Construction of Islam

A) Koran unchanged since written i) I said that the Qur'an is the only religious book which has remained unchanged, but among all other books, it is the only one that has remained unchanged for 14 centuries and beyond. There is a good reason to have a special view of it. ii) Con makes a fallacious claim by implying that just because you can write something and call it the Koran, then it means that the Koran has changed, although I will not accept that. So, if I call a rose a cow, it means that the rose is a cow? No. Sure, you can change the text of the Qur'an by changing words, nobody argues against it. However, you cannot distort the original. The original still remains no matter how much you distort it. However, if you change the Qur'an and most people in the world believe in the distorted version (even among the Muslims), then my point is negated. But, all Muslims around the world follow the same Qur'an, even among the various sects, and this Qur'an was the one that existed during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). B) No contradictions in the Koran Once more my opponent makes a fallacious claim. Of course, it can be easy to write a book without contradictions. The book can be 10 pages long. However, the fact remains that the Qur'an is the only non-contradictory religious book, and it has far more than just "don't commit adultery." The Qur'an has a highly eloquent way of expressing its message, and many a times it mentions the same things, yet no contradiction takes place. Point affirmed. C) The Koran is irreproducible because of its style i) Firstly, if this were a subjective claim, then it should really bother us why the poets of highest level were amazed by the style of the Qur'an, and could never manage to produce something that could reflect things better than the Qur'an does, especially by being rhytmic and consistent. Con wants me to offer a lengthy explanation on the style of the Qur'an. It is impossible for me to do that, while at the same time I have to refute all his other points, and elaborate on my own. He is trying to deceive the readers into thinking that I cannot come with evidence. Take a good look at how many sources he cites to support his arguments. Sure, but so will I. Books can be written on this subject and he wants me to explain it with a few thousand characters. It's not possible. http://www.islamic-awareness.org... http://corpus.quran.com... http://corpus.quran.com... http://corpus.quran.com... ii) To replicate means to recreate something, i.e., clone it. The Koran cannot be cloned into another book, by definition. However, the challenge is for another book which claims to be from God to be able to outmatch the Koran in most areas or all of them. If it can remain consistent, unchanged, influencing for all ages to come, etcetera, then the Koran has a strong competitor. However, that has never been the case. No text that claims to be from God has been a good competitor to the Qur'an. Each and every is filled with errors, contradictions, ad infinitum. iii) 'This is totally abusive because it means I can NEVER challenge this argument.' Con completely ignores the fact that the Qur'an is in Arabic, not English or Chinese. If you cannot understand Arabic, then you cannot criticize the language of the Qur'an. So, what kind of a point is Con trying to make? That he will not be able to criticize the Qur'an because he will never be able to understand Arabic? If not, then his point is invalidated. The English translation of the Qur'an is found in tonnes of forms and shapes. It is just a translation. Muslims pray in Arabic, not English (i.e., the obligatory prayers). Arabic is the original language in the Qur'an. As for the YouTube video, notice how my opponent is acting ridiculously childishly by saying something like "Oh, Pro links me to a YouTube video and I want to barf!" instead of understanding why I linked to it. The verse he quoted is in that video, and if he understands it (which he does not), he will be able to analyze the verse in Arabic and then tell me how fluent it is. He will also be able to analyse the entire chapter of that verse. Apparently, he only wants to barf - maybe he should rather acknowlegde that he has no strong opinion on the subject. D) No one has ever produced a book that has lasted as long as the Qur'an "But Pro concedes that there is an older book than the Koran, so I win this point." I never said the opposite. You do not win the point. You might win the votes by deceiving people into thinking that I said something which is not true. I said that whatever book you read, it has not lasted as long as the Qur'an in its original form. Read the Bible in Vatican and you will find a few of its books not existing in the Bible that you read in Oslo. Read the Vedas and you will find the same distortion. The Qur'an differs to all these books. Nonetheless, where did I claim that the Qur'an is the oldest book of all? E) Mathematics in the Qur'an The mathematics in the Qur'an are far from being scatter plots. Con has ignored my references. Also, even if this were true, then having a book with a very strong meaning, very precise rhytm, style, etc., and having words which are use in so-and-so many ways each, is very complex. You can write the word "day" 365 with ease, sure. But if you go too deep with words, having to deal with the antonyms, singular/plural opposites, etc., you will not have an easy time making a scatter plot. I can go very deep into this, but for instance, "sea" and "land" are both mentioned together with the value of 100, i.e., 100%. The amount of the word "sea" (out of 45 from sea + land) makes up about 71.11%, while the rest 28.88% is "land." This is compatible with the scientific data about the percentage of sea and land in the world. That is another way the Qur'an uses mathematics to connect itself to valid science. Due to having three minutes left, I will address one of my opponent's arguments for this round. He stated that we cannot be created from clay. He ignores the fact that clay exists in several forms and components. There are different clays in the world. The fact that many contain all the important minerals, and so on, and they resemble the human body in many ways, makes it very possible that we have been created from clay.