Working backwards.

[Mystic]

You have to agree with this much.

The Creator would know how to proves things beyond subjectivity and make a case for his will, his light, his proofs, his design, his plan.

You can accuse every human of not being able to make the case, but, you cannot accuse the Creator of that. 

Again, which makes sense, instead of waiting to believers to come prove the right religion, you search yourself. And you play the odds, you eliminate highly irrational ones and keep an open mind on one's that are possibly true. You don't just let majority claim a religion by the fact they happen to testify to a sect more then others who believe in that religion, but you see the arguments for each sect, and perhaps in that, you will find true chosen teachers that God has chosen and who compliment the revelation, that you begin to understand revelation and see the truth. 

I'm not saying you even to give this a high probability of being true. All I'm saying is consider a more serious approach to letting God prove his case and the case for his true religion if there is one.

Yes, I agree till the point that if a creator exists only he should be able to properly present his case and am open to such presentation.

But the thing is all of the views being presented before me are being done by "humans", not by the creator himself. These humans have presented claims to have been chosen or appointed by this said creator, but as you yourself understand, these people cannot and have not presented a remotely convincing case yet. Think about it for a bit, even in your religion, is god making a case for himself or is a human acting as the intermediary and making claims on the supposed creators behalf?

This getting into semantics of what is considered God's direct guidance and what is considered not his guidance.

I would give a chance of those claiming to be intermediates between God and us. If they cannot show any wisdom of why they would be intermediates and cannot prove it, they you can let them be and even argue against them.

But without giving them even a chance, and just dismissing them because there happens to be mathematically more wrong religions, is lazy. If there is a true religon, most religions would be false. If there is no religion that is true, only one more religion would be false.

Therefore talking about majority of religions or believers of different religions not presenting a good case, if you look it objectively, doesn't really mean much.