echidna

To echo Nickle's post, if Biblical codists are anything to judge by it would seem that the Islamics don't want to get left behind. The OP would seem to be a combination of :

1) Selective interpretations of words

2) Selective choice of words / phrases which aren’t necessarily opposite or have numerous alternatives which don’t feature :
a. Satan and praying to Allah, each have dozens of alternatives.
b. Disaster and thanking Allah, each have dozens of alternatives
c. Spending money for Allah and satisfaction is definitely tenuous.
d. People who lost the write way if Islam, does not automatically correlate to dead people.
e. Gold and prosperity definitely each have numerous alternatives and antonyms.
f. Magic and the family conflict seem entirely distinct although it’s entirely possible the meaning has been lost in the translation.
g. Giving poor and Allah blessing also don’t seem the only exclusive opposites.
h. Brain and light have so many interpretations and contexts I really don’t see how this can be relevant.
i. Tongue and breaching, I don’t understand the connection at all.
j. Wishes and the fear of Allah, see i.
k. Expressing something and announcing something, aren’t these just common words ? As such a coincidence in the frequency of common words is nearly inevitable, yes ?
l. Mohammed and Islamic Law, 4 times, well 4’s not really the most remarkable number.
m. Man and women, did you mean to use the male singular with the female plural ? Not another example of Islam’s misogyny I hope.

3) Selective omission and inclusions of certain text to ensure that the word count is appropriate.

Note that if one were to do a word count on such a massive text as either the Bible or Quran, some words / phrases feature more prominently than others. But inevitably, some of those occurrences are bound to coincide. From there it’s simply a case of picking the like numbers and then stretching a link (albeit tenuous) between them.

Now had these phrases all had different occurrences, then surely that would be evidence of the supernatural !!

Cretinist

Holy - 10 times
Lies - 10 times

Lying - 8 times
Muslims - 8 times

Proof: http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/simple.html

Wounded King

I have heard several times from people promoting 'Islamic science' sites about the wonderful fact that the Qur'an describes embryological stages.

As far as I can tell the passages covering this are in some cases clearly inaccurate and in other cases could be derived simply from gross morphological observation or previous works on embryology, such as those of the greeks.

simian

Seems to me that either the only time "eblees" occurs is in "esteazah min eblees", or that possibly creative counting is used.

As for the Koran and reproduction, I did run across an analysis of some of the "advanced scientific knowledge in the Koran". It appears that Mohummad believed a man's "seed" was produced in the kidneys - exactly what the greeks thought, and predating the Koran.

Simian

Asha'man

Did the Koran mention anything about the human female egg? If the Koran had anythign at all useful to say about reproduction, it would seem to be a horrible oversight to miss the egg.

Jayjay

If the coincidences in Quranic word counts are so remarkable, it wouldn't be a great task for some devout muslim to make a list of all words in Quran, sorted in order of descending frequency (surely, it's been done already, just not publicized). That way, the whole world would know how amazing the holy Quran is!

...or they might just see that there are dozens of false matches and whoever compose these lists are handpicking whatever sounds good to them.

Boro Nut

I think that's an appaling thing to say. The Quran was clearly written by highly inteligent people. Lets not forget the arab culture once invented Zero, and they still have to this day.

Boro Nut

Jayjay

I thought it was the Indian culture that invented number Zero, and Arabs merely adopted it and brought it to Europe?

Coragyps

Jayjay: It is written, I forget in what holy text, "Take ye not anything Boro Nut says seriously without examining it for a punchline."

And back on topic, Jack Chick has gathered up Incontrivertible Proof (TM) that the Qur'an is false anyway, so why are we bothering with it here? Please, though, don't invite Chick or Morey to apply the logic in that article to their own book.

River

Actually, the word " Moses" appears 165 times, just in case you are interested.