This isn’t totally mapped out or written prettily but I thought I’d put it out there anyway.
biblebeltatheist and seekthetruth-islam have been having a bit of debate about Islam the Qur’an. seekthetruth-islam seems to put a lot of stock in the Qur’an being a miraculous text. biblebeltatheist disagrees and rightly asks for proof. However, what I want to note is that even were biblebeltatheist to grant that there was proof that the Qur’an was miraculous, it would still not be proof of Allah’s existence. It would only be proof that the Qur’an is miraculous. To say otherwise would be to make an assumption of attribution.
There are significant problems for those attempting to prove any god’s existence and it becomes even more problematic when attempting to prove a specific god or a specific group of gods.
Firstly, you must coherently and logically define what a god is. If you say a god is ineffable, you lose: if god is ineffable you cannot know god or attribute anything to god. If your definition is illogical based on premises you accept, you lose: for example, god cannot be omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent if evil exists; god cannot be omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent if god is the creator and the creation is flawed, and so-on.
Secondly, you have to prove that a god exists. This will be tough. You need evidence. As explained above, miracles are not evidence. I, for one, have my doubts as to whether there can even be evidence. But feel free to try and prove me wrong.
Of course, after that, you still have a significant problem in that even if you have a coherent and logical definition of god and you have proved its existence, you still have not given me reason to care. Even were god to exist, I am fine living without it. You have no way to make your god meaningful to me without the threat of coercion or it directly interfering. And so, we get religion.
Now you have a problem in that you have to prove that your religion is correct. Unfortunately, this means you have to have defined god coherently, proved god exists as according to your definition of god and you have to link that god to your religion.
Once again, I note that miracles are not proof that your religion is correct because the existence of god does not preclude other reasons for what is seen as miraculous. It does not even mean god is the most likely reason for what is seen as miraculous. (Of course, that may hinge on your chosen definition of god.)
The most logical first step would seem to be to see if the traits of the coherently and logically defined god you have proved the existence of line up with the traits of the god of your religion. If they do not, your religion is wrong.
Another step you could take would be to check for contradictions in your religion. If there are contradictions, your religion is wrong.
If you do manage a solid link to this god you have defined and proved and the traits do not line up or there are contradictions, surely you have to ask if you should take your religion seriously. (“What are the motives of god?”)