The Search for Muhammad has Ended
-
Most of popular history garbage and cosmetized naration? I might agree with that. But it does not mean unpopular history is not garbage and not cosmetized. The 'winner' may have propaganda on writing his story but the 'looser' might also have have the same thing.
If your standard like that then, even atheist can give you extensive research with relics, partial quotes from this and that, and quotation to prove God never existed.
I can even brings you books, that claimed prophet Solomon are from java. That books use a lot of research based on relics found Candi borobudur and other relics. The author claims queen of Sheba was Indonesian origin (because there's are old town sabak in central of java). Please note this is only to show that it does not mean not popular history is not Garbages, the above examples are one. Unpopular history even more fragile area because everybody can claim anything they want even without solid evidences and there's no need verification because there's nothing to verified to.
I have said in the first reply, some may be amazed hut some may not and I respect that, including whoever amazed by Pazuzu truth. The problems is the way he state and claimed humanity is at lost because the greatest history turn out to be a lie, not intact with pazuzu (his) story. I hope you understand. )
Now I'm waiting pazuzu direct answers, his conclusions about who actually prophet that has been sent to reveal Alquran and where exactly is the alkabah. Maybe you can shred some lights on that )
Regarding Isa ibn Maryam that stated in Qur;an is not Iesous, am not going to touch that area, in the end it's only his story. More over, he explicitly eliminating most important factors, in the area of languages, Hebrew languages, Arabic languages and so on. He will tell you only him and certain few understand arabic as most of 90 % arabs did not understand their languages, he also will tell you there are no such thing as Hebrew languages, because the languages has only been constructed in the late 19th centuries. He did that so he can do whatever he wants with the languages to support his truth. He creating his own rules about Semitic languages, most probably, because he think the languages also has been part of Zionist propaganda, that is why I also ask whether he is certified linguist, because I do really want to know his credibility to claim such bold statement.
I'm not going to debate him, it is impossible, even for scholars on respected area of concern (History, linguistic, archaeology..etc) to have discussion with one who created his own rules for everything and stating that rules is the truth because is not part Zionist movement, imperialist, belong to minority ( and so on). I was curious after Hebrew languages is not Hebrew, Arabic is not from it's origins, Jesus is not Isa ibn maryam, Muhammad is not Muhammad, will he goes on saying Allah is not Allah in the end? who knows )
may Allah protect us all.
SalamCome on.You were condescending with Pazuzu before. Now you are condescending with all of us. You make too much of yourself and too little of others. Of course we know what we read and of course some of us know ?rabic and of course some or manny of us have enough knowledge and intelect to make out an arrogant boaster and to acknowledge an honest worker. You may be have problems for that, I do not have any. Do not measure everybody up by your standars, we are in no need of a nanny in order not to get lost.
Do as faruk say. If you find something specific that you are able to analise and criticise with a bsis, do it. Qualigying peoples capacities on your own ideas of what they are, seems like damned big conceit.
You do not seem to grasp that when somebody, like most muslims has been fed on certain "histories" and that sets the ideological ground intheir make up, to shake that really amounts to what Pazuzu says, and when he says it, he is simple preparing people for the shock they will not fail to receive, you included. So much so that probably you are not usually as conceited as you appear here, but merely the shock you are under makes you behave like that. You may deny it, but you have all the indications of having suffered a shock.
But realise Pazuzu with his to you arrogant claims, wanted to caution you on that.
So , in my opinion, you are really indebted with Pazuzu for his great consideration in having peoples feelings in mind before dropping his historical Bo-mb.
Get over the shock and bring something that is not merely name calling and wild assumptions on the capacities of other people.
Salaam
-
Salaam,
I beg everyone's pardon for my anger and frustration. What is so special about the Ka'aba? Please someone knowledgeable correct me if I am wrong owing to memory, but the Quran does not give it any significance at all, it is not even worthy and so never mentioned or referred to. What is referenced is Masjid Al Haram, and The Blessed House. Both of these DO NOT equal the Ka'aba, period. The Ka'aba, and its rituals mimic astrological worship rituals and it is beyond a blasphemous shame - that the Quran's verses or God's All honorable attributes/names be mentioned in prayer in such a disgusted perverted setup.
The straight path is not that you turn towards the east or the west.
I can't say I agree with Pazuzu, because I have not comprehensively studied his work, but from what I have read, I say it's possible. Anything for that matter is possible, since I was not there as a witness to the events. Even so, the kind of things that established history follows is illogical to the last degree - I speak of religious histories - not history constructed based on archaeological evidence - but history from oral traditions.
There are some things, that are blatantly illogical and senseless, ridiculous. Most unfortunately these are the sort of things the "Ummah" and it's "great" leaders today are partial to - superstitions and aberrations of the supreme kind. No don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with a ritual prayer, there is nothing wrong with having rites - so long as there is a righteous purpose, and they are used as a means to an end.
Such history and its stories are riddled with illogical and reality defying elements, stamped by the "genius" of shayateen. The stories aren't clever in themselves, but that human beings succumb and allow themselves to be mislead, and perceive desert sand as water. All evil motivated "scheming" leads to disaster, just like Iblis' and the shayateen's very own eventually will.
God stresses in the Quran for us to reflect, ponder, and use the senses that are given to us for they will be judged. I've heard some smart alecs think that since it is their leaders (imams, sheikhs, scholars etc) are the ones at fault, their followers will be forgiven for not knowing - this is ultimate bull crap. On top of these, there are those who believe that their own sect is rightly guided - just look at where they stand now. There are over a billion people who make the "pilgrimage" to that perverted cube in mecca, many 100 000s are strict in observing the so called 5 pillars of Islam, - why then are they so unsuccessful as a community? why are they being hammered from everywhere? they can't even be peaceful among themselves. This is because the curse of God is upon the hypocrites.
-
Brother huruf,
You are right brother ) Im' not going to deny there's a bit of shock there. I was shocked how garbage, craps can be the base for claiming humanity great history is a lie, how such man made garbage that pazuzu quotes serves as the base to discredit AlQur'an truth. The only thing that I indebted to pazuzu is for wasting my time to read such bull craps. Before you attack on this general statements, look at carefully, this thread on the general issues board and I'm asking general question about his work, and still no answer from him...
I'm now begining to see historical pattern here. When Bukhari work is done, in his day, the followers, traditionalist , or whatever you might call them, they fell indebted, liberated perhaps. When Bukhari is criticized, the one who think Bukhari work is liberating, fulfilling, they're also going to say (more or less) like some who defend pazuzu's, saying "look at the amount of work his done", "an honest worker, and so on".
Bro, You cannot judge whether someone honest or not only by looking at amount of work he has done without expecting reward, Are you saying dishonest man otherwise?? come on!! have you known him personally? or you just more like Bukhari, when he labelled some narrator that he did not see as tsiqah and adl, and so on? There might be hidden agenda by pazuzu. To avoid unnecessary reply on this, how do you know and believe for sure there' isn't? are you developing ?iman/believe? towards this guys?s word?
I have seen some, has been deluded by pazuzu truth, not all, only some tiny portion member of the forum perhaps, Alhamdulillah.... in Sha Allah, the garbages will not break outside from its small fans club.
Why did I not brings data to his arguments? For several times now, the point is, whether some brings data or not, the discussion going to be endless debate. Look at the history of this thread and another reply by pazuzu. Some bring another archaeological things, he will call it ?insane?, ?garbage?, part of ?Zionist movement?, and so on. Because he believe his data is the most accurate one (although lack in evidences). Some try to bring linguistic approach, he change the rule of Arabic language (proper noun to noun as he likes) he will stress how the Arabic has been part of lie, how Arab did not understand the language as he is! brickwall
The same thing happen, some bring Hebrew languages and bammm!!! Hebrew languages only has been constructed in late 19th centuries (yet he often quote from old testament)..I think I stressed this matter in this thread to many times ..doh confused? I think even the most resourceful scholars will not win debate with the one who make their own rules and use slander as a responds, I doubt the resourceful scholar even tried to debate him. brickwall
I think you have enough intellectuality to know, out there, among the Archaeologist (a real one!) this topics also becoming an endless debate. The debate between Maximalist versus Minimalist among the scholar (real archaeologist on real expedition, not google base one) happened for quite sometimes now. Bernard Lehman (one of pazuzu ulama) is from the minimalist side as professor Kalibi(another his ulama), whom happned to be lebannese, also from minimalist side ( I might assume there a national interest for pazuzu to defend kalibi's here, I hope I'm wrong). Both sides (maximalist and minimalist) will bring you indisputable archaeological evidences.
You should also probably know, among minimalist also have different views and different agendas, this because the lack of evidences they had. Here, again you might stresses out how maximalist (popular) is cosmetized, fabricated and so on, and the debate never going to end! Let us see how many evidences maximalist discovered had and how many evidences minimalist discovered? Minimalist, (might also supported by you) then says the evidences found ifs fabricated and there we go again the zero sum game.
In the end minimalist will admit the lack evidences they had, compare to the Maximalist (it's a fact). This due to little support they have and get, in terms of funding bravo. So it become the battle to get the funding (we?re talking million and millions of dollars). They are dying to get recognized. Minimalist dying to acquire portion of the ?cake? to prove their hypothesis, theory at best. Their end game? The bible is correct (for both sides)!! Lehman also stating about the funding which is not useful to the other side, why kalibis? did not stand out and get more attention because of funding etc. So, It?s not always black and white brother. nope
Salam
-
Look at this thread, lets contemplate on what is done
Some think al kabah in Lebanon, and Pazuzu (Lebanese) saying is saying for sure al kabah is not there, some bring another arguments that it might be in Macedonia, Yemen and the list goes on and on.
Myself, everybody else may probably die without knowing where is the real al kaba and who prophet Muhammad actually was (not for me anyways hmm) What happened then? die without knowing the messages refer to as a sign/ayat!! die focusing on the debate over human version of history (maximalist, minimalist, etc), die without knowing the qiblah (focal point) as the dirrection. Should this happened, the one who boldy deny Allah in His presents, and the one who still here until the resurrection day will surely laugh his ass out, as he can prove humanity at best is not better than him. I might die second after I'm writing this as we all might, no body knows, it is ultimately one choice to die with peace, iman in his heart or without never know what the messages.
Only God story is the truth brothers. Once you put human his story, her story, as truth you might lost in translation or interpretation, which story? you should know there no absolute truth unless Allah truth right? Sectarian have their own version of history, imperialist might have another version of history, Zionist try to cover up history. Scholar made their stories, minimalist try get funding to write or rewite the story and so on.. Until when this going to stop? if you analysed carefully, there might be a a play?s here.
AlQur'an should used as THE base (this only quran forum as I recall) handshake
For example, relating to the topics, Allah has made THE most prominent (alka'bah) as al bayt al haram (597). May I ask where exactly THE most prominent that has been made as al bayt al haram in Yemen? where exactly THE most prominent albayt al haram in becca valley in lebanon? According to the meaning this al bayt al haram should be THE most prominent, THE most protuberant, other words should be THE most distinguishable among other bayt ( comparable, mankind -not just arabs, can identified one) So,...Where is it??This is one of the ayat/signs to show characteristic of THE most prominent which Allah made as al bayt al haram, if there's such houses in Yemen or becca valley that fit other characteristic mention in AlQur'an (eg bayt al atiq) can you point the directions for me? sun
Some might says (without proof) it has already been destroy, some might say the one in mecca is actually pagan houses (base on man (his) story, and some narations find in kutubus sittah). Even pazuzu said forget about the pilgrimage!! So there is no more haj can be done!! (indirectly saying forget about verses in AlQur?an). Your answer can include photographic evidences perhaps,longitude and latitude that showed why is that bayt considered as THE most prominent albayat al haram compare to others, wherever in you selected area..and the answer is??? ( no more hadith, no more effort to rationalized, just simply direct answer with evidences)
Before you answer know this, I will respect whatever answer you have and not going to push my believe. By all means, if one think in becca valley or yemen, or Macedonia or(you fill the blank)?then go ahead believe it.?am not going to say that 'insane', 'part of Zionist movements' 'etc'. All I need is direct answer, where exactly is it (not contradict characteristic prescribed in AlQur?an) !!! and for those answer we ask Allah Almighty to witness whatever our answer is, and may him explained to us in yaumil hisab
Salam.
-
Bakka and makka are two twin denominations of something that gets filled and then emptied like flooding. That is physically the human heart and symbolically also. We need to empty it of noise and delusion and fill it with divine rahma and love, which is the real life, but difficult since we are trapped in the three dimension constriction which gives us real life but very limited real life.
Salaam
-
Bakka and makka are two twin denominations of something that gets filled and then emptied like flooding. That is physically the human heart and symbolically also. We need to empty it of noise and delusion and fill it with divine rahma and love, which is the real life, but difficult since we are trapped in the three dimension constriction which gives us real life but very limited real life.
Salaam
Nice!
I like it very much -
As an actual historian who have studied history, biblical history and Islamic history, I have this to say the stupidity of this thread is the reason why Quranism does not function independently, look at all you ignorant heretics spewing nonsense out of your anuses because you think a garbage book written by a nomad in the 7th century is some kind of omniscient book and try to adapt science to religion rather the opposite... if we do it in this way as you stupid morons suggest, then Earth is flat! Universe is geocentric! Trees can speak!
Alexander the Great is Abraham? Allahu Akbar, then why is Abraham, some nomad from 4000 years ago, mentioned in the Bible preceding the historical birth and reign of Alexander, reigned in 330 BCE? Plato is prophet Lot? Please, stop, you stupid idiot. David and Solomon were from Rome and the Majid al Haram is the Vatican? My God... the stupidity, the ignorance, not only do you dismiss the historical facts for superstition, but you are denying the facts of David's reign in Israel, my God... I cannot take it anymore. And the essay Pazuzu is suggesting is more retarded than a down-syndrome baby!
I make a takfeer on all of you, people who believe in this are incompetent. You all think that you are so smart and have found the gold, but you are the reason why I encourage secular atheism because they are proven to be much more intelligent, it is a fact that studies have shown atheists are far more knowledgeable than stupid "Muslims" like you, it's because they don't make crazy crack-pot theories to make their fading religion relevant in modern time, just leave your religion already, none of you need it when you piss on it in this way and the historical accurate hadith, which are, by the way, not "sectarian," but Western-accepted historical accounts of the true Islam in the 7th century that none of you adhere to, which is supported by non-Muslims like Watt, Karen Armstrong and a pantheon of other historians more knowledgeable than laymen like you. How can you claim Quran is divine without Hadith? What does Surat Al-Fil talk about? Yes, you can't say because the historical accounts are from the Historical reliable sereeh that you idiots cannot accept even though Quran was transmitted to from the same Sahaba, who is Isa? I cannot accept Hadith claiming him to be Jesus, so I identify him with Vishnu instead! Who is Uzair and how can you prove to me he was worshiped as the Son of God? Historical error! Because there is no such thing in the Bible, it is found in Hadith where Arabian Jews worshiped as a Son of God... but you cannot accept that, therefore you have a burden on your backs. It's funny some of you quote from the Bible when the Hadith are like 69054057495u40584538753jjrd48473 times more reliable.... admitted by non-Muslims historians which you cannot deny. I might as well say that the Book of Mormon is a history book. The problem is not Hadith, but heresy like yours.
Goodbye, heretics. You know what? Here is my identification of the prophets
Adam = Manu
Noah = Mani
Idris = Roger Erbert (who says prophets cannot be from the future? Elijah is like that, Jesus is like that, then Idris is Roger Erbert!!!!)
Hud = Brahma
Saleh = Zoroaster
Abraham = Akhenaten
Ishmael = Tutankhamun
Isaac = Socrates
Lot = Gilgamesh
Jacob = Aesop
Joseph = Baha'ullah
Shu'aib = Rishad Khalifa
Job = Cain
Moses = Another name for Muhammad
Aaron = Mercury
Dhu'l-Kifl = Hermes Trismegistus
David = HE IS THOTH!!!!
Solomon = Alexander the Great!
Elias = Buddha
Al-Yasa = Fatima Zahra
Jonah = Jesus Christ
Zechariah = Priapus
Yahya ibn Zakkariya = Homer
Isa = Vishnu of course!
Muhammad = he is only mentioned 4 or 5 times in the Quran and all the times it could have meant "the praiseworthy," due to my own historical ignorance, I reject Hadith and other historical accounts of Muhammad and therefore he does not exist, but all the other of the pile of crap I just said do in fact exist and these are the correct identifications. -
As an actual historian who have studied history, biblical history and Islamic history, I have this to say the stupidity of this thread is the reason why Quranism does not function independently, look at all you ignorant heretics spewing nonsense out of your anuses because you think a garbage book written by a nomad in the 7th century is some kind of omniscient book and try to adapt science to religion rather the opposite... if we do it in this way as you stupid morons suggest, then Earth is flat! Universe is geocentric! Trees can speak!
Alexander the Great is Abraham? Allahu Akbar, then why is Abraham, some nomad from 4000 years ago, mentioned in the Bible preceding the historical birth and reign of Alexander, reigned in 330 BCE? Plato is prophet Lot? Please, stop, you stupid idiot. David and Solomon were from Rome and the Majid al Haram is the Vatican? My God... the stupidity, the ignorance, not only do you dismiss the historical facts for superstition, but you are denying the facts of David's reign in Israel, my God... I cannot take it anymore. And the essay Pazuzu is suggesting is more retarded than a down-syndrome baby!
I make a takfeer on all of you, people who believe in this are incompetent. You all think that you are so smart and have found the gold, but you are the reason why I encourage secular atheism because they are proven to be much more intelligent, it is a fact that studies have shown atheists are far more knowledgeable than stupid "Muslims" like you, it's because they don't make crazy crack-pot theories to make their fading religion relevant in modern time, just leave your religion already, none of you need it when you piss on it in this way and the historical accurate hadith, which are, by the way, not "sectarian," but Western-accepted historical accounts of the true Islam in the 7th century that none of you adhere to, which is supported by non-Muslims like Watt, Karen Armstrong and a pantheon of other historians more knowledgeable than laymen like you. How can you claim Quran is divine without Hadith? What does Surat Al-Fil talk about? Yes, you can't say because the historical accounts are from the Historical reliable sereeh that you idiots cannot accept even though Quran was transmitted to from the same Sahaba, who is Isa? I cannot accept Hadith claiming him to be Jesus, so I identify him with Vishnu instead! Who is Uzair and how can you prove to me he was worshiped as the Son of God? Historical error! Because there is no such thing in the Bible, it is found in Hadith where Arabian Jews worshiped as a Son of God... but you cannot accept that, therefore you have a burden on your backs. It's funny some of you quote from the Bible when the Hadith are like 69054057495u40584538753jjrd48473 times more reliable.... admitted by non-Muslims historians which you cannot deny. I might as well say that the Book of Mormon is a history book. The problem is not Hadith, but heresy like yours.
Goodbye, heretics. You know what? Here is my identification of the prophets
Adam = Manu
Noah = Mani
Idris = Roger Erbert (who says prophets cannot be from the future? Elijah is like that, Jesus is like that, then Idris is Roger Erbert!!!!)
Hud = Brahma
Saleh = Zoroaster
Abraham = Akhenaten
Ishmael = Tutankhamun
Isaac = Socrates
Lot = Gilgamesh
Jacob = Aesop
Joseph = Baha'ullah
Shu'aib = Rishad Khalifa
Job = Cain
Moses = Another name for Muhammad
Aaron = Mercury
Dhu'l-Kifl = Hermes Trismegistus
David = HE IS THOTH!!!!
Solomon = Alexander the Great!
Elias = Buddha
Al-Yasa = Fatima Zahra
Jonah = Jesus Christ
Zechariah = Priapus
Yahya ibn Zakkariya = Homer
Isa = Vishnu of course!
Muhammad = he is only mentioned 4 or 5 times in the Quran and all the times it could have meant "the praiseworthy," due to my own historical ignorance, I reject Hadith and other historical accounts of Muhammad and therefore he does not exist, but all the other of the pile of crap I just said do in fact exist and these are the correct identifications.It seems to me you should not drink so heavily, makes you look sort of grumpy. But may it is just the wheather.
Have a sweet time.
Salaam
-
As an actual historian who have studied history, biblical history and Islamic history, I have this to say the stupidity of this thread is the reason why Quranism does not function independently, look at all you ignorant heretics spewing nonsense out of your anuses because you think a garbage book written by a nomad in the 7th century is some kind of omniscient book and try to adapt science to religion rather the opposite... if we do it in this way as you stupid morons suggest, then Earth is flat! Universe is geocentric! Trees can speak!
Alexander the Great is Abraham? Allahu Akbar, then why is Abraham, some nomad from 4000 years ago, mentioned in the Bible preceding the historical birth and reign of Alexander, reigned in 330 BCE? Plato is prophet Lot? Please, stop, you stupid idiot. David and Solomon were from Rome and the Majid al Haram is the Vatican? My God... the stupidity, the ignorance, not only do you dismiss the historical facts for superstition, but you are denying the facts of David's reign in Israel, my God... I cannot take it anymore. And the essay Pazuzu is suggesting is more retarded than a down-syndrome baby!
I make a takfeer on all of you, people who believe in this are incompetent. You all think that you are so smart and have found the gold, but you are the reason why I encourage secular atheism because they are proven to be much more intelligent, it is a fact that studies have shown atheists are far more knowledgeable than stupid "Muslims" like you, it's because they don't make crazy crack-pot theories to make their fading religion relevant in modern time, just leave your religion already, none of you need it when you piss on it in this way and the historical accurate hadith, which are, by the way, not "sectarian," but Western-accepted historical accounts of the true Islam in the 7th century that none of you adhere to, which is supported by non-Muslims like Watt, Karen Armstrong and a pantheon of other historians more knowledgeable than laymen like you. How can you claim Quran is divine without Hadith? What does Surat Al-Fil talk about? Yes, you can't say because the historical accounts are from the Historical reliable sereeh that you idiots cannot accept even though Quran was transmitted to from the same Sahaba, who is Isa? I cannot accept Hadith claiming him to be Jesus, so I identify him with Vishnu instead! Who is Uzair and how can you prove to me he was worshiped as the Son of God? Historical error! Because there is no such thing in the Bible, it is found in Hadith where Arabian Jews worshiped as a Son of God... but you cannot accept that, therefore you have a burden on your backs. It's funny some of you quote from the Bible when the Hadith are like 69054057495u40584538753jjrd48473 times more reliable.... admitted by non-Muslims historians which you cannot deny. I might as well say that the Book of Mormon is a history book. The problem is not Hadith, but heresy like yours.
Goodbye, heretics. You know what? Here is my identification of the prophets
Peace Hadithete,
We stupid morons, stupid idiots, incompetent ignorant heretics, spewing nonsense
out of our anuses, being more retarded than a down-syndrome baby, who are
crackpots have icons at our disposal like brickwall which you could have used
or voodoo, by the way, what ever happen toYou shall invite to the path of your Lord with wisdom and kind
enlightenment, and debate with them in the best possible manner. Your
Lord knows best who has strayed from His path, and He knows best who
are the guided ones.God bless you
peace
-
Unlike you, I am a Muslim and not a heretic - I do not drink and you know what I say is the truth, which is why it hurts your petty feelings.
Thanks, hawk99 - brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall brickwall for all the stupid, historically-ignorant comments here, when I read how little all of you know about history, it is not shocking that you reject historical-reliable Ahadith.
As for your verse, you people do not choose to base theology on rationalism. The Muta'zila is true Islam and they followed the verse that you quoted, but today we have the antonym of Muta'zila = Quranism, most of the adherents of Quranism are ignorant about their faith and the history of their faith, they are unwilling to educate themselves and refrain from being zealous it's why that it is an exercise in futility to try to use wisdom for you people when you deny it because of your irrational dogmas.
I did make a thread, I quoted several credible historians that support the authenticity of Ahadith, I was being kind, wise and tried to show you the light, but what do you people do? Quote Quran as the Christians are quoting Bible in refutation to science and other kinds of facts. None of you are rational, you are dogmatic and close-minded, you only wish to see where your backward version of your religion wants you to see; you act as if Quran contains everything in the entire world, when it is the most succinct book of all ancient religious literature. I do not have any agenda to Shia, Sunnism or such; I am here presenting you the history.
It is a historical, testable proven (scientific) fact that Ahadith are vital to history, those that are skeptical towards that, such as Patricia Crone and Ibn Warraq, have their polemics refuted by them unanimously by all credible historians. The fact that you Quranists are gullible to believe the nonsense of those skeptical minimalists such as the aforementioned makes more sense why many of you accept the anus-spewing theories of this thread. I was once a Quranist because I hated the dogma of Sunnism, but I realized I built my own dogma, which is worse, therefore long ago I became a Muta'zilite; rationalist and logician.
It is hard to deny the dogma of Quranism, they have many things that are considered historical errors in the Quran because the explanations for these are found in the Ahadith which they cannot accept, such as Uzair ibn Allah, Surat Al Fil, the transmission of the Quran and their justifications are crack-pot theories that are absolutely unbelievable.
Please, I must ask, why do you reject overall Ahadith? I know my reason, because the Ahadith were unflattering. I did not like to accept my prophet as a pedophile warlord inciting beheading of poets, homosexuals and infidels, as I was a rational person, I could neither accept stupidities that there existed giants on Earth, what is the solution? At the time, I thought it was to put my fingers in my ears and then it all will fade away, but guess what... that's called delusion! The thing that need to happen is re-evaluation of the biographical Ahadith by historians and not clergymen of Saudi Arabia; you will then realize many Hadith are important for Islamic rituals and such, you will understand Islam and history.
I see that many of you have a wrong idea of Bukhari, you think he was some evil man fabricating Ahadith, but the fact is that he was a pure-heart man compiling Ahadith of those he knew about; of course with limited methodology of his time, he was forced to include false Hadith, but that doesn't make him a liar! It just means we cannot rely on his collection as "canonical," but "authentic" and we need to re-observe Hadith from a historical perspective and not that of "because I do not agree with it," if you don't agree with it, then sorry to say it, but you may not have chosen the religion which resonate with you.
I have also seen ignorant Quranists making claims like "Shiites have their own Ahadith" as if that invalidates the whole concept of Ahadith, no, the Shiites do not reject our Ahadith, they reject certain narrators as reliable, likewise, Sunnis reject some Shia narrators, but they are all on common ground regarding the majority of all Ahadith, this only means that from a historical perspective, both Shia and Sunni Ahadith are valid because historians are not biased/zealous and do not take sides on whom is a reliable narrator based on his political party! This only suffice the points of true Muslims and do not support any point of the stupid Quranists rejecting Ahadith.
May God also bless you and make you see the light and put you on the right path away from Quranism.
-
Why do you say "G-D," are you a Jew? More plausible than a Muslim either way.
Also, no, I am a rationalist, God doesn't seal the mind of rational, open-minded people. That's a contradiction! He put a seal on dogmatic, zealous close-minded who only wish to hear their side of the story and when that is refuted, they continue to have their flawed faiths with no evidence to support them other than some verses of a book taken out of context unable to refute the refutations and insult the person refuting them, like you.
-
It is better to brickwall then to believe in NONSENSE, VULGAR HADITH
-
Why do you say "G-D," are you a Jew? More plausible than a Muslim either way.
Nop! I'm no Jew!
Nor am I a soi-disant Muslim for that matter!~ I'm an Adamite ...
... with a purpose to fulfill.Also, no, I am a rationalist, God doesn't seal the mind of rational, open-minded people. That's a contradiction!
Correction You're a self-proclaimed rationalist ...
ie. naming yourself "happy" doesn't mean you're happy!
He put a seal on dogmatic, zealous close-minded who only wish to hear their side of the story and when that is refuted, they continue to have their flawed faiths with no evidence to support them other than some verses of a book taken out of context unable to refute the refutations and insult the person refuting them, ...
Certainly!
After all, you're one living example of such a burdened (by books) donkey.
-
It is better to brickwall then to believe in NONSENSE, VULGAR HADITH
Unable to rationally refute my claims and continue with your dogmatic, close-minded beliefs with nothing to support such a faith. I am a rationalist, the opposite of rationalist is nonsense. You should ascribe "nonsense" to yourself.
~ I'm an Adamite ...
Good for you, you're a follower of a man who never existed; this belief of yours is of course sealed on an irrational basis with nothing to support such claims of "first man" from a rational, scientific perspective. Who is the rational and dogmatic? You're obviously the latter and that is not self-proclaimed! You need to study your religion from a critical observation, this should increase your intelligence and it will no longer stop you from believing in hoaxes like the stories of Adam and Eve.ie. naming yourself "happy" doesn't mean you're happy!
I'm pretty sure if I said I am happy, then I would be happy.I do adhere to rationalism and strongly against dogmatism. This is a fact, otherwise I would be a Quranist like you.
After all, you're one living example of such a burdened (by books) donkey.
Once again, petty insults and an inability to think rationally and non-dogmatically and refuting my comments from a logical standpoint.Even if I am not the most rational, I am superior to you. Otherwise, I would not have a ridiculous religion such as yours that hinders the development of an educated civilization. Muslims like you need to question their nonsensical religion and become rational-minded like I am.
-
Unlike you, I am a Muslim and not a heretic - I do not drink and you know what I say is the truth, which is why it hurts your petty feelings.
Hurt feelings? I am laughing so much... You are too funny. Why do you spend so much energy getting angry and calling names for nothing? You must be boiling.
Salaam, hurter of feelings number one in antiquranistlandia.
-
I'm pretty sure if I said I am happy, then I would be happy.
& I'm pretty sure I said 'naming yourself'!
... I am superior to you ...
Iblys operating through the likes of you comes as no surprise.
Muslims like you need to ... become ... like I am.
As if the world needed any more asses!
-
Hurt feelings? I am laughing so much... You are too funny. Why do you spend so much energy getting angry and calling names for nothing? You must be boiling.
You're laughing so much because you are either too stupid to comprehend the truth or you are suppressing your rational thought due to dogmatism in your Quranism.
When a foolish man hears of the Way, he laughs out loud.And no, I am not an angry terrorist Arab like you are, I am pretty peaceful and meditative because I am a true Muslim unlike you; therefore, no, I am not mad.
& I'm pretty sure I said 'naming yourself'!
Iblys operating through the likes of you comes as no surprise.
As if the world needed any more asses!
Your petty insults doesn't refute my factual statements, such as the post that started all this or the claim to follow a mythical man named Adam from a Jewish fairy tale. Just look at you, you're so dogmatic that you cannot rationally refute anything but insulting a person on an irrational basis and that is called closed-mindedness; it makes sense why you are a Quranist and Adamite, you like to believe in nonsense fairy tales than rational truth. Ibles? You mean the spiritual force of negativity manifested into a body in the parable of Adam? Surely, he is not operating through any of us... he is us.And once again, you are concluding with insults and misquotations exposing your immaturity and dogmatism being the only reason why you follow nonsensical Quranism than actual history and the true way, such as Islam with Sunnah and Hadith.
Goodbye and may you open your knowledge and perceive rational thought instead of this idiotic belief in the worst sect of Islam.