Your modified argument is similar to mine but not exactly. For example, I do believe God to a degree can guide people without revelations and books, or a divine guide...but this is not the guidance I am talking about. I'm talking about a greater guidance.
If Moses came to Pharaoh and didn't bring miracles...and all he did was say "I bring a message which contains the light of God, if you embrace the holy spirit and seek God, you would recognize this to be from God" - it's least to say put's him in a weak position. For people who are confused, they need someone to pull them out of the darkness. They would not be confused if they had the holy spirit in them to the degree they could recognize the sacred nature of the message of a Prophet. They need something clear manifest. The reminders are important, but they need something to give them that trust, beyond, the confusion they are in. They need some form of manifest proof.
Today, if all we have to bring in the discussion in religion and the manifesting the true one, is seek God, embrace the holy spirit, and the true teachings and scriptures and message of God would be revealed to you...but sorry to say...that is not a discussion.
Of course if a book was to be from God and the Guide is appointed by God, they should be morally sublime, and not have clear indications of evil. We may have subjective opinion that some of it's teachings are evil, but in reality, there should be no clear evils in it, that is beyond doubt evil to us. This is clear.
However if I write a book without evils, and I appear as saint and put on act of holiness, people are not allowed to take my claim to being God's representative seriously if there is no clear proof.
People have wishwashy great feelings about certain texts all the time. People feel differently about different leaders or teachers or books.
However God is capable of bringing down clear proofs. Given that he would not do great wonders like split the sea by deceivers or misguided or deluded or immoral people - but rather entrust such miracles (there can be miracles fake people do, but they would not be proofs like these) to his trusted elite servants who only perform such acts by his permission and not their whim.
If all we have in discussion and interfaith, is that we ought to seek God and the truth, and will find it by mysterious feelings, then this to me is a joke of a Creator. He can perform clear indications that will convince the most confused, the most irrational, and bring them to clear insight but doesn't do so.
Now the fact we don't have proofs in the form physical supernatural miracles today, I feel, that this can only be explained by the fact God wrote a book and revealed a revelation to humanity, that it's eloquence is so manifest, so clear, as well as it's sublimity, it's majesty, that it's beyond doubt to everyone who comes to it having reflected and listened to it with some degree of reflection, that it's beyond human capability.
I would feel that he would not write such a book and not emphasize on it's superior nature in that book, and challenge humanity to test if they can bring the like of any of it's chapters, so that a great discussion occurs surrounding the nature of the proof in the form of a miracle in words. For it to be central around this proof, but, it makes no emphasis on the superior nature of it...then I would say it would be indicative of neglect.
This is like a Prophet splitting the moon or turning a stick to snake, and then not even mention before or after, that is a clear proof. Acting like yeah I just did it but I'm not even going to remind you that this is a clear proof of my claims.
God didn't destroy any nations in the past by giving this whimsy argument to feel the truth of the Messengers message. That is important. The rational they call to is a clear reminder. But there ought to be proofs, clear indications...or it's really that compassionate and merciful of God to send such guidance to humanity.
What kind of interfaith discussion is he giving people who see God and are guided by the Guide of time. Nothing. All they say is seek God, ask. Look at Drich doing this. It's a joke.
There has to be a clear sign, a clear proof. God wants us all to understand the nature of that proof, and if we are going to attribute something to God in society, we ought to bring our clear proof.
Otherwise, we are not ever going to unite on the rope of God and people won't be awakened to the Guide of age who is the companion to the journey that leads people in each state they must learn to adopt.
Now given a book after Quran can make similar claims, I believe it's rational that we see that people take this miracle seriously. That's it's eloquence is so far unmatched by society and that people are still unraveling literary qualities that seem beyond human capability.
That it's not just the claim, but that people are taking this claim seriously, and that when we recite it ourselves in the original language, we come to feel that there is this special quality.
The reality is such a book would have followers primarily emphasizing on this feature while if it wasn't such a book, people of it would be like Drich, always telling people to A/S/K (Ask, Seek, knock) and become at worst a laughing stuck, at best, a pointless dead end of a discussion.
If Moses came to Pharaoh and didn't bring miracles...and all he did was say "I bring a message which contains the light of God, if you embrace the holy spirit and seek God, you would recognize this to be from God" - it's least to say put's him in a weak position. For people who are confused, they need someone to pull them out of the darkness. They would not be confused if they had the holy spirit in them to the degree they could recognize the sacred nature of the message of a Prophet. They need something clear manifest. The reminders are important, but they need something to give them that trust, beyond, the confusion they are in. They need some form of manifest proof.
Today, if all we have to bring in the discussion in religion and the manifesting the true one, is seek God, embrace the holy spirit, and the true teachings and scriptures and message of God would be revealed to you...but sorry to say...that is not a discussion.
Of course if a book was to be from God and the Guide is appointed by God, they should be morally sublime, and not have clear indications of evil. We may have subjective opinion that some of it's teachings are evil, but in reality, there should be no clear evils in it, that is beyond doubt evil to us. This is clear.
However if I write a book without evils, and I appear as saint and put on act of holiness, people are not allowed to take my claim to being God's representative seriously if there is no clear proof.
People have wishwashy great feelings about certain texts all the time. People feel differently about different leaders or teachers or books.
However God is capable of bringing down clear proofs. Given that he would not do great wonders like split the sea by deceivers or misguided or deluded or immoral people - but rather entrust such miracles (there can be miracles fake people do, but they would not be proofs like these) to his trusted elite servants who only perform such acts by his permission and not their whim.
If all we have in discussion and interfaith, is that we ought to seek God and the truth, and will find it by mysterious feelings, then this to me is a joke of a Creator. He can perform clear indications that will convince the most confused, the most irrational, and bring them to clear insight but doesn't do so.
Now the fact we don't have proofs in the form physical supernatural miracles today, I feel, that this can only be explained by the fact God wrote a book and revealed a revelation to humanity, that it's eloquence is so manifest, so clear, as well as it's sublimity, it's majesty, that it's beyond doubt to everyone who comes to it having reflected and listened to it with some degree of reflection, that it's beyond human capability.
I would feel that he would not write such a book and not emphasize on it's superior nature in that book, and challenge humanity to test if they can bring the like of any of it's chapters, so that a great discussion occurs surrounding the nature of the proof in the form of a miracle in words. For it to be central around this proof, but, it makes no emphasis on the superior nature of it...then I would say it would be indicative of neglect.
This is like a Prophet splitting the moon or turning a stick to snake, and then not even mention before or after, that is a clear proof. Acting like yeah I just did it but I'm not even going to remind you that this is a clear proof of my claims.
God didn't destroy any nations in the past by giving this whimsy argument to feel the truth of the Messengers message. That is important. The rational they call to is a clear reminder. But there ought to be proofs, clear indications...or it's really that compassionate and merciful of God to send such guidance to humanity.
What kind of interfaith discussion is he giving people who see God and are guided by the Guide of time. Nothing. All they say is seek God, ask. Look at Drich doing this. It's a joke.
There has to be a clear sign, a clear proof. God wants us all to understand the nature of that proof, and if we are going to attribute something to God in society, we ought to bring our clear proof.
Otherwise, we are not ever going to unite on the rope of God and people won't be awakened to the Guide of age who is the companion to the journey that leads people in each state they must learn to adopt.
Now given a book after Quran can make similar claims, I believe it's rational that we see that people take this miracle seriously. That's it's eloquence is so far unmatched by society and that people are still unraveling literary qualities that seem beyond human capability.
That it's not just the claim, but that people are taking this claim seriously, and that when we recite it ourselves in the original language, we come to feel that there is this special quality.
The reality is such a book would have followers primarily emphasizing on this feature while if it wasn't such a book, people of it would be like Drich, always telling people to A/S/K (Ask, Seek, knock) and become at worst a laughing stuck, at best, a pointless dead end of a discussion.
