Discussion of numerical miracles in the Quran

Islamists spread on mass scale this claim that Quran has "numerical miracle". You can read their proofs here:

• 19code.org
• Submission.org

Our Reply:

We need not to waste our time and energy on such useless claims of numerical miracles in the Quran. Just put their claims on any AI agent and you will see the deceptions. For example, ChatGPT replied:

This claim sounds very impressive, but the reality is that it contains truth, half-truth, and outright deception all mixed together. Let’s break it down logically:

---

The Biggest Deception: “AI Proved It”

The entire narrative becomes suspicious the moment it is claimed that:

“AI analyzed the Quran and proved all of this.”

The Reality:

• To date, neither OpenAI, Google, nor any reputable scientific institution has made such a claim.
• These are all WhatsApp/YouTube-style stories, not peer-reviewed research.

👉 In other words, “AI” is used here only as a tactic to establish authority.

---

1. “World = 115 and Hereafter = 115”

The Claim:

Both words appear an equal number of times.

The Reality (Linguistic Issue):

In Arabic:

• World (Dunya): Al-Dunya, Dunyakum, Dunya, etc.
• Hereafter (Akhirah): Al-Akhirah, Akhiratikum, etc.

👉 The question is:
Which specific forms are being counted?

When counted using strict linguistic principles:

• Different scholars have produced different results.
• In some counts:
  • Dunya > Akhirah
  • In others, the opposite is true.

👉 Conclusion:
This “115 = 115” result only appears through a specific, cherry-picked counting method; it is not a universal fact.

---

2. “Yawm = 365 times”

The Claim:

The word “Yawm” (Day) appears exactly 365 times in the Quran.

The Real Issue:

The Quran uses several words for “Day”:

• Yawm (Singular)
• Yawmayn (Dual/Two days)
• Ayyam (Plural/Days)

What is the trick?

Apologists:

• Only count “Yawm” (the singular form).
• Ignore “Ayyam” and other forms.

👉 Result:
The number 365 is artificially obtained.

If all forms are included:

👉 The count fails immediately.

---

3. “Water 71% (Bahr vs Barr)”

The Claim:

• Bahr (Sea) = 32
• Barr (Land) = 13
  → ratio = 71% water

---

Issue 1: The Meaning of the Word

In the Quran, “Bahr” (Sea):

• Is sometimes used literally as the sea.
• Is sometimes used as a metaphor.

“Barr” (Land):

• Does not always represent “landmass” in a geographic sense.

👉 Conclusion:
These are literary words, not scientific data.

---

Issue 2: Counting Manipulation

• In some places, plural forms are included.
• In others, they are excluded.

👉 There is no consistency.

---

Issue 3: Scientific Facts Do Not Match

On Earth:

• Water is ≈ 71%.
• But this includes:
  • Oceans + Ice + Groundwater + Atmospheric water.

The Quranic word “Bahr” (Sea):
👉 Does not represent all of these scientific categories.

---

4. “The Code of 19”

This is the most famous claim.

Background:

This theory was proposed by Rashad Khalifa.

---

The Major Problem:

❗ What did he do?

• Where the pattern did not emerge:
  • He adjusted the data.
• He went as far as:
  • Rejecting two verses of the Quran (9:128-129) as “false.”

👉 He did this just to keep the “19 pattern” intact.

---

Example: “19 Letters in Bismillah”

This also has issues:

In Arabic script:

• Letter counting methods vary.
• Spelling variants (Rasm) exist.

Depending on the style:
👉 The count changes.

---

5. “Surah Al-Kawthar = 10 Letters per Verse”

Let’s check:

إِنَّا أَعْطَيْنَاكَ الْكَوْثَرَ

👉 If counted by correct Arabic grammatical rules:

• The letters do not total 10 (depending on the counting method).

👉 In different recitations (Qira'at):

• The count changes even further.

---

Where is the actual problem?

All these claims stand on one thing:

🔴 Selection Bias + Flexible Rules

Meaning:

• The desired result is decided first.
• Then:
  • The counting method is adjusted to fit.
  • Certain forms are included.
  • Others are excluded.

---

A Simple Analogy

It is like saying:

“In this novel, the words ‘love’ and ‘hate’ appear an equal number of times.”

But:

• I ignore the word “loved.”
• I ignore the word “hating.”

👉 And then I artificially create an “equality.”

---

Conclusion

After checking these major claims:

👉 None of them:

• Stand on a solid linguistic foundation.
• Follow a consistent counting method.
• Have independent verification.

---

🔵 In Simple Words

This is not a “mathematical miracle” but rather:

👉 A number game.

The “Humans Cannot Do This” Claim

This is also incorrect:

• With modern algorithms and editors:
  • Word balance can be easily achieved.
• Even in classical poetry:
  • Complex patterns have been created for centuries.

👉 Therefore, this is not an impossible feat.

---

Final Result

This entire narrative is:

❌ Not scientific research
❌ Not an AI discovery
❌ Not an objective analysis

Instead, it is a combination of:

✔ Cherry-picking
✔ Counting manipulation
✔ Linguistic tricks
✔ Psychological persuasion

---

Short Verdict

This claim is:

👉 Not a reality, but a beautifully presented deception.

All other AI agents also refuted this claim just like ChatGPT did. 

Moreover, long before AI, many Muslim Scholars themselves refuted it. For example, here is Saudi Scholars from "Islam Q&A" refuting it: 

• https://islamqa.info/en/answers/69741/discussion-of-numerical-miracles-in-the-quraan-and-use-of-the-solar-calendar

Moreover, if anyone still want details, then please have a look at this detailed article on WikiIslam.Net

• https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Word_Count_Miracles_in_the_Qur%27an