Muhammad.

[oldcatholicguy]

No, the position is that the Qur’an is reliable and the Hadiths are unreliable.

The goal is to stop Christian hatred of Muhammad and Islam. Ending that hatred (and the hatred and fear many Muslims have for Christians and Jews) is essential to working towards world peace.

In a world of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, we must learn to get along with one another. The beginning of that path is to stop civilizational antipathy and to see God in one another, and not see other communities as the spawn of Satan, recognizing only their flaws and excusing all of our own.

-Hadiths are unreliable? That’s why you’ve cited them in this thread in support of your argument?

-The list of Islamic faiths that only use the Quran can be found where?

 

[josie_L]

No, the position is that the Qur’an is reliable and the Hadiths are unreliable.

The goal is to stop Christian hatred of Muhammad and Islam. Ending that hatred (and the hatred and fear many Muslims have for Christians and Jews) is essential to working towards world peace.

Whoa, Christian hatred of Muhammad and Islam, I don’t think so, i.e., I do not believe that the majority of Christians hate Islam, they just don’t believe it.

In a world of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, we must learn to get along with one another. The beginning of that path is to stop civilizational antipathy and to see God in one another, and not see other communities as the spawn of Satan, recognizing only their flaws and excusing all of our own.

Truth and love should be preached in equal measures, unfortunately, the way things are Christians (and other minorities) will continuously be persecuted in Muslim majority nations (and Communist ones) that do not care for religious tolerance/freedoms and/or democracy.

P.S. You would be better off preaching this on a Muslim forum.

 

[Matthew_Light]

Moreover, if Aisha was nine years of age when she married Mohammed, is it really essential to prove that she was pure, i.e., she was NINE, I mean how could she have been anything else??? The dolls are significant of her tender age and no more.

The point is, she wasn’t nine when her marriage was consummated.

She made that up. It’s just not correct.

I was explaining WHY she made it up.

The evidence that she made it up I already provided several times previously.

 

[Matthew_Light]

Please list the Islamic faiths that disavow all hadiths and rely solely on the Quran.

They are called Quranists:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranism

The Ahmadiyyah align towards Quranism, holding the Qur’an above the Ahadith.

I would expect Islam to undergo modernization and become much more Qur’an focused as they become aware of how unscientific and problematic corroboration of the validity of the Hadith are.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

The point is, she wasn’t nine when her marriage was consummated.

She made that up. It’s just not correct.

I was explaining WHY she made it up.

The evidence that she made it up I already provided several times previously.

You’ve provided evidence that doesn’t consist of hadiths (which according to you don’t count because they are unreliable)?

 

[Matthew_Light]

OldCatholicGuy,

I meant to make it clear I was only referring to some Christians as “fanning the flames”.

My apology that I was not clear enough about that.

I’ve seen your posts here and it is very clear you try to provide a voice of moderation.

Of course you and Pope Francis are real Christians!

 

[oldcatholicguy]

They are called Quranists:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranism

The Ahmadiyyah align towards Quranism, holding the Qur’an above the Ahadith.

I would expect Islam to undergo modernization and become much more Qur’an focused as they become aware of how unscientific and problematic corroboration of the validity of the Hadith are.

Ah, so it is valid to base an argument on the practices of a minority of Muslims (Quranists)that is rejected by the orthodox majority (Sunni and Shia for example) of Muslims and Islamic theology. So, you would also agree that Islam teaches that terrorism is perfectly ok since a minority of Muslims (Islamic extremists) reject the orthodox majority’s (non-Islamic extremist Muslims) view that terrorism is forbidden by the Quran.

 

[Matthew_Light]

You’ve provided evidence that doesn’t consist of hadiths (which according to you don’t count because they are unreliable)?

Yes, those hadiths are also questionable, but they are internally consistent and not obviously self-serving hadiths (whereas Aisha married at age six clearly serves her goal to prove her virginity at marriage and deflect criticism and accusations that she was unfaithful before and during her marriage to Muhammad, as well as establishing her superiority (given standards of that day) over the widows and divorcees who were Muhammad’s other wives).

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Yes, those hadiths are also questionable, but they are internally consistent and not obviously self-serving hadiths (whereas Aisha married at age six clearly serves her goal to prove her virginity at marriage and deflect criticism and accusations that she was unfaithful before and during her marriage to Muhammad, as well as establishing her superiority (given standards of that day) over the widows and divorcees who were Muhammad’s other wives).

So apparently not all hadiths are unreliable. Thank you for invalidating your own argument.

 

[Servant19]

Ah, so it is valid to base an argument on the practices of a minority of Muslims (Quranists)that is rejected by the orthodox majority (Sunni and Shia for example) of Muslims and Islamic theology. So, you would also agree that Islam teaches that terrorism is perfectly ok since a minority of Muslims (Islamic extremists) reject the orthodox majority’s (non-Islamic extremist Muslims) view that terrorism is forbidden by the Quran.

I think the POINT is that there is speculation about some of the historicity surrounding Muhammad’s life, ESPECIALLY when the Hadiths are involved.

The only reason why Matthew even bothered to quote a Hadith was not to say that HIS quoted Hadith is the undeniable historical truth, but to say one Hadith says ABC, and another Hadith seems to indicate otherwise.

One can conclude therefor that the Hadiths are unreliable. In scholarship, they are also being questioned.

Obviously if you are a Muslim and your intent is to justify murder or pedophilia with a Hadith you will probably find a way.

If you are a Christian and your intention is to fan religious hatred and animosity using the Hadiths, you too, will probably find a way…

All in all, the Quranists may well be the minority, but as we all know, it’s not a numbers game with Truth. You can be the only one in earth supporting a position and it may be the Truth.

If we were to look with the eyes of God, we will see that Truth ALWAYS is loving, spreads unity and harmony, not animosity and hatred, is the harbinger of joy and the edifier of the soul.

Looking for things that go against these principles of God are not examples of right relationship with God and true righteousness.

Quranists are in right relationship with God in my humble opinion…



.

 

[josie_L]

The point is, she wasn’t nine when her marriage was consummated.

She made that up. It’s just not correct.

I was explaining WHY she made it up.

The evidence that she made it up I already provided several times previously.

The point is you have no proof for such a hypothesis, moreover, your explanation does not add up, i.e., if the “prophet” is who he claims to be than there should be no doubt that Aisha was a virgin, i.e., he would not have wed her if she was not a virgin, right???

 

[Servant19]

The point is you have no proof for such a hypothesis, moreover, your explanation does not add up, i.e., if the “prophet” is who he claims to be than there should be no doubt that Aisha was a virgin, i.e., he would not have wed her if she was not a virgin, right???

The point is there is no proof for either argument.

Would this stand up in a court of law? I think not…

.

 

[josie_L]

Yes, those hadiths are also questionable, but they are internally consistent and not obviously self-serving hadiths (whereas Aisha married at age six clearly serves her goal to prove her virginity at marriage and deflect criticism and accusations that she was unfaithful before and during her marriage to Muhammad, as well as establishing her superiority (given standards of that day) over the widows and divorcees who were Muhammad’s other wives).

She was not married at six, she was betrothed, and it was at nine years of age that she was wedded and bedded. And again to make the argument you are would impugn the integrity and honour of Mohammed, i.e., he more than anyone else would have wanted a virginal bride, and if Aisha were impure I have no doubt that Mohammed would have sent her back to her parents (or have done something worse).

P.S. I have had numerous discussions with Muslims who have never doubted this hadith.

 

[josie_L]

The point is there is no proof for either argument.

Would this stand up in a court of law? I think not…

Yes, there is proof for my argument, i.e., I have a hadith that states Aisha’s age when she wedded and bedded Mohammed. And this hadith from everything that I have learned thus far is valid.

And historical evidence is not the same as judicial evidence.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

I think the POINT is that there is speculation about some of the historicity surrounding Muhammad’s life, ESPECIALLY when the Hadiths are involved.

The only reason why Matthew even bothered to quote a Hadith was not to say that HIS quoted Hadith is the undeniable historical truth, but to say one Hadith says ABC, and another Hadith seems to indicate otherwise.

One can conclude therefor that the Hadiths are unreliable. In scholarship, they are also being questioned.

Obviously if you are a Muslim and your intent is to justify murder or pedophilia with a Hadith you will probably find a way.

If you are a Christian and your intention is to fan religious hatred and animosity using the Hadiths, you too, will probably find a way…

All in all, the Quranists may well be the minority, but as we all know, it’s not a numbers game with Truth. You can be the only one in earth supporting a position and it may be the Truth.

If we were to look with the eyes of God, we will see that Truth ALWAYS is loving, spreads unity and harmony, not animosity and hatred, is the harbinger of joy and the edifier of the soul.

Looking for things that go against these principles of God are not examples of right relationship with God and true righteousness.

Quranists are in right relationship with God in my humble opinion…



.

-Your humble opinion concerning the Quranists only matters if you are a qualified Islamic scholar.
-You’re right, numbers don’t matter, but orthodoxy does. Quranists fall outside of what is considered orthodox Islam.
-Yours and Matthew’s opinion concerning hadiths stands in conflict with a long history of qualified Islamic scholars viewing them as valid. The only real disagreement between the majority of orthodox Islamic faiths has to do with which hadiths are valid and which are not. The position you and Matthew take is not held by them.
-Matthew didn’t cite hadiths to show that you can find one that says anything, he cited hadiths in order to support his argument about her age and virginity.
-You both can go ahead and stop trying to interject the idea that Christians hate Muslims and Islam. You can stop because both of you apparently hold Islam and its followers in such low opinion that you seem to have no issue imposing your own beliefs on how Islamic theology is formed and works onto the religion and dismissing out of hand how it really is formed and how it really works. You don’t like the hadiths, well just make a comment about how once Islam “modernizes” it’ll get rid of them and then hold up an unorthodox version of Islam as the “real” or “true” version of it. Congrats, you’ve now surpassed Mr. Spencer in skewing Islam. For all his poor scholarship, incorrect citations, and erroneous conclusions, at least Mr. Spencer doesn’t try to rewrite the very fabric of how Islamic theology works in order to prove his points.

 

[Servant19]

-Your humble opinion concerning the Quranists only matters if you are a qualified Islamic scholar.
-You’re right, numbers don’t matter, but orthodoxy does. Quranists fall outside of what is considered orthodox Islam.
-Yours and Matthew’s opinion concerning hadiths stands in conflict with a long history of qualified Islamic scholars viewing them as valid. The only real disagreement between the majority of orthodox Islamic faiths has to do with which hadiths are valid and which are not. The position you and Matthew take is not held by them.
-Matthew didn’t cite hadiths to show that you can find one that says anything, he cited hadiths in order to support his argument about her age and virginity.
-You both can go ahead and stop trying to interject the idea that Christians hate Muslims and Islam. You can stop because both of you apparently hold Islam and its followers in such low opinion that you seem to have no issue imposing your own beliefs on how Islamic theology is formed and works onto the religion and dismissing out of hand how it really is formed and how it really works. You don’t like the hadiths, well just make a comment about how once Islam “modernizes” it’ll get rid of them and then hold up an unorthodox version of Islam as the “real” or “true” version of it. Congrats, you’ve now surpassed Mr. Spencer in skewing Islam. For all his poor scholarship, incorrect citations, and erroneous conclusions, at least Mr. Spencer doesn’t try to rewrite the very fabric of how Islamic theology works in order to prove his points.

Dear friend, I am not here to argue, to prove any points or to sway direction of Islamic thought towards Baha’i thought.

I also do not need to be a scholar to point out two important matters that need to be resolved before accusations of pedophilia and molestation are hurled unwittingly in Muhammad’s direction (which has happened on this thread, and other threads about Islam already). All that is required is logic.

The first point is, and you have kindly pointed this out already, that was it the norm of the day for young children to be married to older men? One can call it a 12 year old or a 9 year old (I personally see no difference) but was this the societal norm of the day?

Secondly, what is the reliability of this particular Hadith?
Was the writer reliable? Was this specific Hadith reflective of historical truth?

These are the questions that must be asked fully before judgment is made on Muhammad’s character.

No need for me to be a scholar, and by asking these questions I am not in any way skewing Islam in a manner worse than Robert Spencer. I am simply trying to be a rational thinker…

Thank you for reading

.

 

[Servant19]

Yes, there is proof for my argument, i.e., I have a hadith that states Aisha’s age when she wedded and bedded Mohammed. And this hadith from everything that I have learned thus far is valid.

And historical evidence is not the same as judicial evidence.

That’s the point Josie. What is the proof?

For example, I marry a girl who is actually 13. She is very young looking. She tells everyone that she’s only 9, and is proud of it. I die, and 20 years later she tells everyone that she was 9 when she married me.

It is recorded and hey presto we have the truth. Historical evidence at its best?

A thousand years later I am remembered as a pedophile…



(and please don’t forget Bukhari collected these “sayings” some 200 years AFTER Muhammads death)

.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Dear friend, I am not here to argue, to prove any points or to sway direction of Islamic thought towards Baha’i thought.

I also do not need to be a scholar to point out two important matters that need to be resolved before accusations of pedophilia and molestation are hurled unwittingly in Muhammad’s direction (which has happened on this thread, and other threads about Islam already). All that is required is logic.

The first point is, and you have kindly pointed this out already, that was it the norm of the day for young children to be married to older men? One can call it a 12 year old or a 9 year old (I personally see no difference) but was this the societal norm of the day?

Secondly, what is the reliability of this particular Hadith?
Was the writer reliable? Was this specific Hadith reflective of historical truth?

These are the questions that must be asked fully before judgment is made on Muhammad’s character.

No need for me to be a scholar, and by asking these questions I am not in any way skewing Islam in a manner worse than Robert Spencer. I am simply trying to be a rational thinker…

Thank you for reading

.

You and Matthew have made it quite clear neither of you care about Islamic thought. Instead you create an artificial version of Islam which supports your particular faith. For all the crying out both of you have done in regards to Christians hating Muslims and Islam, you’ve both displayed a great deal of contempt for it. This isn’t a thread concerning how your particular faith interprets Islam or Muhammad. This is a thread about Muhammad and Islam. Being such any argument based on the idea that hadiths don’t count and only the Quran does skews Islamic theology. The only Islamic faith that seems to embrace your viewpoint regarding hadiths is apparently an unorthodox minor one. The orthodox majority of the Islamic faiths don’t hold yours or Matthew’s position.

Secondly, this is the first time either of you has questioned the validity of any of the hadiths (which by the way implies that there are valid hadiths). Prior to this the position was that hadiths are unreliable and your weak attempt to defend Matthew’s usage of hadiths as him just giving an example of how they can conflict. Matthew has even gone as far as to arrogantly suggest how Islam will do away with the usage of hadiths once it “modernizes.”

But, let’s look at this rationally and with logic-
-given- Islam’s long history of usage and importance of hadiths by the major orthodox branches
-given- The long history of Islamic scholarship and study on the hadiths
-given- Your apparent view that an unorthodox sect of Muslims (Quranists) are correct
-given- Yours and Matthew’s dismissal of hadiths (apparently only when they don’t serve your point)

How do you conclude that you aren’t skewing Islam and don’t need to be an Islamic scholar in order for your opinion to actually matter to this discussion?

Lastly, I like how both you and Matthew turn the girl in question into a liar based on evidence (hadiths) that neither one of you seem to view as reliable. You’ve both pretty much gone from- she was 19 (based on hadiths you view as unreliable) to- she lied about her age because she needed to prove her virginity and she was rumored to sleep around (based again on hadiths you view as unreliable) because she was a selfish woman who wanted to first among his wives. I guess in your book slandering Muhammad’s wife based on evidence you object to when applied to Muhammad is perfectly ok.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

That’s the point Josie. What is the proof?

For example, I marry a girl who is actually 13. She is very young looking. She tells everyone that she’s only 9, and is proud of it. I die, and 20 years later she tells everyone that she was 9 when she married me.

It is recorded and hey presto we have the truth. Historical evidence at its best?

A thousand years later I am remembered as a pedophile…



(and please don’t forget Bukhari collected these “sayings” some 200 years AFTER Muhammads death)

.

Yeah, because the only person who could possibly know her real age is her, not her mother, father, siblings, cousins, extended family, the people who arranged the marriage, the husband, the husband’s other wives, the husband’ family/extended family, etc, etc.

 

[Servant19]

You and Matthew have made it quite clear neither of you care about Islamic thought. Instead you create an artificial version of Islam which supports your particular faith.

Dear friend. No. We support Muhammad whatever he did, as do Muslims. He is the source of morality for that Age.

Muslims and Baha’is are totally on the same page with that.

If a Christian calls Muhammad a pedophile, Muslims AND Baha’is will defend Muhammad against that accusation. That is not “creating an artificial version of Islam”.

Islamic thought varies on the age of Aisha, and Islamic thought also AFFIRMS categorically that what Muhammad did during His lifetime was sinless, and Baha’i thought supports that.

Historical documentation is fallible, Muhammad is not.

For all the crying out both of you have done in regards to Christians hating Muslims and Islam, you’ve both displayed a great deal of contempt for it. This isn’t a thread concerning how your particular faith interprets Islam or Muhammad.

No its not, I agree with you. But if Muhammad is disrespected, Baha’is and Muslims will UNITE to defend against that disrespect.

This is a thread about Muhammad and Islam. Being such any argument based on the idea that hadiths don’t count and only the Quran does skews Islamic theology. The only Islamic faith that seems to embrace your viewpoint regarding hadiths is apparently an unorthodox minor one. The orthodox majority of the Islamic faiths don’t hold yours or Matthew’s position.

Again this may well be true, but I re-iterate, historical authenticity is fallible. Human beings are fallible, oral tradition is fallible. The Quran is universally accepted as infallible.

That is all that is being pointed out here, nothing more, nothing less.

Secondly, this is the first time either of you has questioned the validity of any of the hadiths (which by the way implies that there are valid hadiths). Prior to this the position was that hadiths are unreliable and your weak attempt to defend Matthew’s usage of hadiths as him just giving an example of how they can conflict. Matthew has even gone as far as to arrogantly suggest how Islam will do away with the usage of hadiths once it “modernizes.”

This is Matthew’s opinion. He is entitled to it.

You write something down that has been passed down orally for 200 years, (200 years!) and I can guarantee there will be some inaccuracies. Ever play Chinese whispers as a child?

Bukhari collected oral traditions from 200 years ago. It won’t pass in my mind. I think one of the reasons why Islam has some unity issues is because of these sorts of things. But that again is only my opinion

But, let’s look at this rationally and with logic-
-given- Islam’s long history of usage and importance of hadiths by the major orthodox branches
-given- The long history of Islamic scholarship and study on the hadiths
-given- Your apparent view that an unorthodox sect of Muslims (Quranists) are correct
-given- Yours and Matthew’s dismissal of hadiths (apparently only when they don’t serve your point)

How do you conclude that you aren’t skewing Islam and don’t need to be an Islamic scholar in order for your opinion to actually matter to this discussion?

I think we can introduce an Islamic scholar into the equation to answer that. I will PM Sen McGlinn to see if he can provide some insights. I am definitely not an expert

I provide rational opinion, that’s all

Lastly, I like how both you and Matthew turn the girl in question into a liar based on evidence (hadiths) that neither one of you seem to view as reliable. You’ve both pretty much gone from- she was 19 (based on hadiths you view as unreliable) to- she lied about her age because she needed to prove her virginity and she was rumored to sleep around (based again on hadiths you view as unreliable) because she was a selfish woman who wanted to first among his wives. I guess in your book slandering Muhammad’s wife based on evidence you object to when applied to Muhammad is perfectly ok.

dear friend, all we are saying is that there are contradictions in the various Hadiths and sources on this issue. Nothing else. Is that a biased view?

.