No, saheeh ahadeeth are not debatable except in the books of modernists and quranists, I hope you don't belong to either camp.

So the numerous ahadeeth that establish the hadd for ridda are ahad? and in your books ahad now means the hadeeth is debatable? What a tremendous error.

"text without historical context is meaningless" ahh ok, there is context, but that is neither here nor there. There is an asl that the circumstances of revelation do not limit the ruling. Modernists attempt to bring up the "historical context" to wash away anything their intellect has trouble accepting, when in reality it does nothing to change the ruling. This is an issue upon which there is ijma', don't twist and turn to try and appease the haters.

Whatever, science is your religion not mine. Doesn't affect me whatsoever. (Have you studied what constitutes an evidence perchance?)

Have the offenders been apprehended by the police and prosecuted? That was a complete over reaction.

proofs are for science... science is an art of god

the only proof for god's existance is feeling by believing

and it's not the miracle that leads to faith, the faith leads to the miracle

Evidence: Available body of facts. It's not rocket science - there is no need to study. Yeah, I know it doesn't affect you. People are free to believe that some fictional character exists. Like kids are free to believe that Santa Claus exists.

In the first link you provided, someone is trying to prove the existence of God philosophically. I've read better philosophical arguments about the existence of God, but let's say I agree with Taquiddin Nabhani's argument for god, and that he was able to prove God's existence without a doubt with his argument, the question now becomes: how do you reach to the conclusion that the proven God is Allah and not some other god?

Proving the existence of God doesn't validate your religion, a creator may exist, but proving that Allah exists is an entirely different subject. Likewise, disproving Allah's existence is different from disproving the existence of God.

Moving on...

The second link was exhausting to read, and the argument presented there is RIDICULOUS. To say that the Quran is a miracle just because it's linguistically impossible to match, is laughable. I am not an Arab, so I may never appreciate its linguistic beauty, but if I was, I would still scratch my head at the FALSE CLAIMS presented in the Quran.

The Quran's Linguistic beauty doesn't make it a logically sound book. Linguistic beauty doesn't make the Quran's logical fallacies forgivable, and surely, its linguistic beauty alone, can't lift it up to and give it a miraculous status.

Many claims in the Quran can be disproven by using logic. Why the hell would I care if it's written and read beautifully? Allah repeatedly claims that he's "the most merciful and the most just" being ever known to man, If I can prove that claim wrong, why should I care about the "Beauty" of the Quran?

Moving on to disprove Allah's claim of being the "most merciful" and the "most just"

Point Number one: Allah claims that humans are ignorant creatures.

Point Number two: Allah is testing humans in this life because ONLY Adam agreed to get tested

Allah (allegedly) says: "Indeed, we offered the Trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, and they declined to bear it and feared it; but man [undertake to] bear it. Indeed, he was unjust and ignorant." 

After searching for the meaning behind that line, it turns out that, according to the Quran, humans are being tested in this life because we accepted "the Trust", which other creatures, like the sky and the earth, refused to accept, only Humans foolishly accepted it. Allah created us as "unjust and ignorant" beings after all... But here is the issue, I don't remember being asked to accept or refuse, neither do Muslims, apparently only one "ignorant" person was asked, and that person is Adam.

Personally, I'd like to be asked, if the skies and the earth were asked, I'd like to be asked as well, and no, Adam didn't represent all the billions of Humans that came after him when he said yes. 

Worth pointing out that Animals feeding on each other brutally, the same ones we feed on as well, aren't created to be tested, and will not end up in heaven or hell. Let's put a pin on this for later.

I'll move on to establish different points before I finalise my argument.

Point Number three: Allah will punish a subset of Humans with Eternal Hell. Allah (allegedly) says:

“Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him - those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” Baqarah 2/81

“But the ones who deny Our verses and are arrogant toward them - those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” A’raf 7/36

“But [I have for you] only notification from Allah , and His messages." And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger - then indeed, for him is the fire of Hell; they will abide therein forever.” Jinn 72/23

Most Muslims don't understand the gravity of such punishment. Open an empty text document on your PC right now, tap on number "1" once, now click and hold number "0" for an hour. Now, do you see that number in front of you?

Well, that number is still much smaller than eternity. Allah has promised to punish some sinful humans by throwing them in hell for eternity. I can't think of a single sin that warrants such punishment. You can rape men and women for 60 years and I still wouldn't throw you in hell for 100 years, let alone for eternity.

Kill by the millions, torture the weak, steal, and burn animals with fire, and I still wouldn't sentence you in hell for eternity if I was a "just" judge.

A punishment that grand can never be viewed as "just", ESPECIALLY when that kind of punishment is applied to creatures that Allah made "ignorant" by design.

Point number four: Allah is capable of divine interventions

Allah (allegedly) says: "Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the Companions of the Elephant? Did He not make their treacherous plan go astray? And He sent against them Flights of Birds, Striking them with stones of baked clay. Then did He make them like an empty field of stalks and straw, (of which the corn) has been eaten up."

A clear example of divine intervention mentioned in the Quran. The gist of the story: a bunch of bad people went to Makkah to destroy Al-Kaaba, Allah decided that couldn't happen, so he sent a flock of birds throwing burning stones at those bad people until they all died a horrible death. The important point here is that Allah is capable of divine interventions, put another pin on this for later.

Knowing all of the above, I can finalise the big picture I am trying to paint now:

1. According to the Quran, Allah (allegedly) created us as weak and ignorant beings, and he/she is testing us, some of those who fail the test will reside in Hell eternally. At the same time, Allah claims he's the most "just", and no other being being can be "more just" than him/her.

One can simply argue that Eternal Hell is not a suitable punishment for any sin any human can possibly commit. It's not! There is no way you can logically claim that sort of punishment is "just", let alone "the most just".

So Allah's claim about being "the most just" is objectively wrong. Eternal punishment strips him/her from that title. 

2. Allah claims to be the "the most merciful" repeatedly in the Quran, and that there is no other being that can be "more merciful" than him/her.

One can think of many adjustments that Allah can make that will easily make him more merciful than he/she is right now.

Once again, Eternal punishment comes to mind. The grandiosity of this unfit punishment can also strip Allah of the "most merciful" title he/she awarded him/herself with. I can try to understand 100 years of hell, 1000 is acceptable too, and why not 1.000.000 years!

But eternity? Utter madness.

Another example by which Allah can be more merciful is NOT creating animals. Animals are not Humans, they are not tested like us. We, somehow, justify our suffering in this life, and in the afterlife, by saying "we are being tested".

... but how do you explain the suffering of animals? They are not going to hell, they are not going to heaven. So why are they here if not for testing? Just to suffer pain and cruel environmental conditions? How about NOT creating them at all, isn't that more merciful? The earth and the sky aren't tested either, but they don't feel pain or suffering, so their existence isn't cruel compared to the existence of animals.

Another example by which Allah can be more merciful is by making more divine interventions. He/she clearly cares about Al-Kaaba so much, enough to send birds with fire from hell to protect a small building like Al-Kaaba... but what about the people? How many heart wrenching videos coming out of Syria does he/she need? How many more millions of children should die of starving before he/she intervenes? 

Forget all about that, I believe that solely abolishing the Eternal punishment is a clear enough example of how Allah can be more merciful, and it's, once again, enough to strip him off "the most merciful" title he/she describes him/herself with.

Finally, according to all of the above, one can say, without hesitation, that Allah isn't the most merciful and isn't the most just. Therefore, Allah and Quran are wrong, objectively speaking.

Simply providing examples that explain how Allah can be more merciful and more just, is enough to disprove Allah's claims mentioned in the Quran, and there is not any linguistic beauty that can make those logical fallacies go away or make the Quran's literature a "miracle". Not to mention, Allah makes many other ridiculous claims on how he/she is THE PERFECT being.

well.. you are not so perfect if a weak and "ignorant" human like me can think of many ways to improve you, Allah.

So, only the astronauts are the smart ones!

Religion causes so much hate. This is awful. Religions always feel like a cult to me, makes me uncomfortable.

Technically the picture was made with a satellite, so even astronauts may be depicted