The Quran is from God

R1 Pro commits a straw man fallacy. My argument wasn't that some Muslims believe in Geocentrism, therefore all Muslims should believe in it. I was just showing that there are Muslims who interpret the verse in a Geocentric POV. The Earth being round has nothing at all to do with the argument Pro never addressing the scientific contradiction. He just points to some verses suggesting that the Earth moves. Not actually addressing the verses in question. If the verses actually do say the Earth moves, then it's an internal and scientific contradiction. Pro gives this verse And you see the mountains, thinking them rigid, while they will pass as the passing of clouds... How does this show the Earth moves? It's just saying the mountains move. And you see the mountains, you notice them, at the moment of the Blast, supposing them to be still, stationary in their place, because of their tremendous size, while they drift like passing clouds, [like the drifting of the] rain when it is blown around by the wind, in other words, they [the mountains] will be drifting in like manner until they [eventually] fall to the ground... - Tafsir al-Jalalayn [1] Nothing about a moving Earth. ...He wraps the night over the day... How does wrapping night over the day assume a moving Earth. The night could still be wrapped with a Geocentric Earth. The verse also says Pro quotes a verse saying the Earth is round. Completely irrelevant. R2 Pro again doesn't really answer my argument. If something was created to ride, it assumes no work needs to be done. Let’s say a computer is purchased and the store owner says it’s created for the purpose of running. If it’s taken home and we find out it needs several parts to run, how can it be said the purpose was to be ran if the parts were never there? Would a valid response by the store owner be “Well I didn’t say it has every necessary piece to run.”? Saying it was created to run presumes no work is needed. Just like the store owner, the Quran doesn’t say horses were created to be put together. R3 Why wouldn't someone say there's a protective layer? It looks that way, clouds, sky, ect. Someone could claim there's more than we can see. I didn't add the other layers, because they're not actually layers of their own. If Pro wants to say the Qur'an included the other layers, why did it leave out the ozone layer, homosphere, heterosphere, and the planetary boundary layer [2]? By the way, the Magnetosphere isn't a part of the atmosphere. It's formed by the Earth's magnetic field [3]. The scientific consensus is that the Earth is made of 4-5 layers [4][5][6]. It's not really accurate to claim the D layer is one layer. It's actually two separate layers [7]. R4 Pro doesn't answer the contradiction. Reading the verses, it does give an argument. Pro's arguments. For lack of space, I can't address all of Pro's miracles. However let's suppose these miracles are in fact miracles and were not known at the time. Without question begging, how do you know these miracles were from God? Why not from aliens. The reason you think they are from god is because you cannot think of any other way they knew these, that is the logical fallacy known as the argument from ignorance. There's no way to actually show these miracles are from God and not aliens, thus it can never be proven that the Quran is from God. Nebulas A Nebula can refer to many things, but not smoke. “...various types of star clusters and various kinds of interstellar dust/gas clouds. More strictly speaking, the word "nebula" should be reserved for gas and dust clouds and not for groups of stars.” [8]. Big Bang. I'll quote from a blog post I wrote two months ago which refutes the claims of cosmology in the Quran. “Do not those who disbelieve see” No, they can’t see the Big Bang. This verse must be referring to something else. “that the heavens and the Earth were meshed together then We ripped them apart?” The Earth wasn’t a part of the Big Bang. The Big Bang says nothing about meshing things together, it just says the universe was in a small, dense, and expanded rapidly. The verse must be referring to something else. This isn’t even original. It was stolen from the Epic of Gilgamesh. The EOG claims “…when the heavens had been separated from the earth,” The Egyptians have a similar story... “And then We made of water everything living?” …..this was a part of Thales’ philosophy, way before Muhammad. ...“how could Muhammad know that”. The answer is his friend Harith Ibn Kalada,....would’ve known all about the philosophy of men around these times. [9] Can't respond to anymore due to lack of space. How is the calendar calculation a miracle? An Arab used an Arab calendar. If Muhammad was too unintelligent to know about it, he could've easily asked someone who does. If it was used by Arabs, of course some Arab at that time would know it. It's more likely that Muhammad did this. I will not respond to the links, they're not in your words and they would take up more than 8k. The lightning “miracle” hardly needs a divine being to figure out. Anyone can see that thunder comes down and goes back up in a blink of an eye. How this anything amazing? 1. Muhammed was illiterate There's some evidence to suggest that Muhammad was actually literate [10]. Muhammad being literate or illiterate doesn't tell us if the Quran is from God. The Greek poet Homer was blind [11] and couldn't read or write. However he composed a great piece of literature . Would anyone claim he was a prophet? How does Muhammad's tribe making fun of him prove anything? One can have an offensive new religious belief that upsets their relatives, but this proves nothing divine. Muhammad would fit the “masterpiece” only if Muhammad didn't really believe he was divine, but was tricking people. If Muhammad was just a skilled poet with epilepsy, he would attribute it to a divine being. What do you mean by proving the Quran is “inferior”? It's completely subjective. If Muhammad gave a beautiful masterpiece (even thought that's subjective) it doesn't prove it's divine. It just proves Muhammad was a good poet who believed his poetry was divine. 2. Where are the human emotions? Muhammad seems to be detailing a book about God. Not about himself. The authors of many story books certainly didn't show their emotion, because the story isn't mainly about them. 3. The Quran is fully preserved Preservation only means we know its textual accuracy. It tells us nothing about the factual veracity of the actual content. For instance, if we find several manuscripts from an old religion that says “The moon is made of sweet cheese”, no matter how much it says that, it doesn't make it true. There's many problems with the preservation of the Quran. Wikiislam laid out six main problems, here is one. We know from various sources that the first caliph Uthman ordered various copies of the Qur'an to be burnt because there were clear differences in the recitation of Qur'an among people of Sham and people of Iraq. The differences were so great Uthman and his companions feared future dispute about true Qur'an. (We are not talking about pronunciations, but the contents). So Uthman asked Hafsa for her copy and he ordered to make many copies of Qur'an and to burn and destroy all the existing copies of the Qur'an. Uthman ordered others to accept Hafsa's copy as the official Qur'anic text. This shows that memorization had failed to completely preserve the Qur'an (meaning recitation) in its original form but help of text was taken. [12] Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510 is quoted . [13] Other problems [12] Nobody has the original copy of the Qur'an standardized by Uthman. The most trusted commentary on preservation comes from hadith written hundreds of years after Muhammad. Early copies of the Qur'an did not have diacritical marks, leaving room for an enormous amount of discrepancy. The resolution is negated. Thanks and back to Pro. Sources [1] http://www.debate.org...; ^ All within there