Jump to content
Christianity

Why should I believe in Muhammad over others?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, kirtc said:

what im trying to say is that shias have a much more trusted book of hadiths. a. because they make sense. and b. because they have a ilm al rijal which is a study of hadith narrators.

Where did you get that from? Our scholars would disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Where did you get that from? Our scholars would disagree.

you dont agree that shia hadiths are more authentic than sunni's?

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kirtc said:

revert from sunni father and a christian stepmom. 

Wmehar is pushing a Quranist perspective and im trying to prove that islam is not about the Quran alone. maybe im not the right person to do that.. but there is a lack of learned members replying to this thread.

salam bro

i'm not disagreeing with you at all. nor am i a learned member. but i think a bit less confrontational would be:

Quran is sufficient if only there is an interpretor for it. shias believe after the Prophet saww, these interpretors are the 12 imams (as).

the differences in interpretation gave rise to sects. i believe many hadiths were fabricated to justify each sect's interpretation of Quran. Of course there are other reasons to fabricate hadiths. But to totally reject hadiths is bit foolhardy to me.

a case in point with regards to differing interpretaion, is quranic verse 3:7

[Shakir 3:7] He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

shias believe "none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge".

on the other hand, ahlul sunnah wal jamaah, according to tafsir ibn kathir on this verse,

1. some believe only Allah knows its interpretation while

2. others believe "none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge". the argument put forward being, Allah won't communicate something which people don't understand and Ibn Abbas claimed he is one of those firmly rooted in knowledge - page 12/343, surah Ali Imran Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

Quranist? they think every jack and jill can interpret, using their own conjectures.

Edited by justAnothermuslim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kirtc said:

you are aware that cerain hadiths are fabricted and therefore have decided to not trust them. but what im trying to say is that shias have a much more trusted book of hadiths. a. because they make sense. and b. because they have a ilm al rijal which is a study of hadith narrators.

and what im also saying is that hadith can give you a deeper insight into islam then just the Quran alone.. 

Ok, we're getting somewhere!

Id like to know the criterion these Studies use from these hadith narrators, to grade authenticity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

No, I don't.Sunnis also have an ilm-al-rijal too and between the two of them, they are both not reliable sources. We have to be really careful with hadith.

...sigh nevermind... GC you amaze me.. you are very wrong and I will stop at that. Im sorry. the word abu hurraira alone should say something. 

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, kirtc said:

 Im sorry. the word abu hurraira alone should say something. 

It does, it is a byword for lies. I am amazed that you are disappointed and hurt over this.  Sunni have an Ilm-al-rijal too.

The information is there on SC, this is not something I made up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2018 at 11:52 AM, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I know, right? Some of it is truly, for the lack of a better word, vile.

Brother

Please tell me one thing. 

When  you were thinking of converting to Islam, did the hadiths not put you off from Islam?

How did you resolve the hadith riddle?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, IloveImamHussain said:

Brother

Please tell me one thing. 

When  you were thinking of converting to Islam, did the hadiths not put you off from Islam?

How did you resolve the hadith riddle?

 

I only solved a part of it, that is some of it  must be political propaganda. I intend to research into it further soon.

When I was thinking about converting to Islam, I was unaware of hadiths at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I only solved a part of it, that is some of it  must be political propaganda. I intend to research into it further soon.

When I was thinking about converting to Islam, I was unaware of hadiths at that time.

The way I see it is quite simple.

1. The battle of Karbala took place 50 years after the Prophet's death.

That means that the Muslim character had sunken too low even within 50 years to expect good reportage.

So it is not possible to expect honest hadith reporting. 

2. As for history, the first history book was written by ibn Ishaq who was employed by the the Abbasid caliph al Mansur. Do we expect him to write honestly? Of course not.

3. The split in Islam caused a lot of people to invent stories.

Sunnis invented hadiths to justify the position of A&O as the first two caliphs.

Shias invented hadiths to justify the claim of Imam Ali.

4. So neither side can claim perfect hadiths.

5. Our only job now is to find out who invented more hadiths than the other.

6. I personally think that Sunnis invented many more hadiths than Shias because Imam Ali's claim is reasonably upheld even with Sunnis hadiths alone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2017 at 10:50 PM, Christianity said:

Many people have claimed some kind of divine revelation throughout history, so in that respect Muhammad is no unique. I want to know your reasons for choosing Islam over any other religion, and why I should chose it. Why should we believe in Muhammad over Zoroaster, or Buddha, or Mani, or Joseph Smith, or Ellen G. White? How is Muhammad superior to these other "prophets"? How did he prove himself? What makes him unique? 

Three reasons, 

1. The Message of Prophet Muhammad(p.b.u.h) which is the message of Islam is both 100% rational, and internally consistent. There are not parts of the Quran or part of his Message from Authentic hadith that contradict each other. Since non contradiction is one of the basic facts of how we discern truth from falsehood, if he was truely a Messenger from God(s.w.a), the religion that he brought should have this feature. 

2. This message is also consistent with human nature (called fitra in Arabic) and human society. It is put into practice in every location on earth and in every circumstance. It is free and easily accessible to everyone. It has very subtle and sophisticated theology and yet  the basic truths of the religion are easily understandable and able to be practiced, even by a child. If God(s.w.a) is just and a Divine religion exists, this should be one of its main features, and it is. 

3. The Quran is the only Divine book that exists in the same form, word for word and letter for letter, as it did during the time of Prophet Muhammad(p.b.u.h). The Quran has stood the test of time. In 1400 years, noone has found either a grammatical, local, or scientific error in it (and the Quran has hundreds of verses that discuss science in the way we understand it today and the statements are experimentally verifiable). Again, if God(s.w.a) wrote a book and conveyed it to people via a Messenger(i.e. Prophet Muhammad(p.b.u.h), this should be one of its main features, and it is. 

 

 

Edited by Abu Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems something related to  inheritance came up in another passage @andres @Gaius I. Caesar and whoever else finds this interesting.

2:240

And those who are taken in death among you and leave wives behind - for their wives is a bequest: maintenance for one year without turning [them] out. But if they leave [of their own accord], then there is no blame upon you for what they do with themselves in an acceptable way. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

What does this part mean?^ I don't get what is meant by "without turning [them] out."

It means that they can stay at House their deceased wife for one year with financial support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

It means that they can stay at House their deceased wife for one year with financial support.

yes and there are verses that default the wife after divorce stay living there in the home and to not be turned out either. 

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


×