Last 2 Verses Of Srah Tawbah And Historic Evidences
The academic approach is that such conjectures do not qualify to be a theory.
1. The historical argument is not sound. Using a source that has no tawatur and ijma that came centuries later the Qur’an to challenge the authenticity of its verses which do have a tawatur. ijma and predates the hadith? I don’t think I need to explain how this is irrational. The Prophet (PBUH) recited the whole Qur’an in Ramazan which Sahaba learned, why would they go and search for witnesses for every verse when writing down the Qur’an? Why isn’t there more reports of Sahaba telling us that the two verses are added or missing after they saw the written version afterwards? Sahaba fought wars with each other over Khalifa’s killer and were displeased when they heard news of Hazrat Usman (RA) burning of Qur’an yet one must believe that verses are meaning added to the Word of Allah and they remained silent on this? It’s not believable. That’s the point of tawatur and ijma, you can’t add something to Qur’an and Sunnah without the majority of Muslims making noise and objection to it, and then this objections gets recorded throughout history but this conflict is lacking in terms of the two verses mentioned. Discussion 79364 2. The Farahi approach must be understood. If you read the verse 74:30 and then 31 after it where the number 19 is taken, you will realize that it does not talk about any formula or anything. The word of the Qur’an must testify to what is being proposed. Here the purpose of mentioning number the angel of Hell was a test to the immediate audience of Qur’an to show how arrogant they have become. There is no mention of the number serving any other goal. Choosing to believe so is conjecture and Farahi school of thought will not accept it because the word and context do not allow it. It is the same as trying to pull out ‘scientific miracles’ out of the Qur’an, it is not purpose of the text. 3. The number 19 is arbitrary for selection. Why not choose the number 7? The 7 Heavens, The 7 mathani (15:87) which even refers to the Qur’an. This would be a better number. Yet 19 was chosen for some reason. As you know RK did not believe in Sunnah or Hadith much, followers of this view could at one point argue that why we have 30 days for Ramazan, and start questioning the last 11 days to make sure it is 19 days. Or why we pray 5 times a day and not 19? This could continue and it can lead to butchering of the Deen in general. This is why as Farahi approach goes, Allah uses clear words to convey meaning behind verses and how His religion is established. If number 19 was a tool to protect the Qur’an from addition, He would have mentioned and explained the formula clearly for us but until then this is a conjecture at best and a poor one. 4. The person is questionable. While I do not want to comment on individuals and intentions but in this case, one must understand who Rashad Khalifa was. He claimed not to be a prophet, he claimed to be a Messenger who spoke to Hazrat Jibrael, claiming to be a Rasool and then be murdered. I do not think I need to explain why, we need to be careful with anything he proposed. Both his argument lacks merit and his character was questionable. He is followed mostly by the Qur’anist Muslims and for that, this discussion is relevant. Discussion 1123
Any ghamidi sahabs clip regarding this