(July 31, 2015 at 1:14 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:(July 31, 2015 at 3:58 am)Shuffle Wrote: So let me get this straight. The reasons your religion is unique is because your book and some people described someone inside of the book, some philosophy gibberish inside of the book, and some pages inside the book.Well, I didn't argue all the implicit points, but implied in my argument is that I would expect God to explain/manifest his name/face in creation in detail and remind in detail, and I only find that done in Shia Islam. It's not something I would expect if I was ignorant, but once you come to understand the concept of God's Name and face as explained in Quran and hadiths of the 12 Imams, then you come to know it's something that God would emphasize on. The fact no other religion does, points to Islam being the truth. As for Suratal Ikhlaas, I just find how it logically flows but so simple and rhymes really well (every sentence rhymes), and shows logically how to know the most important vital truth and central reminder of all Messenger to be mind boggling. It spells out the doctrine simple so everyone can understand but has it flow in this implicit majestic manner when thought about philosophically. And the emphasis on the name "The living", it's again, something I would expect God to do. The fact that no other religion does it and makes you think about it, and this was before, the whole philosophical schools that surround it came about, is something that I personally find to be truth from God, because it's what I expect of God yet I don't find it anywhere else. It shows God favors reason and rewards it, through his revelations. Another thing is how much Quran emphasizes on to reflect with both the mind and heart. This is something I would expect of God to do, but something I find missing in other revelations. Also the emphasis to not follow what you have no knowledge of and to bring your proof if you are truthful, I find something uniquely emphasized in the revelation of Mohammad.
In all seriousness, however, your factual basis on which you hold most of your beliefs can not be the book in which you hold most of your beliefs. For example, if I say I believe in the Three Little Pigs, I can not point to the title of the book and say, "Proof!" It's dishonest and silly to do so in that context and in the context of your post.
Your post could be evidence that your religion is more unique, but that says nothing about its superior validity when it is confronted by other religions.
I think you should spend more time discussing such things with the deluded Christians. Some of them need the kind of help that you can provide.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
