Shia Islamic Argument for the existence of God

[Mudhammam]

Your idea of the word "Allah" is unfortunately tinged with qualities from Islamic literature, which is often filled with anthropomorphic descriptions of Allah according to Sunni Islam (the majority of Muslims, about 90%, follow Sunni Islam - which explains their larger share in Islamic literature).

We don't live in a world where "Allah" means anything but that which has been traditionally associated with the monotheistic entity whom sometimes uses messengers to speak with human beings. You're attempt to pretend that your usage of God, deity, or more specifically, Allah, does not unnecessarily conflate the metaphysical monster you've put forth with these other petty monarchs imagined to concern themselves with the lives of men doesn't correspond to reality.

I, however, think of "Allah" in a way more accurately confined to the word's linguistic and literal Arabic meaning.

The DOTV, coupled with some of Ibn Sina's attribute tracings that I found sound, proves the existence of an entity that is necessary, eternal, one-and-only, immaterial, omnipresent, self-subsisting, independent, primary, absolute/infinite, unrestricted, unique, formless, ineffable, uncaused, without rivals, and has all things else depending on it for their existence (the last attribute seems valid only if the principle of causality for contingents is taken as a premise). If you include my additional arguments regarding consciousness, this entity can be called conscious.

In light of the above description, I am satisfied in calling such an entity a deity. And the connotation that I get from the word "Allah" fits this description perfectly. Others may get a more anthropomorphic impression from that same word (e.g. Sunnis), others may harbor a more pantheistic impression (e.g. Imam Khomeini and Ibn Arabi), others may get an impersonal impression from it (e.g. Arabic deists), and yet others may even get a more polytheistic impression (e.g. pre-Islamic Arabs). It is simply a matter of perspective and semantics, not of being disingenuous.

I'm speaking of the necessary being you've argued for in this thread. Those additional attributes you'd wish to attach to Nature would require additional arguments (I didn't find your argument for "infinite consciousness"--whatever that means--or the claim that a necessary being cannot manifest attributes which include extension such as the cosmos, the world, etc., valid or persuasive).