Why logical arguments for Messengers don't work.

[Mystic]

Maybe not clear enough to me as of yet. An example may help. The Torah relates many apparently historical events in which God commands the ancient Israelites to commit actions that today seem morally repugnant. Are these the kinds of teachings to which you refer? There is also a problem with setting up a circular argument. If the book serves as our moral guide, then how can we judge the goodness of its teachings without referencing the book itself.

I will give on example. A person might see Hijaab as unfair treatment to women.  However, does he have objective knowledge of the issue that he knows there can't be good and wisdom in it, that would justify the command?

Rejecting a book simply from our ignorance to understand some laws doesn't make sense. However, if the book taught to kill people who leave the faith for example, to me that latter perhaps can be proven objectively to be evil and that it's impossible God would command such a command.

Perhaps I think differently. If I say that all that is good comes from God, then when someone does something good they are, whether they know it or not, representing God. 

I meant by representative as one who must be obeyed in totality because he represents God's will and has proven to be such. 

There is a riddle goes like this: Can God create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it? The best answer given (by Pascal, I think) is yes. That stone is the human heart.  The proofs and demonstrations are there for all to see. You have presented many of these proofs and demonstrations yourself. The problem is that no one, God, can compel love. Diffidence and obedience can be forced upon someone, but love cannot. 
As for me, I do not come to you with mysterious feelings. All I am saying is that there are deep intellectual traditions within both Christianity and Islam. We cannot be experts in both and, as for me, I’ve only scratched the surface of the Patristic literature and consider myself a far cry from being an expert in it. And yet I can recognize sound reasoning, as you clearly can. 

I agree with what you said. But before someone ought to seriously study a religion, shouldn't that religion claim to have overwhelming evidence it is true? Given that God can write a book that is well in itself beyond human capability, can't he write it in a way that has amazing qualities and be recognized as such?

These qualities would not simply be manifest to those have the holy spirit guiding them, but to people in general. That which is manifested to the heart through the holy spirit is important component.

But if we are going to tell people, only if you are guided by the holy spirit can you see my book to be truth, God is not giving his religion much of a discussion.

I believe miracles still happen. They serve as testimony for those who experience them, but I agree that they cannot be authoritative beyond those witnesses.

I agree, but what I meant was the type that proves a specific guide's authority in this day and age, to the masses.

That’s a bit harsh. Do you not agree that in order to attain knowledge of any kind a seeker must be adequately prepared to receive it? Why should God respond to arrogant demands from His Creations? Is it not fitting and proper that He would only reveal Himself to those who approach Him with humility?

Humbleness is needed to accept truth of God and the path of submission to him, but if all God is leaving us with is preaching "be humble, seek God, and then you will find out his true religion"...he isn't leaving us with anything really in terms of discussion of religion.

Also a general argument for the need of religion is not sufficient, if there isn't proof of the specific religion. That said I do agree we ought to ask God, seek God, and knock on God's door, but that should hardly be brought up in a dialogue as it makes the conversation rather heading no where, and comes off as preaching with no substance.

Respectfully, how is this different from the mysterious feelings that you consider a joke?

Because it is manifested to everyone, not only those who have the holy spirit. For example, even the Arabs of of those who worshiped Jinn, etc, had their own philosophy, were in awe of the eloquence and style and speech of the Quran. 

It's important we recognize God's teachings by the holy spirit, that is next level of faith, however, all you give is to dialogue is that picture will become a masterpiece when you are guided by the holy spirit leaves nothing in room of dialogue to humanity to proving the right religion.  It's all about witnessing it personally. And that is not something that ought to unite humanity.