Why Quranism Does Not Work & Hadith Are Historically Accurate!
-
Sectarianism has brought ISIS in this world. It created the talibans and the saudis. The world watches islam and laughs. It sees Muslims in those countries, and assumes they follow the quran. Sectarians like you turned the quran into toilet paper for the people watching. Instead of being an example you are a subject of ridicule. Instead of engaging in endless debates with ideologues, how about we look at the real life, tangible reality of your sectarianism? Whenever i speak to ignorant westerners, they always mix up the quran's message with the actions of the sectarians. They will outright change words in english when posting verses to try and convince themselves the quran preaches what the sectarian Muslims practice in real life today. They will dismiss any counter argument because they can't conceive that the sectarian Muslims follow certain rules that go against the quran.
Why should I follow a sect that turned the quran and what it teaches into a joke? The greatest ally in the middle east, right after Israel, is Saudi Arabia, where this sectarianism silliness originate from today. Coincidentally Saudi Arabia is also a great ally of the zionist Israel. Why should I follow this sect which is allied with this state which does not hesitate causing terror across the world? I'm talking both the Saudis and the Israelis.
youtube.com/watch?v=LbkQddEDPs0
israeli links to 9/11news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6524835.stm
israel training paramilitaries in colombiawhatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/mex.html
israelis trying to bomb the mexican congressmail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg23381.html
israeli diplomat arrested with explosives in argentinaWhy should i follow your sectarianism again? It enables this.
-
Anybody is free to believe whatever he or she thinks of the Qur'an...
But for anybody who says he or whe believes the Qur'an is God's revelation without restrictions and then pretend that others doubt it if they are not convinced that some other text is authentic is preposterous, from the very moment that the Qur'an is the Qur'an and those other texts are a bundh of heterogeneous things which may or may not have anything to do with the Qur'an an deven contradict it. It is not us who should stop believing the Qur'an but he should stop believeing the Qur'an for his own sake.
On the other hand the qur'an is nto believsable because so and so transmitted it, but because of what it says. If we can verify what it says, then we do not need a transmission. The transmission is not going to add to it any truth not take it from it.
So, if we can verify that it was handed down to x by some otherX1, through some others Xs, is the content going to be truer or untruer?
Certain hadiths stink no matter how or who transmitted them. And some hadith are fullo of wisdom equally no matter who transmitted or who didn't.
we are not speaking aobut the accurate size of a galaxy, but about life nd what we can honestly observe and verify in our own lives.Salaam
-
Peace
the burden of proof lies on person A to present evidence proving the premise.
It would seem the burden does not lie solely on one party to the exclusion of the other since both parties have a premise to prove, (1) this is authentic, or (2) this is inauthentic.
In any case, if both parties do profess belief in the text to some degree, if the text contradicts secondary sources and its proclamations laid aside for those of the latter than there is an issue here as regards source material.
If both are wrong then they are false claimants, and it is likely that both are more man-inspired. Then again logic has a way of deceiving people. I believe it was Nietzsche in The Birth of Tragedy who elucidates this point. Beware the logicians and check out the book. I found it captivating.
Joe
-
Hadithete Brother, if such question was posted by one of the Quranist on a Hadithete forum, he must have been murdered by now. You are not here with open and pure mind, to learn, but for the sake of argument a closed mind.
I have been questioned by Hadithete's before and they would never consider ANY Quranic verse you give them as reference because they have already made up their minds. All Quranist always have an open mind and they are ready to listen and judge in the light of Quran.
When Allah says Quran was given as a book in Quran, why can you even question that it was compiled after the life of Muhammad? Do you think he wasn't responsible enough?
- This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah;
Also, please go through the attachments. https//factszz.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/quranasbook.jpg?w=1016&h=1650
https//factszz.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/hadithslies01.png?w=1118&h=750
https//factszz.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/prophetleftbehindonlyquran.jpg?w=1041&h=2541 -
To me, the self-authenticating 'text/writ' that we call the 'Qurn' is trustworthy and admissible . Its extremely-cogent Message is undoubtedly of Divine origin; eye-opening, firmly objective and highly functional ... further, its overall aesthetic structure sure indicates consistency and superiority ... The typical 'transcriptional (scribal) errors' in the current, prevalent version* of the Qurn seem too minor to be worth fretting over! these can be identified with ease, and should therefore be corrected (by us) ... the sooner the better.
I bear witness that the 'Qurn' is the Messenger of G-D.
SLM
- 114 chapter/s 6,236 passage/s 77,797 word/s 330,709 letter/s
The (supposed) report of (a so-called) af, attributed to (a so-called) im!
- 114 chapter/s 6,236 passage/s 77,797 word/s 330,709 letter/s
-
Salaam,
I tend to agree with Hicham. Quran's integrity is nearly intact and it is all additions of diacritical marks which may cause confusion, and the fact the verse numbering is hardly original since sentences and even clauses are often cut in half or worse, showing that the scribes performing the work were not fully capable of deciphering and interpreting the language. Current interpretations also show that the generated understandings and translations are based on the same incapable interpreters.
The same (fools) who interpreted Quran also compiled so-called hadith because they contain the same interpretive errors (since they repeated the interpretation mistakes in compiling them).
Salaam
-
Yes. They are good passages just like the rest of Quran. Although certain words and the grammar with their traditional meaning could be discussed such as "iman/amen".
Salaam
-
Salaam Man of Faith,
I tend to agree with Hicham. Quran's integrity is nearly intact and it is all additions of diacritical marks which may cause confusion, and the fact the verse numbering is hardly original since sentences and even clauses are often cut in half or worse, showing that the scribes performing the work were not fully capable of deciphering and interpreting the language. Current interpretations also show that the generated understandings and translations are based on the same incapable interpreters.
The same (fools) who interpreted Quran also compiled so-called hadith because they contain the same interpretive errors (since they repeated the interpretation mistakes in compiling them).
Unfortunately, it is not just diacritical marks or verse numbering that was corrupted. According to archeological evidence (Sanaa palimpsests), entire words and phrases were added or deleted soon after the prophet's death.
Additionally, there is historical evidence that there were many codices of al-quran in existence soon after the death of the prophet, which had significant differences between them. According to the historical evidence, Uthman chose one of the codices arbitrarily (the codex of Zaid), and burned all the others (forensic countermeasure, destroying the evidence), and authorized that arbitrarily chosen codex to be the standard text of al-quran. This codex had significant differences and deviations from the codex of Ibn Masud, which was allegedly the most accurate of the codices.
http//www.inthenameofallah.org/Codices%20of%20the%20Quran.html
Confounding this matter, the Yemeni government has locked away the thousands of Sanaa manuscripts and is currently not allowing any further research on them (perhaps scared of the truth that might be uncovered). Go figure.
The verses from the current text of al-quran cannot be presented as evidence of authenticity of the current text of al-quran, because of fallacy of circular argument.
The only way this issue will ever be resolved, and the authenticity of the current text of al-quran established, is when the original text of al-quran written in time of the prophet will be discovered. The current text of al-quran itself requires this external evidence for verification of the truth (4153, 1736).
I am afraid, however, that when that original quranic text will be discovered (or maybe it already has been discovered), it will meet the same fate as the Sanaa manuscripts, and will be kept under lock and key, hidden from everyone's eyes, or will be destroyed by the ones in power.
Peace
-
@truthseeker11, can you post/display some examples of these palimpsests (here) for us to peruse?
-
Salaam hicham9,
http//pl.scribd.com/mobile/doc/110978941/Sanaa-1-and-the-Origins-of-the-Qur-An
http//www.answering-islam.org/authors/oskar/palimpsest.html
http//en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana'a_manuscript
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/soth.html
Keep in mind that this research is based only on 40 folios that were allowed to be studied. The rest thousands of manuscripts are being kept under lock and key by the Yemeni government and no further research is allowed on them.
Salaam
-
http//www.inthenameofallah.org/Codices%20of%20the%20Quran.html
The only way this issue will ever be resolved, and the authenticity of the current text of al-quran established, is when the original text of al-quran written in time of the prophet will be discovered. The current text of al-quran itself requires this external evidence for verification of the truth (4153, 1736).
I am afraid, however, that when that original quranic text will be discovered (or maybe it already has been discovered), it will meet the same fate as the Sanaa manuscripts, and will be kept under lock and key, hidden from everyone's eyes, or will be destroyed by the ones in power.
Peace
Salam,
Fair enough, but as is, the Quran stands pretty well on its own current merit.
Also the website http//www.inthenameofallah.org is pretty foul anti-Quran under the disguise of impartiality as anti-beliefs in general.
Besides, indeed the Saudis are currently busy bombing Yemen to remove any and all evidence if there were any.
Nabil
@inabster