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

[firedragon]

I think that would depend on the Muslim. Generally, I ask so as to understand their position.

Great.

There are four mainly different views on ahadith. But no one ever has considered them "holy". Some of the schools like the Shafi string have isolated a particular number of ahadith and called them Qudsi or holy. Hadith Qudsi does not mean the text is holy, it is called holy because they go back to divine revelation (according to them). Which means the prophet has narrated some story that was what he received as divine revelation.

But no one considers the hadith itself as Holy. Only the Quran is considered holy. Hope you understand. In fact, the predominant, traditional view of ahadith is called "Kabrul Ahad" which means "one persons narration" so they are meant to be doubtful. The Maliki madhhab says "thabaniy warafadh" which means "accept and reject" and that is the science of hadith. Accept and reject. No one considers them holy. If its holy there will not be a thing called Usul al hadith with varying levels of authenticity including mathrook etc.

Hope you understand.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Im sorry if I missed one of your posts. What did you ask?

This:

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.

 

[firedragon]

This:

Sorry. I cannot give a link. And this conversation happens quite often.

If you like you can take it as a made up incident. Your prerogative.

 

[Link]

Simple Answer: this approach is an easy way to stop searching for truth and follow caprice and worship your low desires and deluded yourself you are justified in turning away from Mohammad (s) and not giving Quran and him and his chosen successors a way to guide you.

The easy way to deny truth, is to believe in lies about it, and not give the truth a chance to manifest.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sorry. I cannot give a link. And this conversation happens quite often.

"Often?"

I've never once seen a non-Muslim accept the tenets of Islam as true. It seems unlikely that you and I, on the same forum, would have such different experiences.

If you like you can take it as a made up incident. Your prerogative.

I'm on the fence as to whether the "non-Muslim" in your OP was deliberately made up or is a sincere but incorrect interpretation of someone's actual arguments.

 

[firedragon]

I've never once seen a non-Muslim accept the tenets of Islam as true.

You have completely misunderstood the whole thread.

 

[Link]

"Often?"

I've never once seen a non-Muslim accept the tenets of Islam as true. It seems unlikely that you and I, on the same forum, would have such different experiences.


I'm on the fence as to whether the "non-Muslim" in your OP was deliberately made up or is a sincere but incorrect interpretation of someone's actual arguments.

I've seen this so many times, it's actually, the heart and butter of arguments against Islam.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So non-religious humans only have evidence based beliefs?

I said "faith based". Not "religious based".

Religious beliefs are not the only ones that are faith based. Or non-evidence based.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So what you are saying is its okay to exploit a weakness though in your you know that this may not be historical fact?

The anti islam apologists could in all honesty think a false hadith to be true.

Remember, they believe in all honesty Muhammad is a false prophet, who married a yong girl, or was a war lord.



But, if a Muslim wishes to be a guide to present Islam correctly for them and other Muslims, they can show why that hadith is false, or true.

But this type of people are being disingenuous. So you think that argument will work? No way.

I am not sure what you mean if this argument will work.

But, all you can do, is provide the correct view.

It is quite logical. Quran represents the ideas of Muhammad, His views, His teachings. So, if a hadith is saying something different than the ideas in Quran, it is a false hadith. If the hadith has a parallel with verses in Quran, it would be true. Why wouldn't this argument work?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I agree, but religion cannot claim to be moral.
I love the arts, music, books, theatre, etc
I do not believe (not sure that's the right term) in the supernatural - give me proof that it exists and I'll change my mind

Of course, religion can claim to be moral. Morality is subjective and is covered by the Thomas Theorem: If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.

You are subjective in that religion cannot claim to be moral. It does so all the time. You really have to learn how subjectivity works, and also in you.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've seen this so many times, it's actually, the heart and butter of arguments against Islam.

Then maybe you can succeed where @firedragon failed, and provide an example of it actually happening.

A single example of a non-Muslim who accepts the Hadiths as true (edit: and uses this in an argument against a Muslim). Can you do it?

 

[firedragon]

The anti islam apologists could in all honesty think a false hadith to be true.

Remember, they believe in all honesty Muhammad is a false prophet, who married a yong girl, or was a war lord.



But, if a Muslim wishes to be a guide to present Islam correctly for them and other Muslims, they can show why that hadith is false, or true.



I am not sure what you mean if this argument will work.

But, all you can do, is provide the correct view.

It is quite logical. Quran represents the ideas of Muhammad, His views, His teachings. So, if a hadith is saying something different than the ideas in Quran, it is a false hadith. If the hadith has a parallel with verses in Quran, it would be true. Why wouldn't this argument work?

I agree.

But when a non Muslim says “I believe this Hadith is absolutely true because Muslims said so”, then they have to believe in other Hadith also because “Muslims said so”.

that’s the whole point of this thread.

it’s better for a non Muslim to take a historical approach rather than make that claim of ad populum and appeal to authority. Logically fallacious.

 

[Altfish]

Of course, religion can claim to be moral. Morality is subjective and is covered by the Thomas Theorem: If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.

You are subjective in that religion cannot claim to be moral. It does so all the time. You really have to learn how subjectivity works, and also in you.

I'm sorry, an atheist is just as moral (I would argue in most cases more moral) than a person of religion.

Not sure what the Thomas Theorem has to do with morality or anything else.
I do not define supernatural to be real (it is false) so the Thomas Theorem is irrelevant

 

[firedragon]

The anti islam apologists could in all honesty think a false hadith to be true.

Remember, they believe in all honesty Muhammad is a false prophet, who married a yong girl, or was a war lord.



But, if a Muslim wishes to be a guide to present Islam correctly for them and other Muslims, they can show why that hadith is false, or true.



I am not sure what you mean if this argument will work.

But, all you can do, is provide the correct view.

It is quite logical. Quran represents the ideas of Muhammad, His views, His teachings. So, if a hadith is saying something different than the ideas in Quran, it is a false hadith. If the hadith has a parallel with verses in Quran, it would be true. Why wouldn't this argument work?

The same argument you are posing was cited a million times to one individual but he claims the Hadith is absolutely authentic and historical fact. And you personally know exactly which conversation I am speaking about.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm sorry, an atheist is just as moral (I would argue in most cases more moral) than a person of religion.

Not sure what the Thomas Theorem has to do with morality or anything else.
I do not define supernatural to be real (it is false) so the Thomas Theorem is irrelevant

That humans have worth is real because I determine it to be real and act accordingly. And that to you the truth is objective, is real to you and guides your further behavior.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I agree.

But when a non Muslim says “I believe this Hadith is absolutely true because Muslims said so”, then they have to believe in other Hadith also because “Muslims said so”.

that’s the whole point of this thread.

it’s better for a non Muslim to take a historical approach rather than make that claim of ad populum and appeal to authority. Logically fallacious.

To me, Muslims do not agree on hadithes. I have seen this many times.

The authenticity of a hadith has nothing to do with a Muslim believes or not. Its authenticity is purely based on compatibility with the
Quran.

Muhammad said in the Quran that, everything is found in the Quran. So, therefore, a hadith cannot add any new teachings to the Quran. A hadith can only be showing application and explanation of the things which are already in the Quran.

 

[ecco]

Yeah. When understanding is as low as the gutter things like this prop up in peoples minds.

Actually, my understanding is quite high. I have seen many people post scenarios of alleged conversations.

It's pretty easy to tell which are actual conversations and which are just a strawman set up by the author.

With the strawman, it is clear that the author has no understanding of the actual mindset of one of the "protagonists" he is trying to portray. The failure is obvious.

 

[firedragon]

To me, Muslims do not agree on hadithes. I have seen this many times.

Of course not. You are right.

The authenticity of a hadith has nothing to do with a Muslim believes or not. Its authenticity is purely based on compatibility with the
Quran.

Muhammad said in the Quran that, everything is found in the Quran. So, therefore, a hadith cannot add any new teachings to the Quran. A hadith can only be showing application and explanation of the things which are already in the Quran.

Great.

So why would a non-muslim believe in a few cherry picked hadith as historical fact?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The same argument you are posing was cited a million times to one individual but he claims the Hadith is absolutely authentic and historical fact. And you personally know exactly which conversation I am speaking about.

I dont remember which conversation. But, all can be done is, to explain the correct view. People still reject it. You know they have free will.

 

[ecco]

You can make that judgement call based on your own self mate. I know you are attempting very hard to create an ad hominem.

I did make that judgment. See post # 137 above.

Again, it was laughingly obvious.