There Is No Proof of God

RecitalIf I can call it evidence or not, and it's just there, I don't really see the point in mentioning it in a debate.Preservation1. You said "Bring me two Qur'ans in Arabic off course, where words are added or changed. Right, you can't so there I proved its preservation."This does not address my question of where any contemporary manuscript/s of the Qur'an is/are. Two Qur'ans today are going to be the same, but my question is in whether they're the same as it was when it was first compiled (I did watch the videos)2. About the Torah and Gospel's corruption, you're really missing my point. I know that you're claiming the originals were given to Moses and Jesus, and that men changed/got rid of them, but I'm asking you to provide evidence that these original books you're claiming Allah gave Jesus/Moses even existed, which you didn't give an answer for. I agree that "To say that the Bible we have today is the Gospel that is mentioned in the Qur'an is ludicrous.", because like I said, that would be contradictory, but you've yet to show that the Gospel actually mentioned in the Qur'an even existed.3. You said "Allah SWT didn't corrupt the religion, Jesus PBUH did his Job and mentioned what would happen to him. Men has free will and men have changed these books, so therefore it isn't Allah's fault. It isn't Allah's fault that the trinitarian Christians killed off and slaughtered the unitarian Christians.".It is Allah's fault. If he's real, he chose not to protect the book from being changed by men. Free will isn't a factor in this when you're telling me that Allah protects the Qur'an from being changed (which you have yet to show me an original manuscript). And it would be Allah's fault for allowing Trinitarians to kill off Unitarians when Islam claims that he protected Muslims/Muhammad (Surah 5:67)4. You didn't fully address what I said here: "If he exists, Allah decided to purposely deceive people about Jesus' death, causing the biggest shirk-committing religion ever, that will lead billions to Hell, and he decides to send a final prophet that shows the error of Christianity... Over 500 years later. The question a Muslim should ask themselves is: If Allah will allow (new note: realize that I said allow, not that he himself corrupted it) his true religion to become corrupted, and (here I should've put "let people") erase all evidence of the original message of his prophet existing, twice, in a row with the Torah and Gospel, what justification would you have for believing he didn't (use deception or allow corruption) a third time?" and I then said "He isn't real. No one who is "The Truth" and "The All-Compassionate" would do what Islam claims God does", in other words, a truthful and compassionate God would not A) Deceive people about his prophet's death (not truthful) and B) Let that deception lead to a heretical religion which he chooses to correct after hundreds of years (not compassionate). To justify your position you'd have to answer my A and B points. I would say you answered B by saying "if someone hasn't heard of the true word of God and then dies, he won't be held accountable", meaning deceived Christians from before Muhammad, aren't held accountable, but that raises more questions. One being, why even tell what the actual truth is? If no one knows it, no one would be held accountable, and we'd learn the truth after we die. Wouldn't that be more compassionate, considering telling the truth just leads to more people in Hell? Being silent is not lying. And another being, if Allah does choose to reveal the truth, what reason would he have for waiting so long? And you never answered why Allah deceived people about Jesus' death.5. You didn't address this point either: "And can you prove the memorization prior to it being written didn't even fall slightly victim to error? I don't see the logic in using preservation to prove it's true, if you need to assume it's true to believe that it was perfectly preserved (that God didn't let memory error happen)."Linguistic MiracleThings you said:"We don't have to accept any miracle from the Bible, it doesn't work like that. Sure, there's a miracle in it, but who says that didn't came from Allah SWT?"The thing is that you haven't proved that the Torah and Gospel mentioned in the Qur'an ever existed, meaning you have no basis in evidence to say any of the supposed miracles are from Allah of the Qur'an."Secondly,if I'd convert to Christianity I should still follow most rules of Islam, for example I should pray with my face on the ground."I don't really see the point in this, but if there is one: You'd be following a lot of the same rules, but also many foundationally different ones. The lives of devout Christians and devout Muslims are very different.3. "A) You practically admit that no one can create something like the Qur'an. B) The shortest chapter of the Qur'an has 10 words and in those 10 words we can find 40 rhetorical devices. What human can create that? Right, none. C) The Qur'an mentions the word Day 365 times. The Qur'an mentions the word month 12 times." (I added the letters)A) My point is that it is an illogical argument because it's inherently impossible to create something like the Qur'an in the eyes of Muslims. I can't claim something is impossible to match in every way, and when I don't believe you matched it after an attempt to do so, tell you that that's proof I'm right. You could do that with anything.B) What is the chapter and what are the 40 rhetorical devices?C) I'm not going to attempt to debunk the claims themselves because I don't know anything about Arabic, so I'm going forth giving them the benefit of the doubt. The reader can decide for themselves. With that, if these claims are true, I wouldn't view this as definite proof of Islam. You could use it as evidence, but in an investigation, for example, a few pieces of evidence do not outweigh all the unanswered questions and inconsistencies (that goes into my above points of asking you to answer/explain certain things). If a piece of information is inconsistent with everything else you find, it would be logical to believe that there's another explanation for it that is in line with the rest of the evidence, whatever that may be. If you want to argue that what I said here isn't true, you have to show a logical inconsistency in what I said, or show that what I said doesn't apply to Islam Science I think the thing with this is, you can find things that look Scientifically accurate if you're looking at it from a modern lens. It really only works if you're looking to confirm Islam after you already believe it (which is called confirmation bias). If you look at from the neutral position of looking at the evidence, I don't think there's a good reason to believe anything miraculous is going on.Embryology:Obviously the Qur'an is making a distinction from the lump of flesh made from the clot, and the flesh that clothes the bones after the bones are made from the lump of flesh. I never said that the verse states that the bones are clothed with flesh after they finish forming. I simply said that this verse claims the bones are made from a lump of flesh, and after they're made, they are clothed with flesh, which is exactly what it said. "The wording of the verse is quite vague on this point and what it says is quite compatible with what we know of embryology."And because it's vague, the fact that it can fit with Science isn't really miraculous when vague things can be interpreted in multiple different ways. Mountains: The Bible said that Mountains have roots before the Qur'an said they pegs (Job 28:9, read what I said at the beginning of linguistic miracle too). It would be more reasonable to say that Muhammad got it from the Bible than from God.Spherical Earth:The claim we learned it was spherical in 1597 is false. Even the myth that Christopher Columbus discovered it puts it before that in 1492 (And we know it was before 1492). It has been known since the the time of ancient Greeks (Which is before even Jesus was born), although it wasn't as widely accepted. You then claim that the Qur'an says the Earth is shaped like an Ostrich Egg. The Earth is not the shape of an Ostrich Egg. The polar diameter (12,714km) is slightly smaller than the equatorial diameter (12,756km). Such a minimal difference isn't even visible to the naked eye, as you can see from pictures of the Earth. This is nothing like an Ostrich Egg, where the diameters are instantly distinguishable.Universe Expansion:This goes into what I said about confirmation bias. If what you said is just a clear statement from the Qur'an, why aren't mine? "He restrains the sky from falling upon the Earth". The sky, or what Christianity and Islam call the Heavens are not things that can fall. They are something you can go through. To say Allah could make it physically possible to do it would be avoiding the point that the Qur'an says he preventing it. Fingertips:Where did you get the idea that the Qur'an is speaking about determining identity? At the most you could say Allah is saying he can even assemble specific details like fingerprints, but this still makes no claim that all fingerprints are unique. Where does it say that?Water Cycle:Every single verse makes very basic claims about water, clouds, etc. Where's the detail?------------------------------------The word limit right now is too low to talk about any another subjects. We can have a separate debate about the things I didn't get to after this one