First Read And Then Believe
@Irfan76 ‎”This argument uses reverse reasoning. For example, if light is present, we conclude that there must be a source producing that light, even if we cannot directly see the source itself” ‎ ‎Yes, it is logical to say that if there is light, there must be a source producing it. However, logically speaking, there could be multiple possible sources of that light. ‎ ‎If you explicitly claim with 100 percent certainty that the light is being produced by someone holding a torch, and that there is absolutely no other possible source, then logically we would ask: ‎ ‎How do you know that the source of the light is someone holding a torch? ‎ ‎Now, regarding the Qur’anic challenges and prophecies: ‎ ‎How can you be 100 percent sure that the source is God? You say that God made the challenge and God made the prophecy, but when we are reading the text for the first time, we have not yet determined that it is from God. ‎ ‎If we are reading the text first, how can you involve God in the explanation before establishing that the source is divine? ‎ ‎As for the verifiable matters, such as the preservation challenge and the fate of the Children of Israel (Bani Israel), it seems that you are mainly relying on these two points. Regarding other types of knowledge in the text, once someone has already made up their mind that the Qur’an is from God, they can interpret any knowledge as divine. But if we agree that we are reading the text first, without prior assumptions, then we are left mainly with two arguments: the challenge and the prophecy. ‎ ‎Regarding preservation: ‎ ‎Human beings have the ability to preserve texts, either orally or in written form. What is so extraordinary about preservation? Preservation must have a cause, but that cause could simply be the efforts of the person making the claim or their followers who were influenced by him. How do you know that the cause of preservation is from God? ‎ ‎Regarding prophecy: ‎ ‎This argument has some logical strength, because when a person makes a prediction, they are not necessarily controlling the events that bring it about. ‎ ‎So we are left with only one main argument: prophecy. ‎Do Do you agree that, logically and honestly, prophecy is the only independent basis for establishing that the Qur’an is the word of God? The other points, such as preservation or internal knowledge, could serve as additional supporting evidence — but only after we have already established, on some primary basis, that the Qur’an is from God.