firedragon
Veteran Member
Actually, I am quoting those who try to demonise Muhammed.
I think my OP is not elaborated enough. Apologies.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do some Atheists, Christians, Hindu's etc., believe in Islamic ahadith so passionately?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Actually, I am quoting those who try to demonise Muhammed.
I think my OP is not elaborated enough. Apologies.
Yes, its exciting, and even more challenging, is if you can find "1 true Muslim" who believes all that you claimed and also accepts the existence of a "mistake" in the Qur'an.
So, it may be easier to seemingly find "mistakes" than it is to find people who will ever call whatever you find a "mistake" anyway. Bwuahahah, there is no winning.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I understand that well that you would not care about fairness.
A huge claim because no one has proven existence of God, what to talk of soul, prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations, mahdis!
If this conversation actually happened on this forum, I trust you can give us a link. Offhand, I'm not really inclined to assume that your version reflects what was actually said.
I think there is a version at least of that conversation in the thread "Proof of Islam" right at the end, with Tokita. Tokita is a non-Muslim who strongly insists in the Hadiths so that they can use it effectively to try to denigrate and insult Muhammed, Islam, and Muslims.
I understand that well that you would not care about fairness.
I think most people who believe in God or say they believe in God believe in really nothing much at all that they have any experience with, they just say what their parents told them is right to say, or people they respect or what they ended up feeling is best or feels best to say.
They don't think that what is right before their eyes has anything to do necessarily with what they call God, so their God is some remote thing that they don't really interact with at all mostly, and is maybe more of an afterthought or a story they tell themselves on Holidays or something.
If their God is not blowing the wind purposefully, then what is their God, where is their God? They have no God. I think most people, even Theists, are really just Godless people these days. The wind is not God doing it to them, so then what does their God even do at all or how do they know or see it in action and what are they even referring to? If nothing they say has anything matched up to their reality, any sort of evidence or proof, they credit nothing that is real or apparent to what they call God, then I think its really no God at all, just fluff and talk.
Likewise, if your God is nothing and doesn't even exist, and you don't even know if it exists because what you call God is not at all apparent to you or proven to you, then where do your prayers even go anyway? (not you, but them I mean), no where at all probably, since they are calling to some far away imaginary notion from a far away place, and not dealing with anything even near them in their understanding, and even if their prayers were answered, they would not perceive it as such, or would credit it or the mechanism involved as something else or incorrectly.
Its an easy test though, to see who believes in a God by my standards or not. Just ask, what do you credit as responsible for the wind blowing, how it blows, and where every leaf or particle it blows ends up laying or resting or landing? Would you call what does that a God that is consciously bringing such about in every detail or something else or which does not do so with control or deliberately or does not even know where things will land or what will happen? Most will say, or at least think, the wind blows because of the natural system, and the leaves land by chance where they do, by physics and laws, which they may say God put in place and set in motion, or otherwise that no God did any such thing, but either way, no God is directly involved in such an experience or appearance in their view.
So at the very least then, I know that they differ in their beliefs from mine, even if they say they believe in God, it is not the same God as me, and in my opinion, there is no God but mine, so they are really just Godless according to what I consider the Only True and Real God.
That makes, in my view, the actual amount of people who believe in God, the smallest minority in the modern world, whereas the very vast majority of both non-religious and religious people are in my view basically atheistic non-believers who don't recognize God's activities or presence at all, and so are "deaf, dumb, blind" with a veiled understanding which conceals the truth from their senses.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
It's honestly NOT that we challengers to the faith or its notion actually believe these things. It is our chance to put a Muslim to the test by first confirming that they believe the texts/hadiths to be accurate and "good," and then point out to them that these other things (like the ones you mention above) also exist within.
I don't have to believe that these "hadiths" contain a single thing that is correct to point out that someone is being contradictory when they state that the advice/law laid down by them is "flawless" and yet then have to beg off, apologize for, or twist and turn words and meanings around when someone brings forward a difficult-to-swallow article.
It's precisely the same as someone stating something like "These are Bigfoot's tracks here in the mud!", but then you say: "Well, if we assume that those are Bigfoot's tracks, then why do they look exactly like bear tracks?" Are we literally believing that those tracks are Bigfoot tracks in that moment? No. Not in the slightest. And then, as a bear literally walks past, waves hello, and leaves a track that looks exactly the same, they still sit there blubbering about Bigfoot. Sometimes it even ends up a lot like that.
I don't have to believe that these "hadiths" contain a single thing that is correct to point out that someone is being contradictory when they state that the advice/law laid down by them is "flawless" and yet then have to beg off, apologize for, or twist and turn words and meanings around when someone brings forward a difficult-to-swallow article.
It's precisely the same as someone stating something like "These are Bigfoot's tracks here in the mud!", but then you say: "Well, if we assume that those are Bigfoot's tracks, then why do they look exactly like bear tracks?" Are we literally believing that those tracks are Bigfoot tracks in that moment? No. Not in the slightest. And then, as a bear literally walks past, waves hello, and leaves a track that looks exactly the same, they still sit there blubbering about Bigfoot. Sometimes it even ends up a lot like that.
I care about understanding problematic beliefs that millions of people hold. In other words, if only a handful of people believed in Islam and Muhammad, I wouldn't care. But because hundreds of millions of Muslims believe these things, they become important factors in the world. We know, for example, that for the women of the world, Muslim majority countries tend to be the least safe places women can live.
I suppose the idea is to poison the well.
Hard to have a conversation starting off saying there is no reason to believe anything written in your holy book actually happened.
So for the sake of conversation, you accept, however you personally feel about its reliability, the possibility of the events recorded in the book because the other party uses it as a basis for their argument.
ecco
Veteran Member
Is the above an actual conversation or a strawman you created in an attempt to make some point?
exchemist
Veteran Member
Erm...OK.....but then your point is that the OP doesn't make sense. I agree.
I'm not sure you really need to enquire of us all what we think about it.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I am not sure if they have that dogmatic belief. I have never seen an atheist that claims that all Muslims have the same beliefs. But to be fair Islam appears to have a higher percentage of literalists than Christianity does right now. Applying those beliefs even to the hadith. I know there are many that do not do so. But there are countless Muslims that will defend the actions claimed of Muhammed in the hadith that you mentioned in your OP.
Maybe even I actually didn't understand and only thought I did, could you elaborate? What were you trying to get at or say really?
I am an Islamic Qur'an Literalist, I believe that the Qur'an may use symbolic language, but is mainly Literal and meant to be taken as Literal and talking about Literal things Literally, bringing up interactions meant to be understood as having actually happened, discussing scenarios that are meant to be believed as real, and even insisting upon the reality of such "is this then magic?" making it clear that the people who think this is magic or falsehood or trickery are the ones who will be in error.
The people who believe in the Hadith (I'm not one), also believe it is literally true, true accounts of things said and done, and it appears that it was meant to be understood as that also by those who collected such saying or in my belief may have fabricated some or all of them or received them from ultimate fabricators, but all were meant to be "true stories" as far as I think it was supposed to be understood.
There are also non-Muslims who consider these stories to be either based in truth, partially true, or entirely true (likely except the miracles maybe, or even the miracles possibly being really witnessed or experienced but there being some other explanation possibly than the one a believer might choose).
Similarly, there are non-believers in the stories of Jesus found in the Gospels who believe in them as true, or based on truth, and all the same.
There are also those who don't believe in them, but want to insist that "you have to believe in them if you're part of this group" in order that "you can thus be proven to be bad or stupid" by following such literally, or even symbolically.
These are the types of people:
A person who wants to convince you to leave whatever beliefs or practices you do or associate with and abandon it all (not caring necessarily what you replace it with).
A person who wants you to be like whatever they are (or something else specifically, even if they aren't themselves that).
A person who doesn't care much at all.
A lot of people think or wish they were the apathetic third type, but many people are not, however much they may wish to be, and instead it is the human nature apparently to want others to be like ourselves or at least not what we think is bad in some way. We thrive on enemies, but also want to make friends out of people, and remove the blockages we may perceive as in the way towards our being friends or "same-same".
I want everyone to think and believe as I do, so that I can like them more, because then what they say and think meshes with my worldview better and what I say and think, I even want them to have similar tastes as me so they can give me useful and good food recommendations and I can expand "myself" through them, like one big "Me" across the world.
Yet, seeing that people are highly resistant to becoming my thorough little buddies, I have increasingly felt irritated with them, leading to that third option "not caring much", but that isn't so, its more like wanting chocolate, seeing chocolate right before you, but its fake or you can't have it, or its just a mirage and you'll never be able to have it, and so instead of not actually caring, I just feel annoyed and agitated by all the potential people I perceive as never respecting me or being respected by me very much, since we both secretly must think we are each stupid for not believing the same things.
shunyadragon ? Did you get his permission to post that image?Were you quoting an atheist, a Christian, or a Hindu?
Or were you quoting this guy...
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
I don't think it is reasonable to reject hadithes, or accept hadithes without a reason.
A hadith can be authentic (truly from Prophet or an Imam) or it could be made up by someone else.
So, we need to go case by case. If you think a hadith is false, you must have a good reason to reject it. I don't think it is reasonable to reject a hadith on the basis that it was written long after. You know, it still could be a true hadith, verbally memorized and transmitted by believers to the later generation until it was written.
Last edited:
I looked at the last 2 pages of that thread and couldn't find anything that resembles the conversation in the OP.
I'm not inclined to put any more effort than that into giving @firedragon the benefit of the doubt.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
No, I do not believe in existence of a God and a God doing all this. All this is but an illusion, a play that seems to happen, due to interaction of what physical energy creates, nothing other than flitting of physical energy. Perhaps you have heard of a verse in Gita which says nobody kills another and no one is ever killed. All these are appearances. What constitutes us is eternal, we are star-dust.
The Advaitists (non-dual Hindu philosophy, that is my belief) consider those who think what happens in the world as truth, are ignorants (X real deaf, dumb and blind X).
"ya enaṁ vetti hantāraṁ, yaś cainaṁ manyate hatam;
ubhau tau na vijānīto, nāyaṁ hanti na hanyate."
(Neither he who thinks this is the slayer nor he who thinks it is slain, both are never in knowledge, for this never slays nor is slain.)
BahagawadGita 2.19
yaḥ — anyone who; enam — this; vetti — knows; hantāram — the killer; yaḥ — anyone who; ca — also; enam — this; manyate — thinks; hatam — killed; ubhau — both; tau — they; na — never; vijānītaḥ — are in knowledge; na — never; ayam — this; hanti — kills; na — nor; hanyate — is killed.
Last edited:
This is a quote of the post I was talking about from the Proof of Islam Thread (I think that firedragon's conversation was just made up basically in order to demonstrate a point or a version of conversations that seem to occur but not literally a word for word conversation that they had which would look weird like that if it did happen), but Tokita is an anti-Islam person, I think they say they are a theist as many anti-Islam people are not atheists but Christians and Jews and Hindus etc, basically "most everyone else", including some Buddhists and "Witches" and all kinds, Satanists, whatever (notice how Tokita insists on the Hadiths):
It shows for me on page 39:
Proof of Islam?
So that is an example of a non-Muslim, a person who is also particularly hostile towards Islam and Muslims as one can read through that thread, who insists upon the Hadiths or at least insists upon Muslims requiring the Hadiths and that they believe the Hadiths and not reject the Hadiths, in order that they might better insult Islam, Muhammed, and Muslims, and make them out to be corrupt, so that they can make the religion and its supporters seem as unpalatable and vile as they possibly can, so that people might all abandon the religion and it be destroyed and shamed.
This is a very common thing that non-Muslims seem to be doing, they seem to strongly insist that "Muhammed did this, Muhammed did that" based on things they read in the Hadiths, which they seem to be insisting are true things, since they show Muhammed in a bad light in their eyes or by modern standards, and when people say they don't believe in those, they say basically "well you have to, you aren't Muslims if you don't" and this is a joke "please believe in that stuff so I can hate you for it!".