Quranism: Difference between revisions

4 bytes removed ,  8 March 2021
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
Line 38: Line 38:
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. It simply becomes an ancient Arabic document of rambling, repetitive, and often-times confusing, statements and commands. The reader is left with such questions as "Who wrote this and why?" and "Who is Abu Lahab, and why are he and his wife going to be tortured?" and "Why don't these stories match the ones found in the Bible?" and "Who is [[Isa|'Isa]]?" The Qur'anist is ultimately a monotheist who creates their own religion based on a 1400-year-old nonsensical Arabic document.  
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. It simply becomes an ancient Arabic document of rambling, repetitive, and often-times confusing, statements and commands. The reader is left with such questions as "Who wrote this and why?" and "Who is Abu Lahab, and why are he and his wife going to be tortured?" and "Why don't these stories match the ones found in the Bible?" and "Who is [[Isa|'Isa]]?" The Qur'anist is ultimately a monotheist who creates their own religion based on a 1400-year-old nonsensical Arabic document.  


The often-leveled charge by the obscure Qur'an-only sects that "Sunni's and Shi'ite's are following a deviant form of Islam by introducing these man-made books," is laughable and the epitome of hypocrisy, considering most of the narrators of hadith are the very same people who passed down the Qur'an itself. The first Muslims ([[Sahabah]]- companions of Muhammad, which include all four [[Caliph|Rightly Guided Caliphs]]) who partook in the Hijra to [[Medina]], ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. The generation of Muslims that followed the death of Muhammad (the [[Tabi'un]]) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. And the generation of Muslims that followed them ([[Tabi' al-Tabi'un]]) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. Recording and sorting through these narrations in written form was little more than codifying and clarifying already existing beliefs. To suggest that adhering to Muhammad's sunnah constitutes a deviation from pure Islam is ludicrous.
The often-leveled charge by the obscure Qur'an-only sects that "Sunni's and Shi'ite's are following a deviant form of Islam by introducing these man-made books," is laughable and the epitome of hypocrisy, considering most of the narrators of hadith are the very same people who passed down the Qur'an itself. The first Muslims ([[Sahabah]]- companions of Muhammad, which include all four [[Caliph|Rightly Guided Caliphs]]) who partook in the Hijra to [[Medina]], ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. The generation of Muslims that followed the death of Muhammad (the [[Tabi'un]]) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. And the generation of Muslims that followed them (Tabi' al-Tabi'un) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. Recording and sorting through these narrations in written form was little more than codifying and clarifying already existing beliefs. To suggest that adhering to Muhammad's sunnah constitutes a deviation from pure Islam is ludicrous.


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 [[Islamic laws|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.  
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 [[Islamic laws|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.  
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,633

edits