your potential misconceptions specifically with regards to the nuomena (explained in OP) being numerology. It is very easy to conflate maths and numerology, especially in this case where you have millions of Rashadians who subscribe to this and are put in the same category as 'rational monotheists'. I'd like to point out that Edip left a little easter egg in his reformist translation, which could potentially render his own semantical approach to the tablet redundant/irrelevant, to a certain extent. Read on and I'll show ya.

I'm not focusing on semantics here, just mathematical. Did you know, that a German Jewish scholar, Judah ben Samuel HaChasid aka "Rabbi Judah the Pious," had discovered a mathematical system based on the number 19 in the original parts of the Old Testament in 11th century? That aside... Would it be logically valid to say that the word "nineteen" in the 74th segment of the tablet has remained semantically static since the era of the arabian tongue? Perhaps so. Do you not find it somewhat interesting that it was found in 1974? Remember, no semantics, no nusemantics here. Number of passages in the whole tablet is 19x334.

One segment of the tablet is missing the basmalah, 19 segments later, the symbols that represent the basmalah are found in that segment. It follows that the sum of the segment numbers from segment 9 (the segment with the missing symbols of basmalah) to segment 27 (the segment where the extra basmalah occurs), goes like this... where s=segment(s9+s10+s11+s12+s13... +s26+s27) equals 342. 342 is the total number of passages between the two basmalahs in the 27th segment of the tablet. 342 is too a multiple of 19. I say "is", it's not how it appears to me, it just "is". These are just a few examples of mathematical intricacies (not numerology) which is separate from semantics. I'll leave it there for now. But my point is, when you say you're not a code 19 believer, what do you mean? Do you mean that you don't see these intricacies as something worth digging deeper into? Or do you mean something else?

Ah yes, the esoteric easter egg in the reformist translation which shows Edip Yuksels DETERMINIST side. It's about 7:15. And the footnote reads... "The so-called "problem of evil" has created  a great challenge for theologians and philosophers  who accept a Benevolent and Omnipotent God. The  Christian medieval philosopher St. Augustine, in  Enchiridion, has an interesting argument regarding  the existence of Satan: "He used the very will of the  creature which was working in opposition to the  Creator's will as an instrument for carrying out his  will?"

WOW! You cannot deny that this implies that the Quranic deity is both Allah AND Iblis. Two sides of the same coin! Wow. This footnote opens the doors to 10000000000000 psychedelic ideas, that I dunno where to start. Perhaps this changes your view about Mr Yuksel, yes he's not right about everything, but there is enough to suggest that he is an interesting character who is on to something, whether you believe in it or not. It'd be cool to hear some thoughts on this.

Sorry for the long post, it was due.


Peace and welcome
I agree with your claim for changing meaning of words or disappearing real meaning of some expressions by passing time but  28 Arabic Alphabets (ABJAD regardless their shape) are used in Quran text  or different ones in original. ?


Yeah, as I was saying, there is enough evidence in the universal history of numbers to suggest that the numerical values have arabic alphabet are arithmetically static.
Back to the basic law within this universe.

Everything yes everything which is bound / contained within this universe  has a beginning and an end.. none is eternal..
That includes "Language" and "Book"..

And there's nothing to do.. it just the natural way of how things are in this universe..

These are few example of "Words" which semantically has changed a lot..
"islam" and "muslim" which now has a semantic meanings of "An identifier / name of a specific religion / sect".
"dien" which now has a meanings of religion / sect

We cannot rely on language or book, as both has their own finite lifetime..
But we can always rely on God as He alone has an infinite lifetime..

So yes, you cannot put your faith in "classical arabic" (or any other language) or Quran (or any other book)..

But then that means you're choosing to have a subjective faith in an invisible deity and from your words I can see that you are anthropomorphizing the infinite deity. << I sincerely despise this, like I can't be bothered to put into creative expressionism how much I despise this anthropomorphizing of God. It's so dangerous and so silly. Usually I take what's valuable and throw out the rest, but it seems that you cannot possess anything that is of use to me with regards to my question, because of this mere act of anthropomorphizing. Sorry i dont mean to be rude I'm just stating how I see it personally.

The Qurān was not "revealed" in (what we call) "Classical Arabic" (but in: an* Arabian tongue).

CA was formulated by (post-qurānic) Ajamites (e.g., Sēbōē/Sibawayh); [cf., 16:103]!

~ Both the script and vocabulary (of the Qurān) bespeak an Aramean origin [ergo. Mesopotamia, not Hijaz]

* indefinite

Can you shed more light on this please? I am doing linguistic anthropology but I cannot find anything about arabian tongue per se.
The only thing the code 19 phenomenon shows, is that some people lack the logic/rational mind to realize "19" covering hell indicates a physical substance.  19 is universally the atomic index number of potassium.  Eg if aliens would exist, speaking an entirely different language - the atomic index number of potassium would still be 19.  The biggest remainder in human ashes.  Furthermore the fact the universal index number of the substance is being used, instead of the common al-qalyah (which has ambiguous meaning throughout the evolution of all languages - historically also referring to sodium) - shows us God is well aware of this dynamic aspect of language and possible future shifts in semantics. 

Lack of common sense is a way bigger obstacle than the differences between modern and quranic arabic.


Good comment man, but I thought you didn't believe there is anything phenomenal about the number 19? Or are you using the 19 hypothesis to attempt to reveal my contradictions?


Submitters / Code 19 / Re: Hexagonal Life
« on: April 15, 2015, 12:19:03 AM »
Yes and no. We are supposed to use the self error correcting decode the semantics, because over last 1500 years you can't be sure if the the verses that anthropomorphize God were intended to be that way. And many other verses.

Back to the basic law within this universe.

Everything yes everything which is bound / contained within this universe  has a beginning and an end.. none is eternal..
That includes "Language" and "Book"..

And there's nothing to do.. it just the natural way of how things are in this universe..

These are few example of "Words" which semantically has changed a lot..
"islam" and "muslim" which now has a semantic meanings of "An identifier / name of a specific religion / sect".
"dien" which now has a meanings of religion / sect

We cannot rely on language or book, as both has their own finite lifetime..
But we can always rely on God as He alone has an infinite lifetime..

So yes, you cannot put your faith in "classical arabic" (or any other language) or Quran (or any other book)..

I'm sure there are people who would debate that with you. As far as the inimitable gematrical intricacies in the tablet, I see something there, and not just chaotic coincidence. But I don't know what exactly it IS that I see, other than something that cannot be outrightly dismissed as coincidence. Remember, I'm referring primarily to the numbers, not "nusemantics". Because the semantics isn't clear.

If one cannot rely on anything actually being semantically objective and authentic within al-quran then one simply cannot deny the claim morality is simply a social construct, and that there is simply NO such thing objective morality/good/evil, therefore it's ok to embrace hardcore solipsism and all the open doors that come with it.

As a result of this, even if I argue that we have evolved to be social and friendly animals so we ought to be amicable, a solipsist can simply say that we have also evolved aggression and tribalism from which contrary oughts can be derived. The solipsist could easily further argue that even if virtually every person has the same amicable nature, one could still not derive a value from this supposed fact, an ought from an is.

Classical Arabic has been dead for centuries. People know its general form but not the true meaning. Many many many words of Al-quran remains ambiguous with countless interpretations of its meaning and form.

I do not deny the death of the universal history of numbers. So I'm inferring here that I still think that there is something spectacular about the code 19 phenomena.

However I feel as though the code 19 phenomena as propagated by Yuksel has raised MORE important questions. I see a level of inconsistency with ALL translations of the Quran, with regards what happened in 1974. I think, if there has been a diabolic conspiracy to stop the quran from being a pocket book, I find it plausible to infer the possibility of a language death of Fusha/classical arabic which has not been addressed by islamic reformists.

What does one do if can cannot rely on a language, in which there is a lot of potential evidences to indicate that alot of the semantics may have been completely lost or changed over the past 1400 years. If one is unable to access the original semantics of the quran, does one just continue to believe in the "generally accepted" translations among reformists? Do we continue to believe it because we believe that it is definitely authentically semantic, or do we believe in it so we can utilize the power of the placebo affect in order to manifest change in ones life?

Any ideas? I've been struggling with this for a while. I have this feeling that I cannot put my faith in the generally accepted reality of classical arabic, even you study the verses of the quran comparatively, logically speaking, this doesn't guarantee semantic authenticity, at least not for the whole text. What does one do in a situation like this?


General Issues / Questions / Re: Other/Modern messengers of God?
« on: April 06, 2015, 03:27:42 AM »
the so called new messengers are trying to fill up some kind of hole in the same way a UFO abductee does. it's chaotic I don't understand why they go through all the effort of building a website and making powerpoint presentations and PDF's only to put out strawman arguments. ugh, shits weird man. Shits weird.

Pages: [1] 2 3