Do you know WikiIslam ?

[The Grand Nudger]

You have independent reasons to believe magic book is gods word, magic book says an event happened, therefore it happened is a non sequitur, you realize? 

No, I don't realize that. Someone who believes that the Qur'an is truly God's words, verbatim, is justified in believing that all events recounted in the Qur'an really happened, in so far as his initial premise is justified. This argument is definitely valid in structure, its soundness, however, is controversial, because not all people accept that the Qur'an is divine.

That's why a Muslim believes angels exist, that's why they believe an afterlife with very specific descriptions exists, it's essentially because scripture contains these doctrines.

That may be how islam works, at least according to you - but it's not how logic works.  You'll need at least one more premise before it's even valid.  You probably don;t recognize it as much because it's a fundamental article of your faith.  When you imagine gods, you can't imagine them outside this silent premise, and so don't realize that you've made it.

Can you identify what the silent premise is or at least could be, to give you something like a valid form?  

I don't think I hid any premises, a Muslim's independent reasons for believing that the Qur'an is divine can be summarized as follows: the content of the Qur'an can't possibly be the product of Muhammad PBUH(*), it's precisely to avoid this fact that you have revisionist scholars who reject even the clearest facts about the surrounding milieus in Early islamic times. Some say the location of early Islam is not mecca, but somewhere else like Petra in Jordan.. some say the Qur'an is posthumous writing.. some say Islam rised in a milieu where christian texts were well-known, etc. All kinds of wild ideas are suggested to explain how the content in the Qur'an could possibly appear in the middle of pagans in the desert. 

I don't think the reliability of narrators matters at this point, as people dispute the divinity of the Qur'an/the prophethood of Muhammad even if they grant their historicity. 

Magic book could be the product of god and still recount events that never were, unless we add another premise.  Whether or not it's just so awesome that Big Mo was too dumb to have come up with it, again according to you, is both hilarious and completely irrelevant.  Though I will point out, that you've gone from "hadith science"...to hadith irrelevancy, at this point, haven't you? It's not even important whether or not the thing you're so embarrassed of you'd bullshit strangers about it really is worthy, can really cash that check. Me neither, telephone.

If these people don't believe in God, I don't think it makes sense to discuss any religious text. All religious claims are false by default if one doesn't think belief in God is justified. As for the effect on people or society, this is a non-sequitur, because true facts can have a bad effect.. say, our knowledge of the atom made nuclear weapons possible.. for the lack of a better example.

(*) I really need to point this out, it's tempting to say that this is an argument from ignorance/incredulity. But this kind of arguments is not always fallacious. In fact, all inductive arguments are more or less arguments from ignorance: the conclusion is more general than the premises.

I don't have to believe in gods to notice you do, nor do I have to believe in gods to see that the authors who crammed words in gods mouth were at least trying to express some profound sets of truths they felt compelled to share.  I think that a great many religious claims are true, despite all theistic claims being false.  Your gods are free riders. Yet again you manage a non sequitur because neither gods nor religions are allowed....yet again according to you, to exceed the meager extent of your own islam riddled imagination.