Talk:Rashad Khalifa

Bible Code

I think this page should be linked to the page on the Bible code since they both deal with finding messages in sacred texts based on numerical interpretations. — Hippietrail 23:45, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If there was a page for Code 19 or whatever the best name for it is that should be linked to Bible code, but not the Khalifa main page. gren 6 July 2005 15:37 (UTC)

Bukhari

I have a question about this paragraph in the article:

The most famous collection of Hadiths, that of al-Bukhari, does indeed say that the verses were only present in one copy of the Sura existing at the time of the compilation of the Qu'ran.

What is the hadith number in Bukhari? I am aware of the following hadith in Bukhari vol. IV, no. 62

Zaid bin Thabit said, "When the Quran was compiled from various written manuscripts, one of the Verses of Surat Al-Ahzab was missing which I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting. I could not find it except with Khuzaima bin Thabjt Al-Ansari, whose witness Allah's Apostle regarded as equal to the witness of two men. And the Verse was:-- "Among the believers are men who have been true to what they covenanted with Allah." (33.23)

However, this hadith mentions the verse 33.23, not 9:128-129 that Rashad omitted. So what's the hadith number in Bukhari for 9:128-129?

By the way, regarding the above hadith in Bukhari, this was apparently before the Qur'an was compiled in one volume. Zaid was collecting the Qur'an in one volume. The hadith is not saying that only one person had written 33:23 but that Zaid only found it with one person in written form at that time. It's still possible that others wrote it but were away or Zaid didn't ask them. And how did Zaid even know that the verse was missing? Why was he looking for it? The hadith actually confirms that the verse was not "missing." He (and others) must have memorized it to look for it in written form. OneGuy 02:05, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There are two hadiths. The first is the hadith regarding the collection of the Qur'an into a single volume by Zayd bin Thabit at the order of Abu Bakr. At that time, we have, (attributed to Zayd), "So I started locating the Qur'anic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men. I found with Khuzayma two verses of Sura-at-Tawba which I had not found with anyone else," and then 9:128-129 are quoted. [Bukhari, VI, No. 201] The language of this hadith does not imply that Zayd was only looking for written materials. The second hadith is Bukhari, VI, No. 510, which is again attributed to Zayd, and the occasion was the compilation of the ^Uthmanic rescension some years later. My source is Dennfer, ^Ulum al-Qur'an," I have not confirmed the exact Bukhari references. [by Abd al-Rahman Lomax]

Major structural change to article

I have moved all "controversies" to the United Submitters International article. I feel that they belong there because they are controversies surrounding the beliefs of Submitters sect/cult/group, and not just Khalifa himself (though Khalifa was the founder of the group). --Zeno of Elea 28 June 2005 06:50 (UTC)

The word "sect" is inappropriate and is considered by us Quran Aloners to be an insult

Please refrain from using terms such as "sect" or "cult" in reference to Rashad or anyone of us. Thanku.

Just thought I'd elaborate on this a bit. A good traslation in Arabic of "sect" would be "shi'a," and the Qur'an is, shall we say, rather negative about being "shi'a." Now, it could be argued that a group of people who hold a relatively uniform set of idiosyncratic ideas and who think those ideas superior to the ideas of others not members of the group is the very definition of "sect" -- it certainly is the Qur'anic usage. The above writer does identify with a group and clearly presumes a relatively uniform body of ideas held by it. But, yes, "sect" does imply a conclusion about this and is generally inappropriate in Wikipedia articles, unless the group accepts the term. And "Submitters" don't. "Group" is better. I'll note that instead of whining about someone else's mistakes on a wiki, it is appropriate to simply correct them. --Abd ulRahman Lomax

Well, everything has been groupified. Days ago. Zora 5 July 2005 02:49 (UTC)

No, "shi'a" is not a bad word in the quran, its a great word:

Verily Ibrahim was a Shia of Nuh” [Al-Quran Chapter 37 - Verse 83]

By the way, what does Quran say about rape? Or whait, forget rape, what about "manipulated the girl's breasts"?

--Striver 6 July 2005 02:41 (UTC)

Abd ulRahman Lomax: about "shi'a," it goes to show... words change meaning with context. Shi'a is indeed used in a negative sense in the book, referring to those who set themselves apart from others and consider themselves right and others wrong. But the word itself means "party," or "group of similar people," and that is how it is used, neutrally, at 37:83. Which could be better translated than what is above, the literal meaning is "and surely of his [Noah's]party [was] Abraham." To say that Abraham was a "shi'a" of Nuh would imply that Abraham was a partisan of Nuh, as distinct from other prophets or leaders, which was certainly not the case. Rather, God is telling us that Abraham and Nuh were of the same group, the group of the rightly guided. (end comment from ARL)

Khizar- These are all lies against Rashad Khalifa. This is an extract from [1]

• "Like Prophet Muhammed before him, who has been attacked on the Internet with all kinds of false accusations, Dr. Khalifa was also accused, by what seems to be a pre-arranged scheme, of sexual misconduct with allegations that he adamantly denied. These allegations stemmed from the nature of a U. N. project he was conducting as a biochemist to study human body aura. His accusations, his denial and their insistence on repeating it, were just more examples of how traditional Muslims fail to follow the Quran alone, as seen in their failure to follow the commandments of God in the Quran in such circumstances. This incident, however, did expose the hypocrites and their allies, who still sing the false accusations in their fading hope of diverting the people away from his message of Quran ALONE, GOD ALONE. These accusations are no different from the accusations on the Internet of prophet Muhammed of sexual misconduct and abuse that can be seen on many anti-Islamic sites. Such sites are all lies and meant to insult Islam (Submission) and the belief in ONE GOD and His book the Quran ALONE."

Therefore these are false charges and they should be removed.

Look, if it was in the papers and he pleaded nolo, you can't just wish it away. It's a fact. I already added the bit that Striver left out, about Submitters claiming that this was religious persecution.

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: Khalifa was charged with sexual offenses, and he pleaded no contest to at least one sexual offense. That's a fact. Interpretations of the fact are interpretations. What's the "false accusation?" My impression was that Khalifa pled no contest to a lesser offense; the original newspaper article presented a strong piece of evidence that an actual rape had not occurred. (end comment from ARL)

Do you have any proof re the existence of this UN project? Zora 6 July 2005 12:40 (UTC)

Khizar- This has all been well discussed at [2]. Please go through that thread to see that these are false allegations. Edip Yuksel knew RK personally-- user:idmkhizar

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: I also knew Khalifa personally, and a close friend became his devoted secretary. The incident is well-known among those who knew Khalifa, so I find it strange that Yuksel (see the URL) questions the newspaper clipping's authenticity. My information came, as I recall, from his secretary. Khalifa later pled, to my memory, no contest to charges lesser than rape. What actually happened? Was he actually guilty of some sexual impropriety? I don't know. But to attribute the incident to some kind of Sunni plot is nothing but sectarian fantasy, and reveals more about the mind-set of some of his "supporters" than about Khalifa or his enemies. I'll note that, if Khalifa was actually doing research on the human aura (weird as it may seem), he might have touched the woman's breast as part of this, so what he allegedly admitted to the police was not necessarily inconsistent with his story about the research. Khalifa *did* do research for the U.N., but about food chemistry, his specialty was the conversion of petroleum into food. My recollection is that the U.N. reprimanded him after this incident, but I don't recall specific details. Why did he plead no contest instead of not guilty, if he was not guilty? Well, Khalifa was what I would call, technically, paranoid. He may have believed that "they" were out to get him, and "they" were powerful, he could not get a fair trial. So he was offered a plea bargain, and he took it. As Yuksel correctly points out, had the prosecutor actually believed he was guilty of the rape of a minor, if there was evidence to prove this in U.S. court (where the 4-witness requirement is moot), Khalifa would not have been let off with a slap on the wrist. Khizar cries "false allegations," but the newspaper article was real, and there really were charges filed against Khalifa, and he really did plead no contest. What's the lie? What does this incident prove? Not much. It is pretty easy to derive from it that Khalifa was a human being and not perfect. But he did not claim otherwise. I think Khalifa was seriously mistaken about the significance of what he found, but the "rape" story is a great distraction from the facts about his "message." (end comment from ARL)

The Image

I think we need to find a better image or remove the 19.org information from it. Encyclopedias should not have "courtesy of 19.org" on the pages. I am also not sure what the courtesy is, meaning, how it was licensed to wikipedia and under what conditions, but I think the advertising (more or less) shouldn't be here. gren 6 July 2005 15:37 (UTC)

Relevance of the Tucson Citizen newspaper article?

Are the misdemeanors of people, especially where they are based on potentially BIASED newspaper articles really of relevance in an encyclopedia?

Would an entry on Bill Clinton say he smoked marijuana but did not inhale? Or that George Bush sniffed cocaine in his youth?

I think that the section on the newspaper article which has been used by Sunni sects as a slur on Rashad's character is inappropriate on this page and displays a lack of regard to neutral point of view.

Salam!

That is your pov. You could qoute other sources that explains why the newspaper is biased and wrong.

ma salam.

--Striver 7 July 2005 10:06 (UTC)

I did a little copyediting, to make the article flow better. I also re-added the bit re Rashad claiming to be a divine messenger. If Submitters are going to claim that the rape charges were religious persecution, readers should know why mainstream Muslims found him so outrageous. Zora 7 July 2005 10:25 (UTC)

Latest edits

An anon -- one of the Submitters, no doubt -- changed mosque to masjid, added verbose wording for Khalifa's claims, and added a claim that the attack on Khalifa was done by an Al-Qaeda-linked group and was an instance of terrorist action.

I trimmed the verbosity, changed masjid back to mosque in one instance (there is nothing wrong with using the word mosque! it's comprehensible, which masjid is not), and deleted the claim to be a victim of Al-Qaeda. Disgusting ploy, especially at THIS time. Zora 7 July 2005 12:15 (UTC)

Khizar- The term 'masjid' in Arabic means 'place of submission'. Mosque is a wetsern invented word. We Quran Alone Muslims dont like that term. If you want you can say 'place of submission' but not mosque since that would link us to sunnis and shais who are bent on named terminologies which we dont. -- user:idmkhizar

What is truly DISGUSTING Zora

Zora - the mosque reference is fine, just wanted to make it clear that the name of the mosque which is significant in this instance.

Also the wording is quite clear in that it says 'thought' to be linked. Surely a group "Al-Fuqra" that assassinates an individual for religious 'crime' is an instance of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism and belongs in the same grouping as Al_Qaeda.

Are you claiming that Al-Fuqra's assassination was NOT DISGUSTING??

Are you saying it's OK to kill a man for his religious convictions/ideas? That my dear is DISGUSTING.

Use your username, or take one. Sign your communications and edits. Don't call me "my dear". I may be female, but I won't be patronized. No, I'm not saying that violence or murder is OK. I'm saying that trying to win sympathy for your group by playing on the "terrorism" motif is manipulative. Zora 7 July 2005 14:45 (UTC)

Sex Allegations

I just scanned through this 'talk' section and saw some rather hateful comments by Striver, perpetuating the rape accusation against Dr. Khalifa.

Striver, do you read the Quran? Sura 24, among other examples, explicitly states that all sexual allegations must be confirmed by FOUR witnesses.

I attend a high school where I hear all sorts of things about young men and women and their rumoured sexual acts. I simply do as the Quran commands me, I disregard the igorant basis of rumours and backbiting and live my own life. God will judge us all in the end, or do you believe otherwise?

[104:1] Woe to every backbiter, slanderer.

[25:63] The worshipers of the Most Gracious are those who tread the earth gently, and when the ignorant speak to them, they only utter peace.

Unless FOUR witnessess are produced, or physical evidence (which was not ascertained, since the girl was lying, according to the DOCTORS at the local HOSPITAL... but what would they know, they're only doctors, right?)

[24:16] When you heard it, you should have said, "We will not repeat this..."

Anyways, Striver and anyone else who insults Dr. Khalifa without fully studying his work, his message (worship God alone), and God's Miracle won't be able to say they weren't given a fair chance. I fear for y'all the retribution of an awesome day.

I cite the Mathematical Miracle of the Quran [3] as proof of its divine origin, I cite 3:81[=1] as proof of God's Messenger of the Covenant, and I cite 3:82-90 as the inevitable retrubtion (either in this life, or on the day of Judgment) for those who disbelief. God calls them "the evil ones".

[30:10] The consequences for those who committed evil had to be evil. That is because they rejected GOD's revelations, and ridiculed them.

[29:68] Who is more evil than one who fabricates lies and attributes them to GOD, or rejects the truth when it comes to him? Is Hell not a just retribution for the disbelievers?

Peace. May you remove your head from whatever orophice you've placed it in, perhaps God will guide you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David.ilyas (talk • contribs)

Changes by David Aitken

• There’s nothing “alleged” about the numerical pattern, which can be verified online at these PDF locations: [4]. It is a physical fact, not an opinion, that a numerical pattern exists based on the number 19. Whether you choose to see it as a miracle or not is a matter of opinion. The pattern has been spoon-fed to the world. For example, if you view [5] you can see that there are 57 (19x3) Q’s (Qaafs) in Sura 50, which is initialed with a Q (Qaaf). If you view Each one is marked with a star. This is repeated for all the initialed suras, and other physical facts are explored. The pattern is not “alleged,” rather the interpretation (coincidence or miracle) is a matter of interpretation.

Investigator: Cunado's edits

Peace be upon whatever investigator is forced to view this page.

First, I apologize for brining you into this. Submitters do not call themsleves Muslim, they do not claim to be a part (or sect) of Islam. Submission is a new religion, which uses the Qur'an as its sole liturgy of guidance and constitution of living. Khalifa was *one* of the members to found this movement, and as early as 1989 they stopped claiming to belong to Islam and stopped using the word "Muslim."

Their Qur'an reads: Islam will be replaced by Submission.

Whether Cunado agrees with this or not, it is a matter of *fact* that USI is not Islamic.

Muslims don't consider USI to be Islam, and USI does not call itself Islam.

Khalifa's career

The info cited about Khalifa's career is incomplete, leading only up to 1980 (he didn't pass on until 1990 after all). This article is about Khalifa's position with the Muslim world and his role with the USI. This is in the "religion" section of Wikipedia.

Since the history is lengthy and distracts from the point of this article, I'm removing it. Not only that: but it's incomplete and inaccurate.

Inaccurate? In Martin Gardner's article he claims that he has a 60-page booklet published in *1972* about the number 19. However, there was no publication of *anything* to do with the number 19 until 1974 (January).

Miracle of the Quran:

Significance of the Mysterious Alphabets

Rashad Khalifa, Ph D, 1973, Islamic Productions International, Inc., St. Louis, MO.

In the beginning of the book, there is a note where Rashad thanks to four people for their useful suggestions before the publication. They are:

Virgil I. Moss Ahmed H. Sakr Sulayman Shahid Mufasir Mujahid Al-Sawwaf

The following pages contain a two-and-half page biography of Khalifa and a note of dedication: to his father Abdul Halim Khalifa, the leader of al-Rashad al-Shaziliyya order in Egypt... (Years later when Rashad gave up from Hadith and Sunnah entirely, his father would reject him and 38 leading scholars met in Saudi Arabia under the leadership of Saudi cleric Bin Baz would issue a fatwa in 1989). The biography is followed by a two-page introduction. The date under the introduction is *October 1973*.

In brief, the book, published after October 1973, presented his statistical research on the frequency of the initial letters in the Quran, which he started in 1968. It does not contain a single reference to the number 19.

Gardner's article is inaccurate, and it's proven by published material (as cited above), and it only goes up to 1980. Since when does Wikipedia specialize in broken and half-truths?

I'm removing the history, it's irrelevant and inaccurate. Peace.

1) It's not lengthy, you're possible inability to read:

"He worked as a science advisor for the Libyan government for about one year, after which he worked as a chemist for the United Nations' Industrial Development Organization, then became a senior chemist in Arizona's State Office of Chemistry in 1980."

does not qualify it as lengthy.

2) You had no problems with the information there whatsoever until recently when I added the little fact, from the article that was being cited for quite a while, about his work for the Libyan Government. What, don't like Ghaddhafi?

3) Incompleteness doesn't constitute a need for removal, that simply means it should be expanded not deleted

4) It's not innacurate, it's called a typo. See Edip Yüksel's article regarding a typo. Would you like for it to be added that Rashad Khalifa's work is innacurate for the typos found in his book? At the most you can add in the footnotes that the article makes this typo.

5)"This article is about Khalifa's position with the Muslim world and his role with the USI. This is in the "religion" section of Wikipedia."

The page itself is about Rashad Khalifa, not necessarily his works, that's subsections of the page, there is no reason why his carrear should be considered as irrelevent. Why don't you vandalize the Jesus page, I'm sure theirs no reason to mention his work as an alleged carpenter, after all this is the religon section of Wikipedia!

Con) I'm readding it, you're causes for removal, a) A typo B) You don't like Libya and C) It's supposedly "irrelevent" are not justifiable causes for removal.

Links

• 1) Let's keep it balanced and brief, 3 for 3.
• 2) You can't call the link "Facts about The "Submitters" Group" - look at the website! LOL! "Zionest," "Liers," it's a joke.
• 3) You can't call the link "Fact of Fiction" - look at the website! "Rashad's cult"

USN: "logical reason"

786

Salaam everyone,

Ahmed wants a "logical reason" why his link cannot be here.

OK. I can't go onto the Islam article and slap a Bahai link at the bottom and say, "Well, Bahai is the continuation of Islam."

There is an Islam article and a Bahai article. They are seperate. If you want (Mr. Ahmed Nitshoba), you can take the time to make your very own USN article. But do not pretend link USN has anything to do with Submission. You're not fooling anyone.

We have been over this with you; give it up. For the record, most of you know about gematrical values. Alef is one, in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic. This is never disputed. Our Mr. Nitshoba asserts that Alef is 3. As the objective and sincere reader will readily conclude, we are dealing with someone whose perception of reality is grossly skewed.

Thanks,

A-SUBMITTER-to-GOD-ALONE

---

Well, and you are not fooling anyone either, at least not me. The USN website has nothing to do with the Bahaii faith, but has everything to do with Rashad's message. Rashad delivered a very important piece of information about the Great prophecy, declaring that Submission (and not 'islam') will dominate the whole world gradually starting from the states. There are no sites that continue with this idea except for the usn2161.net website.

Don't fool those who don't know with your wrong explanation of the numerical values. The TGv (Total Gematrical Value) is based on the Gv (Gematrical value) which Rashad used. God is omnipotent, if He replaces one sign with another, it is either equal or better than the one before it.

It is your perception of reality that is grossly skewed, you give it up.

--User: Ahmad, 22 January 2007 --

Recent Vandalism - Nov. 9, 2006

Ahmad Nishitoba is continually vandalising this article, under different IP adresses. I have been forced to revert the article more than once now. I do not want to risk breaking the 3 revert rule.

I feel that this may lead to an article lockdown if this is not put to a stop. Administrators will be contacted - God willing - if this continues.

-A Submitter to God alone, Nov. 9, 2006

Yes, i would like to take that to an adminstrator, your continous removal of the usn link breaks the rules, specialy that you haven't cited a specific reason for it. And by a reason i mean definite examples from the website showing how it CONTRADICTS with Rashad's message.

-- User:Ahmad, 22 January 2007 --

Web links

Ahmed Nishtoba's site should not be listed here. He does not follow the same religion of the Submitter's,

The two links that I restored, United Submitters International -Masjid Tucson, and God's Mosque have no relation to Ahmed Nishtoba. The removal of these sites would not be done by a practicing Submitter, as they would not want to hinder the representation of true Submission to God alone. I assume that Ahmad, you may be removing these two sites which belong under the title of Submitters, since your link came up in place of them. Sorry if I'm wrong and it's not you, but it seems logical that is what is happening - so please stop it now!

Peace, -- User: ISubmit786, 22 January 2007 --

Well, wrong again !. This is your own opinion when you say Mr.Nishitoba does not follow the same religion of the Submitter's. Are you gonna force your opinion on the rest of us ?. what is the criteria you have based this opinion on ?

-- User: Ahmad, 23 January 2007 --

I see Ahmad Nishitoba and few followers keep reverting the links to include the United Submitters Nation against general consensus. You can review some logical reasons given already by other editors above as to why your link is not appropriate for this page, but I will add a few here:

You use a different geometrical value system than what Rashad Khalifa and the Submitters use, you don't advocate the same system as the person that this Wikipage is about. And it is a different system than what the world uses. Remember what the geometrical value is based on? It is based in commerce as a counting system- that's not something that the value can change, it would cause chaotic and unfair trading practices to take place.

Rashad Khalifa and the Submitters were/are not in the business of predicting earthquakes. You don't see that anywhere in his history. It has nothing to do with him. You have now predicted somewhere around half a dozen or more earthquakes which were supposed to destroy a whole community and start a new world order. But you have disguised any link to your past predictions, and quickly change the date of the predicted devestation every single time. The submitters are not in the business of beating around the bush like that, nor is it remotely representing anything on this Wikipage.

You have no message different than Rashad Khalifa's message, you add nothing new to increase the knowledge about Rashad Khalifa, rather you divert and reduce the quality with your link, because you change the values of geometrical value system (which is a challenge to God's system), continually predict earthquakes that never materialize (I would think you should consider stopping and checking yourself if you haven't experienced the support from God yet), and you have no miracle. This is one of the things that Rashad Khalifa preached: not to listen to someone who has no substantial message beyond "follow me and my opinion", provides no miracle, and does not demonstrate support for their claims. Your link would not fall under the category of what he preached.

This is not the page where you should be advertising your claims, the only reason that I can see that you are battling to have your link placed here is because you are not interested in the message, but in the idol. You are battling for the "idol" page. How about making your own page where you can edit it to your liking. I'm sorry that it just does not belong here, and you have ignored the other page editors and consensus.

Peace

-- User: ISubmit786, 24 January 2007 --

"I see Ahmad Nishitoba and few followers keep reverting the links to include the United Submitters Nation against general consensus."

-If it's about the number of comments, i can get you more numbers!, you can never reach consensus on wikipedia, because it's built on difference of opinions .

"You can review some logical reasons given already by other editors above as to why your link is not appropriate for this page"

-Haven't seen any !

"You use a different geometrical value system than what Rashad Khalifa and the Submitters use, you don't advocate the same system as the person that this Wikipage is about."

-Wrong, the TGv. is not the Gv. but is built upon it. Same like when you add a link to Einstein's article, that advocates a new discovery proving the theory of relativity of Einstein. The TGv proves and confirms the Gv system of Rashad, same like Quran confirms previous scriptures.

"And it is a different system than what the world uses. Remember what the geometrical value is based on? It is based in commerce as a counting system- that's not something that the value can change, it would cause chaotic and unfair trading practices to take place."

-To my knowledge, nobody in the world of commerce today uses the Gv. as a counting system !, if you read carefully you will find that the TGv. system is based on three universal systems (Gv. GSv. and ASv.) , and it is not intended to be used for commerce ! .

"Rashad Khalifa and the Submitters were/are not in the business of predicting earthquakes. You don't see that anywhere in his history. It has nothing to do with him. You have now predicted somewhere around half a dozen or more earthquakes which were supposed to destroy a whole community and start a new world order. But you have disguised any link to your past predictions, and quickly change the date of the predicted devestation every single time. The submitters are not in the business of beating around the bush like that, nor is it remotely representing anything on this Wikipage."

-I believe Rashad predicted a similar catastrophic event, of an asteroid hitting the Arabian peninsula. Secondly we never denied past predictions on usn2161.net , we removed them only because of their nature being time-dependent tests of faith, the dates build upon each other, and the prophecy has been constantly about 119, so there is no need to freeze the scene at a specific age of the same prophecy.

"You have no message different than Rashad Khalifa's message, you add nothing new to increase the knowledge about Rashad Khalifa, rather you divert and reduce the quality with your link, because you change the values of geometrical value system (which is a challenge to God's system),"

-This is only your opinion and everbody is entitled to his own opinion, but this opinion is not shared by all submitters, so don't force it upon them. God sends new signs as He wills, you are the one who is challenging this system,

[16:101] When we substitute a sign in place of another, and GOD is fully aware of what He reveals, they say, "You made this up!" Indeed, most of them do not know.

"continually predict earthquakes that never materialize (I would think you should consider stopping and checking yourself if you haven't experienced the support from God yet), and you have no miracle. This is one of the things that Rashad Khalifa preached: not to listen to someone who has no substantial message beyond "follow me and my opinion", provides no miracle, and does not demonstrate support for their claims"

-The Quake is coming soon by God's leave. The miracle is already there on the website www.usn2161.net. Ahmad Nishitoba's name is coded withing the 14 initials of Quran, and he has presented sufficient proofs from Quran, but only those who have eyes that can see, can recognize them .

-Conclusion: Submission started with Abraham, and has always been one religion from God, yet people failed to see how the message keeps building up and how enlightment and knowledge comes gradually from God. If you fail to see the link between usn and Rashad Khalifa, then unfortunately for you, you are no better than those who were stuck in judaism and failed to move on with Jesus, or like those who were stuck in Jesus and failed to move with islam, or those who were muslims but failed to embrace Rashad's message. Stop idolizing Rashad and move on with the message of absolute devotion to God alone.

-- User: Ahmad, 24 January 2007 --

Rashad Khalifa's advocating

Almighty God sent Rashad Khalifa to teach us how to worship Him alone and abolish all forms of idol worship. This does not mean that the praise is to Rashad, but to God (Quran 1:2). If we understand Rashad's teachings, we won't idolize him, or his message (by making a new sect out of it), instead we would uphold his teachings, that he brought from God. The teachings of Ahmad Nishitoba are a follow-up. The focus is on the message and its righteous meaning, NOT on the human delivering the message. This very basic knowledge was Rashad's words about the idol worshipers. If we understand the message of Rashad, we will understand the message of Ahmad.

-- User: Zakaria A., 23 January 2007 --

Criticism and Response

His writings were banned in many Muslim countries. Muslim scholars likened his numerology to Jewish and Christian gematria.. The Muslim Digest, published in South Africa, attacked Khalifa as a heretic.

1. He removed two verses from the Qur'an, the last two of the ninth chapter in order to get his calculations to work. He claimed that they were added nineteen years after the death of Muhammad. Some have claimed that the removal of these verses is in contradiction to the Qur'an itself, including the following verse:

• [15:9] We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).

2. Many also believe that his claim to be a messenger was against the Qur'an. This arises from their differing belief as to the definition of messenger ("rasool") vs. prophet ("nabi"). The following verse from the Qur'an is frequently cited:

• [33:40] Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.

Submitters' Response to Criticism

1. The two last verses of Sura 9 are satanic injections

Rashad Khalifa was sent to purify the religion from all fabrications and injections; to restore the message to its original, by God's leave. The removal of the satanic verses 9:128 & 9:129 is among many other corrections in the religion.

• [15:9] Absolutely, we have revealed the reminder, and, absolutely, we will preserve it.

In this verse God promises us to preserve Quran, the quranic built-in code 19 is the proof that God kept this promise. The miracle of 19 that God mentions in Quran (Sura 74) is the first physical evidence that every letter in Quran is from God. Therefore, any injection (addition) into God's Final Testament is noticed. This means that the correct Quran is all over the world, if one just marks the mistakes. Let's bear in mind that some countries like Iran, have changed the original arabic spelling .[citation needed] of some words in Quran, does this mean that God failed to keep His promise in preserving the Quran? On top of that, Bukhari himself says that all verses in Quran where witnessed by at least two people, except these two verses, they where witness by one, Khozayma Ibno Thaabet Al-ansaari .[citation needed] .

Al-ansaari = Supporter

The believers who supported prophet Muhammad where Medinan (Muhammad emigrated/Hijra from Mecca to Medina). Thus, the first revelations of Quran were revealed to Muhammad in Mecca, then After Hijra, the following revelations were revealed in Medina. Now, if we study the revelation of Sura 9, we will see that it's Medinan, except the two last verses, they are Meccan! How can a Medinan Sura have Meccan verses when all revelations after Mecca where in Medina? And how can a Medinan guy witness Meccan verses? This is a brief History about the doubts of these two verses. The mircale confirms that these two verses are nothing but satanic injections into Quran.

The mircale of 19 is not limited to the removal of these two verses. It's coded all over the Quran, thus saying that Rashad Khalifa removed the verses in order to make the mircale work is due to lack of knowledge of the miracle. If one is familiar with the miracle of 19 in Quran, he/she will see that it's coded all over the Quran.

2. Quran teaches the difference between a messenger and a prophet

• We did not send before you any messenger, nor a prophet, without having the devil interfere in his wishes. GOD then nullifies what the devil has done. GOD perfects His revelations. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.^{[Quran 22:52]}

Nor indicates that a messenger and a prophet are not the same, let's have a closer look on this.

a) when one is sent from God, he is a messenger (rasol), this messenger can be angel or human.

GOD chooses from among the angels messengers, as well as from among the people. GOD is Hearer, Seer.^{[Quran 22:75]}

b) Notice, the precise order of the words

• Say, "If the earth were inhabited by angels, we would have sent down to them from the sky an angel messenger."^{[Quran 17:95]}

• "Or unless you own a luxurious mansion, or unless you climb into the sky. Even if you do climb, we will not believe unless you bring a book that we can read." Say, "Glory be to my Lord. Am I any more than a human messenger?"^{[Quran 17:93]}

(angel --> messenger) i.e. not all angels are messengers, but all messengers are angels

(human --> messenger) i.e. not all humans are messengers, but all messengers are human

c) messenger prophet (rasolan nabiya)

Now, some of the human messengers are prophets (nabi):

• Mention in the scripture Moses. He was devoted, and he was a messenger prophet.^{[Quran 19:51]}

• And mention in the scripture Ismail. He was truthful when he made a promise, and he was a messenger prophet.^{[Quran 19:54]}

The precise order of the words above (messenger --> prophet) is a sign from God; not all messengers are prophets, but all prophets are messengers.

So what is a prophet? He is a messenger prophet who delivers a new scripture from God. On the other hand, a messenger upholds and confirms an existing scripture, he does not bring a new scripture.

• GOD took a covenant from the prophets, saying, "I will give you the scripture and wisdom. Afterwards, a messenger will come to confirm all existing scriptures. You shall believe in him and support him." He said, "Do you agree with this, and pledge to fulfill this covenant?" They said, "We agree." He said, "You have thus borne witness, and I bear witness along with you."^{[Quran 3:18]}

Muhammad is the final prophet = Quran is the final scripture:

• Muhammad was not the father of any man among you. He was a messenger of GOD and the final prophet. GOD is fully aware of all things.^{[Quran 33:40]}

God did not say "...final messenger and final prophet". Not a single verse in Quran says Muhammad is the final messenger.

RESPONSE:

1.Dear Reader. Yóu have to be very carefull, because these people are trying to fool you:

1) A Sura does not have to be completly Meccan or Medinan it can have verses from Medina and from Mecca. 2) There is no indicaion that the last two verses of sura 9 are Meccan. 3) Why should we believe that the verse:

• [15:9] Absolutely, we have revealed the reminder, and, absolutely, we will preserve it.

means that he would save it not now but 1400 years after this aya was revealed. This and all things the so called "Submitters" say does not make any sense.

2. This argumentation is so weak: Why do you take the order of words in the sura 19 verse 51 and not the order in the following: sura:

*We did not send before you any messenger, nor a prophet, without having the devil interfere in his wishes. GOD then nullifies what the devil has done. GOD perfects His revelations. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.[Quran 22:52]

It would make much more sense to take the order of words from this aya, because if someone is not a messenger (rasul) he can still be a prophet (naby): The Submitters have themselves given us the evidence that every Messenger is a Prophet, and not the other way around: If the Submitters opinion is right than god the almighty would repeat himself. It would be enough to say that "We did not send before you any messenger". Because in your opinion all prophets are messengers. Why should he then still mention "nor a prophet". You say that the word messenger includes Prophets. Why then the extra addition? Allah (st) does not make mistakes and EVERY word in his book is chosen carefully. There is only one way to understand this verse: The word prophet includes the word messenger. This means that not every Prophet can be a messenger. To understand the falshood these people are tryng to propagate please visit: http://mostmerciful.com/deceit-one.htm http://www.answering-christianity.com/rk_cult_exposed.htm

Messenger of Covenant

Hi

I try and still cannot understand how verses 3.81 and 33.7 are supporting his claim to be the Messenger of Covenant (image - his claim). Verse (33:40) clearly stated that Muhammad is the Messenger of God (covenant), and Verse 3.81 (image) speaks about the coming of Muhammad and the Quran to confirm all previous revelations. It is the Covenant by followers of previous revelations to accept Muhammad and his confirmation through a new Book from Allah, ie. the Quran. However they rejected Muhammad and the Quran after finding out he is an Arab, from the Jahilliyah and among the worst nation during that time. They refused and proud by their non Arab Prophets. On the other hand, Verse 33.7 (image) speaks about the Covenant between Allah and the Believers/Disbelievers and that were made through every Prophets with the objective that the Disbelievers shall not turn around against the Believers and flee during war. This is so since the Believers/Disbelievers cannot see, spoke or receive revelations from Allah and thus need to enter covenant with Allah "through" their Prophets. Someone needs to explain it logically before many are able to understand the facts that Allah sent a Messenger and it is Rashad Khalifa. I hardly believe that this claim can pass any honest debate, or perhaps someone here can explain verse 3:81-87, and verse 33:7-15.

(click here to see the comparision)

Hide unsigned original research

Original research with no significance

Verse 3.81-87 Comment AND, LO, God accepted «» First part, Covenant through the prophets through the prophets «» Covenant between Allah and followers of earlier revelations this solemn pledge - If, after all the revelation and the wisdom «» The covenant. They don't expect Muhammad is an Arab which I have vouchsafed unto you there comes to you an apostle confirming the truth already in your possession «» Confirm through the Quran (61:5) you must believe in him «» Terms and conditions of the covenant and succour him - Do you - said He" acknowledge and accept My bond on this condition? They answered: "We do acknowledge it." «» Followers of earlier revelations agreed Said He: "Then bear witness [thereto] and I shall be your witness. And, henceforth, all who turn away [from this pledge] it is they, they who are truly iniquitous!" - Do they seek, perchance «» Second part, performance of covenant. a faith other than in God They breached and seek religion other although it is unto Him than Islam after knowing Muhammad that whatever is in the heavens and on earth is an Arab. They refused and are proud surrenders itself with the prophets. willingly or unwillingly since unto Him all must return? - Say: "We believe in God «» Third part, they don't expect Muhammad and in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us is an Arab, and reject Muhammad. and that which has been bestowed upon Abraham All previous prophets are non Arab. and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and their descendants and that which has been vouchsafed by their Sustainer unto Moses and Jesus and all the [other] prophets we make no distinction between any of them «» Allah reminds them not to make And unto Him do we surrender ourselves." a distinction between Arab or - non-Arabs Prophets For, if one goes in search of a religion «» Fourth part, they reject and proud of their prophets. other than self-surrender unto God They only accept Christianity, Judaism etc, not Islam. it will never be accepted from him and in the life to come he shall be among the lost - How would God bestow His guidance «» Fifth part, conclusion. They breached the covenant. upon people who have resolved to deny the truth «» ie. after entered convenant with Allah after having attained to faith «» ie. to follow Muhammad and having borne witness that this Apostle is true «» ie. the Quran as the Confirming Book and [after] all evidence of the truth has come unto them? Verses (61:6) (46:12) (5:48) (2:41) (2:91) For, God does not guide such evildoing folk (2:97) (3:3) (3:50) (4:47) (35:31) (46:30) - (2:89) (2:101) (6:92) and (5:46) Their requital shall be rejection by God and by the angels and by all [righteous] men - (3:81-87) Verse 33.7-15 Comment Recall that we took from (through) the prophets «» FIRST PART, the Covenant. 33:7 is about covenant their (ie. the disbelievers) covenant from the believers/disbelievers not turn around - against the Believers and flee during war (Sixth Part) including you (O Muhammad) «» The word "including" because it is between Allah and the Noah Disbelievers/Believers.. and "including" their Prophets Abraham Moses «» TAKE NOTE, all these Prophets are dead during and Jesus the son of Mary the revelation, and neither can Muhammad - travel back in time and be with all these Prophets We took from them (disbelievers) a solemn pledge Subsequently, He will surely question the truthful about their truthfulness and has prepared for the disbelievers «» The word "disbelievers" support the facts that the Covenant a painful retribution is between Allah and Believers/Disbelievers. - O you who believe «» SECOND PART, performance of Covenant remember God's blessing upon you when soldiers attacked you «» War, the test from Allah we sent upon them violent wind and invisible soldiers God is Seer of everything you do When they came from above you and from beneath you your eyes were terrified your hearts ran out of patience and you harbored unbefitting thoughts about God - That is when the believers «» THIRD PART, the Believers fulfilled their Covenant were truly tested they were severely shaken up - The hypocrites «» FOURTH PART, the Disbelievers breached and those with doubts in their hearts said their Covenant with Allah What God and His messenger promised us (ie. covenant) «» The word "promised us" support the facts that was no more than an illusion! the Covenant were made by followers of - every revelations through their Prophets A group of them said O people of Yathrib you cannot attain victory; go back Others made up excuses to the prophet «» FIFTH PART, proof that the Disbelievers Our homes are vulnerable breached their Covenant when they were not vulnerable They just wanted to flee Had the enemy invaded and asked them to join they would have joined the enemy without hesitation - They HAD PLEDGED to God in the past «» SIXTH PART, REINSTATEMENT OF THE COVENANT that they would not turn around and flee making a PLEDGE with God «» had pledged and "making a pledge" involves a great responsibility is referring to the Covenant in 33.7 - (33:7-15) As we can see, verse 33:7 is about covenant from the believers/disbelievers not to turn around against the Believers and flee during war and verse 3.81 is about confirming previous revelations with new Book from Allah, ie. the Quran. Therefore, the RK's declaration to be the Messenger of Covenant through verses 3.81 and 33.7 is a fallacy. It is clear that He is not the Messenger of Covenant and these verses is referring to Muhammad and confirmation through the Quran. Muhammad is not the father of any man among you but he is the Messenger of God (Covenant) (33:40) These were my views and perhaps someone can explain it. http://rashadkhalifa.blogspot.com/ Code 19 & Declaring the Quran is FALSE Rashad Khalifa declared the Quran is FALSE and delete two verses (9:128-129) from the Quran based on the Code 19. He also declared the Muslim Ummah as the Kuffar or Disbelivers. Therefore, I was wondering whether anything related to the 19 is intended as a test by Allah to the Disbelievers. This question is based on the reading the actual context of Code 19 Theory, ie. verse (74:1-39) and based on the translation of: Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar Ali Ünal Sher Ali Ahmed Ali Others Please refer to the 4th Premise for reading the contextual analysis of Code 19 Theory. The discussion is divided into four parts. Part 1, 2 and 3 is the authority for the logical methodology in the Quran. Part 4 is the actual analysis of the Code 19 theory. Last part is some primary question that are relevant to the issue of deleting two verses from the Quran. 1st Premise: All True Premises 2nd Premise: Entirely Clear Verses 3rd Premise: Do not ask 4th Premise: Contextual Analysis of Code 19 Submitters or Deniers? 1st Premise: All True Premises Do not mix the Truth with Falsehood, below is the authority: And do not mix the Truth with Falsehood (2:42) If one or more premises from the Qu'ran is FALSE, then the conclusion cannot be TRUE. All premises must be TRUE for us to have a TRUE conclusion. This is the main rule of Islam from the Qu'ran. Therefore, IF the conclusion from all true premises THEN follow the rule ELSE do not follow the rule Other authorities O People of the Scripture why do you confuse the Truth with Falsehood (3:71) And the example of a bad word is like a bad tree uprooted from the surface of the earth not having any stability (14:26) Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found within it much contradiction (4:82) What is [wrong] with you? How do you make judgement? Then will you not be reminded? Or do you have a clear authority? (37:154-156) These, our people, have taken besides Him deities Why do they not bring for them a clear authority And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie?" (18:15) Or do they say "He has made it up"? (ie. the Quran) Rather, they do not believe Then let them produce a statement like it if they should be truthful Or were they created by nothing or were they the creators [of themselves]? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain Or have they the depositories [containing the provision] of your Lord? Or are they the controllers [of them]? Or have they a stairway [into the heaven] upon which they listen? Then let their listener produce a clear authority (52:33-38) 2nd Premise: Entirely Clear Verses Follow the entirely clear verses and no one know it interpretation. Not entirely clear verses must be explained by the entirely clear verses from the Quran so that the words become entirely clear verses. Therefore.. IF verse is entirely clear THEN follow that verse ELSE no one knows its interpretation (ignore the verse) Below is the authority: It is He who has sent this Scripture down to you Some of its verses are definite in meaning these are the cornerstone of the Scripture and others are ambiguous The perverse at heart eagerly pursue the ambiguities in their attempt to make trouble and to pin down a specific meaning of their own only God knows the true meaning Those firmly grounded in knowledge say ‘We believe in it: it is all from our Lord’ only those with real perception will take heed (3:7) 3rd Premise: Do not ask Do not ask matter that is not clearly mentioned or explained in the Quran. It is intended as a test for the Disbelievers. O you who have believed DO NOT ASK about things which if they are shown to you will distress you But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed they will be shown to you Allah has pardoned that which is past and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing A people asked such [questions] before you then they became thereby disbelievers (5:101-102) regarding matter that no interpretation has come from Allah Rather, they have denied that which they encompass not in knowledge and whose interpretation has not yet come to them Thus did those before them deny Then observe how was the end of the wrongdoers (10:39) regarding mathematical assumptions And they have thereof no knowledge They follow not except assumption and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all (53:28) 4th Premise: Contextual Analysis of Code 19 Verses (74:1-39) O thou «» 1st Group, those who are grateful, the one who wrapped himself in a cloak! purify themselves against their Stand up and warn! low desires And magnify thy Lord and purify thy garments and abandon contamination! And reproach not others to acquire more for yourself And for thy Lord, then have thou patience - Then, when the horn is sounded «» 2nd Group, those who are ungrateful, truly, that Day will be a difficult day the Deniers, vs. the above character. - and not easy for the ones who are ungrateful «» Main character, they like something that are easy, look good, popularity, Forsake to Me whom I alone created and interesting for them I assigned to him the spreading out of wealth and children as ones who bear witness And I made smooth for him «» Proof for the above statement. a making smooth "Desire", they always seek something Again, he is desirous easy, abandoned Allah prohibition that I increase it - No indeed «» What they did? he had been stubborn Unable to follow simple rules (3:7) about Our signs They deny Allah verses, "DO NOT" - I will constrain him «» Consequences, they will not with a hard ascent understand the Quran, and - becoming deniers/disbelievers Truly «» How they plotted to declare the he deliberated Quran is FALSE and distort God's words and calculated «» They believe in predictions Then, perdition to him! assumptions, and numerology How he calculated! «» Seeking ways to distort words of Again, perdition to him! Allah for their "desire" (25:43) How he calculated! - Again, he looked on «» They strive hard but unsuccessful and, again he frowned «» They will never succeed if using and scowled ALL TRUE PREMISES from the Quran - Again, he drew back «» They give up to follow clear rules and grew arrogant «» Including claiming self - as a Messenger? And he said: «» Declare the Quran is FALSE, including This is nothing but fabricated old sorcery delete verses? …and through their This is nothing but the saying of a mortal calculation/predictions - «» The consequences, because they I will scorch him in Saqar deny and declare the Quran is FALSE - And how will thee recognize what Saqar is? - It forsakes not nor causes anything to remain scorching the mortal - Over it there are nineteen. «» Basis of Code 19 theory - Allah - relates this to the Deniers, ie. We assigned none Their guardians (methodology) but angels to be wardens of the Fire «» guardians/methodology - and We made the amount of them not «» Why the number? It is a test. but as a test The number divide believers/disbelievers for those who were ungrateful ie. those who declare the Quran is - FALSE through calculation/predictions. So those who were given the Book «» Group 1, Christian and Jews? Who are reassured don't believe in code/numerology - and those who believed «» Group 2, Muslims/Believers? Who add to their belief don't believe in code/numerology - And will not doubt «» Group 3, Christian/Jews becoming those who were given the Book Muslims? Who don't believe in and the ones who believe code/numerology - And say to those «» Group 4, The Deniers/Disbelievers. who in their hearts is a sickness Believe in code/numerology/ and the ones who are ungrateful predictions etc What had God wanted by this example? «» Basis for them to strat plotting the - Quran, seek for something easy, Thus, God causes ie. Ungrateful to go astray whom He wills «» Purpose of this number, TRAP and He guides whom He wills signs for Deniers. Compare below, - actual signs for Believers And none knows the armies of thy Lord but He «» No one know its interpretation (3:7) And it is not other than a reminder for the mortals - No indeed! «» The ACTUAL SIGNS for Believers By the moon Signs that Allah want us to observe and the night Who can tampered with this Signs? when it drew back and polished is the morning - Truly, it is one of the greatest of all things as a warner to the mortals - to whomever willed among you «» Allah decide who will believe, that he go forward based on "obedience" to simple rules or remain behind ie. the "DO NOT" in the Quran Every soul is a pledge for what it earned - but the Companions of the Right (56:7-14) - (74:1-39) Conclusion Declaring the Quran is FALSE = Over it are Saqar (hell) = Over (it) Saqar are 19 = Over (it) 19 are the test to the disbelievers Submitters or Deniers? Other primary question Do you "dispute and deny" verses 9:128 and 9:129 ? (for whatever reason, Messenger or else. It is not relevant to the question) Simple question. Yes, or No According to the following verses, those who dispute the Quran are automatically becoming the Deniers. No one disputes concerning the signs of Allah except those who disbelieve (40:4) The Quran have been perfected. This day I have perfected for you your deen and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as deen (5:3) The Quran has been protected by Allah since Muhammad.It is not relevant to us to find out how Allah protects the Quran. Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed We will be its guardian (15:9)