Author Topic: Degree of language death of Classical Arabic problematizes Al-Quran translations  (Read 6427 times)

CyberAnthro

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma +0/-0
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?

Peace.

Bahman

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 3369
  • Karma +1/-4
  • Gender: Male
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.
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. ?

Peace.




hicham9

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
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
I was not delivered in this world into defeat, nor does failure course my veins.
I'm not a sheep waiting to be prodded by my shepherd. I am a lion, and I refuse to talk, walk or sleep with the sheep.

hicham9

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male


Mesopotamia, the land lying between the two rivers (Euphrates & Tigris)
= QA: mṣr (مصر)

M (when initial) means: water/river/or?
(when middle) means: bind/confine/or?
R (when final) means: land/territory/or?

Imo ~ this is where most, if not all qurānic events took place [...]



Just my two Dinars

SLM
I was not delivered in this world into defeat, nor does failure course my veins.
I'm not a sheep waiting to be prodded by my shepherd. I am a lion, and I refuse to talk, walk or sleep with the sheep.

Jafar

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 4283
  • Karma +114/-3
  • Gender: Male
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.

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..

Quote
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?


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)..

CyberAnthro

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma +0/-0
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.

uq

  • Global Moderator
  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 411
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Peace CyberAnthro!

You raise a good topic.

I will address the topic in three points.

1. All languages mutate over time, including Arabic. This is simply a semantic given. However, the more important question is "Can we trace the original meaning of a statement in a language which is no longer used?" For some dead languages, the answer is "No," because there are no extant texts authored in that language from which we could derive an understanding of the manner in which words were used. In other dead languages, the answer is "Yes," because there are sufficiently enough texts in existence to allow us to garner an understanding of how its speakers used their words. Fortunately, Arabic was preserved in writing from the 9th century onwards. And it wasn't simply preserved by several books. It was preserved by a massive body of texts dating back to that time. The only concerning factor is that there are very few preserved texts (not including the Quran) that precede the 8th century. So we do have a gap in our evidence lasting for a couple of centuries. However, during this time, the Quran would have served as a common denominator amongst all the Arabian tribes after having accepted Islam. This, in my mind, would have certainly contributed to the preservation of spoken Arabic from the 6th century to the 9th century. This is especially true amongst the bedouin Arabs because their preservation of history and lineage was almost entirely oral, and they placed a great emphasis on oratory. These two factors do not negate the liability of mutation of Arabic throughout the 6th and 7th centuries, but they do go some way in abating it.

2. I like to distinguish between the Arabic used in the Quran, and the Arabic used by people after the Islamic expansion in the 8th and 9th centuries. I prefer to call the Arabic used in the Quran "Peninsular Arabic." Whereas, I prefer to call the Arabic used by people post-750 AD "Classical Arabic." I use the term "Peninsular" because Arabic was confined to the Arabian peninsula at the time of the Quran's revelation, whereas "Classical Arabic" was used throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and even parts of South Asia. I make the distinction between "Peninsular" and "Classical" because there were many new terms introduced to the language after circa 750 AD. This was a response to encountering foreign cultures and it was an attempt at Arabising foreign concepts; with particular regard to non-Arab Christian works and the works of Classical Greek philosophers. I have little doubt that new words were added to the language, but this in no way implies that the meanings of original words were forgotten, if anything, it strengthened them. There are many examples of morphology I could give where this is the case, but I feel that my post will be too long for the casual reader.

3. The available evidence relating to the use of Peninsular Arabic is sufficient to the extent that we may accurately understand the intended meaning of the One who authored the Quran. I do not encourage people with an elementary understanding of Arabic to read the Quran in its original text. Otherwise, in my view, an elementary student will do more harm to their understanding than they will aid it. You need to know your stuff if you want to read the Quran in its original form. I always encourage people to read several different translations of the Quran in their mother tongue, whether it be Urdu, Punjabi, Mandarin, French, Dutch etc. Using several different translations will allow the reader to even out any biases that the translator consciously or unconsciously imprints in the text.
uq

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
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.

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.

Peace

CyberAnthro

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma +0/-0
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. ?

Peace.

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.

Peace.
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.

Peace

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?

Peace.

hicham9

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Peace @CyberAnthro; all

The Qurān was not "revealed" in (what we call) "Classical Arabic" (but in: an*indefinite 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]

...

Mesopotamia, the land lying between the two rivers (Euphrates & Tigris)
= QA: mṣr (مصر)

M (when initial) means: water/river/or?
(when middle) means: bind/confine/or?
R (when final) means: land/territory/or?

Imo ~ this is where most, if not all qurānic events took place [...]

Can you shed more light on this please? I am doing linguistic anthropology but I cannot find anything about arabian tongue per se.

G-D willing, I intend to start a new thread regarding the [pre-qurānic] Arabian tongue of the Qurān [conceivably in the near future ...]

~ I'll make sure to post the link here once done (so you can see it).

SLM
I was not delivered in this world into defeat, nor does failure course my veins.
I'm not a sheep waiting to be prodded by my shepherd. I am a lion, and I refuse to talk, walk or sleep with the sheep.

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Peace.
Can you shed more light on this please? I am doing linguistic anthropology but I cannot find anything about arabian tongue per se.
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?

Peace.

Peace,

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.

CyberAnthro

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma +0/-0
Peace,

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: upi.com/1504651

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.

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Interesting post.  Not making it easier for me to respond to it.  I'll try to break it down and reply in-line.  Please don't interprete this as being a confrontational/aggressive stance I'm taking.  It just helps me to reply on point and keeping my focus.

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 sorry I can't send you relevant articles outside the posts I made about it on this forum.  As far as I'm aware, no one ever made this connection.  Here is the link  http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607107.0  to my post on it on freeminds, it's not a coherent article but a reflection of the discovery and my progression in understanding its significance.  I'm working on a full article on this connection on a website outside this forum if God wills.

I'm aware of the linkage between super-heavy elements and surah numbers in Quran.  I will repeat this more often throughout this post, my major objection is the surah index numbering is not part of the Quran.  It was never ordered by muhammed, nor by God.  The current surah codex we know was ordered by Uthman.  Uthman has no authority over Quran.  Those who think the current codification of Quran is authorized by God can only provide ahadit to backup their claims.  To me the surah index numbers are meaningless.  Human created.  Pointless to refer to them in any proof supporting a 'code 19'.

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.

Well one of this superheavy elements is deuterium.  You should look it up.  It will reveal the true meaning of what Quran means when it says 'we created everything in pairs'.

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: upi.com/1504651

I'm aware of these hypothetical/predicted elements and about successful experiments producing them.  Certainly, if anything is Gods signature it's to be  found in Mendeljevs table more than any numerological hypothesis.  I don't see any connection to 'code 19' though.  Though it's remarkable when Quran speaks about the substance covering a place where human fuel is being burned (hell) it pinpoints the electron count of the element spot on.   

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.

Outside Yuksels lack of linguistic expertise, he is shooting in his own foot.  Using surah index numbers that are only supported by Uthman (not God) to support his belief in code 19 is to me intellectual hypocrisy.  No hadith means no hadith.  The surah index numbers he's using to back up his claims are only supported by hadith.  Again I stress surah index numbers were never an integral part of Quran but later additions to it.  Some part of Yuksel is still sunni, accepting Uthman was authorized by God to index Quran as we know it today.  Well, I'm not sunni.  I refute this idea.

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 understand this.  Though I'm convinced after a lot of cross-checking, recalculating stuff and studying code 19 thesis, there is no maths at all in it.  None!  There is only numerology.  No formula.  No ruleset.  No method.  A lot of cherrypicking (even cherrypicking which Quran version to use), intellectual dishonesty and even outright wrong counting.

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.

I know about Rabbi Judah the Pious.  Again, numerology.  It's not maths.  There is no statistical significance at all.  I don't know what was discovered in 1974 outside someone's delusion and miscounting ending up in a giant misunderstanding of surah 74.  It means nothing to me.  The number of passages in Quran is also a multiple of other numbers.  It has no meaning for a statistical/mathematical point of view. Can't you see?

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?

I know I'm repeating myself.  But you are giving divine authority to Uthman when he ordered to codify the Quran in this format.  There is no verse in Quran authorizing Uthman to do this.  It's not quranic evidence.  It's uthmanic evidence.

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.

Now this is one of the ideas I do share with Yuksel.  I pretty much interprete Iblis in a similar way.  I never needed code 19 to do so though.

Peace

ps: surah 74, even from a gematrical point of view is no multiple of 19 in any sense.  This should tell you something.