What's the difference between Quranist, God Alone and Quran Alone
-
Peace,
I see these three different terms used and I wonder what's the difference between them.
I for one consider myself to be one of the God Alone muslims.
One reason is because I believe in the articles of faithGod
Messengers of God
The Holy Books
The Angels of God
The Day of Judgment
The Ultimate PlanThe Holy Books are included in the articles of faith, therefore can you be
a Quranist or Quran alone muslim and adhere to the belief in the other
Holy Books?Help me understand
Peace O0
-
Peace hawkninetynine.
I am a " believer". I follow the deen/system/ religion of Adam, Noah, Abraham, the Patriachs, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed and all the prophets and messengers of God. The Deen/system/religion is " Submission and total loyalty to GOD Alone".
All these prophets and messengers have asked us to " Repent" and " Redeem ourselves back to God s kingdom" , not to accept any other deen/system/ religion, for it is " Idol worship" or " shirk".
A" believer" believes the " Message" brought by the prophets and messenger., follows GOD Alone, and trusts in God to guide him/her.
May the Lord guide all those who seek Him Alone.
Peace.
-
There are many kinds of believers.
"God alone" sounds like another way of saying monotheism.
What "Quran alone" means must come down to how one defines the Quran I happen to think that the preserved Quran is no more or less than a sequence of words in the Arabic language. I would argue that those with a less strict view of what the Quran actually is run a great risk of adhering to something other than the actual Quran, though they deny this.
"Quranist" seems contrived to separate from "traditionalist". I don't know, I don't like it much.
I think Muslim are those who actually submit to God. Many claim to do just that, while they are following their own desires instead. -
Peace,
Thank you good logic for your explanation. Do you know of any differences between the three.
(Quranist, God Alone and Quran Alone)Peace Magnus,
There are many kinds of believers.
"God alone" sounds like another way of saying monotheism.Wouldn't Quranist and God alone muslims consider themselves monotheist as well.
Peace O0
-
Peace,
Thank you good logic for your explanation. Do you know of any differences between the three.
(Quranist, God Alone and Quran Alone)Peace Magnus,
Wouldn't Quranist and God alone muslims consider themselves monotheist as well.Peace O0
No matter what difference they have, they all the ssame, in one thing, freedom of thinking, liberated, just as ibrahim (Liberman) was
so , quranist, god alone, quran alone, are the freedom of thinking and analysing, so it's the same thing, it depends on the level of intelligence, or knwledge of language or honesty
-
Peace,
I see these three different terms used and I wonder what's the difference between them.
I for one consider myself to be one of the God Alone muslims.
One reason is because I believe in the articles of faithGod
Messengers of God
The Holy Books
The Angels of God
The Day of Judgment
The Ultimate PlanThe Holy Books are included in the articles of faith, therefore can you be
a Quranist or Quran alone muslim and adhere to the belief in the other
Holy Books?Help me understand
Peace O0
Quranist are either one of those parties
- They only accept the Quran as a religious source.
- They accept the Quran and previous scriptures.
- They accept the Quran and Islamic rituals but not hadiths.
- They accept the Quran and Islamic rituals and hadiths that does not contradict the Quran.
- Not necessarily among any but switch according to specific issues. Most Quranist tend to be in this category, at least the ones here are.
None believe in abrogation. None believe in accepting what contradicts an explicit verse from the Quran.
Now there should be another criteria but this is still a work in progress and that is nothing should be made binding that is not supported by an explicit verse from the Quran. Some Quranist still have a problem with this. This usually are the ones who still follow the Islamic rituals and hadiths that do not contradict the Quran. They still do not want to acknowledge Quranist who don't want to follow the Islamic rituals since they are not stated as such in the Quran. They want to make those rituals binding as they are (like the 5 salat). Without an explicit verse from the Quran they will not able to since many Quranist will demand that evidence from the Quran.
Also the ones who only accept the Quran have a hard time accepting those who follow other sources as well since they see that as an attack on the Quran's self sufficiency. However they have to come up with an answer about the previous scriptures the Quran talks about abundantly. They usually claim these scriptures we have today are not the ones the Quran is talking about. But this is not supported by any Quranic or historic evidence. Because the verses in the Quran about the previous scriptures are explicit, they find that the only argument to go with is questioning whether these scriptures still exist today. We have to understand that there is a difference between following something and following something that contradicts the Quran.
If you believe in abrogation and believe that the sunnah as it is in Islamic sources can add legislation that is binding, than you will not get far with Quranist. Even with the ones who accept hadiths since those ones still will not accept what contradicts the Quran. This is what seperates a Quranist from a Sunni/Shia follower. Abrogation and binding authority. These sects can accept what contradicts the Quran and can make binding what the Quran never did.
Code 19 is another good example where some have tried to make binding what the Quran was not explicit about. They rely on implicit verses. Implicit verses will not get you far. There is nothing wrong with following code 19 or any other mathematical code, as long as you don't contradict the Quran. But you can't make binding what is not explicit in the Quran. It is wrong for the 19ers to attack those who don't wish to follow it, but its also wrong to attack them for following it. If they don't contradict the Quran than there is no reason not to follow it. The Quranist persuasion is for the whole of mankind. We have different backgrounds and different personalities and different ways of thinking, The Quran however shall unite us.
Like I said, this is still a work in progress. But this is how the Quranist persuasion will develop.
So what is explicit? Its what the vast majority of Quranist can agree with. Not what some agree with.
No abrogation and only an explicit verse of the Quran is binding and under no circumstance should anything that contradicts an explicit verse of the Quran be accepted.
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Peace,
I see these three different terms used and I wonder what's the difference between them.
I for one consider myself to be one of the God Alone muslims.
One reason is because I believe in the articles of faithGod
Messengers of God
The Holy Books
The Angels of God
The Day of Judgment
The Ultimate PlanThe Holy Books are included in the articles of faith, therefore can you be
a Quranist or Quran alone muslim and adhere to the belief in the other
Holy Books?Help me understand
Peace O0
They are all labels, with different meanings to different people. Usually detractors say "Quranist" dismissively about any that deny extra-Quranic hadith. While some people try to reclaim the word in a positive sense, it has an ordure about it. "GOD Alone" is also a label, albeit one that emphasizes the focus is on ALLAH and not the Message. As noted in OP, "GOD Alone" also touches upon the brotherhood of ALL monotheists, regardless of Message. "Quran Alone" emphasizes the rejection of extra-Quranic hadith. Personally, I don't care for this label either, because it sounds like one worships AQ. & It is a beautiful Message, but the focus should never be other than ALLAH.
A Quran alone muslim adheres to the belief in other books because the Message is the same (human meddling aside). This also means that a Christian who is a monotheist upholds, knowingly or not, all other Messages. Likewise to a follower of Judaism who is monotheistic and follows the Torah. All monotheists are essentially the same.
A muslim that denies that there are other forms of the Message outside of AQ is incorrect per AQ. There are Messages outside of AQ--each effective for a particular audience.
Of the three labels, "GOD Alone" is best. Other possible names are monotheist or muslim (small m). Is not a monotheist a muslim? hmm
Have you heard that one who points a finger at another points four fingers back at themself? Let us strengthen ourselves in the Deen and invite seekers, and not antagonize others who find strength in other Messages.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Peace hawkninetynine.
I do not know the difference. It depends on their sincerity. Only God knows the innermost thoughts.
Also He is the only one who judges and shows us what " we dispute" on the day of judgement.
i agree with you " God Alone" is the uniting factor. Especially when He is the Only one who guides.
Peace.
-
Peace all,
Greetings and Peace, all group
They are all labels, with different meanings to different people. Usually detractors say "Quranist" dismissively about any that deny extra-Quranic hadith. Personally, I don't care for this label either, because it sounds like one worships AQ. & It is a beautiful Message, but the focus should never be other than ALLAH.
Of the three labels, "GOD Alone" is best. Other possible names are monotheist or muslim (small m). Is not a monotheist a muslim?
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-HadiAm I reading correctly when you type that "Quranist" is a pejorative
term used to describe those who do not accept hadith? In other words, it is not a
description embraced, but a title given?Greetings and Peace, all group
Have you heard that one who points a finger at another points four fingers back at themself? ) Let us strengthen ourselves in the Deen and invite seekers, and not antagonize others who find strength in other Messages.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-HadiYes I've heard of the finger pointing, I am guilty of that, we must invite in the best possible way.
Peace O0
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Peace all,
Am I reading correctly when you type that "Quranist" is a pejorative
term used to describe those who do not accept hadith? In other words, it is not a
description embraced, but a title given?Peace O0
Yes, it often is used as a perjorative. Some DO embrace the label--but most any label has different meanings for different people. The problem arises when someone uses the same description for themself that another uses as an insult; it is like the "Quranist" is saying that they agree with all that is said about/against them. It may make it harder to invite seekers from traditional understandings if the first impression is tainted.
To each their own! )
May ALLAH see fit to Guide all seekers.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Quranist as a modern term comes from Quraniyoon. Itw as a label used by the Egyptian authorities in the 1970s when they were cracking down on some Quranist members. The name stuck.
Historically Quranist were known as Ahl Al Kalam and Mutaziltes as Aisha Musa points out here
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf-6OJg7krM
-
Peace Bigmo,
A historical perpective about the beginings of the Quranist movement is refreshing
It gives a starting point for investigation
ThanksYou stated in an earlier post
Now there should be another criteria but this is still a work in progress and that is nothing should be made binding that is not supported by an explicit verse from the Quran. Some Quranist still have a problem with this.If you or anyone else could provide some details about their daily lives (Do they perform the salat,
or at jum'a is there a khutbah, do they celebrate eid etc.,) I would appreciate it.Peace O0
-
I wonder if any would be considered Muslims by God? angel
Peace,
Humbling. I read this book entitled "Love For Allah" (can't remember the author) but in it there was a small story about how one man when asked if he was a Muslim would say "If it be the will of Allah."
Peace,
Amina
-
Peace Bigmo,
A historical perpective about the beginings of the Quranist movement is refreshing
It gives a starting point for investigation
ThanksYou stated in an earlier post
Now there should be another criteria but this is still a work in progress and that is nothing should be made binding that is not supported by an explicit verse from the Quran. Some Quranist still have a problem with this.If you or anyone else could provide some details about their daily lives (Do they perform the salat,
or at jum'a is there a khutbah, do they celebrate eid etc.,) I would appreciate it.Peace O0
What I meant is those who only follow the Quran have a tendency to criticize those who wish to follow the Islamic rituals or previous scriptures. They see pilgrimage to Mecca as not authentic and have alternative explanations but they differ on it. While those who follow the hadiths that do not contradict the Quran and follow the Islamic rituals have a problem with those who don't perform thoe rituals as they do. The reason this is so is because they have not seen rituals as a means to an end but see them as an end by themselves. Quranist who come from islamic background or even Judaic background have that tendency. In time people will realize that there are different ways to worship God and rituals are a means to an end. There is no standard rituals in the Quran that has to be done in a specific way. There are guidelines for us to follow. The Quranist persuasion has a lot of individualism in it.
-
Peace Bigmo,
Thank you for the information.
There will always be differences of opinion, but I don't think it's a good idea to make
wholesale changes that will divide and alienate us. The removal of rituals that have
no Quranic verses requiring them will only bring division. For example
no khutbah at Jum'a!
no required number of rakat's
with no required number of rakat's, the question becomes how many rakats
in congregational prayer do we make?
would maghrib still be three rakat's
It appears that those who rely only on the Quran have moved too far in the other direction.
While it is admirable for those who have broken away from those who have violated
the shahadah, i.e, the many different sects, we must remember that upholding the
shahadah should be our main focus and that bickering over details can create divisions
if we are not careful.This verse is appropriate
You shall hold fast to the rope of GOD, all of you, and do not be divided. Recall GOD's blessings upon you-you used to be enemies and He reconciled your hearts. By His grace, you became brethren. You were at the brink of a pit of fire, and He saved you therefrom. GOD thus explains His revelations for you, that you may be guided.Peace O0
-
I personally don't see myself as a "Quranist", but as a muslim who wants to follow the Quran alone.
You did not have to follow the Quran to be a muslim (Islam predates the Quran).
Abraham is the first one to Coin the name "muslim" 2278...About following other scripture. The Quran clearly differentiates between scriptures, *there should be no mish-matching and upholding of other scriptures.
Then we revealed to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and superseding them. You shall rule among them in accordance with GOD's revelations, and do not follow their wishes if they differ from the truth that came to you. For each of you, we have decreed laws and different rites. Had GOD willed, He could have made you one congregation. But He thus puts you to the test through the revelations He has given each of you. You shall compete in righteousness. To GOD is your final destiny - all of you - then He will inform you of everything you had disputed.
And Thank you Bigmo for pointing out Aisha Musa's video. I have forgot about it. May it be useful God willing.
-
Peace youssef4342,
I agree with the notion that the Quran is the final revelation and that the other scriptures
have been corrupted.Your point of view is appreciated, can you expand on your views about Friday
khutbah which from my understanding is not in Quran Kareem.Peace O0
-
Peace be with you as well,
I would like to expound
I do NOT believe in total corruption of the Previous scriptures. I have found many similarities and cross references across scriptures, around 300 from the Quran cross reference to the previous scriptures (this is not counting the many times that the previous scriptures can cross reference back to the Quran).
The previous scriptures have many authors, and thus one cannot just lump them all together as "falsehood". I see truth in the previous scriptures, much more truth than falsehood i would say.I personally do not believe in a friday "khutbah" or sermon. This is not in the Quran. however, a verse pointing to religious/Quranic study like 9122,3829 4724, 482.
This is of course from my current beliefs. God knows better.
-
Peace youssef4342,
I agree with you on this
Peace be with you as well,
I would like to expound
I do NOT believe in total corruption of the Previous scriptures.As for the Kutbah, how would you have Jum'a conducted.
Would it be salat and disperse
should it be announcements, salat, disperse or some sort of variation of the Kutbah.You shall hold fast to the rope of GOD, all of you, and do not be divided. Recall GOD's blessings upon you-you used to be enemies and He reconciled your hearts. By His grace, you became brethren. You were at the brink of a pit of fire, and He saved you therefrom. GOD thus explains His revelations for you, that you may be guided.
Peace O0