Mentioning no names, but..

‘The signs of a hypocrite are three’

Advertisements


Categories: Hadith

27 replies

  1. Paul

    There is absolutely no evidence that these words were ever actually spoken by mohammed.

    Please show me the earliest manuscript evidence that provides a clear proof that mohammed said this. You won’t be able to – the hadith have practically zero historical credibility.

    Like

    • Please provide clear proof of a single sentence that Jesus supposedly said in the bible.

      You won’t be able to…

      Liked by 1 person

    • How about Luke saying he personally interviewed all the eyewitnesses.

      Like

    • Kev,
      It’s a smart idea to not throw people with stones while your house is made from glass.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Wow…what skepticism.

      Given the gospels date to within a lifetime of Christ, and scholars are amazed at the early attestation and abundance of evidence, I wonder where one gets such confidence?

      Especially when the words of Muhammad comes centuries after the events, have almost no historical testimony in comparison and are plagued by hundreds of thousands of conjectural fabricated Hadith, it beggars belief that someone would be so inconsistent.

      John McIntyre, “The Uses of History in Theology”, Studies in World Christianity 7.1, 2001:

      Even those scholars and critics who have been moved to depart from almost everything else within the historical content of Christ’s presence on earth have found it impossible to think away the factuality of the death of Christ. (p. 8)

      Gerd Ludemann, The Resurrection of Christ: A Historical Inquiry, 2004:

      Jesus’ death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable. (p. 50)

      JD Crossan, who denies the authenticity of many of the saying and deeds attributed to Jesus in the canonical Gospels, says in The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, 1999:

      [there is not the] slightest doubt about the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate. (p. 375)

      He’s repeating his point from Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, 1994:

      That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be. (p. 145)

      Geza Vermes, the late Jewish New Testament scholar, The Passion: The True Story of an Event that Changed Human History, 2006:

      The passion of Jesus is part of history. (p. 9)

      Bart Erhrman, renowned textual critic, but no friend of traditional Christianity, in The Historical Jesus: Lecture Transcript and Course Guidebook, 2000, says:

      One of the most certain facts of history is that Jesus was crucified on orders of the Roman prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate. (p. 162)

      Roman Catholic scholar, RE Brown, The Death of the Messiah, 1994:

      Most scholars accept the uniform testimony of the Gospels that Jesus died during the Judean prefecture of Pontius Pilate. (p. 1373)

      Like

    • “Given the gospels date to within a lifetime of Christ”

      LOLOLOLOL!

      Liked by 2 people

    • You sad that the Koran is falsified by Raymond Brown?

      Like

    • No I’m not sad. But thanks for asking.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Kev3, ever heard of oral transmission?

      Sahih Bukhari is a collection of those orally transmitted narrations, which have been verified by examining the isnad/matan, not only by one man, but many classical scholars.

      Also, manuscript evidence isn’t required for these orally transmitted narrations, even if manuscripts never existed, we would still be able to verify them.

      You’re probably just trolling. I doubt you’re actually ignorant on the basic hadith sciences.

      Liked by 3 people

    • ”are plagued by hundreds of thousands of conjectural fabricated Hadith, it beggars belief that someone would be so inconsistent.”

      It’s called verification/Grading of Hadith.

      Unlike you, it doesn’t take us centuries to figure out whether a narration is true or false.

      For us it can be done quite easily if you have the knowledge. You have access to pretty much all the relevant information regarding the narrators, you just have to grade it after assessing all the evidence.

      Pretty much every Hadith we know have been graded already, we don’t have to wait until we find new manuscripts in caves for information regarding our religion, we already know that stuff.

      Liked by 2 people

    • “even if manuscripts never existed, we would still be able to verify them.”
      Exactly!
      Majales Al-sama’ (i.e gathering to listen and take the Isnads and narrations) is a phenomena restricted to the Islamic culture.

      Liked by 2 people

    • LOL!

      I think the short answer is “NO!” there is no evidence that mohammed actually said these words.

      Hashim

      Don’t make me laugh. The isnad and matn “science” is self-referencing circularity.

      The problem you have is that the isnad requires subsequent generations of oral transmitters who are not part of the chain of transmission whose honesty and accuracy can never be known. Even the names of these people isn’t known, any personal agenda they may have had and any other issue could have slanted their transmission.

      You can’t assign mystical, magical qualities to these guys since they would not have been companions.

      In short, after the isnad, you have generations of transmitters between the isnad and bukhari/muslim/whatever who would have changed the supposed tradition in any way they wanted.

      In short, you’ve got nothing. Without manuscripts all you have is the word of bukhari and other hadith collectors, who would not have had access to any written materials. Let’s say bukhari goes to some obscure region of the caliphate and interviews an oral transmitter – how could he possibly tell whether this person had the correct story? The answer is, there is no way he could have verified the oral transmission.

      Like

    • “Even the names of these people isn’t known”
      That’s why we shouldn’t waste our time with David’s moronic students.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Kev3, please read some scholarly work on hadith sciences. You obviously have no clue on how it all works, and i don’t want to explain it. Go read a book or something.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I’ll mention names. How about Paul Williams going on the answeringmuslims site and saying “belittling others in public is wrong and probably sinful” after David Wood called Zakir Naik a joke.

    And this is the same Paul Williams who called kev a moron just a couple of days ago. And ive lost count how many times he has called me and Paulus nutters.

    And what he allows discover the delusion to call Sam is dreadful.

    Like

  3. which one is true and which one is false of this two non eye witness accounts? mark 1:11 then a voice came from the heavens:YOU ARE my beloved son.ON YOU my favor rests. matthew 3:17 with that a voice from the heavens said THIS IS my beloved son.my favor rests ON HIM. god’s word is changed by one or two of the gospel writers. I want to know which one have power and authority to change the word of god? matt or mark or both?

    Liked by 3 people

    • You know us lawyers get suspicious when witnesses say the same story word for word. If it is exactly the same story word for word then we smell collusion.

      The fact that the gospel accounts have minor insignificant variations actually reinforces their veracity as that is exactly what you would expect eyewitnesses telling the same story.

      Like

    • Scholars do no longer think the gospels were written by eyewitnesses. They copy from each other.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I am not talking about criminal court witnesses. I am talking about so called word of god. what is your evidence for four gospel authors have same ideas in their minds? if any of four gospels were left out from the canon of nt will you still defend that so called minor insignificant variations of that left out gospel? or gospels? is matthew witness of baptism of jesus? I believe he become follower of jesus after chapter 9 or 10 of his gospel. anything prior to that second or third hand knowledge for him. just go back gospelles decades of the church and imagine how many oral variations of the same gospel stories. that make easy for church to canonize four different gospels. there is one jesus but for gospels. there are twelve plus apostoles but only one book of acts. why? I believe if you take critical look to the bible you will understand its real and unsolvable problems. there is no reason to trying to solve the problems because bible is not word of god. book with this much of problem is absolutely not word of god.

      Like

  4. Paulus,

    I find usually your comments to be inaccurate, irrational, or irrelevant but your **some** of your comments and **to only some extent** regarding the problems with hadith are indeed true but many Muslims who have been trained in the traditional institutions post Mutazilites are indeed in denial about it.

    By such a denial, they are to some extent distorting the message of the Qur’an.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I think that why the satanic cult called falsely (Quranists) will be gathered with christians in the day of judgment. They reject the teachings if the prophet pbuh which Quran has commanded us to follow just to satisfy jews and christians. Eventually, neither Allah (sw) nor (christians& jews) will be saisfied with those satanic people.

      “traditional institutions post Mutazilites are indeed in denial about it.”
      This is a big lie I challange you to prove.
      I’m waiting.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I agree that the Quranists are in very serious error.

      And so are you.

      However, it is much more worthwhile and productive to converse with some Quranists and explain how they are in error than to converse with you.

      Despite your post being brief, it still demonstrates a lazy, convenient, fascist, narrow-minded, and ignorant mindset devoid of real scholarly knowledge of Muslim history and with a very sectarian attitude.

      Thus, based on your filthy last post, if you prove that you are worth the time than I will spend the time when I find time.

      Like

    • “it still demonstrates a lazy, convenient, fascist, narrow-minded, and ignorant mindset devoid of real scholarly knowledge of Muslim history and with a very sectarian attitude”
      You don’t need my blessing ! You can get it from those who don’t believe in Quran in the first place. The “SIR” Ahmed Khan, for example, got that blessing before you’re even born, yet his account is upon almighty God.
      I’m waiting you to prove your big lie before I need to prove for you anything. Your approach for criticizing hadith is just to create an Islam relying on western culture. However, I’m telling you criticizing hadith from that approach is indeed criticizing Quran itself.
      I don’t think you even know what Mutazilites approach is – if they have any – for hadiths.

      Note: I’m really sick from playing the “sectarian card” once we face your lies. If I’m wrong, I would have no problem to say it loudly, I don’t look forward titles. I try my best to be a muslim as Allah wants. That’s it.

      Like

  5. Lol, the first one reminds me of Pinocchio, and his alter ego Jay Smith.

    With Pinocchio, we can tell he’s lying when his nose grows. With Jay Smith, we can tell he’s lying when he opens his mouth.

    P.S. Paulus, before you comment, this isn’t a hate comment, i’m simply stating a fact 😉

    Liked by 2 people

Trackbacks

  1. Mentioning no names, but.. | kokicat

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: