It's probably because you said 'i.e., Islam' rather than the more generally targeted 'e.g., Islam'
i.e. (id est), after all, is a specifier. It takes a general term, and qualifies it, i.e., provides the specific example you're talking about.
e.g. (exempli gratia), on the other hand, merely provides an example for clarification. A Free-as-in-beer example, as it were. It does not eliminate other options from being considered, merely specifies one option that qualifies.
Therefore, when you're saying that Jediism makes more sense than [another religion] i.e., Islam, what you're actually saying is that specifically, Islam makes less sense than Jediism, while Jediism makes less sense than the rest of the religions.
If instead, you were to say that Jediism were to make more sense than [other religions], e.g., Islam, then you would be saying that Jediism makes more sense than religion in general, which is much less combative, especially since all the Abrahamic religions pretty much boil down to the same thing when you get down to the core beliefs, and so specifying one of them as being less sensible than a religion whereby a person may gain power over the very nature of physics through deft control of mutualistic symbiotes infesting our cells makes little to no sense.
Also, if I'm not mistaken it's established in the expanded universe that one cannot be a Jedi Knight until one has created their own lightsaber (specifically, I'm pretty sure that is established in I, Jedi). Why would a purported follower of Jediism claim to be a knight if he hasn't undertaken that task yet?