Old threads of discussion I have had.

[Mystic]

You rather a person has no proofs for Islam and just repeats what his scholars fed him, and so you an easily refute, is what you mean.

I'd rather they were a little harder to refute, I can't learn from a dialogue that isn't challenging. That's not what I meant at all, and it's the opposite of what I said, you lying weasel.

I know the point you come across was opposite to what I said. I actually believe all the hate towards me is not due to how I communicate, but simple, because I have proven my case.

Everyone in Arabia loved Mohammad and even heard of claims he was going to be a Prophet by others who saw clouds above him that will always share him and follow him along with his scent and not having a shadow. All which can't be magic, especially the shadow by what we know of science now. The Quran counsels Mohammad and says "For it's not you who they deny, but rather the unjust deny God's signs/proofs", and that means he didn't care for being accused as a liar. Sure they called him a liar, but they didn't have anything personal against him.

I don't really care what you guys think of me other than you guys use it as an excuse to avoid the truth.

Character assassination so you don't have deal with the proofs. That's what is frustrating.

And when I didn't have clear coherent way of expressing these proofs, you guys liked me more. But when the proofs became clearer and more details were provided to show each premise,  people began to character assassinate, and just call it all babble.

I didn't understand really fully, why, but I thought about Quran, and Mohammad was not need of psychological council, but this for who follows him in warning and presenting by proofs, so that they don't get disheartened.

And I understand it. So go ahead, call me whatever. It doesn't matter. I know your position is not against me, it's the proofs and signs of God you dislike.