DO you agree with The Cat?

Do you agree with Cat that all the hadiths are unauthentic?

Yes I agree with Cat because his arguments are valid
14
39%
No I dont agree with Cat and dont think his arguments are valid.
22
61%
 
Total votes: 36

sum
Posts: 6679
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by sum »

Hello massorite

It is very clear indeed why Muhammad did not want hadiths to be recorded. They portray a most evil man and Muhammad knew this. He did not want to go down in history as a sexual deviant, paedophile, assassin, murderer, enslaver, trader in slaves, rapist, committer of genocide, stoner, beheader, amputatator, wife beater and liar.

Without the ahadith we would not know about these hideous attributes of Muhammad and so Muhammad, both in the ahadith and in his Koran, forbade the recording of his evil. Muhammad was only too aware of all this. He wasn`t a fool and did not want a tainted picture of him lasting throughout history. It is all so obvious.

sum
Last edited by sum on Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

The Cat wrote:
Spoiler! :
And your shameful thread has been debunked thoroughly, as in ALL of our debates...

The Hadiths' Perfidy
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8185" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Because:
--The Koran states so: 4.87; 7.185; 12.111; 31.6; 45.6 where hadiths are portrayed as vain discourses. 16.116 trashing their authority.
--Muhammad interdicted to write them down (see therein).
--History proves that this has been respected for around TWO centuries (see therein, the infamous early manuscripts).
--Intercession is for Allah alone (2.48; 2.123; 6.51; 6.94; 32.4, etc).
Much, much more therein!

You're even wrong about the Koraners for they are considered apostates by mainstream Muslims, these Sunnites you like to parrot.

Now, have a look at your own silliness...
viewtopic.php?p=128503#p128503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:I am going to embarass you here. I have decided to create a poll myself because I know you are a coward who wont have a heart to accept defeat . I dont like doing such stuff but now I am forced to do it now . You should understand that none agrees with your crap and you are the one who is embarassing here. I will soon create a poll. If majority agrees with you on your stance on hadiths I will publicly apologize and I will accept that I was a fool and will take back what all I said.Its a promise!
First when trying to 'embarrass' anyone, you really should double check your typo... They're rather embarrassing for... you!

NONE agrees with my 'crap'? You're already proven wrong, for 10 (on 20) voters agreed with me. That's 10 above your expectations!
It's 50/50 right now... and how I wish a majority to see your promised apology, taking back -ALL- that you've said (so erroneously). :whistling:
You are currently on my ignore list because the arguments you make a way to below poverty line to address. I am not interested in debating with trolls. They are lot of intellectual people on this forum with whom I would love to engage. If they can take up your case I am ready but I don't find you worth wasting time. please ask your supporters to make a case for quran alone just as you try to make. Its my open challenge to any of your supporter.

Btw Instead of apologizing to an idiot like you I say go to hell.You certainly didn't comment all these days when more people agreed with me rather than you.

Anyways as far your arguments are concerned they have already been answered and thrashed badly in the resource center thread. Please ask any of your supporter to debate me on those arguments. Let them take your arguments as a base since they claim to support your cause.


@@supporters of CAT

If you support this idiot's arguments you are most welcome to debate me 1 on 1. Please let me know if anyone of you wishes to defend what this idiot says. I bear no enmity with anyone of you here so please be my guest.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

And one more thing. If you really want accurate results then this poll should be advertised.20 votes is too less an amount to draw any conclusion. I am sure you will know how many people agree with you actually.

I reiterate. Please ask your supporters to take a up a case for quran alone or a case. 20 votes is too less an amount to draw any conclusion. I am sure you will know how many people agree with you actually.

I reiterate. Please ask your supporters to take a up a case for quran alone or EVEN A CASE FOR ALL AHADITH ARE UNAUTHENTIC OR FABRICATED i.e QUESTION OF THIS POLL!

and I am ready to debate them 1 on 1 or even 1 vs many.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote: Btw Instead of apologizing to an idiot like you I say go to hell.You certainly didn't comment all these days when more people agreed with me rather than you.

Anyways as far your arguments are concerned they have already been answered and thrashed badly in the resource center thread. Please ask any of your supporter to debate me on those arguments. Let them take your arguments as a base since they claim to support your cause.
So you already want to break your parole, asserting to EVERYONE that...
viewtopic.php?p=128503#p128503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If majority agrees with you on your stance on hadiths I will publicly apologize and
I will accept that I was a fool and will take back what all I said.Its a promise!


Now, you've already lost the argument. The very absence of any authoritative hadith, before at least Bukhari, proves you wrong.

You can't disprove that we actually have not a single hadith from Muhammad himself and that the long ahad chain of transmission
(6 to10 narrators) is proving so. The so-called 'Sahih' hadiths aren't even, for at least 95% of them, mutawatir (corroborated type).
Prove us how narrator 4 (on 6 to 10) didn't change the wordings of narrator 3, or invented them. See the Chinese Whispers too...

Then, your Sunnite position is simply disgusting:
On one hand you'd readily dismiss all the hadiths if that included the Koran too;
On the other your thread in Resource center frontally interdicts such a move...
(Which you'll have to erase according to your very promise...) :D

More so, your logic comes down to uphold its content as LEGITIMATE. Then, logically, you become morally responsible for its outcome:
--Female circumcision
--Marriage of genitally mutilated child-bride
--Stoning, etc, etc.

Acknowledging the authenticity of the hadiths comes down to sanction their legitimacy.
You're saying to Muslims: I despise your hadiths but hey go ahead since they're authoritative!
viewtopic.php?p=130181#p130181" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=130330#p130330" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=130869#p130869" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=130980#p130980" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Finally, you've already acknowledged your defeat in many threads...
viewtopic.php?p=130998#p130998" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I agree that we dont have manuscripts to prove every single hadith existed as was narrated by people who compiled them.....
viewtopic.php?p=152252#p152252" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:
The Cat wrote: And I don't have to shout how you were defeated, you did that yourself copiously...
Never ever fall for the historical crap. I made a mistake of getting into historical things.
Its a TRAP to set you up.If you fall for it you lose the case.
It,s even in this sentence that you've decided to take on your thread!
skynightblaze wrote:
The Cat wrote:And even way before, in this very thread...
There must be proof . Its only that I aint finding it.
See how you've forever busted yourself? How can you prove anything about the hadiths...while trashing away history? :reading: :lotpot:

Even here, you've already lost... loud and clear:
viewtopic.php?p=128503#p128503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You should understand that none agrees with your crap
Now tell me in % what constitute 10 voters in regard to none? :stupid:
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:
The Cat wrote:
Spoiler! :
And your shameful thread has been debunked thoroughly, as in ALL of our debates...

The Hadiths' Perfidy
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8185" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Because:
--The Koran states so: 4.87; 7.185; 12.111; 31.6; 45.6 where hadiths are portrayed as vain discourses. 16.116 trashing their authority.
--Muhammad interdicted to write them down (see therein).
--History proves that this has been respected for around TWO centuries (see therein, the infamous early manuscripts).
--Intercession is for Allah alone (2.48; 2.123; 6.51; 6.94; 32.4, etc).
Much, much more therein!

You're even wrong about the Koraners for they are considered apostates by mainstream Muslims, these Sunnites you like to parrot.

Now, have a look at your own silliness...
viewtopic.php?p=128503#p128503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:I am going to embarass you here. I have decided to create a poll myself because I know you are a coward who wont have a heart to accept defeat . I dont like doing such stuff but now I am forced to do it now . You should understand that none agrees with your crap and you are the one who is embarassing here. I will soon create a poll. If majority agrees with you on your stance on hadiths I will publicly apologize and I will accept that I was a fool and will take back what all I said.Its a promise!
First when trying to 'embarrass' anyone, you really should double check your typo... They're rather embarrassing for... you!

NONE agrees with my 'crap'? You're already proven wrong, for 10 (on 20) voters agreed with me. That's 10 above your expectations!
It's 50/50 right now... and how I wish a majority to see your promised apology, taking back -ALL- that you've said (so erroneously). :whistling:
You are currently on my ignore list
viewtopic.php?p=163053#p163053" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:bye: :stretcher:
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

Lets see how many supporters of your turn up to defend you. Most of your supporters are quran alone muslims like AB, Mesmorial, Ghalib etc. More ever if you are liking to go by the results of poll then I can ask people whom I know havent voted here to give their votes.


Mate you are a solid troll . I was wrong when I said that BMZ is the greatest troll in this universe. You are at par with BMZ. I haven't seen arguments as poor as yourself. THose arguments which you have made are a piece of cake for me and they already have been answered plenty of times but since you are a troll you keep repeating same things again and again .Anyway I refrain from debating because you are not worth anyone;s time . I can spend my time debating with intellectual people rather trolls like yourself.

@Supporters of CAT

Please turn up and show your faces and please accept my debate challenge . If you believe in this idiots incoherent ramblings please do turn up . Its a request to all those who deem this gigantic troll as scholarly.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:I refrain from debating because you are not worth anyone;s time . I can spend my time debating with intellectual people rather trolls like yourself.
Gee, I thought I was on your 'ignore list'! See how you're constantly contradicting yourself...

How could you debate with 'intellectuals' while parroting and trolling Sunnite's arguments saying history is a trap-crap?

You even sound like them with your dismissive attitude when cornered. And you've been warned about this time again:
viewtopic.php?p=160296#p160296" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=160429#p160429" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=161087#p161087" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't it like yeezevee found out about you...
viewtopic.php?p=128325#p128325" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Why don't you just say this dear SKB?? ., "I love to win the argument and love to insult any one
and every one who don't agree with me., But Muslims and Islam have special place for my insults"


In a rare moment of lucidity, you almost understood, almost...
viewtopic.php?p=128053#p128053" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote: I cannot disagree with you (yeezevee) that rejecting hadiths would make things better for the society than what it is now.....
I also understand the consequences of my line of argument. I mean if hadiths are proven authentic then there is a chance
that muslims instead of rejecting muhammad take them as valid sources. In that case I would have to repent so to be frank
I am not sure whether my argument is right.
Muslims already take them as valid sources and so apply the Shariah of which 90% comes from hadiths.
Why should Muslims discard the 'reliable' hadiths you're defending? You're own Pascal Wager can't work!

You say that they portray Muhammad as a criminal, well Muslims harshly disagree. Ever heard of the Danish cartoons?
ImageImage
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

To all those who agree with the TROLL CAT.. I have refuted the argument that ALL THE AHADITH ARE FABRICATIONS IN MY LATEST POST IN THE THREAD IN THE RESOURCE CENTER. Here it is..

viewtopic.php?p=163332#p163332" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also please do stand up if you have the balls and respond to my arguments. You are free to use this TROLL's arguments if you want .
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:please do stand up if you have the balls and respond to my arguments.
In your ludicrous last post you wrote:
''Now there are some ahadith which say that Muhammad forbid writing down any material other than quran. Now if the ahadith writers
were fabricators then why would the same writers mention facts that would expose them for what they did ?...
''

How about contradicting yourself... once more! In your first post, same thread:
Did muhammad really allowed writing of hadiths when we have a mixed evidence (i.e hadiths should be written as well as they shouldnt be)??
The answer to his yes muhammad allowed writing down of hadiths later and he abrogated the previous command to not write hadiths.
Can't you keep in tune at least with yourself?

That's the hadiths merry-go-round... A maze in which you can prove anything, its contrary and whatever else in between.

ImageImage

Giving them any credibility, legitimacy as you & Muhammadans do, is endorsing a wild wide world of superstitions !
:sharia:
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

I think I was right in decision not to reply to this gigantic troll . It seems that this troll cant even understand what can be termed as a contradiction and what cannot be. :lol:
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

See how even Sam Shamoun, of answering-islam, saw the same contradiction, in my new post from The Hadiths Perfidy:
viewtopic.php?p=163405#p163405" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

See also, further down, how even your cherished Ibn Abbas is an Abbasid fabrication... (extract)
It seems that there are no extant works that originate from the pen of Ibn Abbas. At best, we have Ibn Abbas as he was transmitted by
several generations and finally compiled (with al-Tabari's Tafsir, being one of the first substantial collections of sayings attributed to him)
.... The ability easily to fabricate hadiths, exegetical or otherwise, combined with a real motive to do so -the mythic status of Ibn Abbas-
leaves us in doubt about anything attributed to him.

Uncertainties surround the lives and exegetical activities of tradents leading from the students of Ibn Abbas to the informants
of al-Tabari as well.... The biographical information on Ibn Abbas above depends heavily on this material. Unfortunately, the
rijal material is as suspect, as it is abundant. The mythic status assigned to Ibn Abbas in this material is good example of how
it has been manipulated. It accounts of the lives of the transmitters cannot be assumed to be objective.
All this from an Internet book:
The Authenticity of Muslim Literature from the Formative Period, by Herbert Berg.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=8oYLyS_ ... &q&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Much more in the post...

You're now on to prove the very historicity of Muhammad, from external sources contemporaries to such an Arabic potentate... :whistling:
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

Snb added another ludicrous post in his thread... This time relying on islamic-awareness!
skynightblaze wrote: ARGUMENT 8 : Muhammad never Existed
You're deluded again. Where did I ever say he never existed? Read my challenge again and stop making a Sunnite fool of yourself!

I've asked for ''external sources contemporaries to such an Arabic potentate'' which, according to the siras/hadiths,
Muhammad (570-632) was at least between 630-632. The external sources you've provided are later than the traditional
prophet lifespan (570/632). That alone debunks EVERY traditional accounts from the siras/hadiths existing!

For example, where do they state that Muhammad plundered Galilee or Gabitha?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrina_Iacobi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It records a prophet in Arabia during the birth time of Islamic tradition proclaiming the advent of a Jewish Messiah. The document
contradicts the notion in Islamic tradition that the prophet was dead at the time of the conquest of Palestine but agrees with some
traditions of other peoples of the time.
1) --Was the traditional Muhammad a Jewish Messiah, as depicted therein?
2) --It portrays the Saracens (not yet Muslims) as allied with the Jews. Is this traditional?
3) --It shows a warring leader in Syria between 634-640. Is this the traditional account?
4) --It contradicts the Islamic tradition that he was dead by 632.
5) --But it agrees with some traditions of OTHER peoples of the time.

More so, the Doctrina described him as something NEW:
''What do you tell me, lord and teacher, concerning the prophet who has appeared among the Saracens?'' -''I have fear
that we are getting ready to meet the devil, yet depart, Lord Abraham, and learn about the prophet who has appeared.
..''

It's pretty clear that it relates to someone alive (between 634-640) whom had just appeared! Is this the traditional account?

You state that John Bar Penkaye describes how Muhammad's tradition were kept on and it shows you haven't read correctly.
The text underlines how Muawiya: ''As a result of this man's guidance (Muawiya) they held to the worship of One God, in
accordance with the customs of ancient law. At the beginnings they kept to the traditions of Muhammad.
''

See how it debunks your assertion that he was an example to follow. The text praises Muawiya for going contrary to that!

That's what you get for blindly parroting Islamic sources as genuine, are they the siras/hadiths or islamic-awareness...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bernard Lewis states that "the collection and scrutiny of Hadiths didn't take place until "several generations" after Muhammad's death
and that "during that period the opportunities and motives for falsification were almost unlimited." In addition to the problem of oral
transmission for two hundred to three hundred years (Bukhari being the earliest in the middle of the 9th century....) there existed
motives for deliberate distortion, and a certainty that non-deliberate distortions would add or omit.
1) --Opportunities and motives for falsification were almost unlimited.
2) --Then there's the problem of oral transmissions over 200 years. The Chinese Whispers...
3) --Motives (political, personal interest, religious factions) for deliberate distortions.
4) --Certainty that non-deliberate distortions happened (by additions or omissions).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophetic_ ... usefulness" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is often noted that a coherent image of Muhammad cannot be formed from the literature of sīra, whose authenticity and factual value
have been questioned on a number of different grounds. Wim Raven lists the following arguments against the authenticity of sīra:

1. The fact that no sīra work was compiled during the first century of Islam.
2. The many discrepancies exhibited in different narrations found in sīra works.
3. Later sources claiming to know more about Muhammad then earlier ones.
4. Discrepancies compared to non-Muslim sources.
5. Some parts or genres of sīra, namely those dealing with miracles, are not fit
as sources for scientific historiographical information about Muhammad.
skynightblaze wrote:This not only proves Muhammad existed but it also proves that the ahadith which talk about plundering (Ghazwas for example) people and taking them as captives are definitely true!
Another hasty generalization from a wrong premise. Was Muhammad plundering Syria/Iraq by 637, according to the tradition?

It really takes someone as absurd as snb to state that plundering Syria/Iraq by 637 gives credibility to the siras/hadiths.
It was the custom (sunna) of all the nomadic Bedouin's tribes to do so!
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

Garudaman wrote:skynightblaze can't match The Cat in every discussion, so she create this thread
Snb never even learned the difference between 'authentic' and 'authenticity' yet pose himself as the epitome of 'logic'!
I then must constantly redress his fallacies (so the nickname of 'His Senility'), which he counters with a 'troll' sedative!

Now he keeps 'answering' in his hide away, taking RC for what it was never meant and never used before as such.

Moderators... if snb is allowed to keep like this in RC, I'll meet him right in his sanctuary.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
Skenderbeg
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:45 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by Skenderbeg »

Cat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bernard Lewis states that "the collection and scrutiny of Hadiths didn't take place until "several generations" after Muhammad's death
and that "during that period the opportunities and motives for falsification were almost unlimited." In addition to the problem of oral
transmission for two hundred to three hundred years (Bukhari being the earliest in the middle of the 9th century....) there existed
motives for deliberate distortion, and a certainty that non-deliberate distortions would add or omit.
I don't understand why you deny what we read in the hadiths about the so called Arab prophet, The hadiths tell us plenty of bad and evil things Mohammed did in the name of his new religion that he was creating, The hadiths tells us Mohammed robbed, murdered, took slaves, including female slaves both to be sold and used as sex slaves, We also read in the hadiths that Muslim women came forward to complain about being beaten by their husbands..

All the evil actions we read about Mohammed doing which you seem not to like are supported by the Quran, is not robbing allowed by Quran? killing ? taking female sex slaves ? beating your wife ?

The hadiths tell us Jews were killed and their homes and land were taking by Mohammed and his followers, yet the Quran mentions Muslims taking land and homes but it doesn't mention from whom they robbed it from, but the hadiths tell us it was from the Jews...

I don't believe the hadiths are real meaning divine in anyway, but I believe what they tell us about the person called Mohammed that Muslims follow as their prophet., Hadiths give us a good clue too what kind of man Mohammed was and of course some people are ashamed when reading the ugly thing he did in detail, but as I said its all supported by the Quran.

So if you don't like what the hadiths tell us about Mohammed, then you cant like or believe in the Quran...
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

Skenderbeg wrote:I don't understand why you deny what we read in the hadiths about the so called Arab prophet.
The question here is: Are they authenticated reports on Muhammad? Not if what they say please or displease you.
http://www.rim.org/muslim/hadith.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

1. From a religious point of view they are forbidden by the Koran (3.7; 5.3; 7.185; 16.116; 17.73; 31.6, 77.50, etc).
The Hadiths' Perfidy: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8185" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2. None was authoritative before at least 150 years after Muhammad, an impossibility if they were genuine from inception.
We do not have a single manuscript of hadiths from the former Umayyad period.
viewtopic.php?p=122489#p122489" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3. The corroborated hadiths (mutawatir) are but a pocketful, no more than 5% of them all. For example, when was he born?
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=5518" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

4. They were proven forgeries by a great number of Western scholars: Goldzhizer, Schacht, Juynbold, Wansbrough, etc.
http://www.answering-islam.net/Books/Sc ... uation.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

@skenderbeg

I suggest reading my thread in the resource center to see where all these anti ahadith or quran alone arguments stand. Ofcourse I am not finished yet in the thread. The moment I see any new arguments being made they will make way to my thread. :*)
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:I suggest reading my thread in the resource center to see where all these anti ahadith or quran alone arguments stand. Ofcourse I am not finished yet in the thread. The moment I see any new arguments being made they will make way to my thread.
Koraners arguments first appeared from the Mutazilites of old and the generalized preceding sunna (ie. custom).
Your very argument that obeying the messenger = obey Muhammad is unheard of before imam Shafi'i (d.820)!!

Then the Western scholars have proven hadiths altogether backward forgeries: Goldzhizer, Schacht, Juynbold, Wansbrough, etc.
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txw/hadith.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
An interesting observation of Goldziher and Schacht and other Islamicist scholars is that, commonly, isnads that were more
elaborate and seemingly technically correct tended to be associated with spurious hadiths! One of the brilliant ways that the
scholars have shown that specific hadiths did not exist at specific times is that they were not used to support legal doctrines,
where their presence would most certainly have been used as central evidence. More recent massive scholarly research,
particularly by John Wansbrough, concludes that virtually none of the hadiths are actually directly associated with the Prophet.



And I gave this Joseph Schacht's article from answering-Islam.
http://www.answering-islam.net/Books/Sc ... uation.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In general we can say: the more perfect the isnad, the later the tradition. Whenever traditions claim an additional guarantee
by presenting themselves as transmitted amongst members of one family, e.g., from father to son and grandson, from aunt
to nephew, or from master to freedman, it can be positively shown that these family isnads are not a primary indication of
authenticity, but only a device for securing its appearance. In other words: the existence of a family isnad, contrary to what
it pretends, is a positive indication that the tradition in question is not authentic....

We find new traditions at every successive stage of doctrine, and the lawyers occasionally object to historical traditions adduced
by their opponents because they are unknown to or not accepted by the specialists on the biography of the Prophet. A considerable
part of the standard biography of the Prophet in Medina, as it appeared in the second half of the second century A.H., was of very
recent origin and is therefore without independent historical value.
This was from a lecture he gave but the book itself is loaded with hundreds of scholarly researches proving his point:

Joseph Schacht, Origins of the Muhammadan Jurisprudence (365 pdf pages, which I'm actually reading):
http://ahadithstudies.files.wordpress.c ... chacht.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And snb hasn't still found where the Koran is giving the title of Imam to Muhammad such as to Abraham (2.124) or Moses (46.12)! :D
skynightblaze wrote:Ofcourse I am not finished yet in the thread. The moment I see any new arguments being made they will make way to my thread.
Debate this here or else I'm gonna get into your ludicrous zone. No one ever used RC to hide from debating as you do.
No third call: Moderators... if snb is allowed to keep like this in RC, I'll meet him right in his sanctuary.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by skynightblaze »

^^^^^

RC thread is none of your business so stay out of it!. You have got no right to tell me where I post and how I must reply. The entire forum is open for you if you want to respond to the arguments I make in RC. Your arguments will be there for everyone to see . I am confident that you cannnot make any good arguments so I will leave upto the readers to decide whether they want to take you seriously or not.Now Since you have shown zero ability of a debate time and again you are being ignored . i am going to examine the western scholars whom you talk of and I will reply to them in the resource center if I can.

In short you need to f!ck off with your threats some where else . Nothing is going to stop me from embarrassing you.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.
User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: DO you agree with The Cat?

Post by The Cat »

sum wrote: It is very clear indeed why Muhammad did not want hadiths to be recorded. They portray a most evil man and Muhammad knew this.
Yet snb ascertains that this was abrogated later by the very same Muhammad.
Why didn't he bother then to be portrayed as 'evil' anymore? What's so obvious?
Image
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.
Post Reply