Registration of new members is currently closed. Guestbook opened for now.  Guests who have questions may post at our guestbook.  No lengthy debates please. Kindly note: MV is a place for serious learning through mutual consultation where we have zero tolerance for trouble-makers, narcissists and needless disputants. We simply stand for what is compatible with the Noble Quran regardless of titles such as "traditionalism" or "modernism." We have the right to our opinion just as you have the right to yours. All disagreements must be left at that. Final Judgement belongs to The Almighty.
MUSLIM VILLA - QURAN ONLY
March 29, 2024, 05:33:28 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

quranist also refuse history base of verses ?

+-
Shoutbox
November 01, 2023, 03:44:32 pm Zainab_M: Allahhuma ameen .. ameen.
November 01, 2023, 03:43:43 pm Ruhi_Rose: Yes .. making lots of dua everyday ..... watching those real life video clips, my face feels wet with tears all the time.  May ALLAH grant the best to these wonderful, brave & steadfast martyrs,  Ameen ya Allah.
November 01, 2023, 03:38:26 pm Zainab_M: Keep praying, praying a lot for Gaza. It's worse than a prison .. it's a concentration camp.  Children as young as 10 or 11 are having to care for their younger siblings ages 2, 3 and 4 becoz many have lost both parents.  It's a very, very, very tearful situation there.
October 26, 2023, 03:40:19 pm N. Truth Seeker: Don't forget to look up MV Blog Zainab's Lounge for our Gaza updates.
October 20, 2023, 04:24:44 pm Zainab_M: Right sister Heba.  Gaza hospital bombing has the fingerprints of Israel all over it.  For Israel this is no big crime.  They have done this and much worse many times in the past and intend to do the same and worse many more times in near future.
October 20, 2023, 04:20:20 pm Heba E. Husseyn: Catching Zionist lies isn't hard. Soon after Gaza hospital bombing killing and maiming hundreds, Israel was quick to accuse Islamic Jihad of a misfired rocket.  That didn't sound plausible because IJ does not have such sophisticated bombing devices.  Zionist lie was fully exposed when anglican archbishop of Jerusalem,Hosam Naoum,  said today that 3 or 4 days prior to boming Israel had warned Gaza hospital to evacuate. Yet CIA claims in its flawed analysis that the rocket did not come from Israel.  But conveniently does not explain how Israel could have known 4 days earlier that a "misfired" rocket from IJ was coming.  Yet on the basis of this flawed & bias analysis of CIA, Biden is comforting Israel he believes Israel didn't do that war crimes bombing.
July 29, 2023, 03:02:07 am Zainab_M: Yesterday was Ashura, Muharram 10, 1444 (July 27, 2023).  Read about this very tragic day and details of the world's greatest 7th century revolutionary: WHO WAS HUSSEIN.
June 28, 2023, 09:48:39 am Zainab_M: Walaikum As Salaam.  This was the first Hajj open to all after the pandemic. It was attended by 2.6 million Muslims.
View Shout History
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: quranist also refuse history base of verses ?  (Read 502 times)
0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.
iwan rse
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« on: March 10, 2012, 05:48:07 am »


from wiki islam
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an_Only_Islam_-_Why_it_is_Not_Possible
it said this :
Quote
To be a Qur'anist requires a good deal of faith and a considerable lack of theological common sense. If one rejects the Hadith (ie. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud), the Tafsir (ie. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas, al-Jalalayn, Maududi), and the History (ie. al-Tabari, Ibn Sa'd, al-Waqidi, Ibn Ishaq), then the entire historical context of the Qur'an, along with any proof of Muhammad's existence, is lost
Are you all really refusing not only hadiths but also history and its historical context ??  isnt to understand quran we  need to know the background history ? (I means RealHistory not hadiths) ?? says an surah or verses in war situation, it could be disastrous applied in peace ?

I found something fishy on those wikiislam. It said Muhammad is immoral(!!)
Quote
These Qur'an only "Muslims" reject the Hadith, a fundamental aspect of Islam, simply due to it highlighting the immoral truths of Muhammad, early Islam and its numerous laws. They may deny this as the reason behind their rejection of Hadith, but this fact is proven by many Qur'anists who alternatively accept Hadith as a historical source but dismiss it as a religious one. Furthermore they reject anything about Muhammad which they claim "contradicts the Qur'anic description of him". This approach is intellectually dishonest and logically unfeasible. Either the Hadith are a valid source of information for Muslims or they are worthless. You cannot pick and choose which bits you want to keep and which bits you want to throw out when the good and the bad all originate from the same sources.
who wrote that piece ? he is insulting the prophet to defend fake hadith ?

still, While im not quranist I completely disagree that quranism declared heretical. It doesnt make sense at all.... crazyones
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Zainab_M
TEAM MV Founder
Admin
Hero Member
*
Posts: 6318



WWW
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2012, 01:00:48 pm »

Salaam.  Sorry, we missed out this post which is the reason for the delayed response.

Actually the replies of all these unnecessary points raised by wikislam have already been answered and dealt with in much greater details in our previous posts.

Thus, my reply will mostly involve giving the necessary links for information from within our own works here.


To be a Qur'anist requires a good deal of faith and a considerable lack of theological common sense.

Faith is of utmost importance and while I cannot speak for others, I can say that we at MV who follow the Quran alone have very, very strong Faith.  Concerning theology .. can wiki even answer what theology actually means?   To make a long story short, as a Muslim and in the presence of the Noble Quran, it's a violation to accept the authority of theology that ensues from theologians.   For more on theology, please read our existing post titled "Does the term 'theology' connote to true Faith."

If one rejects the Hadith (ie. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud), the Tafsir (ie. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas, al-Jalalayn, Maududi), and the History (ie. al-Tabari, Ibn Sa'd, al-Waqidi, Ibn Ishaq), then the entire historical context of the Qur'an, along with any proof of Muhammad's existence, is lost

Hadith followers never give up their age old obstinacy of putting hadith at par with history.  Let me say, there's a big difference between hadith and history.  While several historical descriptions are also not 100% correct, it has a far higher degree of authenticity than hadith because the method of compilation applied in history by professional historians is much different compared to the games played in hadith which only has one method of establishing its 'authenticity' i.e. isnad.  Needless to say, isnad is NOT a foolproof method at all.   Rejecting hadith has no connections with rejecting history, although even history cannot be accepted if it contradicts the Noble Quran.  A vitally important issue which the Hadith followers constantly overlook is that Allah has confirmed in the Quran repeatedly that His Final Message is the SOLE CRITERION.  When will the Hadithists heed this indispensable point?   Regarding the huge importance of Quran alone as the sole Criterion, please refer to our post "Ever thought what "Al-Furqan" refers to?"  Also kindly check our work "Difference between Hadith and History."


Are you all really refusing not only hadiths but also history and its historical context ??  isnt to understand quran we  need to know the background history ? (I means RealHistory not hadiths) ?? says an surah or verses in war situation, it could be disastrous applied in peace ?

I think your question has been answered above.  Kindly also check the links I've provided.

I found something fishy on those wikiislam. It said Muhammad is immoral(!!)

This is a very old practice of Hadithists.  In order to defend the Hadith narrators and writers, they are quite willing to retain their lies that defame and slander our great Prophet (s).  The Hadithists have made it clear time and again that their loyalty to Hadith narrators and compilers is far more than their loyalty toward Allah Almighty and His final messenger.  That's the reason why today 90% of the Ummah has flown down the gutters.

These Qur'an only "Muslims" reject the Hadith, a fundamental aspect of Islam, simply due to it highlighting the immoral truths of Muhammad,

Well, what wikiislam is trying to say is that Hadith has the right to speak lies against the Prophet (s) and according to the Hadithists such atrocious lies are not a good enough reason to reject Hadith.  Excuse me.  This is plain kufari and needless to say, I can NEVER agree with it.  


this fact is proven by many Qur'anists who alternatively accept Hadith as a historical source but dismiss it as a religious one.

I reject Hadith both as religious and historical source.  I have since long only accepted Hadith as a content of the trash can.   So, I don't know which Quranist wiki is talking about .. surely not us.


Furthermore they reject anything about Muhammad which they claim "contradicts the Qur'anic description of him". This approach is intellectually dishonest and logically unfeasible.

This blasphemy is also endlessly repeated by Hadithists, that is, to openly reject the Supreme Authority of the Noble Quran by not recognizing it as the Sole Criterion even though Allah Almighty has made it crystal clear that we are not obligated to accept anything not warranted by the Quran.  Thus, what the wikiislam is saying here is that it's okay to accept Quranic contradictions.  Whoever has written this piece at wikiislam is not just a kufar but a very shameless one.  This person is surely making me sick!

Followers of Hadith and Shariah have gone to the extent of kufari to claim that if Hadith (from which ensues the Shariah) passes a law, the Quranic disapproval of it is irrelevant.  That's the depth of Satanism in which Hadithists are sunk into.  A Hadithist who once came here said exactly this, in the post "Does 'wudu' really become ineffective if one passes wind?"  Please read this thread.



Either the Hadith are a valid source of information for Muslims or they are worthless. You cannot pick and choose which bits you want to keep and which bits you want to throw out when the good and the bad all originate from the same sources.

We have also dealt with this issue long ago.  This Hadithist who wrote this wants to take the aspect of not picking & choosing as the reason for accepting all ahadith .. those few that are good and the bulk that are bad.   But we take precisely this reason as rejecting all ahadith.   I quote myself on this topic from one of my previous posts as follows:

Quoting myself:
I admit there are some good narrations which I  like, ones compatible with the Glorious Quraan and the Prophet's (pbuh) humble temperament.  But the improper ones have shaken my trust considerably and I am not sure if I can give the benefit of the doubt for authenticity even to the good ones.  Thus, while the inappropriate ones should be discarded, the nicer ones can simply be retained as 'wise Islamic teachings by anonymous.'  Nothing should be attributed to the Prophet (s).  There's yet another important aspect to reflect upon.  Even if a few Ahadith are found unauthentic or absurd in the entire set of all collections, it would be enough to shake the trust of people .. because if something is based on truth with a straight intent of conveying the truth and nothing but the truth, there ought to be no cracks anywhere.  We cannot just quote the good ones and slip the bad ones under the carpet.  This is not the way 'guidance' is supposed to present itself to people.  If we really value a collection of writings or narrations, we should be proud of every word of it .. just like we are proud of every single Ayah of the Glorious Qur'aan .. it's contents, it's uniformity, eloquence, and the honesty and beauty with which it presents the truth.  But it's the opposite with the Hadith.
Unquoting:

To read this complete post, check "The reason I personally found many Ahadeeth disturbing."

If you are given a glass of water which is 80% contaminated and 20% clean .. it goes without saying that obviously the right thing to do would be to throw away that glass of water altogether.  But if someone is very addicted to the culture of Hadith, the farthest they should go is to only retain those very few good ones as either anonymous quotes or simply retain them in the names of the narrators or compilers.  But the Prophet (s) name must absolutely be left out of such fabricated & false games and intrigues by the Hadith pranksters.




who wrote that piece ? he is insulting the prophet to defend fake hadith ?

still, While im not quranist I completely disagree that quranism declared heretical. It doesnt make sense at all....

Yep .. that's exactly what I already told you.  Hadithists always insult the Quran and the Prophet to defend the hadith.  That's why I call them KUFAR & MUNAFIQS without any regrets.  
Report Spam   Logged

MuslimanMahlon
Allah suffices
Full Member
***
Posts: 142




Badges: (View All)
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2012, 09:11:41 pm »

Well, what wikiislam is trying to say is that Hadith has the right to speak lies against the Prophet (s) and according to the Hadithists such atrocious lies are not a good enough reason to reject Hadith.  Excuse me.  This is plain kufari and needless to say, I can NEVER agree with it.


Thus, what the wikiislam is saying here is that it's okay to accept Quranic contradictions.  Whoever has written this piece at wikiislam is not just a kufar but a very shameless one.  This person is surely making me sick!
Report Spam   Logged

“Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion — and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion… while truth again reverts to a new minority.”

Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
MuslimanMahlon
Allah suffices
Full Member
***
Posts: 142




Badges: (View All)
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2012, 09:12:21 pm »

 LaaughingAway
Report Spam   Logged

“Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion — and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion… while truth again reverts to a new minority.”

Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Selma
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2012, 07:27:33 pm »

It's not surprising WikiIslam is attacking the Prophet (as) because actually...well, this is what the site has to say:

Quote from: WikiIslam
WikiIslam's goal is to become the one-stop source of information critical of Islam. This information is based primarily on its own sources, the Qur'an, hadith and Islamic scholars. It takes a rational approach in its handling of Islam and is notable for dealing extensively with false propaganda and Islamic pseudoscience.

WikiIslam is like these  Thumbsdwn websites:
http://www.answering-islam.org/
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
http://www.faithfreedom.org/

WI needs to cut down the Qur'an alone stance is because Hadith contains (extremely false) incriminating content on the Prophet (as) that is integral to their cause. Which is funny, staunch Hadithers and hardline Islam crtics are in cahoots. That says something right there....hmmm....one could wonder.

 
Report Spam   Logged
Zainab_M
TEAM MV Founder
Admin
Hero Member
*
Posts: 6318



WWW
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2012, 08:52:10 pm »

Yeah exactly, WikiIslam is no different from all those thumbs-down sites - sources of a load of humbug!


....... staunch Hadithers and hardline Islam crtics are in cahoots.  

That's very correct.  The Hadithers provide the ammunition to the Islamophobes & critics to lambast Islam.  It's impossible that the Hadithers don't realize it, so I won't call it inadvertent on their part either.  The love for their corrupt medieval imams is so deeply imbedded in the hearts of the Hadith guys that for the sake of justifying their offensive writings, they are allowing the enemies of Islam to see a false & distorted image of our beautiful Faith and thus helping to encourage the anti-Islam campaign by the diehard critics.  For this reason, you will always observe the non-Muslim critics of Islam to be very supportive of Hadith, just like the mainstream Hadithers.  I have argued about the gaping discrepancies of Hadith, its blatant unauthenticity and the dire need of adhering to the Quran alone in several online forums in the presence of both Hadithers and hardline Christians.  Each time, both of them would gang up against me, with loud condemnations of my approach.   If you tell anyone at answering-islam.org that the Hadith institution is FALSE (which it definitely is), they will blow up with fury just like the mainstream imams.
Report Spam   Logged


Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Scammers & spammers will be reported | © If you borrow MV contents you must mention our link with hypertext | MV Team is not responsible for comments by members or guests.
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy