Jinns are not fiction

@COG

Two-thirds of the entire world believes in the Abrahamic God.

So what ?
Could it be that you mix up "Quantity" and "Quality" ?


Airmano

You have seen fallen angels?

Yes, Jinns are mentioned in the Quran. Yes, many people have seen them.

The Saint wrote: What do you mean Muhammad's birth and life have no corroboration? He is a historical figure. All facts about him are known through through eyewitnesses

Except the most important one: the revelation of the Quran.

They are not needed. The Quran is proof of its divine origin. Few people may have seen Gabriel. But the Quran is witnessed, read, analyzed by the whole world.

How is the mere existence of the Quran proof of its divine origin?

The fact is that this trust exists. Similarly so, it exists about God as well.

Yup, it is a fact that lots of people trust God.  But is this trust justified?

what reasons do we have to reject His existence?

What reasons do we have to reject Russell's Celestial Teapot?  The default position ought to be to reject such arbitrary hypotheses unless good evidence can be provided to accept them.  This is just Occam's Razor, without which we could populate the world with all sorts of outlandish entities from invisible unicorns to fairy godmothers.

God�s existence is self-evidently true. Also known as a �basic belief� in the language of philosophy. The idea of self-evident truths are accepted by all. Take science for example: science takes the world�s reality as a self-evident truth; it believes that the world is real. In other words, the physical world is separate and external from our minds and our thoughts.

The reality of the world is the simplest assumption to make sense of personal experience.  If the world does not exist, then we need to make a a whole series of much more complex hypotheses involving brains in jars or vast Matrix-generating computer networks.  Again, science (along with most sensible people) makes the simplest assumption that fits the facts, until/unless someone can offer evidence for a more complex hypothesis.

Is it not possible that the concept of a friend that you have just described is instinctive and it comes naturally because we just know that He exists.

No doubt.  It also comes quite naturally for most people to believe that they are smarter than average.  But simply because they believe it, that doesn't make it true.

How do you know that? An atheist should have no idea about what does it feel when one experiences faith? When one communicates with God?

I wasn't always an atheist.

This is known as the fallacy of affirming the consequent. If a concept is a self-evident truth, then it does not require information transfer; but if a concept does not require information transfer, that doesn't necessarily make it a self-evident truth. As we saw above, our belief in the omniscience and omnipotence of our parents did not require information transfer, but neither was it true. No, I saw nothing of the sort. It was what you tried to say without any logic or evidence. I would say parents to a child of a certain age are close to being God as it is possible. But once the child grows that faith is transferred to where it belongs.

Which part are you objecting to?  That our belief in the omniscience and omnipotence of our parents did not require information transfer?  Or that the belief was wrong?

Even if the above argument were valid, it would only argue for some vague form of deism, not for Islam and not necessarily even monotheism. Why not?

Because:

The Quran was obviously an information transfer. It is still fair to suggest that belief in Islam is no different than believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is information transfer, yes. The basic concept of God does not require information transfer. It is common knowledge and a universal truth. Flying Spaghetti and the Green Pumpkin are not basic concepts but flights of imagination under the influence of intoxicants.

Islam is not a basic concept either.  Even if you can convince yourself of the basic concept of God without information transfer, you're still no closer to Islam than to Christianity, or Hinduism, or the Greek pantheon -- or Pastafarianism. 

Do you hold any positions of responsibility? If so, you must urgently advise all the people that rely on you that you believe in jinns. This will enable them to make alternative arrangements.

Why would they want to do so? Because you have a difficulty with things you cannot see or touch, feel or smell? Why are you assuming other people feel the same way? Isn't it possible that they have already made the effort to find them and have? While you are still blundering about in self-imposed ignorance.

I'm not joking. If you were my doctor or lawyer I would be absolutely horrified that you believed in such nonsense. I would be completely unable to trust your judgement.

Even though you are neither my doctor nor lawyer or even an acquaintance I am still concerned how can people like you make an issue of other people's beliefs just because the said beliefs do not conform to theirs, about which they know absolutely nothing.

It is terrifying that people can believe in these fairy tales in the 21st century. I'm assuming you are an adult?

I am an adult, yes. But how can you be so incredulous in the 21st century when all kinds of new discoveries are being made? However, if you are hobbled by your materialistic stubbornness you are the victim of your own self-destructive nature.