Why do some Atheists, Christians, Hindu's etc., believe in Islamic ahadith so passionately?

[firedragon]

That is OK, but you have unnecessarily included Hindus in the title.

There is no need to get touchy mate.

 

[ecco]

But why would you quote a hadith as historical fact if you are an atheist?

I don't and I haven't. I've already told you that.

Then why do you quote it as historical fact?

I don't and I haven't. I've already told you that.

Many have been shown in this thread. So pls go back and read.

You and your buddy have shown none. Because there aren't any.







Once more...
If it makes you feel good to intentionally make up stories as you did in the OP then that is what you will continue to do.

If it makes you feel good to intentionally make up stories about me and other atheists then that is what you will continue to do.

 

[ecco]

So you just blindly accept whatever NPR states with no analysis whatsoever? Do you think they got their information from a hadith or another website?

No, I don't just blindly accept whatever anyone states with no analysis whatsoever. I've already addressed this...

The information was in accordance with what I have read from other sources over the years.

Once again you have shown that either you do not bother to read what I write or you choose to ignore it.

I guess either or both work for you.

Do you think they got their information from a hadith or another website?

Perhaps here we see another part of your problem. You use just the non-existent evidence from scriptural writings for your knowledge. You can defend this only by believing that everyone else also works the same way. They don't.

Feel free to respond, but I'm done with this thread. We all have seen how you work. I don't need to keep on exposing your ways.

 

[firedragon]

I don't and I haven't. I've already told you that.



I don't and I haven't. I've already told you that.



You and your buddy have shown none. Because there aren't any.







Once more...
If it makes you feel good to intentionally make up stories as you did in the OP then that is what you will continue to do.

If it makes you feel good to intentionally make up stories about me and other atheists then that is what you will continue to do.

Lol. So agitation sets in when the asked for example is yourself.

 

[firedragon]

No, I don't just blindly accept whatever anyone states with no analysis whatsoever. I've already addressed this...

​

Once again you have shown that either you do not bother to read what I write or you choose to ignore it.

I guess either or both work for you.



Perhaps here we see another part of your problem. You use just the non-existent evidence from scriptural writings for your knowledge. You can defend this only by believing that everyone else also works the same way. They don't.

Feel free to respond, but I'm done with this thread. We all have seen how you work. I don't need to keep on exposing your ways.

Great.

 

[Augustus]

Did you miss...
...or did you just choose to ignore it in order to further your futile argument?

It does not matter how many NPR/CNN/BBC sources you use, the ultimate source of that information is still the same. It is not scholarly history but Islamic theology or sectarian mythology.

To put it in a form that might be easier for you to understand given your lack of background knowledge, what you are doing is somewhat similar to saying St Paul was a Protestant and tracing the split between Catholics and Protestants to disputes between the disciples in 1st C Judea.

Unless you prefer to accept Islamic theology and sectarian narratives ahead of secular academic scholarship, you cannot claim that Sunni Muslims existed in the 7th C.

Here's the bottom line...if it makes you feel good to think that atheists believe stuff that is written in religious scripture, then go right on believing it.

You are still failing to grasp what the OP says, and have already illustrated it perfectly well to anyone who understands the problem.

The OP is about people being unaware they are repeating theology, not scholarly history, and when this is pointed out to them they ignore this fact and double down on it being actual history (as you did) with some flimsy excuse as to why it's still 'true'.

So:

Non-Muslim X reads NPR website on early Islamic history unaware that he is really reading Islamic theology and/or sectarian mythology

Non-Muslim X uncritically repeats what NPR website said on early Islamic history under the mistaken assumption he is 'rationally' making an evidence based argument regarding secular history.

Person Y points out that pop-culture understanding of early Islamic history is really Islamic theology and/or sectarian mythology.

Non-Muslim X insists that it is real history because Muslims believe it/NPR said it/I saw a documentary on NatGeo/other people in their thought bubble uncritically repeat it/I want it to be true/etc.

Is it clear enough yet?

 

[Aupmanyav]

There is no need to get touchy mate.

I do not get touchy. The fact is that the followers of one Abrahamic religion want to put down others. Judaism, Christianity, Sunni Islam, Shia Islam, Bahai, Ahmadiyya Islam and so many others. Hinduism has none of this. We respect the religions that forked out of Hinduism, and we think they are worthy of that respect.

 

[firedragon]

I do not get touchy. The fact is that the followers of one Abrahamic religion want to put down others. Judaism, Christianity, Sunni Islam, Shia Islam, Bahai, Ahmadiyya Islam and so many others. Hinduism has none of this. We respect the religions that forked out of Hinduism, and we think they are worthy of that respect.

You mean to say no Hindu has ever quoted a single hadith for anything in the history of humanity? Or did you not attempt to understand the OP?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hindus have no stake in it. If any Hindu has quoted from a hadith, it is like what Augustus said above, just BTW.

 

[firedragon]

Hindus have no stake in it. If any Hindu has quoted from a hadith, it is like what Augustus said above, just BTW.

Thats the whole point.

Everyone quotes ahadith as historical fact. Muslims are Muslims so at least you can understand that they have a bias and more importantly they have a "theological bias", but what bias do Hindu's have to quote a hadith as a BTW or as prime witness?

Now you are being bias by saying "all hindus in the history of a millennium or more have only quoted ahadith just "btw". Thats your prejudice. First go to the internet at least, do some searching and do some research and prove with evidence that Hindus have never ever quoted ahadith as historical events to demonise Muslims and Muhammed. Dont just make saviour type of comments because your kind was addressed in the OP. Its tribalism.

I didnt say "All Hindus" or "all of everyone". Read the OP again, read the headline twice or thrice, it says "some".

Peace.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hindus do not make Muslims demons. Their own acts will make them saints or demons.

 

[firedragon]

Hindus do not make Muslims demons. Their own acts will make them saints or demons.

Yeah. So its a "My kind" is what is say they are? Well, you from your kind just misrepresented a post mate. Quite bad for them really.