The Islamic God exists.

Round 3 OutlineI. IntroII. Other religionsIII. Incorrect predictionsIV. Jaded statistics on opponent's partV. SummaryVI. LinksI. I must admit, my opponent took a creative route to make her argument. Using probability to show that many of the predictions within the Islamic religious book are known to be true. Yet, many other religions have done exactly the same. II. Other religionsThere are at least 729 other religions. "There are more than 730 established Religions in the world which are broken out into more the 3200 different sects." [4]Now just at there are approximately seven billion people on the Earth now, there were many religions who perished long ago. Meaning the total number of religions that ever existed as some point would be much higher. Since early hominids have existed for over one million years, that's a lot of time to make educated guesses. Let's hazard a guess that there were about ten times the amount of religions created ever as that exist in the world today. That would mean 7,200 attempts. Not only that but each religion could learn from the previous one. To sum up, religious doctrines are made up of hypothesis, guesses, and conjuncture. You can see this clearly in other religious doctrines as prophets fail to show up when predicted and events happen differently that foretold. Let's say one group of religions guessed the Earth was flat and another that the Earth was round. Just like survival of the fittest, the groups who guessed flat would be mocked and people would flock to the religious talking about a round Earth. Not to mention that now you have several religions that all are correct in their predictions thus far. III. Incorrect predictions Surely, there must be some incorrect predictions. Even if there are none, all it means is the religious leaders were very good at protecting themselves. If you make no claims, you can't be proven wrong. Think of an author trying to make as much money as possible by making predictions about the future. How would he/she do it? How much risk would he/she take? The more far fetched predictions would generate more attention and thus revenue when proven almost certainty true. IV. Jaded statistics on opponent's partMore importantly, some of the guesses may have been highly thought out. Think of someone who stares at the moon a lot. They would see the eclipse. People with very good eye sight would be able to see more detail of the moon. Even in those times it would be possible to make a very good guess that the moon reflects light. As for the Earth being flat, that's more of a 50/50% chance. I don't think too many people really thought the Earth was triangular in shape. I would also like proof that the holy book actually used the word sphere. Since sphere is a 3-d object as opposed to a 2-d circle. "Further, the Qur"an also mentions every living thing is made of water. " Muslimdebater You could also make the argument that every living thing is made of heat. I would think ancient people would think more in terms of air, fire, water, and Earth. If you twist the meaning a little, every living thing is made up of all four, air, fire, water, and Earth. So, that seems like a 100% chance prediction, since all four were right. V. Summary Relying upon predicitions seems a poor choice to sort out which religion is correct. "Though Muslims often argue for the divine origin of the Qur’an on grounds that “no error, alteration, or variation” has touched its copies since its inception, such a view does not accurately represent the facts. " [5] Think about what this is stating, make several different copies with different predictions each and whenever a prediction turns out incorrect keep the correct prediction copies, and destroy the copies with incorrect predictions. Finally and maybe one of the most importance, Islam is one the youngest religions in existence, starting in 700 AD "The origins of Islam are attributed to Muhammad's personal quest to share God's words to others in 7th Century AD. " [6] Meaning the creators of the religion had more advanced technology to make predictions and more time to analyze the mistakes of previous religions. In other words, of course the Islamic holy books would be more accurate than other religious texts, because the creators came to the game later. Even now criminals are thinking of more and and more advanced schemes. The more I think of it 700 AD was really late in the game for religions. There is so many ways that the writers could have access to evidence that the world was spherical in shape and the moon reflected and so forth. There may not be the sheer volume of evidence that the Earth was round in 700 AD as today, but surely there was evidence. In fact "Around 350 BC, the great Aristotle declared that the Earth was a sphere" [7]. Poor science, religion moving in on science's turf since at least 700 AD. Now only that but Aristotle discovered the part about the moon reflecting light. "For example when Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) discussed the shape of the earth. One of his arguments to prove the earth's sphericity was the fact that during a lunar eclipse, as the moon enters or emerges from the earth's shadow, the shape of the shadow seen on the moon is always round. Only a spherical object always produces a round shadow. If the earth were a disk, for example, there would be some occasions when the sunlight would be striking the disk edge on, and the shadow on the moon would be a line. " [8] As I see it ordinary people created the Koran and plagiarized Aristotle. This sends a chills down my spine and makes me angry. Its about time scientist say to the religious people "you kids get off my lawn!" Thank you for the debate, you are a most clever adversary. VI. Links4. http://www.answers.com...5. http://www.gotquestions.org...6. http://www.answers.com...7. http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov...8. http://www.answering-islam.org...