God is TRUE - Some proofs!

[Geir]

Chapter number 57 is named "The Iron" - Al Hadid اÙ,,حديد. It's the only chapter named after a metal in the Quran. The word Iron appears in this chapter only one time in verse number 25.

Iron (Chemical symbol FE) has the atomic number 26 which means that it has 26 protons (this number is stable along all the variants of Iron). Iron has many isotopes. The most abundant isotope is FE-56 (56 is the approximate atomic weight of this isotype). Isotope FE-57 is one of the four stable isotopes (in fact it comes between FE-56 and FE-58 making it in the middle position between the three most stable isotopes, the 4th less stable isotope is FE-54).

Let's consider these facts:

* The number of this chapter is 57. FE-57 is one of the four stable isotopes of iron. Consider it's central position amongst the stable ones as mentioned above.

* The 26th occurrence of the word God - "Allah" - اÙ,,Ù,,Ù‡ - in this chapter appears in this verse.

* This same occurrence of the word God - "Allah" - اÙ,,Ù,,Ù‡ - is the 2444th from Qurans beginning. 2444 divides perfectly by atomic number of iron 26. It's equal to 26 x 94.

* This same occurrence of the word God - "Allah" - اÙ,,Ù,,Ù‡ - (which is the last of two in the verse) is the 26th word in verse. The first word of God - "Allah" - اÙ,,Ù,,Ù‡ - in this verse comes in the 20th position.

* The first letter in the verse is L (Lam) (Ù,,اÙ...) in the word Ù,,Ù,د. The interesting thing is that the 26th letter is also L (Lam) (Ù,,اÙ...) in the word (وأنزÙ,,نا). Even the 52nd (26 x 2) letter is also L (Lam) (Ù,,اÙ...) in the word (اÙ,,ناس). Isotope FE-52 is the only isotope that has 26 protons and 26 neutrons. The others have different numbers of neutrons.

* The 56th letter (relating to the most abundant isotope) is B (Baa') (باء) in the word (باÙ,,Ù,سط). We continue counting to find that the 78th letter (that's to say 26 x 3) is B (Baa') (باء) in the word (بأس). Notice how letters (by their positions) match at the multiples of the atomic number of iron and at the atomic weight of the most abundant isotope.

* Similar phenomena (of letters matching at key positions) is seen in other places in the Quran such as in chapter 76 (The Human). Letters there match at the number of chromosomes / chromosome pairs humans have.

* Counting further we find the the 104th (i.e. 26 x 4) letter in the verse is letter H (Haa') (هاء) in the second and last word of God (Allah) which is actually the last letter in it. This occurrence of word God - Allah is, as mentioned earlier, the 26th word in verse and the 26th occurrence in chapter).

* The gematrical value of the word Iron in Arabic is 26

* The word Iron - Al Hadid اÙ,,حديد comes in the 13th (26 : 2) position in verse.

* If we count the opening verse (Al Basmallah) as a verse, this verse would be the 26th.

* According to what I see on the internet (as at Wikipedia) the number of iron isotopes is 28. The number of words in this verse is 28. There are in addition to the 28 main isotopes six "child isotopes" (such as 54mFe under Fe-54), which are called "high spin isotopes". These correspond in number to the number of conjunctive Waws (Ùˆ) (ands) in this verse.

 

[Whitney]

Geir, are you willing to honestly have what you posted here challenged by rational and educated argument, or are you just here to proselytize? If you're here for the former, I request you respond to the challenges posted here. If not, I must ask that you cease.

Geir, Will is a moderator and has asked you nicely once to stop preaching and just discuss your views.  Preaching is against the forum rules but we are very welcoming towards discussion.  Please make yourself familiar with the forum rules and rules enforcement process:  viewforum.php?f=9

[Moosader]

If a person is "smart enough" to figure out these numerical "coincidences", wouldn't a person be smart enough to write it in the book in the first place?
Doesn't mean god wrote anything, people can be creative too. ;P

[karadan]

Maybe I should have listened more in school... I like to write but am unable to emulate my thought strings into words as well as I’d like to. Not unless I spend a massive amount of time perusing my sentences and re-writing them dozens of times. I guess I should go to writing school. I have it all in my head but I just can't seem to adequately get it on paper (or monitor) when attempting to respond to a subject such as this, at least not with the ease, inventiveness and efficiency that I’d like.

I guess what I mean to say is, I wish I was as good at formulating exquisitely apt responses such as the ones seen in this thread (including the pictures).  

The standard in this place is ridiculously high.

[Geir]

I am presenting facts under the topic of proofs for God. I am not sure in what way I am violating the rules. But I wonder what made ppl here shift from being agnostic to becoming atheists?

[Will]

I am presenting facts under the topic of proofs for God. I am not sure in what way I am violating the rules.

You're not engaging people in the conversation, just posting more and more and more of what you deem to be evidence. Do you really think your conclusions are beyond reproach? If so, you're not discussing, you're preaching. Preaching is bad on forums because it stifles debate and actively resists discussion. If not, why not engage people that tried to converse with you? Why not respond to challenges of your reasoning?

But I wonder what made ppl here shift from being agnostic to becoming atheists?

It depends on who you ask, but that seems like a very different topic.

[Geir]

Ok.. I understand what you mean.. So what do you think people about that phenomena?!

[Ihateyoumike]

Ok.. I understand what you mean.. So what do you think people about that phenomena?!

I think there's nothing phenomenal about your "facts" at all. If you look hard enough, you can see anything you want to, especially in religious texts. Take The Bible Code for example. I hardly read any of your "proofs" before dismissing them because you can do that kind of thing with just about anything.

[curiosityandthecat]

I think there's nothing phenomenal about your "facts" at all.

Bingo! We have a winner.

Numerology doesn't prove anything aside from one's creative talent at manipulating numbers.

[Whitney]

There are a ton of posts on this forum.  I'm sure that someone with a lot of free time could go through them and find some numerological code which spelled out something interesting.

[Tanker]

The OP has  not responded to anyone, it seems to me hes talking at us and not to us. If I were to make a guess I would say hes just copy and pasting without even reading the responses. It doesn't seem like hes here for a discourse just to preach,

[Whitney]

The OP has  not responded to anyone, it seems to me hes talking at us and not to us. If I were to make a guess I would say hes just copy and pasting without even reading the responses. It doesn't seem like hes here for a discourse just to preach,

We've spoken to him and he seemed to understand our point about just posting stuff being preaching.  So, we'll see how it goes.

[joeactor]

I am presenting facts under the topic of proofs for God. I am not sure in what way I am violating the rules.

Meh.  Your "proofs" are nothing more than mathematical anomolies in large bodies of text.  It's human interpretation of randome noise in human written text.  Want some examples?  How about Moby Dick predicting the death of Lady Diana:
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/diana.html

... some more interesting stuff here:
http://www.awitness.org/essays/bibcode.html

And plenty more out there with some very minor research.

When you start with a conclusion (ie. "My Holy Book Is Right"), then you can find the justification for it by using human intelligence and random noise in a large body of text.

But I wonder what made ppl here shift from being agnostic to becoming atheists?

Ok, that's a good question.  I don't know.  But I can tell you that I went from a Christian to an Agnostic Theist.  This was mainly due to the inconsistencies in the teachings, and the lack of any evidence to support the claims.  Add in all the other world religions that claim to "know" the truth, none of which have any more proof, and it was a fairly easy transition to admit that I don't know the truth... and I'm fairly sure that nobody else does either.  The best I can do is be open to other people's views so that I'm ready when (or if) the truth presents itself.

I have yet to hear a convincing argument from any religion.

My 2 cents,
JoeActor

[Geir]

About the Moby Dick thing.. You can't compare since in the Moby Dick some letters were skipped. In the things I present nothing is skipped.

[templeboy]

Here is a generalized summary of a logical way to come up with the so-called "proofs" you present.

1) Come up with a systematic method of extracting some numbers from your text.
2) See what they add up to
3) Associate the output number with a natural phenonema.

That is why numerology fails as a rational, logical, scientific methodology. It is the antisithis of hypothesis-testing. Because as others have pointed out, similar methodology applied to any text can come up with similar results. That said, it is easier in "holy" books like the bible or qu'ran, simply because of the numerical way they are arranged.

Ever heard of a fella called Occam, who had a metaphorical razor? link