There is only one god

I will now refute Pro's points in round 2.1. Pro has chosen to ignore what my refutation of his 4th point in round 2. For ease of judges, I will copy and paste my refutation of his 4th point. "This point is easy to refute. The term used in the definition is "god" which is singular. If I were to define a lion(singular), it would be wrong to say "A lion are animals(plural) that have manes". And vice versa. It would also be wrong to call a pride of lions(plural) an animal(singular) with four legs. Thus Pro is clearly confused on the implication of simple rules of the English language. "Pro has chosen not to address this point of mine. Thus it stands true uncontested.2. It is written in the bible. The following 2 sentences proves my point. First is the direct verse from Hebrew 1:14. "Therefore, angels are only servants--spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation. ". http://biblehub.com...The second below is from Matthew Henry's Commentary on the bible. Matthew Henry (18 October 1662 – 22 June 1714) was a Welsh Non-Conformist minister. "What the angels are as to their nature: they are spirits, without bodies or inclination to bodies, and yet they can assume bodies, and appear in them, when God pleases. "Thus it's proved, angels are spirits.3. "Trees are able to respire does that make them humans because we respire too? "Show me a religious material that say trees are humans.4. "The soul isn't part of nature it transcends it, either as an imaginary concept or as a genuine thing beyond physical limitations. "This statement is flawed for 2 reasons. a. Definition of Nature:Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural, physical, or material world or universe. "Nature" refers to the phenomenon of the physical world, and also to life in general. . http://en.wikipedia.org...Definition of natural:Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind. P1: Being part of nature is being natural (not made or caused by humankind. )P2: the soul is not made by humankindC: the soul is part of nature. b. This statement ONLY addressed the soul part. It did not address death. Remember that nature also refers to the phenomenon of life in general and that death is a phenomenon of life.5. I only need an additional existence aside from god that fits my definition of god to make it plural. Pro clarifies here that there IS an additional existence "There IS one "Angel of Death" the rest have no control over it. " Thank you Pro for agreeing with me.6. From your own source . http://angels.about.com... "The Angel of Death who is charged with taking your souls will take your souls; then you will be returned to your Lord. " (As-Sajdah 32:11). " How can you be charged with a task if you are powerless to do it? 7. I used lions as an example regarding singular and plural forms of a word. Pro is obviously confused about this point. 8. I've always had the impression that Allah and God are both omnipotent as well as omniscient. I did not think that they would have the need to "struggle" to "decide"on something. And Pro, I would suggest you to read your links before blindly posting them. Once again, from your own source. "Dissociative identity disorder (previously known as multiple personality disorder) is thought to be an effect of severe trauma during early childhood, usually extreme, repetitive physical, sexual, or emotional abuse. " . http://www.webmd.com...Pro claims that his almighty Allah has "severe trauma during early childhood, usually extreme, repetitive physical, sexual, or emotional abuse. "9. The BOP is on Pro to show religious materials that proves gods in Greek mythology are "morphed forms of Allah". Do note that the assumption in my initial round is "Assumptions : All religious materials can be taken literally unless there exist contradiction within the same religion. "10. Again BOP is on Pro. Please show prove in the Quern that "Allah is fine with us naming planets after his false personas. "11. Pro contradicted himself. "Hinduism has only one god" "The rest are simply demigods"Demigods as mentioned by Pro fits into my definition above. Pro also chooses to ignore my assumption above with his bigotry statement "Only Islam is correct. "12. Pro did not address the issue of polytheism in Taoism.13. In regards to ancestral religions and Buddhism, Pro states that "neither of those believe in an actual entity similar to God. " Zero god is also NOT ONE god. Thank you Pro again for supporting Con. And again Pro chooses to ignore the assumption when talking about Christianity. 14. This debate is regarding gods and not prophets nor which religion is right or wrong. I have provided evidence in EACH religion proving that the topic "there is only one god" is FALSE. Pro has yet to provide any religious evidence contradicting my arguments. Thus Con is obviously the right answer.