Examples of a potential Socratic Dialogue in Islam

What could a Socratic dialogue about Qur’an al Kerim sound like? Here follow three small examples of such possible Q/A-conversation. We may call it a Socratic dialogue. Start easiest:

A: What is man’s main task in life?
B: To serve Allah swt.
A: Firstly, what is serving?
B: It is performing actions to please the one who is being served.
A: Why is it necessary to serve Allah swt?
B: A believer loves Allah swt and wants to reach His reward
A: If there would be no reward, would you still find it necessary to love Allah swt?
B: Yes. Loving Him for Him alone, is part of serving Him, and serving Him is done out of love.
A: What is love for a Muslim, try and describe it please.
B: Love is not just a positive caring emotion for someone or something, it’s also an action.
A: What action?
B: Caring and sharing. You do nice things for them that they like.
A: How do you care and share for, with Allah swt?
B: You do the things that He asks in His Book.
A: What things?
B: You pray, perform the other rituals, you do good works.
A: Tell us something of these good works. What good works do you do out of love for Allah swt?
B: Me? I do my best to treat other people, animals and other creatures well; I pray to Allah swt.
A: Why is it necessary to treat others well out of love for Allah swt, is it not enough to do it for them?
B: Allah swt wants us to be caretakers of His creation, it is part of our duty to Him.
A: Now I look into your Qur’an. What doest ALM mean?
B: No-one knows, they are just letters.
A: Why are they there?
B: It is said that they are meant as a sign that man doesn’t know everything and He does.
A: What do you say they mean?
B: I say that it is not allowed to speculate on things we don’t know.
C comes in now: We should leave it to the scholars, they have better knowledge, also of things with double and obscure meanings.
A: Who says that you and I are ignorant, or uneducated?
C: You didn’t study fiqh.
A: Can you prove or assess my credentials?
B: Every believer has the duty to find knowledge, even if it were in China.
A: So is it allowed to search and share knowledge?
B: Yes, but you must back up your statements with evidence.
A: Did any scholar know the exact meaning of ALM?
B: I don’t thinks so.
C: 'Thinking' isn't yet 'knowing'. Always keep that in mind.
A: Is it allowed to form your own opinion on three letters?
B: As long as you make clear that it is your opinion, why not.
A: Must you ask consent to think and speak at all?
B: I'd say, it isn't necessary, because people are allowed to mutually consult.

Second level:

A: 'And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent' What is 'apparent' here, in Kabul, may be different in Cairo or Washington. So, women have freedom of choice, as to what they wear?
B: No, because Rasulullah said, that a woman may only display her face and hands.
A: That still leaves her freedom of choice, whether she wears trousers, dresses, skirts, yes or no coat, a cap, or a hat and shawl, in whatever color or fabric she wants.
B: Euhm... no, because Rasulullah has said, that the fabric may not be transparent or brightly colored.
A: Still -- she can choose whatever style she wants.
B: I see your point, she has perhaps more freedom than that some people say.
A: But, there is no compulsion in religion. So, she is free whatever she wants anyway.
B: On the one hand -- yes; on the other hand, no. If she wants to be a Muslim in the real sense of the word, she is eager to fulfil the Prophet's word.
A: But, the Prophet said, if the faithful are, at least, able to eagerly say Shahada, then the rest is less important. What's in your heart, counts most. Rules are extra. I read that in ahadith.
B: Yes, but if you're too easy with yourself, you may loose your religion, discipline, good effort. Qur'an al Kerim says, that the faithful must compete in good deeds.
A: Then, why is using your freedom no good deed? Maybe, in the eyes of Allah SWT, using your freedom is a sign of taking good initiative, and is any alternative no second hand bargain. What do you know?
B: You think I didn't know that? Why do you think, more freedom of dress is restored now, in Kabul?
A: So, why talk bad about women who take their freedom?
B: Indeed that's haram, but giving them feedback in person, is good thing. You must help others.

Third level:

A: You can't prove, Qur'an al Kerim is the book of Allah and we can't prove, there is a God.
B: Yes, you can. The whole system of the universe is too complex, ingenuous and consistent to be just haphazard arrivals. There is obviously something or someone who mastered it out, but we just can't see it from here.
A: That's no proof.
B: Why not. Qur'an says, we don't know what Allah looks like, or how Allah functions. So, why not just drop the chase. His works are visible enough.
A: That's weak, and you it.
B: On the contrary, and #you know that. Sometimes, a building, mountain or object is too big for you to see. You just see little bits of it. And, that's only a building, mountain or object. You know you are in Kabul, but can you see all of it? Allah is way bigger for your eye to behold. You can't just take distance, travel, and then hope to see Him. The problem is lack of humility and acceptance, for many people. They see themselves too big.
A: Why isn't Qur'an al Kerim just another fairytale book, invented by someone?
B: Because many verses are true in the laws of nature, which people didn't know at the time.
A: The Greeks, the Persians, the Chinese, Indians: They knew. The Prophet used their works.
B: It's your turn to prove that, now.
A: Can you actually prove, the Prophet received revelations, that indeed he was illiterate?
B: There have been many, many witnesses. Their testimonies are well-documented.
A: Are these writing objective enough? They were written down in their own community.
B: But, the best writings were written down by foreigners. Outsiders. Yes, Muslim outsiders. And, history everywhere is mostly written down by people from their own community. American history was written by American historians and no one contests their reliability. Only now, in the internet era, we also see testimonies of their probable opponents. Why would Rasulullah's reporters be more untrustworthy or unobjective than historians elsewhere? Can you give any #good proof?