OK, I get that if you are unfamiliar with Surah 2 then just taking a short ayat and posting it may not make a whole lot of sense to you. You should read the Surah in its entirety.
But referring to God as a bully? How so?
If the passage given strongly implies that the people were afraid of dying *because* of the God in question (he had specifically told them to die with nothing else indicated as a reason for why they were afraid of death, after all), but they ended up not dead in the end because of his fickleness? It would be something like me telling you to die and shoving a bomb down your throat that I decided not to detonate in the end. Saying "Behold my mercy for not killing you when I put you into the danger in the first place" generally doesn't end up with everyone being grateful, as should be fairly obvious.
Don't you think that someone, or some group, would by now have been able to dethrone the work of a illiterate 7th century Arab merchant?
Ignoring the empty repetition of the parts before this, I look at this part and have to wonder how you think that this argument would be convincing to your audience here. The line of argument could be just as easily used for the holy texts in Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and many other faiths and religions and would be equally unconvincing. The reasons for why religions stick around are numerous, especially when the adherents tie them in with politics and create communities that are very strongly biased towards things that they view as tying them together.
So far the best thing we have is "
Assassinations Foretold in Moby Dick!". I'm sure that even you could produce something more worthy. Maybe even a piece of work which could in fact end this debate for good?
Bearing in mind that not only have you not shown any inadequacies in the Moby Dick reference, you've not shown any inadequacies in the general line of arguments invoked by mentioning it. For example, that if you look hard enough, you can find a lot of seemingly miraculous coincidences that very much were not intended by the author of numerous books. The Moby Dick Assassinations bit only really came into existence because a person specifically made the challenge to find assassinations predicted in Moby Dick, fully expecting that nothing like that could be found in Moby Dick, which would reinforce his belief about things found in the text of the Bible being unique evidence of divine inspiration. Going beyond that, it wasn't even remotely the most relevant link provided in that post to your request, either, as should have been overwhelmingly obvious. In short, you're openly being dishonest here, which is one of the reasons that you are not being treated as credible.
*Additionally, Brendan McKay the website creator for the "Assassinations Foretold in Moby Dick!" page also has a link to a "
Nineteen in the Quran" page, although rather than evaluate what has been presented in the book, he has decided to leave the page completely blank. The only statement which can be found within this section reads " Sorry, nothing here yet." ROFLLL! What Mr. McKay is doing is metaphorically placing his head in the sand, and trying to pretend as the findings do not even exist.
More likely, like with many projects, especially ones that are done on a person's own time, life got in the way and interest was lost when the immediate aggravating stimuli was removed, and very possibly, other refutations were and are easily available, as
appears to be the
case. Strange as it might be for you to believe, quite a few people who live in a country with forms of Christianity that are politically active and actively seeking to enforce their beliefs on others and barely touched by Islam... just don't care about arguing against Islam much, because there's little to no personal involvement. The real question again, though, for here, is "Why should we expect claims that follow the exact same highly questionable logic as claims seriously made by others that were utterly debunked when actually examined to be significantly different in the end?"
So far, you really haven't given any solid reasons to do so and your personal credibility has not been demonstrated to be sufficient to give reason to put any weight behind your claims.
