Video Proves Intelligent Design

[Sumerian]

This video shows the miracle of the golden ratio, the Kaaba and designing by God.

[Rohulah Khorasani]

Beautiful

[Al-Hassan]

This video shows the miracle of the golden ratio, the Kaaba and designing by God.

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

While the beginning of the part of the video showed some interesting facts(assuming their obtained data is correct), the later part in the video where they try to relate the Golden ratio number with the number of letters in Surat Al-Imran , verse 96, is very incorrect, let alone a dishonest presentation on their part in my opinion. 

 

Let's dissect what they say to see why. 

 

From the beginning of 7:15 of the video, the speaker is stating that the number of letters in verse 96 of Al-Imran, which mentions Mecca(The context of the verse actually says Becca), has 47 letters in total. This is incorrect and the correct number of letters in the verse is actually 42. Here is the verse. See for your self and count. 

 

إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ

 

 

Moreover. The speaker also states that there are 29 letters in total, from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Mecca. Firstly, the word "Mecca" specifically does not exist in this verse, but rather, "Becca"(Another name for Mecca) is written. Nevertheless, even if we were to accept the word Becca instead of Mecca, the number of letters from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Becca still does not count to 29, but rather the correct number of letters is 24.

 

With that being said, using the correct number of letters and the same analogy that the documentary used to related the incorrect number of letters to the Golden ration, our correct result has nothing to do with the golden ration number. 

 

Let's do the Math....

 

42/1.618 --> 25.9579.....Moreover, 25.9579, does not equal 24, hence, their assumption that the golden ratio being relevant to the number of letters in this verse is incorrect. 

 

Of course, there is no doubt, undeniable and sound evidence of miracles in the Noble Quran. I'm not arguing against that, but rather, I'm against this one specifically because it is not correct, has no basis and is an unfair presentation to the viewers. 

 

(wasalam)

[14infallibles]

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

While the beginning of the part of the video showed some interesting facts(assuming their obtained data is correct), the later part in the video where they try to relate the Golden ratio number with the number of letters in Surat Al-Imran , verse 96, is very incorrect, let alone a dishonest presentation on their part in my opinion. 

 

Let's dissect what they say to see why. 

 

From the beginning of 7:15 of the video, the speaker is stating that the number of letters in verse 96 of Al-Imran, which mentions Mecca(The context of the verse actually says Becca), has 47 letters in total. This is incorrect and the correct number of letters in the verse is actually 42. Here is the verse. See for your self and count. 

 

إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ

 

 

Moreover. The speaker also states that there are 29 letters in total, from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Mecca. Firstly, the word "Mecca" specifically does not exist in this verse, but rather, "Becca"(Another name for Mecca) is written. Nevertheless, even if we were to accept the word Becca instead of Mecca, the number of letters from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Becca still does not count to 29, but rather the correct number of letters is 24.

 

With that being said, using the correct number of letters and the same analogy that the documentary used to related the incorrect number of letters to the Golden ration, our correct result has nothing to do with the golden ration number. 

 

Let's do the Math....

 

42/1.618 --> 25.9579.....Moreover, 25.9579, does not equal 24, hence, their assumption that the golden ratio being relevant to the number of letters in this verse is incorrect. 

 

Of course, there is no doubt, undeniable and sound evidence of miracles in the Noble Quran. I'm not arguing against that, but rather, I'm against this one specifically because it is not correct, has no basis and is an unfair presentation to the viewers. 

 

(wasalam)

(salam)

Try recounting where you count two letters at a shadda in the middle of a word. Someone can confirm but I once read that in older arabic words were written with the letters duplicated at the shadda, and later shortened to just putting a shadda. I'm not sure about this though. Not that this makes their argument about the golden ratio right, but I just wanted to point out that it may not have been a dishonest presentation in the sense you're suggesting.

Edited February 8, 2014 by 14infallibles

[Al-Hassan]

(salam)

Try recounting where you include two letters at the shadda. Someone can confirm but I once read that in older arabic words were written with the letters duplicated at the shadda, and later shortened to just putting a shadda. I'm not sure about this though.

(wasalam)

 

I just counted the numbers of letters again for each verse with two additional letters for every Shada and came up with 48 letters. One letter off from what the documentary states. However, there are 29 letters from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Bakka, just as the documentary states if you consider equating every Shada with two letters.

 

However, I have never heard that in the early Arabic writings that before the Shada, two letters used to represent it. Maybe someone who knows about this can hopefully confirm this.

[14infallibles]

(wasalam)

 

I just counted the numbers of letters again for each verse with two additional letters for every Shada and came up with 48 letters. One letter off from what the documentary states. However, there are 29 letters from the beginning of the verse to the end of the word Bakka, just as the documentary states if you consider equating every Shada with two letters.

 

However, I have never heard that in the early Arabic writings that before the Shada, two letters used to represent it. Maybe someone who knows about this can hopefully confirm this.

(salam)

The last shadda you counted doesn't count, because it is in the beginning of the word, and this shadda only signifies that one reads it almost as "hudallil'alamin" instead of "hudan lil'alamin". It doesn't count as a double letter. 48-1 = 47.

Edited February 8, 2014 by 14infallibles