The People who Say They're "Quranists" are Liars!

[Hamzza]

The way of praying was passed on from early muslims unchanged, muslims were praying from the early days non stop. So the knowledge of praying was being passed on from early days of salah till to day. You or any of us didn't read the instruction of how to pray from Sahih Al-Bukhari or Muslim but from your parents or the imam, or the teacher.

Unlike the hadith that were compiled after hundred of years after the death of Prophet Muhammad and had to go through intense authentication and verification that was agreed upon from early days.

Murtads & Zanis were being executed from early times, from the time of the Sahaba until Bukhari and Muslim compiled their Hadiths, we have clear examples of this and it was a tradition followed and known from the religion by necessity, yet modernist Quranists reject it. No matter how many excuses you make for the Quranists, they will remain inconsistent.

 

[Aurelian]

(just saving this part in case you try to change or delete it later)



ok now this activates my spidey-sense... this is straight-up a Quranist talking point. now I'm seriously thinking you are likely a crypto-Quranist this whole time. all the weird beliefs.... it all makes sense now. I remember when my "Quranist" neighbor used to tell me this exact same thing that you are saying.

all the strange beliefs... how you swoop in to defend "Quranists" when I make this thread against them..... it all makes sense now...

Oh, from feminist-western-liberal-marxist to now a quranist. you always accuse ppl of being something.

As I said, I just gave their perspective of the hadith. If I was a quranist i'd said don't believe in Hadith, but I didn't said it.

 

[Aurelian]

Murtads & Zanis were being executed from early times, from the time of the Sahaba until Bukhari and Muslim compiled their Hadiths, we have clear examples of this and it was a tradition followed and known from the religion by necessity, yet modernist Quranists reject it. No matter how many excuses you make for the Quranists, they will remain inconsistent.

Ali, and Abu Bakar burned homos, but burning them is not a punishment in the hadiths. They just improvised.

 

[Odious Delirium]

This link is for a pdf on a book about the authority of the sunnah in our deen through just the use of quran ayaahs for delusional "quranists" and in general for confused people.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://thethinkingmuslim.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Authority-of-Sunnah.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiy3tWd-aKAAxXYg_0HHfaiDfYQFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2ADRhQ_Q5V-aHE-NDTdqJC

 

[Odious Delirium]

Ali, and Abu Bakar burned homos, but burning them is not a punishment in the hadiths. They just improvised.

Can you provide an authentic source?
The only time I remember burning taking place was when Ali burnt some proto shias for worshipping him and trying to spread fitna and start a civil war.

 

[tyrannicalmanager]

The easiest way to dismantle a Quranist is simply to ask if the punishment described in the Quran should be implemented into common law. if they say no, they admit they don't truly follow the Quran but only their desires.

I've seen debates where "Quranists" straight say stoning or lashing isn't applicable in "today's time". these people unironically believe 200 after the prophet, people are unable to verify manuscripts or compile them, but they can reject parts of the Quran 1400s later.

 

[Aurelian]

Can you provide an authentic source?
The only time I remember burning taking place was when Ali burnt some proto shias for worshipping him and trying to spread fitna and start a civil war.

The punishment for homosexuality - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

 

[Aurelian]

The easiest way to dismantle a Quranist is simply to ask if the punishment described in the Quran should be implemented into common law. if they say no, they admit they don't truly follow the Quran but only their desires.

I've seen debates where "Quranists" straight say stoning or lashing isn't applicable in "today's time". these people unironically believe 200 after the prophet, people are unable to verify manuscripts or compile them, but they can reject parts of the Quran 1400s later.

Stunning is not in the Quran, according to them it stunning is not part of Islam.

 

[tyrannicalmanager]

Stunning is not in the Quran, according to them it stunning is not part of Islam.

sorry error on my part. still, not many of them are not a fan of lashing like Tawhidi or Javed, despite claiming to follow the Quran and nothing but it.

 

[Odious Delirium]

The punishment for homosexuality - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

Isn't that an interpretation of the punishment described in the quran that the people of Luts received for acting on there homosexuality? Being flung from the sky with rocks being rained on them and fire.
Wouldn't a quranist agree with this punishment since its in the quran

No one during the prophet's time was even caught for homosexuality and the prophet has said in his hadeeth to follow his sunnah and the sunnah of the "rightly guided khalifs" that prophetic hadeeth is how the Rashideen khalifate got its name and why there rule is deemed special. (Not because they where sahaba since muaiwyah was the first Khalifa of the umayyads and he was a sahabi aswell.

The rules and interpretations of the quran and hadeeth that they added was an extention to the hadeeth of the prophet.

Plus that was the opinion they held can you provide a source of homosexuals who where actually judged by them with these punishments?
I don't think they caught any in there time.

 

[Hamzza]

Ali, and Abu Bakar burned homos, but burning them is not a punishment in the hadiths. They just improvised.

It's calle Taziir dumbass. There is no prescribed punishment(Hudood) for the sodomites in the Quran and Sunnah so the Judges has to make a decision. The Ijtihad of Abubakar and Ali radiyalahu anhumaa is deen.

 

[Hamzza]

Sodomy is worse than zina, so the punishment has to be more severe. This is also called Qiyas and is part of the deen

 

[Aurelian]

It's calle Taziir dumbass. There is no prescribed punishment(Hudood) for the sodomites in the Quran and Sunnah so the Judges has to make a decision. The Ijtihad of Abubakar and Ali radiyalahu anhumaa is deen.
View attachment 284462

Hadith where the prophet said: "No one should punish with fire except the Lord of fire.” So how you see it, since this hadith exist but Ali and abu bakar

Murtads & Zanis were being executed from early times, from the time of the Sahaba until Bukhari and Muslim compiled their Hadiths, we have clear examples of this and it was a tradition followed and known from the religion by necessity, yet modernist Quranists reject it. No matter how many excuses you make for the Quranists, they will remain inconsistent.

used fire as punishment early days

 

[Bari🐍]

How do they pray, do hajj, fast, etc. Quranists are very idiotic people truthfully. When you reject all hadiths you miss out on a lot of context and even important stories.

 

[Bari🐍]

Ali, and Abu Bakar burned homos, but burning them is not a punishment in the hadiths. They just improvised.

If I recall that is from a weak hadith.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

The way of praying was passed on from early muslims unchanged, muslims were praying from the early days non stop. So the knowledge of praying was being passed on from early days of salah till to day. You or any of us didn't read the instruction of how to pray from Sahih Al-Bukhari or Muslim but from your parents or the imam, or the teacher.

Unlike the hadith that were compiled after hundred of years after the death of Prophet Muhammad and had to go through intense authentication and verification that was agreed upon from early days.

Yes the knowledge of praying has been passed down laakin what makes it valid is that it’s based on the hadith themselves.

Otherwise it wouldn’t be possible to ascertain whether or not the manner in which we pray now is valid or not. After all 14 centuries is a long time, enough for deviations to occur. People could have added, denied etc whatever they wanted and without the Hadith there wouldn’t be a way to determine what’s correct or wrong etc.

Our following of our parents, imams etc is based on our belief that what they’re teaching is based & acquired from the Hadith. Furthermore as you grow up you have the opportunity to verify it yourself by going back to the source ie Hadith.

It’s absolutely nonsensical to reject Hadith, the very source that validates our knowledge of how we pray yet claim to follow this knowledge at the same time. It’s a contradiction that invalidates their false claims that they’re adhering to the quran.

The very same people that passed down the Quran also did the same for hadith. They believed in it & utilised the hadith as a legitimate source for understanding quran. Yet we’ve people now claiming otherwise, if the best of people among Muslims used the hadith to not only understand but interpret the Quran then logic dictates that we should follow & adopt their approach as well.

You can’t claim they passed down the Quran correctly but not Hadith as such an action calls into question the validity of passing down the Quran itself.

The “quranist” methodology if we can call it that, is a double edged sword as the criticisms they launch against the authenticity of the Hadith also applies to the quran. Since the Hadith can’t be trusted then there’s no reason to accept the Quran as both were passed down by the same people.

If you claim that people made mistakes, added stuff, basically distorted the Hadith then you would’ve to be equally not accept the validity of the Quran as they were both passed down by the same people. Since Hadith can’t be accepted due to distortion in transmissions then this should be equally true for the Quran.

What’s stopping someone who lied & distorted the Hadith from doing the same to the Quran? Absolutely nothing, so the “quranist” critique back fires on the them & they have no leg to stand on. No point in calling yourself “quranist” in such a case as their reasons for rejecting the Hadith equally applies in the case of the Quran thereby invalidating their claim in adhering solely to the Quran.

 

[Hamzza]

Yes the knowledge of praying has been passed down laakin what makes it valid is that it’s based on the hadith themselves.

Otherwise it wouldn’t be possible to ascertain whether or not the manner in which we pray now is valid or not. After all 14 centuries is a long time, enough for deviations to occur. People could have added, denied etc whatever they wanted and without the Hadith there wouldn’t be a way to determine what’s correct or wrong etc.

Our following of our parents, imams etc is based on our belief that what they’re teaching is based & acquired from the Hadith. Furthermore as you grow up you have the opportunity to verify it yourself by going back to the source ie Hadith.

It’s absolutely nonsensical to reject Hadith, the very source that validates our knowledge of how we pray yet claim to follow this knowledge at the same time. It’s a contradiction that invalidates their false claims that they’re adhering to the quran.

The very same people that passed down the Quran also did the same for hadith. They believed in it & utilised the hadith as a legitimate source for understanding quran. Yet we’ve people now claiming otherwise, if the best of people among Muslims used the hadith to not only understand but interpret the Quran then logic dictates that we should follow & adopt their approach as well.

You can’t claim they passed down the Quran correctly but not Hadith as such an action calls into question the validity of passing down the Quran itself.

The “quranist” methodology if we can call it that, is a double edged sword as the criticisms they launch against the authenticity of the Hadith also applies to the quran. Since the Hadith can’t be trusted then there’s no reason to accept the Quran as both were passed down by the same people.

If you claim that people made mistakes, added stuff, basically distorted the Hadith then you would’ve to be equally not accept the validity of the Quran as they were both passed down by the same people. Since Hadith can’t be accepted due to distortion in transmissions then this should be equally true for the Quran.

What’s stopping someone who lied & distorted the Hadith from doing the same to the Quran? Absolutely nothing, so the “quranist” critique back fires on the them & they have no leg to stand on. No point in calling yourself “quranist” in such a case as their reasons for rejecting the Hadith equally applies in the case of the Quran thereby invalidating their claim in adhering solely to the Quran.

The Quran was preserved in the hearts of the Sahaba and on the trunks of the trees and stones until Abubakar RA compiled it in one book during his Caliphate, this is much earlier than when the first ahadith were compiled in a book, that's why we don't have Isnad for Quran. Though, you are right, as even the manuscripts can be tempered with and need strict preservation.

Another thing that weakens the Quran comparison argument is the amount of bogus Hadiths invented from the prophet ﷺ, you don't see fake alternate versions of the Quran floating around like with the Hadiths, it's estimated that one liar invented 3000 fake Hadiths from the prophet ﷺ.

I don't expect Quranists to pray and perform Hajj, the only reason they try to invalidate ahadith is to be freed from the burdens of these responsibilities.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

The Quran was preserved in the hearts of the Sahaba and on the trunks of the trees and stones until Abubakar RA compiled it in one book during his Caliphate, this is much earlier than when the first ahadith were compiled in a book, that's why we don't have Isnad for Quran. Though, you are right, as even the manuscripts can be tempered with and need strict preservation.

Another thing that weakens the Quran comparison argument is the amount of bogus Hadiths invented from the prophet ﷺ, you don't see fake alternate versions of the Quran floating around like with the Hadiths, it's estimated that one liar invented 3000 fake Hadiths from the prophet ﷺ.

I don't expect Quranists to pray and perform Hajj, the only reason they try to invalidate ahadith is to be freed from the burdens of these responsibilities.

Laakin the sahabah believed, acted and passed on the actions of the Prophet ﷺ before their compilation. You see their rejection goes beyond the hadith as they also reject the understanding of the quran that goes against what they believe is correct.

So in essence their claims of only adhering to the quran is a false one as what they truly seek is to reject what does not align with their ideas/desires/values etc. It makes no sense to doubt the sincerity of the people who transmitted the hadith when they're the same people who passed down the quran to us.