[Quranic Reflection]: Quran vs Hadith- why the Hadith is false

[WinterHold]

Muslims expanded when they followed the "Quran" only; after they began believing in the books of Hadith their downfall started, civil wars ravaged the Islamic realm.

Yeah, the ummah used swords for that, not magic book.  Predictably, the ummah collapsed when it's ability to wage war collapsed.  It didn't have anything to do with thinking that washing your hands a particular way was the right way because somebody overheard big mo say so.  As to the internecine warfare between schismatic muslims..that was there from day one - a dispute over a claim to the throne, as always.

Your own personal and imaginary past, even if it were true, couldn't support your overall claim at any rate..unless you're telling us that you only believe in religious texts when that state is expanding militarily having suppressed or eliminated all internal malcontents.......?  Is that, really, why you think hadith are false?  Because muslims started losing?  Anywho... Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.  I don't think that's how it went down...but it wouldn't make hadith any more or less true or false if they were the reason history collapsed from your islamist point of view.

There's alot of ink spilt, in mere reality, about how a society that can successfully export what would otherwise be it's internal violence benefits from the uneasy peace between folks who would kill each other if they ran out of other people to kill..or just couldn't reach those other people anymore, for whatever reason.  In a sense, rapidly expanding cultures are victims of their own success.  They need to keep expanding, because the effort spent in ending others will be spent, whether in a quest for territory from your neighbor states, or territory within your borders between criminal gangs (or, in your case, tribal warlords - if there's a difference).

Without a just cause any army will fall; like the U.S army fell in Afghanistan and the Romans before them.
The "Quran" was the just cause early Muslims believed in; when their grandsons switched to Hadith the 'just cause' evaporated, and defeat became eminent.

An army so massive both in manpower & arsenal is only powerful as long as its cause for war is just. Whenever they lose that; they are vanquished. Ask Hitler, Hulagu Khan, hell ask George Bush too, he is still alive.

--
As for Islamic factions, their cause is based on demonising a group(s) of people; because that is in the core of Islam to identify a group of beings as evil: "the world has good people and bad people; saints & demons". The Quran gives a specific list to evil people, so it wasn't enough for Islamic factions: they expanded the list massively using the "Hadith" books, and whomever belongs to any list the faction believes in is demonised.

Thus; if you were a Shiite Fatimid Caliph wanting to wage war on Iraq to control the Euphrates, then put Iraqies in the list of "demonised" folks, by ordering your religious schools to issue a Fatwa against them. Mobilise armies then invade.
Result ? massive civil wars in the Islamic realm.

[R00tKiT]

Without a just cause any army will fall; like the U.S army fell in Afghanistan and the Romans before them.

Armies can fall even if they have a just cause AND a huge army. Here is how: drop an atomic bomb on the big righteous army.

What reality do you live in ?

[arewethereyet]

Merry Christmas guys.

Hope Santa is good to you both...Kloro and WinterWonderland.

[Deesse23]

For what it's worth, I think Quranism is a step in a better direction. Many of the worst parts of Islamism come from Hadiths, like the age of Muhammed's wife Aisha

Aisha wasn't technically a child when she was 9, how many times should we repeat that? In some US states nowadays, it's technically possible to marry at the age of 12,

Did he just argue?:
In 2021, in the US its "technically possible" to marry a 12y old girl, therefore it was ok, 1300y ago, on the Arab Peninsula, for some guy to actually marry a 9y old girl.
Did he really just argue that?
I mean, technically its either stupid beyond belief or dishonest, or actually proably both.

and we don't see atheists complaining a lot about that.

Do we? And if so...Whats the relevance of some atheist complaining about child abuse, to the child abuse itself? Is it less of a child abuse if an atheist complains? Is it more of a child abuse it an atheist does not complain? How much influence does any complain of any person have on the matter of fact of a child abuse?

Dude that was the most mindbogglingly stupid "tu quoque" i have seen in a long time, and i am reading some real stupid shit really often thanks to idiots like your ilk......followed by an even more (if thats even possible!) stupid, and dishonest, attempt to smear your opponent.

What a prime example of a pious follower of the prophet, may he fuck himself instead of 9y old children,  you are.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It’s Gandalf, I tells ya…Gandalf!!

Boru

Even in the context of a fictional story, saying that there are, for example, four Horcruxes that Voldemort used, when everybody else says there are seven (based on good arguments), should really raise eyebrows.

It would certainly raise mine. Not because four Horcruxes is wrong, but because it’s a heated dispute about something that doesn’t exist. 

Boru

[R00tKiT]

Did he just argue?:
In 2021, in the US its "technically possible" to marry a 12y old girl, therefore it was ok, 1300y ago, on the Arab Peninsula, for some guy to actually marry a 9y old girl.
Did he really just argue that?

Yes, because the legal age of marriage depends on the social context. If, somewhere in the US, it's socially acceptable to marry a 12 years old girl, it shouldn't be surprising that, in other social contexts, it was acceptable to marry a 9y old.

Do we? And if so...Whats the relevance of some atheist complaining about child abuse, to the child abuse itself? 

First, because it's not child abuse. Second, because many atheists are bastards who cherrypick their targets. They know that the social context matters when it comes to assessments about the morality of some action, and yet ignore that when it comes to the actions of a religious figure.

[WinterHold]

For what it's worth, I think Quranism is a step in a better direction. Many of the worst parts of Islamism come from Hadiths, like the age of Muhammed's wife Aisha

Aisha wasn't technically a child when she was 9, how many times should we repeat that? In some US states nowadays, it's technically possible to marry at the age of 12, and we don't see atheists complaining a lot about that.

The Hadith contains hideous parts belonging to some sick mentalities that ruled the Ummah; Muslims forget that only 500 years ago the world was so different and Islamic empires had civil wars; each with their own religious doctrines claiming to be "Islamic".

Sunnis : pray 5 times a day

Shia' : pray 5 times a day

Ahmadi : pray 5 times a day

Ibadi : pray 5 times a day

Mu'tazila : pray 5 times a day

Kharijite : pray 5 times a day

Winterhold : I pray 3 times a day because I only rely on the Qur'an, I am the only Muslim in the world who figured this out, and everybody else follows some sick mentalities that ruled the Ummah. The sects of the Ummah went to war, therefore they are wrong. I am also a pathetic loser and can't properly defend controversial hadiths that sometimes irritate non-Muslims, I therefore decided to toss the entirety of the Hadith corpus to avoid any headache.

@WinterHold, you're putting yourself outside the Ummah. In any case, you should read more about the Dunning-Kruger effect, being aware of it might help you escape your delusion.

Being unable to determine the daily number of prayers is a devastating blow to your understanding of Islam. You're literally the only person in the universe who prays 3 times a day because you think you're too grandiose to follow Muslim scholars. And because of that, you should be more concerned about the possibility that you are pathetic loon, than about armed conflicts in the ME you clearly don't understand anything about.

I am also asking you, kindly, to stop pretending complete assurance about whatever you decide to blurt out about Islam, and deal with the reality that you got it all wrong your entire life.

Yes, of course I put myself outside, didn't the Quran tell every Muslim to do so ?

Sura 17, The Quran:
https://quran.com/17:13?font=v1&translations=131%2C20

(13) We have bound every human’s destiny to their neck.1 And on the Day of Judgment We will bring forth to each ˹person˺ a record which they will find laid open.

(14) And it will be said,˺ “Read your record. You ˹alone˺ are sufficient this Day to take account of yourself.”


— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran

Your deeds are your own; your weight is your own; your sins are your own. The "Ummah" is not going to lift your deeds, didn't God say:

Sura 35, The Quran:
https://quran.com/35:18?store=false&translations=

(18) No soul burdened with sin will bear the burden of another. And if a sin-burdened soul cries for help with its burden, none of it will be carried—even by a close relative. You ˹O Prophet˺ can only warn those who stand in awe of their Lord without seeing Him1 and establish prayer. Whoever purifies themselves, they only do so for their own good. And to Allah is the final return.

— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran

Your soul is on its on. So why are you taking the "Ummah" as a human shield? Their business is their own; they destroyed their empires themselves, they sinned badly, and they are paying the price now. 

No soul burdened with sin will bear the burden of another. If the Ummah dripped itself in mud, let it rot.

[The Grand Nudger]

Without a just cause any army will fall; like the U.S army fell in Afghanistan and the Romans before them.
The "Quran" was the just cause early Muslims believed in; when their grandsons switched to Hadith the 'just cause' evaporated, and defeat became eminent.

Imma stop you right there.  You don't know the first thing about armed conflict, justice has nothing to do with who wins, and I doubt that your fellow muslims (past and present) would appreciate your characterization of them all being idol worshippers...bowing down and killing other people and their fellow believers...over a book, rather than believers in a god - though I enjoy it very much.  

It's not as if you think america is just for example..and yet you might notice that this is the american century? It's not that you think islam is unjust, as another, but you've obviously realized that the ummah got their shit pushed in. Would your appraisal of america change if we'd just annihilated the afghan people and declared the country a territory, you know..winning? Would your appraisal of isis change if they'd managed to hold onto their caliphate?

--
As for Islamic factions, their cause is based on demonising a group(s) of people; because that is in the core of Islam to identify a group of beings as evil: "the world has good people and bad people; saints & demons". The Quran gives a specific list to evil people, so it wasn't enough for Islamic factions: they expanded the list massively using the "Hadith" books, and whomever belongs to any list the faction believes in is demonised.

Thus; if you were a Shiite Fatimid Caliph wanting to wage war on Iraq to control the Euphrates, then put Iraqies in the list of "demonised" folks, by ordering your religious schools to issue a Fatwa against them. Mobilise armies then invade.
Result ? massive civil wars in the Islamic realm.

Ever occur to you that when magic book demonizes some group of people that's just as poorly thought out?  I mean, you're sitting here telling us that magic book and hadith both do a thing and that the thing is a bad thing, and that's part of why you believe in one.... but not the other?

---

Yes, because the legal age of marriage depends on the social context. If, somewhere in the US, it's socially acceptable to marry a 12 years old girl, it shouldn't be surprising that, in other social contexts, it was acceptable to marry a 9y old.

Both things surprise people who know it's not exactly great for some middle age man to boink a nine year old girl..or a twelve year old girl. Which might explain why the us has a whole bunch of laws meant to prevent child marriages.

-but go ahead and tell us more about how atheists are bastards because they point out big mo molested a child. If islam requires you to go to bat for child predators, that's just another thing that islam fucked up, and why islamists are, themselves, fucked up. Fighting the good fight for kiddy diddlers.

[WinterHold]

Without a just cause any army will fall; like the U.S army fell in Afghanistan and the Romans before them.
The "Quran" was the just cause early Muslims believed in; when their grandsons switched to Hadith the 'just cause' evaporated, and defeat became eminent.

Imma stop you right there.  You don't know the first thing about armed conflict, justice has nothing to do with who wins, and I doubt that your fellow muslims (past and present) would appreciate your characterization of them all being idol worshippers...bowing down and killing other people and their fellow believers...over a book, rather than believers in a god - though I enjoy it very much.  

It's not as if you think america is just for example..and yet you might notice that this is the american century?  It's not that you think islam is unjust, as another, but you've obviously realized that the ummah got their shit pushed in.  Would your appraisal of america change if we'd just annihilated the afghan people and declared the country a territory, you know..winning?  Would your appraisal of isis change if they'd managed to hold onto their caliphate?

The right cause has everything to do with armed conflicts; since it is the main motivator of the "soldiers" fighting. Whenever the "cause" is too vague, the soldiers will lose the will to fight if the cause evaporated, in war tactics we call that "demoralisation"; and whoever lose the will to fight loses the battle.

Take the Iraq war as an example: when "WMDs" turned out to be a fake cause, the U.S amy collapsed and the country was given to Iran, also in Afghanistan, when 9/11 became too old; Bin Laden got killed already, the U.S amy lost all the morals and all the will; the soldiers just had nothing to fight for. 

[quote pid='2082045' dateline='1640264365']

WinterHold said:

--
As for Islamic factions, their cause is based on demonising a group(s) of people; because that is in the core of Islam to identify a group of beings as evil: "the world has good people and bad people; saints & demons". The Quran gives a specific list to evil people, so it wasn't enough for Islamic factions: they expanded the list massively using the "Hadith" books, and whomever belongs to any list the faction believes in is demonised.

Thus; if you were a Shiite Fatimid Caliph wanting to wage war on Iraq to control the Euphrates, then put Iraqies in the list of "demonised" folks, by ordering your religious schools to issue a Fatwa against them. Mobilise armies then invade.
Result ? massive civil wars in the Islamic realm.

Ever occur to you that when magic book demonizes some group of people that's just as poorly thought out?  I mean, you're sitting here telling us that magic book and hadith both do a thing and that the thing is a bad thing, and that's part of why you believe in one.... but not the other?

[/quote]

I was quite obvious:

Quran= specific list of demonised people
Hadith= almost unlimited list of demonised people.

[Mister Agenda]

For what it's worth, I think Quranism is a step in a better direction. Many of the worst parts of Islamism come from Hadiths, like the age of Muhammed's wife Aisha

Aisha wasn't technically a child when she was 9, how many times should we repeat that? In some US states nowadays, it's technically possible to marry at the age of 12, and we don't see atheists complaining a lot about that.

It should be a crime in every American state to marry before 18. It's a disgrace that it's not already the case. I'm not going to argue with you over whether a nine-year old is a child, technically or otherwise.