The Qur'an simply tells you to adopt directives from the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ). That automatically means you need to follow the authentic ones - since others aren't from the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ).
Who are you following? Are you following some clerics who believe in the authenticity of that Hadith or are you following the Quran (the word of God of Islam)? If you want to believe in that Hadith that suggests Muhammad directed to kill apostates - then I don't believe you can also claim to believe in the teachings of Quran. Show me where in the Quran it suggests to kill the apostates?
You are mixing up manmade law (treason) versus God's law against apostates.
God of Islam claims there is no compulsion in religion [Quran 2:256] and that God will deal with individuals who leaves the religions himself [Quran 4:137-138] and God in Islam even told Muhammad to pardon those who distort God's words [Quran 5:13] and told Muhammad that he (God) would protect Muhammad against anyone that turns their back against Muhammad or any previous prophets and becomes an opposition (real troublemakers) [Quran 2:136-137]. All these verses indicate that- that Hadith you are inclining to believe in - cannot be true because it is not in harmony with these verses!
By the way - in the manmade law of treason - only one man has been ever executed and it was when William Bruce Mumford, who was convicted of treason and hanged in 1862 for tearing down a United States flag during the American Civil War. So, if anyone was killed by Muhammad's army during a war for switching sides and supplying the other side with damaging information then that has nothing to do with Islamic God's law in peaceful times against people who abandons their faith in Islam. People's emotions are higher during war time and soldiers do many bad things because they feel there is opportunity to get away with it. But you cannot compare war time incidents with peaceful time rulings. An ignorant father or an ignorant brother cannot kill his daughter or sister for wanting to leave the religion when that woman is not damaging anyone else by her decision. A little bad name to Islam is not enough to kill otherwise innocent beings!
[Quran 5:32] clearly forbids killing for any minor reasons. Quran says killing one person is like killing the entire humanity!
Bottom-line is -you cannot convince people to accept Islam by threating to kill them when they leave! How far Muhammad would have gone with your line of thinking? Do you really believe a religion from God - can spread that way?
When Quran talks about Muslims to listen to Muhammad - it is primarily meant for Muhammad's immediate followers to whom Muhammad was reciting the verses directly to. Common sense should dictate that it was not meant for future generations to follow everything someone did whom they cannot see in front of them. I don't believe future generations are asked to follow things from unreliable sources and from reading and analyzing documents collected multiple generations after Muhammad! For future Muslims Quran is suffice!
Other than the regular dose of cultural diffusion - I also believe the religion is hijacker since centuries ago and Clerics cannot change anything nor do they have the courage to do so because dangerous people are out there who are too stubborn to accept any changes. I am sure you don't want any change either!
Quran claims to be complete and sufficient for all future Muslims
[Quran 6:115] It claims it has every example needed to figure out things
[Quran 39:27] It claims it is totally consistent
[Quran 39:23] and Quran warns against reading any other verses other than Quran
[Quran 45:6]. The words in Quran cannot be changed
[Quran 18:27] but these clerics for centuries have adopted things that are not in harmony with the teaching of Quran. They are not consistent with the Quran and anyone following those concepts are in fact misguided IMO!
The hadith that are authentic have been verified by scholars to be so
What do you mean when you say - verified by scholars to be authentic? How can anyone authenticate anything that was initially banned for generations and finally collected at least 214 years after everyone from Muhammad's era were gone? It is impossible to authenticate any such document. Even if five sources says the same thing - it can still be false because all five sources can have a common root bad source. Generations ago a false hadith could have spread and by the time centuries later someone attempted to collect them - he may feel it is authentic because multiple sources in multiple city has the same hadith.
What do you know about the authentication process?
The first known collector Bukhari method was to go to a town and spy on the person claiming to have a Hadith. He would quietly watch the guy's every move for a couple of days and sometimes longer. If the guy seems honest then Bukhari would approach him for the hadith. Problem with that method is - the guy heard that hadith from his grandfather who heard it from his great grandfather and so on. So, if any of his forefathers were dishonest then what he had was a false hadith to begin with. It wouldn't matter if he was an honest person or not! So, unless you can go back in time and test all of his forefathers' honesty - it is impossible to authenticate the Hadith!
An intelligent God wouldn't expect Muslims to follow writings that were collected and written in such a faulty way and written at least 214 years after Muhammad departed. Muhammad's successors (Caliphas) banned writing or sharing of any Hadith (Sunnah) for at least first 100 years. Why would an Intelligent God plan information to pass hands in such a way to future Muslims? How did the Muslims get by without these Ahadith for the first 214 years?
This is why I am saying there is no harm in consulting verbal directions pass through generations or hadith that discusses simple subjects such as number or prayers etc. But big contradictory matters like "killing apostates" - should not be adopted or taught if its only source is in the Ahadith and those Ahadith should not be accepted as directions of the Quran because it clearly contradicts with the Quran. Quran clearly says - there is no compulsion in religion!
[Quran 2:256]
On top of that if one were to accept such conspiracy, how could that same person feel assured about the preservation of the Qur'an that has been recited, taught and learned by those same people he considers to be liars, corrupters and conspirators?
Muhammad's immediate successors banned writing of any Hadith (Sunnah) because they wanted to preserve the authenticity of the Quran and they wanted to prevent corruption of any kind. They are not responsible for Ahadiath. So, if anyone still wrote something somewhere in the earlier days- then don't you think they already violated guideline set forth by Muhammad and Caliph ruler of the Islamic community? Why trust violators?
Furthermore, the Qur'an says in chapter 16, verse 44: "With clear arguments and scriptures; and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect."
According to scholars this refers to both the Qur'an and the Sunnah, but I suppose you disagree? If that is so then do you consider that in the Qur'an, by reciting the Qur'an, the Prophet (ﷺ) made clear what was sent down?
I will look into it but it appears to be talking about earlier doctrines that came before Muhammad during Moses and Jesus time. Muhammad job was to make clear of everything! It is NOT about 200 year later Ahadith!
It doesn't contradict the Qur'an at all.
It does! I provided verses in my earlier posts that completely contradicts with the Hadith you provided that was collected by a Turkish guy more than 200 years after Muhammad passed away and that Hadith was collected by a person who started collecting Ahadith when he was basically a teenager! Even if his Hadith corresponds with another more authentic one - it could all come from the same faulty root source!
Because the ahadith have been proven to be authentic and are in perfect harmony with the Qur'an.
Your mind is made up. You have accepted this faulty Hadith. So, no point in discussing any further!. Just don't follow up on it!
That's not true. Hadiths were written down even during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ). Imam Bukhari's book was not the first of books of hadith.
What proof do you have? It is my understanding that - no one was allowed to write Ahadith during Muhammad life time or at least for next 100 years. If anyone wrote anything down then they already violated what Muhammad directed. Why trust them to be truthful? Why didn't Muhammad himself compile some sort of additional books? Why Abu Bakr didn't either? Why 200+ years later people from Uzbekistan or Persia had to go out in a mission to collect these? Anyhow I am pretty sure the most important thing to God in Islam is [Quran 2:62]. Small disagreements regarding number of prayer etc.is minor issues in my opinion. At what age did Muhammad himself started praying and fasting? What about people before revelation? It is safe to say God would be understanding if minor details are not done as prescribed by Muhammad. Best efforts should be taken though but moral compass has to be used not just blind faith! Things have to make sense. Killing apostates - as obviously is not prescribed (on the other hand) would be a deadly sin!
