ChristianVisitor

Quranist sect?

26 posts in this topic

I just recently heard about this Islamic sect. Apparently, they don't hold to the major Sunni Madhabs, don't identify as Ibadi or Sufi, or consider themselves a branch of Shia. From what I read they just follow the Quran based on strict exegesis without any adherence to a school. 

Would you consider them Muslims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to be one and no, I wouldn't because they actually dispute the Shahada, saying it's La ilaha illa illah ( There is no God but God ) versus La ilaha illa illah, wa ashadu anna muhammadan RasulAllah ( There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger)

You know as well as anybody else that belief in the prophet Muhammad (saws) makes one Muslim, so why change the Shahada? 

They are a lot of like the Sola Scriptura people and tend to cherry pick the Qur'an to fit their views and lifestyle. 

silasun, shiaman14 and reisiger like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2016 at 5:01 PM, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I used to be one and no, I wouldn't because they actually dispute the Shahada, saying it's La ilaha illa illah ( There is no God but God ) versus La ilaha illa illah, wa ashadu anna muhammadan RasulAllah ( There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger)

You know as well as anybody else that belief in the prophet Muhammad (saws) makes one Muslim, so why change the Shahada? 

They are a lot of like the Sola Scriptura people and tend to cherry pick the Qur'an to fit their views and lifestyle. 

But most Sola Scriptura Protestants do hold to a denominational creed (whether Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, etc.). If you read some church websites they will say something like we believe in the Anglican 39 Articles or the Lutheran Formula of Concord or the Presbyterian Westminster Confessions. 

I think the best comparison would be Independent Fundamentalists. They don't have an official creed but say they only rely on Scripture. Interesting, that the Quranist sect in Egypt came out of the Salafi sect (rejecting the taqlid).

Gaius I. Caesar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ChristianVisitor said:

Interesting, that the Quranist sect in Egypt came out of the Salafi sect (rejecting the taqlid).

The difference being is that Salafis are ultra conservative and the Qur'anists tend to be really liberal. But you are right, some don't hold a particular creed whereas some do (Code 19'ers and International Submitters)

Now Code 19 was discovered by an Egyptian who was raised  Sufi, Dr. Rashad Khalifa and as he started writing about the Code 19, he gained more followers and declared himself a prophet. Eventually, he had to leave Egypt because of his bold claim and came to America, lived there until he was murdered in 1990. There are still quite a few people who think he was a prophet to this day.

shiaman14 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2016 at 11:01 PM, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I used to be one and no, I wouldn't because they actually dispute the Shahada, saying it's La ilaha illa illah ( There is no God but God ) versus La ilaha illa illah, wa ashadu anna muhammadan ( There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger)

You know as well as anybody else that belief in the prophet Muhammad (saws) makes one Muslim, so why change the Shahada? 

The Shahadatayn that is recited doesn't exist in the entire Qur'aan. Furthermore, because one doesn't recite the second testimony doesn't mean that the Prophethood of Muhammad becomes annulled or the belief that he's a Prophet is negated by not mentioning his name.or one doesn't believe in him.This is what makes the Sunni and Shi'ah unintelligent and irrational. 

Furthermore, belief in the Prophet doesn't make one a Muslim, it makes you a 'mu'min' (believer). 

003:018
There is no God but He (Arabic: La illa ha illa hu): That is the witness (shahida) of God, His angels, and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice. There is no God but He, the Exalted in Power, the Wise” 

______________________________________________

O HOW DOES ONE BECOME A BELIEVER IF THEY DO NOT PROCLAIM 'SHAHADAH' IN THE TRADITIONAL MUSLIM WAY?

 

True faith is not simply based on a ritualistic public proclamation of a particular form of ‘Shahadah’ in the midst of a congregation. Nor indeed is it formally completed by handing out certificates!

 

True faith is a matter of inner belief and can only be manifested outwardly by practice based on one's own volition and not forced or to be seen by others.

 

In the end only God knows the true condition of one's faith.

 

060.010 (Part)

"...O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them (Arabic: fa-im'tahinuhunna) : God knows best as to their Faith(Arabic: Allahu a-lamu bi-imanihinna): if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers ..."

 

How does one test them, what would constitute the proof? Is there any guidance from the Quran?

 

009.010 -11

"In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge"

 

Therefore one understands the following actions as proof of one's belief.

 

  • Establish Prayer

  • Pay the Poor Due (Zakat)

 

 

http://quransmessage.com/articles/shahadah FM3.htm

 

 

Netzari and Son of Placid like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to be a Quranist, but after some more research I became a sunni again. Quranism is genuinely incomplete. They accept the Quran as the only source in islam we should follow but they are blind to the fact that the Quran was narated and collected the same we the as the ahadith were. Also they apply tafsir of the Quran which is mostly derived from the same people who collected and narated the ahadith.

Not to mention the people who call themselves Quranist were a weird bunch. Many of them were there so their religion would fit their westernised view of islam. Many inferiority complexes over there.

Guerrilla likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I can say, There is no God but God, I'm good, but if I have to add, "And Muhammad is His messenger", as in His only messenger, then I start to run into problems. All Prophets were messengers. These are some of the contradictions we run into...There is no distinction between prophets, but Muhammad was the best.

I see the addition as an agenda to separate the beliefs. Religion has done such a good job of making sure we don't get together and agree. It also keeps those dividing points out front and puts way more emphasis on them than their actual value.

The reason Quranists are incomplete is because the Quran actually fills in blanks, and debunks doctrines in the past scriptures. If they don't accept past scriptures it's not going to work.

 

Netzari likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/27/2016 at 6:59 PM, Son of Placid said:

If I can say, There is no God but God, I'm good, but if I have to add, "And Muhammad is His messenger", as in His only messenger, then I start to run into problems. All Prophets were messengers. These are some of the contradictions we run into...There is no distinction between prophets, but Muhammad was the best.

I see the addition as an agenda to separate the beliefs. Religion has done such a good job of making sure we don't get together and agree. It also keeps those dividing points out front and puts way more emphasis on them than their actual value.

The reason Quranists are incomplete is because the Quran actually fills in blanks, and debunks doctrines in the past scriptures. If they don't accept past scriptures it's not going to work.

 

 

You are wrong.

Wrong regarding the shahada, wrong regarding the contradictions, wrong regarding the "agenda", wrong regarding dividing people.

The shahada does not mean that Prophet Muhammed(S) was the only prophet (messenger). But that he is a prophet of Allah(SWT). You seriously believed that it meant he was the only one?

There is no contradiction, see above regarding the meaning of the shahada.

Prophet Muhammed(S) was mentioned in biblical scriptures as well. Stating that he is a Prophet is stating the truth, there is no agenda except for saying the truth and saying the actual fact.

If anything the abrahamic religions tell us to do good to each other, in islam we are told to value ahlul kitab, we say that there is only one God, i.e. monotheism, you are also saying that(?) and so are the jews. We have huge common factors, we share many prophet, if people wish to unite regarding their common factors then they can, but it is people who likes to divide because it feeds their egos and give them the sense of "I am better than you".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, IbnSina said:

 

You are wrong.

Wrong regarding the shahada, wrong regarding the contradictions, wrong regarding the "agenda", wrong regarding dividing people.

The shahada does not mean that Prophet Muhammed(S) was the only prophet (messenger). But that he is a prophet of Allah(SWT). You seriously believed that it meant he was the only one?

There is no contradiction, see above regarding the meaning of the shahada.

Prophet Muhammed(S) was mentioned in biblical scriptures as well. Stating that he is a Prophet is stating the truth, there is no agenda except for saying the truth and saying the actual fact.

If anything the abrahamic religions tell us to do good to each other, in islam we are told to value ahlul kitab, we say that there is only one God, i.e. monotheism, you are also saying that(?) and so are the jews. We have huge common factors, we share many prophet, if people wish to unite regarding their common factors then they can, but it is people who likes to divide because it feeds their egos and give them the sense of "I am better than you".

I have a wife so I'm used to being wrong.

So let me get this clear. A simple statement that I can do any time because I am not a trinitarian...

There is no God but God, and I am a Muslim now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

I have a wife so I'm used to being wrong.

So let me get this clear. A simple statement that I can do any time because I am not a trinitarian...

There is no God but God, and I am a Muslim now?

What does it mean to be muslim? What does the word muslim mean? 

These are question that you should ask before asking if you are a muslim, you must first define the word.

To begin with, do you understand the Shahada now? We do not say that Prophet Muhammed(S) is the ONLY prophet, but that he is Gods prophet, as is Prophet Jesus, Prophet Moses, Prophet Yousef, Jakob, Noa, etc. And all the other known prophets as well that we are aware off, there are unnamed prophets also which are gone with history, but they were still prophets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2016 at 3:58 AM, IbnSina said:

What does it mean to be muslim? What does the word muslim mean? 

These are question that you should ask before asking if you are a muslim, you must first define the word.

To begin with, do you understand the Shahada now? We do not say that Prophet Muhammed(S) is the ONLY prophet, but that he is Gods prophet, as is Prophet Jesus, Prophet Moses, Prophet Yousef, Jakob, Noa, etc. And all the other known prophets as well that we are aware off, there are unnamed prophets also which are gone with history, but they were still prophets.

Please don't assume I am demeaning Prophet Muhammad in any way. That is never my point. I made a post, you said I was wrong, wrong, wrong, so you may have to answer a few questions before you can properly correct me.

Can you be a Muslim without specifically declaring Muhammad as a messenger?  Not denying, just wondering if there are 125,000 Prophets, all had the same injeel suited to their demographics, all held in the same level of regards, must you single one out? We can name very few, but short of having to mention all of them...do you have to pick one, or does it have to be Muhammad in order to be a Muslim? 

Muslim means surrendered one. It's a commitment mentioned often in the Bible. It's a commitment many people have adhered to in the span of all religions. It's a commitment I take seriously because I have lived long enough to know that God is not just a concept in the sky. Not only that, He's not just one concept understood by one Prophet.

The proof is in what the modern "Islam" ignores. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Can you be a Muslim without specifically declaring Muhammad as a messenger?

No. 

It's essential to acknowledge all prophets (s), especially the final one, who completed and finished the gift wrapping of the totality of God's message. To acknowledge only some of the Prophets, and breaking the chain of allegiance prematurely, puts one outside the fold of Islam, and into another religion and denomination. 

Son of Placid and Pearl178 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, magma said:

No. 

It's essential to acknowledge all prophets (s), especially the final one, who completed and finished the gift wrapping of the totality of God's message. To acknowledge only some of the Prophets, and breaking the chain of allegiance prematurely, puts one outside the fold of Islam, and into another religion and denomination. 

That was my point. It's what separates Muslims from the past religions.

I get the break in the chain, but I also don't see any new laws created in the Quran. I see the Quran correct the same doctrines I learned to live without. I see people creating the religion around their understanding, including new rules and man made god laws, I see there is much collision between those who understood one way, and those who understood it another. I see it broken into many sects, all with an aversion to the others. It's not new. The Jews did it, the Christians did it, just not sure I want to go through all that again. 

Let's remember, there is only one God and a kabillion strains of the big three religions. What's the chances God created all those divisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

That was my point. It's what separates Muslims from the past religions.

Yes, and it's a distinction of importance. 

4 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

I get the break in the chain, but I also don't see any new laws created in the Quran. I see the Quran correct the same doctrines I learned to live without. I see people creating the religion around their understanding, including new rules and man made god laws, I see there is much collision between those who understood one way, and those who understood it another. I see it broken into many sects, all with an aversion to the others. It's not new. The Jews did it, the Christians did it, just not sure I want to go through all that again. 

Above all, the Quran and last Prophet provided clarification, formalization, and solidification of the monotheistic doctrine, which had culminated over generations with other prophets. This was God's plan. 

There are two main concepts. 

First, the concept of gradualism, so human society could slowly realign itself towards the message. Secondly, the ironclad concept of finality of the message, so certainty could be reached, and humaity wouldn't be left with an "incomplete puzzle" hanging over their head. 

Both worked in sync, and strategically, out of God's mercy and the understanding of our nature. He's the best of planners. Ultimately our free will and free thought is required to see the whole picture to the end. 

Would you settle for a Commodore 64 or the final, absolute perfect computer model (for the sake of argument)?

13 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Let's remember, there is only one God and a kabillion strains of the big three religions. What's the chances God created all those divisions?

Because there are a kabillion free wills. God didn't "create" these divisions, as much as he created people with the faculties to pursue these if they wished. But he does provide clarity towards a "recommended" path, if ones free will inclines them that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muhammad came for the same reason as Jesus. To bring people back to the message. He (Jesus) never accused past scriptures of corruption, but He sure got after the religious leaders of the time for their corruption. How often did they accuse Him of breaking a law, and how often did He remind them that the laws they made did not come from God? 

Muhammad came to remove the idolatry which had crept in to the land. He brought the people back to monotheism. That was God's plan. Muhammad gave Christians more credibility than any Muslim since. He even sent his people to live with Christians. Doesn't sound like Muhammad was into division. The divisions started the day he died. 

Quote

clarification, formalization, and solidification of the monotheistic doctrine,

Clarification is subjective. Formalization is the building of a religion, and solidification is setting the formalization in stone, (the hoops of obedience). Every religion does it, then every sect does it. By the time they are done the people are listening to what they say the Bible says, (or Quran) rather than looking for themselves. Because so many interpretations seem abstract, it's hard to trust the real words of scripture while waiting for someone special to solve the mystery of black and white. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean this in all respect, but the "complete" shahada makes me very uncomfortable. Demanding that a prophets name be mentioned next to Allah during every single call to prayer comes awkwardly close to shirk. 

"They (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshipped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they should have obeyed God. They were commanded to worship no one besides God who is the only God and who is too exalted to be considered equal to any idols." (Qur'an 9:31)

Son of Placid likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the Disciples of Jesus were called Muslims, or called themselves Muslims.

How does that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2017 at 8:07 AM, Netzari said:

I mean this in all respect, but the "complete" shahada makes me very uncomfortable. Demanding that a prophets name be mentioned next to Allah during every single call to prayer comes awkwardly close to shirk. 

"They (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshipped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they should have obeyed God. They were commanded to worship no one besides God who is the only God and who is too exalted to be considered equal to any idols." (Qur'an 9:31)

https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/05/16/is-orthodox-shahada-shirk/

Netzari and Guerrilla like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2017 at 8:07 AM, Netzari said:

I mean this in all respect, but the "complete" shahada makes me very uncomfortable. Demanding that a prophets name be mentioned next to Allah during every single call to prayer comes awkwardly close to shirk. 

"They (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshipped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they should have obeyed God. They were commanded to worship no one besides God who is the only God and who is too exalted to be considered equal to any idols." (Qur'an 9:31)

Can you define shirk? @Netzari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's my understanding that "shirk" involves attributing a partner to Allah, specifically in worship or deification. As the Qur'an says:

Verily, Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him (in worship), but He forgives except that (anything else) to whom He wills; and whoever sets up partners with Allah in worship, he has indeed invented a tremendous sin. [Quran 4: 48]

Now, I know that Muslims don't worship Muhammad. But in light of this ayat, it seems that Muslims inadvertently violate this when they say the Adhan, which is literally a call to worship. They are literally mentioning a created being next to the name of Allah during worship. I know that Muslims arent polytheists, but I still feel this is dangerously close (not that my opinion matters).

Salam and Shalom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Netzari said:

It's my understanding that "shirk" involves attributing a partner to Allah, specifically in worship or deification. As the Qur'an says:

Verily, Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him (in worship), but He forgives except that (anything else) to whom He wills; and whoever sets up partners with Allah in worship, he has indeed invented a tremendous sin. [Quran 4: 48]

Now, I know that Muslims don't worship Muhammad. But in light of this ayat, it seems that Muslims inadvertently violate this when they say the Adhan, which is literally a call to worship. They are literally mentioning a created being next to the name of Allah during worship. I know that Muslims arent polytheists, but I still feel this is dangerously close (not that my opinion matters).

Salam and Shalom

It doesn't, we are simply affirming the creed that Muhammad is the Messenger of God. This is done five times a day to remind us that he is just a Messenger. It's a reminder for us not to elevate him to a stage that we start deifying him, he is just a Messenger. Anyone elevates him is considered a heretic and even punished for his views. Furthermore, since you're claiming that this can be shirk or close to shirk, then that means that our dear Prophet (s.a.w.) was close to shirk since he commanded bilal (r.a.) to say the adhan. 

:salam: 

Guerrilla likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in the same sense, the disciples were considered as Muslims because they followed their Messenger as a Messiah, and worshiped one God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎17‎-‎11‎-‎2016 at 10:33 PM, ChristianVisitor said:

I just recently heard about this Islamic sect. Apparently, they don't hold to the major Sunni Madhabs, don't identify as Ibadi or Sufi, or consider themselves a branch of Shia. From what I read they just follow the Quran based on strict exegesis without any adherence to a school. 

Would you consider them Muslims?

Yes, I do consider them to be muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2016 at 8:43 PM, IjazLinorAhmad said:

The Shahadatayn that is recited doesn't exist in the entire Qur'aan. Furthermore, because one doesn't recite the second testimony doesn't mean that the Prophethood of Muhammad becomes annulled or the belief that he's a Prophet is negated by not mentioning his name.or one doesn't believe in him.This is what makes the Sunni and Shi'ah unintelligent and irrational. 

Furthermore, belief in the Prophet doesn't make one a Muslim, it makes you a 'mu'min' (believer). 

003:018
There is no God but He (Arabic: La illa ha illa hu): That is the witness (shahida) of God, His angels, and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice. There is no God but He, the Exalted in Power, the Wise” 

______________________________________________

O HOW DOES ONE BECOME A BELIEVER IF THEY DO NOT PROCLAIM 'SHAHADAH' IN THE TRADITIONAL MUSLIM WAY?

 

True faith is not simply based on a ritualistic public proclamation of a particular form of ‘Shahadah’ in the midst of a congregation. Nor indeed is it formally completed by handing out certificates!

 

True faith is a matter of inner belief and can only be manifested outwardly by practice based on one's own volition and not forced or to be seen by others.

 

In the end only God knows the true condition of one's faith.

 

060.010 (Part)

"...O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them (Arabic: fa-im'tahinuhunna) : God knows best as to their Faith(Arabic: Allahu a-lamu bi-imanihinna): if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers ..."

 

How does one test them, what would constitute the proof? Is there any guidance from the Quran?

 

009.010 -11

"In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge"

 

Therefore one understands the following actions as proof of one's belief.

 

  • Establish Prayer

  • Pay the Poor Due (Zakat)

 

 

http://quransmessage.com/articles/shahadah FM3.htm

 

 

how could you believe in the Quran but not the Prophet SAW who brought the Quran?

This makes no sense.

The only way you can even consider accepting the Quran is if you believe in the Prophet SAW. So I cant see how you would not consider acceptance of the Prophet SAW as not part of being defined as a Muslim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.