Convert me if you can

[Regens Küchl]

our starting post suggested that you had already accepted an Abrahamitic god as a fact, and just need help to know which Abrahamitic religion is right.

Yes.

Under such a circumstance, I'd actually be inclined toward Judaism, on the grounds that God would get it right the first time.

I beg you not to move the goalpost. I thought of Judaism too, but ruled that problem out because you stated to only want to choose between two choices.:

Let's pretend that I've decided I need religion in my life. I've decided to choose between Christianity and Islam.

I like that roleplayng, for it is intellectually challenging and challenges our wisdom about religions.
A forum section dedicated to religious roleplayng would not be a bad idea.

On a person like that it is no bad strategy to use the "Power of god card" as a first. One who accepts already the Abrahamitic god as a fact will surely accept that he has power.

Still a problem, since you'd still need to prove that God spoke to Muhammad but not to Paul, the members of the Council of Nicaea, various other authors of NT epistles, John of Patmos, Joseph Smith, David Koresh, etc...

Allah choose Mohammed(blessed be his name) because of his pure heart and worthyness without equal.
The christians needed several centuries to win the whole roman empire for their false religion, but the muslims managed to take a gigantic part of it from them within one generation after Mohammed(blessed be his name) and hold all of it until today (except granada and armenia).
No prophet before or after mohammed ever was that succesfull.
Wouldnt you say that this speaks very much for him?

Also, to believe that Allah did speak to Muhammad and tell him the truth about Jesus is to believe that (1) Jesus was actually a total failure as a prophet and (2) that Allah watched the Jews and Christians get it all wrong and did nothing. It seems to me the dumbest strategy would be to speak to some guy in another country, several hundred years later and assume that would take care of the problem.

(1) I read with great interest this thread
http://atheistforums.org/thread-5532.html
and agree with the argument that there is no such thing as a failed prophed because all prophets are great.
Or else you would have to call the two prophets that were murdered by the jews in the OT also failed prophets.
(2) Allah did not watch and do nothing, but sent several prophets over the centuries. But the lowly humans continued to get it all wrong until Allah choose his last and greatest prophet.
That "another country argument" of you is still ridiculous. Do you think that Allah saw rome as the heart of the world? Rome was just the home of the false apostle called Pope.
Arabia would have become being swallowed by christianity, so Allah choose his last and greatest prophet there. Arabia stood at the doors of the christian empyre, so it was possible for the prophet to build an arabian army and free the world from the rule of the unbelievers.
Another reason for Allahs choosing a prophet not within the christian empyre is the fact that Islam is meant to be spreaded to all humans, all continents, al the world.
From rome Islam could not so easily have reached into the deepest africa, tunesia etcetera as it did from arabia.
And still another reason is the unequaled beautiness of the arabian language. Allah wanted to tell his last prophet the Koran in the most beautiful language there is. Arabic, which is spoken in Arabia

Humans like Paul, who not even saw himself as another prophet, can so likely be wrong.

???

Just flipped open the epistles and picked out one example:

Galatians 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Sounds like a self-described prophet to me.
?

Sorry to prove you wrong but

The book of Acts presents Paul as a prophet, but Paul claims that he is an apostle. History has upheld Paul's claim rather than that of Acts.
http://www.jcu.edu/bible/paul/Life/Proph...postle.htm

As for the difference try this
http://www.faithwriters.com/article-deta...p?id=35862

At the end Mohammed proved and still proves to be pretty influential! Wouldnt you say so too?

Well, if we're going by greatest success story = authentic religion, I'd say go with Paul rather than Muhammad.

I did not say greatest success story = authentic religion, but what would have become of pauls teachings without constantine later making christianity state religion?

The roman emperors and popes themselves were the very problem. They were false apostles and their royal helpers, already being pawns of Satan.
They would not have heard to the rightful voice of Allah and neither would they have been worthy to.

So there couldn't have been a reformation like the kind we saw with Martin Luther? The popes and emperors were so hard of heart than a burning bush couldn't have persuaded them of the error of their ways?

Actually yes, because you know that the hard heartened pope did not like to listen to Luther but wanted him killed.
So Allah was not one to send a reformator to debate the pope, but rather a prophet who comes with an army of rightful believers to fight for Allahs glory. That befits Allah.

Different country? It is subjective from the point of view what one calls a different country.
Arabia is geographically nearer to the holy land of the bible than rome. Arabia was already touched by christianity when Allah decided to save it from the message of the false apostles by speaking his true message to a worthy man, who became the last and final prophet.

But Muhammad had no influence in Rome or Constantinople. He couldn't persuade Christians except by the sword.

( Will sift through apologetic sites later... )

As islam is for all humans, Mohammed (blessed be his name) was not sent to persuade christians alone but all the world.
In Rome or Constantinople he would have been either killed or unneccessarily hindered.
And than there is the historical fact that the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople were deathly rivals when Mohammed (blessed be his name) came to power. Because of that hateful rivalry the christian empire did not stand united and could be subdued by the prophets forces.

I think Allahs plan is very clear to see here. Divine logic that led to success.