Kokoebapluse:



From the links that you share it clear that you know nothing.

Here is the bible verse

Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Where did it mention that God seperate earth from heaven in this verses?

Go and read the Genesis passages. God created the heaven and earth and separate them. Genesis 1:1-25

Back to yoruba. Yoruba belive that it was orunmila Who crented this earth. Yoruba belive that orumila took a foul and a soil from heaven and pour the soil on the water and tell the foul to scatter that soil all over the ocean to form land.

It's not Orunmila mister, it's Obatala, google and don't embarrass yourself.

There is no single way youruba seperate from heaven. AM a yoruba you cant tell me What i know.

I'm Yoruba too and stop using that line. Google is there.

Read,

At one time, Olodumare and the sky that is his abode were nearer to earth than they are now, so near that one could reach up and touch the sky. Man then annoyed God by using the sky for food and wiping his hands on it. As a result, God and the sky separated themselves from the earth. Since that time, Olodumare has controlled the world from a distance.
https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100249155

But quran clear it that heaven and earth were join together before clove asunder. And created everything from the water

You're still being deluded here.

Here's from the Greek myths.

Cronus by his action had separated Heaven and Earth. Uranus also had other consorts: Hestia, Nyx, Hemera, and Clymene.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Uranus-mythology

The belief of heaven and Earth separation is an ancient myth and not scientific in big bang, there was no earth nor any galaxy before the big bang to separate from anything.

This is the beginning of revolution

It's Evolution not revolution.

- it's Abiogenesis.

But if you said quran wrong then Scienstic are also liar.

Your Qur'an is wrong and science don't lie.

Let's start here

sulasa07:

Scientifically impossible indeed,Science that changes like Glo 4G to 3G,and 3G to 4G

This is one of the way out for Muslims anytime a scientific fact contradict Muhammed book (quran).

But whenever their is a slight similarity between their book and science, you will only hear Allah is great.

Science keep changing and that's why you can't reject quran whenever it go against science. However, Science keep making your life better while quran does the opposite.

Bunch of hypocrite

Note: quran go against basic scientific fact that can never change. I will give examples

Xmuslim:


This is one of the way out for Muslims anytime a scientific fact contradict Muhammed book (quran).

But whenever their is a slight similarity between their book and science, you will only hear Allah is great.

Science keep changing and that's why you can't reject quran whenever it go against science. However, Science keep making your life better while quran does the opposite.

Bunch of hypocrite

Note: quran go against basic scientific fact that can never change. I will give examples

I may quote the verse later. In suratul-kahf, quran claim that the sun set in a muddy clay and it also claim that zulkarnain (now know to be allexandria the great) got to the where the sun rise and where it set.

There is even an hadith in the tafseer that claim that in the end time, sun will set from where it use to rise. This is a geocentric description of the planet. Sun never rotate around the earth, opposite is the case.

But when zakir naik and his other apologetic guys come across these, they always find a way to escape . They will give stupid excuses.

In the end, quran can't defend itself. It is Muslims that defend it. It is good to be out of the box, I was once gullible like other Muslims of today.

Alhamdulilah , I'm now an apostate

Muhammad Saw Eclipsed Of The Sun Ran Inside Mosque Saying His Prayers Thought He's Gonna Die Is Another Miracle Recorded In Quran...


"The sun eclipsed and the Prophet got up, being afraid that it might be the
Hour (Day of Judgment). He went to the Mosque and offered a with
the longest Qiyam, bowing and prostration that I had ever seen him doing".

(Bukhari 2:167)

SharonLoveth:
Muhammad Saw Eclipsed Of The Sun Ran Inside Mosque Saying His Prayers Thought He's Gonna Die Is Another Miracle Recorded In Quran...


"The sun eclipsed and the Prophet got up, being afraid that it might be the
Hour (Day of Judgment). He went to the Mosque and offered a with
the longest Qiyam, bowing and prostration that I had ever seen him doing".

(Bukhari 2:167)

lol! It is expected from a 7th century guy who knew nothing about the science of eclipse.
Today scientists have the knowledge of the eclipse that will occur throughout the 21st century.

Shame on religion/superstition
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_eclipses_in_the_21st_century

Xmuslim:
lol! It is expected from a 7th century guy who knew nothing about the science of eclipse.
Today scientists have the knowledge of the eclipse that will occur throughout the 21st century.

Shame on religion/superstition
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_eclipses_in_the_21st_century

But they said Muhammad was a great scientist when he was alive

SharonLoveth:


But they said Muhammad was a great scientist when he was alive

that's what we were told. I believed it for a long time too until I liberated myself. Many are still in the bondage of such nonsense

Xmuslim:
that's what we were told. I believed it for a long time too until I liberated myself. Many are still in the bondage of such nonsense

Make God deliver them

SharonLoveth:


Make God deliver them

amen

SharonLoveth:


But they said Muhammad was a great scientist when he was alive

Xmuslim:
that's what we were told. I believed it for a long time too until I liberated myself. Many are still in the bondage of such nonsense

The prophet was no Scientist, he was a limited human based on the texts.

The narration in Sahih Muslim is as follows:

After arriving in Medina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by some people who were fecundating some date palms, so he asked them what they were doing. When they told him, he said, “I don’t think that will provide any benefit,” or in another narration, “It would be better if you didn’t do that.”

So they refrained from doing it, and that year the crop was not as good. They mentioned it to him (peace and blessings be upon him), and he replied:

“I am only a human: if I command you to do something in your religion, then take it; but if I tell you to do something based on personal opinion, then [realize] that I am only human,” and in another narration, “Yet if I inform you of something from Allah, then do it, for indeed I will never convey an untruth on behalf of Allah Mighty and Majestic,” and in yet another narration, “You know better of your worldly affairs.”

(narrated by Muslim, 2361)

The separation of logical/scientific thought, from the spirituality, belief and worship.

It looks to me that the significance and implications of this Hadith has been downplayed a lot in mainstream Islam.

IMAliyu:



The prophet was no Scientist, he was a limited human based on the texts.

The narration in Sahih Muslim is as follows:

After arriving in Medina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by some people who were fecundating some date palms, so he asked them what they were doing. When they told him, he said, “I don’t think that will provide any benefit,” or in another narration, “It would be better if you didn’t do that.”

So they refrained from doing it, and that year the crop was not as good. They mentioned it to him (peace and blessings be upon him), and he replied:

“I am only a human: if I command you to do something in your religion, then take it; but if I tell you to do something based on personal opinion, then [realize] that I am only human,” and in another narration, “Yet if I inform you of something from Allah, then do it, for indeed I will never convey an untruth on behalf of Allah Mighty and Majestic,” and in yet another narration, “You know better of your worldly affairs.”

(narrated by Muslim, 2361)

The separation of logical/scientific thought, from the spirituality, belief and worship.

It looks to me that the significance and implications of this Hadith has been downplayed a lot in mainstream Islam.

Apologies in advance if I address the prophet of Islam as Muhammad. It is because I no longer believe in his prophethood. I will try to be as civil as possible.

You have tried to make a point. However, your point does not answer the reason why a quranic verse or hadith narration will go against established fact in science.

Back to the hadith you quoted, I have seen it before and infact I think it exposed Muhammad that he's never a prophet. He's only a smart man. If his advice yielded positive, people would have praised him based on it and he would not say it's not a revelation. Even you today would have counted it as part of his miracle.

Let's assume what he said is true. Why do we now have to follow his teachings in our daily affairs. Why can't he just limited himself to religion. Why was he telling us how to sleep. Some Muslims scholars misguided me when I was a Muslim that sleeping with the right side is actually in line with science. Today we all know it is a FAT LIE.

Muhammad interfered in every aspect of our life. If he's only allowed to talk about religion, why did he not just limit himself to it. He told us to deepen flies in our drink because one feather contain disease, the other contain cure. Today we all know this is not scientific. There are hundreds of examples that shows that the man was not a prophet.

The fathu makkah. If you haven't seen the hadith, I may look for reference. He told the sahaba that he had a dream that they entered makkah. If his god showed him a dream, why was he not able to enter makkah that year. A sahaba was even questioning his prophet hood when he accepted negotiation offer from the kufar.

Muhammad excuse was that he only saw a dream, he didn't know the year. So Allah gave Muhammad half information?

Lastly, the concept of abrogation in the quran shows that the quran is from a fallible being. Don't come up with alcohol prohibion please. Search for other abrogated verses (e.g the one that said Muhammad can't marry any additional wife and the one that later says now it is permitted for him. Even the content of the verse that talk about abrogation is weird. Allah says:

What We abrogate (of) a sign or [We] cause it to be forgotten, We bring better than it or similar (to) it. Do not you know that Allah over every thing (is) All-Powerful? ( quran 2:106).

So Allah will reveal something, but will change his mind and quickly make Muhammad forget what was revealed. Even the kufar of makkah attacked Muhammad based on this concept

When We substitute one revelation for (another) revelation, – and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),– they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not (Q 16:101)

Feel free to request for any reference that I skipped if you need them and read with an open mind. The way you will read Bible or Ifá book.

labani06:


I can see you don't know Quran but I will like you to buy a book called the Quran and modern science compatible or incompatible by Dr. Zakir naik I promise you you will see the miracle of Quran everything is inside this book wallah Quran is from God it is a true standard message of Allah Allah has already explained to us everything.

I use to believe that book too. I read it and even listened to Dr zakir full lecture with the same title. Infact, drzakir was the reason why it took me longer time to apostate. It takes smartness to understand that zakir naik is only twisting quran to fit science.

If you want to know the tr, watch a debate between people of different opinion or read books written by both parties. If you listen to the party that support your idea, you will never know the truth.

Start from here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_9tZsAFSU0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuBefTgupBk#menu (debate)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KD6T69QrJU


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDsv1S0G9xk

Infact, Muslims in the west no longer boast of the scientific miracles of the quran. Now they are saying quran is not meant to be a scientific book but spiritual book and we should not borther about the errors

tintingz:
If Qur'an is not a book of science why then are you using science to confirm it truth?

Let's the Qur'an stays a book of fairytales.

Coming from someone that said the earth and heaven separated in big bang.

Exactly my point. And Muslims should be allowed to take the good part of it and discard the false. But telling the world that Qur'an is infallible is the biggest fraud in the history of mankind

IMAliyu:



The prophet was no Scientist, he was a limited human based on the texts.

The narration in Sahih Muslim is as follows:

After arriving in Medina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by some people who were fecundating some date palms, so he asked them what they were doing. When they told him, he said, “I don’t think that will provide any benefit,” or in another narration, “It would be better if you didn’t do that.”

So they refrained from doing it, and that year the crop was not as good. They mentioned it to him (peace and blessings be upon him), and he replied:

“I am only a human: if I command you to do something in your religion, then take it; but if I tell you to do something based on personal opinion, then [realize] that I am only human,” and in another narration, “Yet if I inform you of something from Allah, then do it, for indeed I will never convey an untruth on behalf of Allah Mighty and Majestic,” and in yet another narration, “You know better of your worldly affairs.”

(narrated by Muslim, 2361)

The separation of logical/scientific thought, from the spirituality, belief and worship.

It looks to me that the significance and implications of this Hadith has been downplayed a lot in mainstream Islam.

Limited human, Ok ooo

Xmuslim:


Apologies in advance if I address the prophet of Islam as Muhammad. It is because I no longer believe in his prophethood. I will try to be as civil as possible.

You have tried to make a point. However, your point does not answer the reason why a quranic verse or hadith narration will go against established fact in science.

About this, it seems that those verses were written in the form for a human's view and perception of the world, {to be understood metaphorically (this my personal opinion and not the general one)} and not physical reality.
That's why some verses describe the earth as though it was flat or the sky as though it was a solid object, because the uninformed mind would sees it as such.
As to why it would be made in that way? IDK, but I'm capable of coming up with some theories.

I personally I'm not a fan of the whole Quranic Science thing, because with all due respect to my fellow Muslims, it seems to be that after something is discovered someone reinterprets a verse in the Quran to make it as though it was already understood and talked about by the Quran, unless it contradicts it then it's the science that's wrong and rarely if ever the other way around. It's too much of a pick and choose for my taste. I'm in more or less of an agreement with user.mane here.

Back to the hadith you quoted, I have seen it before and infact I think it exposed Muhammad that he's never a prophet. He's only a smart man. If his advice yielded positive, people would have praised him based on it and he would not say it's not a revelation. Even you today would have counted it as part of his miracle.

Let's assume what he said is true. Why do we now have to follow his teachings in our daily affairs. Why can't he just limited himself to religion. Why was he telling us how to sleep. Some Muslims scholars misguided me when I was a Muslim that sleeping with the right side is actually in line with science. Today we all know it is a FAT LIE.

Muhammad interfered in every aspect of our life. If he's only allowed to talk about religion, why did he not just limit himself to it. He told us to deepen flies in our drink because one feather contain disease, the other contain cure. Today we all know this is not scientific. There are hundreds of examples that shows that the man was not a prophet.

About this, it's something I've thought about for some time now.
It seems to be from the exaggerated perception of Muhammad (SAW) that's held
It's the narrative that he was "The perfect and infallible human being incapable of error and his every action should be emulated and his every word followed." Despite the text suggesting otherwise.
This is where a lot of fault in today's Muslim society is born in my understanding, it's the inability to see and separate the Good things that should be copied, the questionable things and the culture and idea of the time and place.

My idea for a solution to was a Sunnah categorisation with varying importantance. (This did not include obligatory practices that come with being a Muslim)
Which was the:
-The Helping Sunnah (highly recommended to emulate or follow) e.g. giving charity to the poor, helping the sick, orphans and old etc. Acts that aren't only seen as Good deeds, but helps another person in the process and is a benefit to society.
-The personal/spiritual Sunnah (moderate priority) e.g. fasting, nafila, zikr etc. Acts you do at your own will for yourself and is between you and Allah.
-The cosmetic/cultural or historic Sunnah (low or negative priority) e.g. wearing a robe, growing a beard, eating with your hand, multiple wives etc. I use "cosmetic" because a lot Muslims just do this to signal to other Muslims that they are more devoted. This is the class of things he(the prophet) did mostly because that was just the culture or it was a common idea for the time and place. This is the problematic class because it's the most common and easy to copy, but has little to no value. Even in the doctrine emulating this will not increase your Good deeds or your chances of making it to Jannah.

^^ an idea I thought of opening a thread for to discuss, but I'm reluctant to create any threads right now or the near future.

This is where the issues you are talking of comes from, it the fact that we look to him for guidance over things that he wouldn't/shouldn't have much experience or authority over.

The fathu makkah. If you haven't seen the hadith, I may look for reference. He told the sahaba that he had a dream that they entered makkah. If his god showed him a dream, why was he not able to enter makkah that year. A sahaba was even questioning his prophet hood when he accepted negotiation offer from the kufar.

Muhammad excuse was that he only saw a dream, he didn't know the year. So Allah gave Muhammad half information?

This for me is a question of what is a prophet/messenger?
What kind of relationship do they have with the Divine?
What is the limitation to the so called prophecy and revelation, as in what do they know and don't know?
Are they just really smart people that have an altered state of mind?

I don't really have much of an answer or explanation here.

Lastly, the concept of abrogation in the quran shows that the quran is from a fallible being. Don't come up with alcohol prohibion please. Search for other abrogated verses (e.g the one that said Muhammad can't marry any additional wife and the one that later says now it is permitted for him. Even the content of the verse that talk about abrogation is weird. Allah says:

What We abrogate (of) a sign or [We] cause it to be forgotten, We bring better than it or similar (to) it. Do not you know that Allah over every thing (is) All-Powerful? ( quran 2:106).

So Allah will reveal something, but will change his mind and quickly make Muhammad forget what was revealed. Even the kufar of makkah attacked Muhammad based on this concept

When We substitute one revelation for (another) revelation, – and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),– they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not (Q 16:101)

The idea of abrogation is not even fully understand or even accepted by a lot of Muslims.
I personally haven't looked into it that much, I'll have to read up on it.
If I remember correctly, it's the idea that the later verses take higher priority when there is a a contradiction between them and an earlier verse.
From what I've seen it seems to be a pick and choose.
Some verses seem to be understood to be applied to a specific case or time and are no longer applied anymore in the way most Muslims think of them. eg. the war and violent verses that call for the killing of kufar and taking of slaves (I'm sure we all know these verses) are understood by the majority to be limited to when the Muslims were at war with the people of Makkah and that it stops at just being a historic command and not an eternal command like the extremist believe.
But if we say that some verses are limited to a specific time period or condition, who is to say that some other verses shouldn't be looked at in the same manner as well.

IMAliyu:


About this, it seems that those verses were written in the form for a human's view and perception of the world, {to be understood metaphorically (this my personal opinion and not the general one)} and not physical reality.
That's why some verses describe the earth as though it was flat or the sky as though it was a solid object, because the uninformed mind would sees it as such.
As to why it would be made in that way? IDK, but I'm capable of coming up with some theories.

I personally I'm not a fan of the whole Quranic Science thing, because with all due respect to my fellow Muslims, it seems to be that after something is discovered someone reinterprets a verse in the Quran to make it as though it was already understood and talked about by the Quran, unless it contradicts it then it's the science that's wrong and rarely if ever the other way around. It's too much of a pick and choose for my taste. I'm in more or less of an agreement with user.mane here.


About this, it's something I've thought about for some time now.
It seems to be from the exaggerated perception of Muhammad (SAW) that's held
It's the narrative that he was "The perfect and infallible human being incapable of error and his every action should be emulated and his every word followed." Despite the text suggesting otherwise.
This is where a lot of fault in today's Muslim society is born in my understanding, it's the inability to see and separate the Good things that should be copied, the questionable things and the culture and idea of the time and place.

^^ an idea I thought of opening a thread for to discuss, but I'm reluctant to create any threads right now or the near future.

This is where the issues you are talking of comes from, it the fact that we look to him for guidance over things that he wouldn't/shouldn't have much experience or authority over.


This for me is a question of what is a prophet/messenger?
What kind of relationship do they have with the Divine?
What is the limitation to the so called prophecy and revelation, as in what do they know and don't know?
Are they just really smart people that have an altered state of mind?

I don't really have much of an answer or explanation here.


The idea of abrogation is not even fully understand or even accepted by a lot of Muslims.
I personally haven't looked into it that much, I'll have to read up on it.
If I remember correctly, it's the idea that the later verses take higher priority when there is a a contradiction between them and an earlier verse.
From what I've seen it seems to be a pick and choose.
Some verses seem to be understood to be applied to a specific case or time and are no longer applied anymore in the way most Muslims think of them. eg. the war and violent verses that call for the killing of kufar and taking of slaves (I'm sure we all know these verses) are understood by the majority to be limited to when the Muslims were at war with the people of Makkah and that it stops at just being a historic command and not an eternal command like the extremist believe.
But if we say that some verses are limited to a specific time period or condition, who is to say that some other verses shouldn't be looked at in the same manner as well.

Let me start by saying you earn my respect 100%. If all Muslims read and respond with an open mind like you did, the world will be a better place.

Unfortunately, some Muslims (when encountered with difficult question regarding Islam) result to the following responses.

1. Quran and hadith are infallible. Thus, if there is a contradiction with science or modern society, it is science and modern society that is wrong

My response

I can't abandoned 100% established fact for a book that was written in my absence. I have to test the book without bias

2. God has given us very little knowledge. So, we need to accept some things dogmatically. God will explain them in the hereafter.

My response

I can't trust a God that didn't give me enough knowledge to understand his message

3. There are ambiguous verses as mentioned in the quran and God warned us against trying to explain those verses.

My response

I can't trust a god that can't make his book unambiguous 100% despite being omnipotent and omniscient. Inability to explain stuff without ambiguity is human characteristics

4. Whenever we see error in the quran or hadith, it's shaitan that is playing with our mind. The book of Allah is always perfect, but Satan want to drag us to hell fire

My response

I will always trust my brain over the text written in the 7th century attributed to God. I will always believe in objective analysis rather than dogmatism. Thus, I will welcome shaitan if he will assist me in objective criticism without bias

I will response to your comment in another post
Thanks

IMAliyu:


About this, it seems that those verses were written in the form for a human's view and perception of the world, {to be understood metaphorically (this my personal opinion and not the general one)} and not physical reality.
That's why some verses describe the earth as though it was flat or the sky as though it was a solid object, because the uninformed mind would sees it as such.
As to why it would be made in that way? IDK, but I'm capable of coming up with some .

I'm perfectly fine with your explanation even though it may not be accepted by the mainstream Muslims and Islamic scholars (especially sunni/salafy). But if this theory makes you happy with your faith and it does not harm any human, I will support you against anyone that doesn't acknowledge your freedom of religion even though I'm not religious.

I personally I'm not a fan of the whole Quranic Science thing, because with all due respect to my fellow Muslims, it seems to be that after something is discovered someone reinterprets a verse in the Quran to make it as though it was already understood and talked about by the Quran, unless it contradicts it then it's the science that's wrong and rarely if ever the other way around. It's too much of a pick and choose for my taste. I'm in more or less of an agreement with user.mane here
.

I can't agree less with you. This is drzakir naik principle of quran and science which is a bias approach.

About this, it's something I've thought about for some time now.
It seems to be from the exaggerated perception of Muhammad (SAW) that's held
It's the narrative that he was "The perfect and infallible human being incapable of error and his every action should be emulated and his every word followed." Despite the text suggesting otherwise.
This is where a lot of fault in today's Muslim society is born in my understanding, it's the inability to see and separate the Good things that should be copied, the questionable things and the culture and idea of the time and place.

^^ an idea I thought of opening a thread for to discuss, but I'm reluctant to create any threads right now or the near future

.

Well as a former sunni Muslim, our aqeeda(creed) is that Muhammad does not talk out of his own whims (as revealed in the quran). This is why we tend to follow every bit of whatever we found in his hadith. Infact, some of our scholar equate quran to hadith. It is that serious.

This is where the issues you are talking of comes from, it the fact that we look to him for guidance over things that he wouldn't/shouldn't have much experience or authority over.


This for me is a question of what is a prophet/messenger?
What kind of relationship do they have with the Divine?
What is the limitation to the so called prophecy and revelation, as in what do they know and don't know?
Are they just really smart people that have an altered state of mind?

I don't really have much of an answer or explanation here.

Talking about prophet relationship with the divine. Logically, God should give complete guide to his prophet including every details when needed (time, day, place etc). For example the fathu makkah dream. But if you want to think of prophet/divine relationship in another lesser dimension, I can't disagree with such possibility.

The idea of abrogation is not even fully understand or even accepted by a lot of Muslims.
I personally haven't looked into it that much, I'll have to read up on it.
If I remember correctly, it's the idea that the later verses take higher priority when there is a a contradiction between them and an earlier verse.
From what I've seen it seems to be a pick and choose.
Some verses seem to be understood to be applied to a specific case or time and are no longer applied anymore in the way most Muslims think of them. eg. the war and violent verses that call for the killing of kufar and taking of slaves (I'm sure we all know these verses) are understood by the majority to be limited to when the Muslims were at war with the people of Makkah and that it stops at just being a historic command and not an eternal command like the extremist believe.
But if we say that some verses are limited to a specific time period or condition, who is to say that some other verses shouldn't be looked at in the same manner as well.

I will encourage you to study the science of quranic abrogation. Although not all Muslims agree to abrogation principle despite many verses that shows contrary. I cannot disagree with them if that make more sense to them. However, there will be a lot of contradictions in the Qur'an if there is no abrogation.

I quite understand that majority of the violent verse (which Christians sometimes use against Muslims) were revealed during war and should be understood as such. However, there are some that are exception. There are many examples of such verses in surah taubah (Qur'an 9)

Xmuslim:


Exactly my point. And Muslims should be allowed to take the good part of it and discard the false. But telling the world that Qur'an is infallible is the biggest fraud in the history of mankind

Spot on.

I don't have issues if Muslims agree the Qur'an isn't perfect and even reform the Qur'an but saying the Qur'an is perfect, the truth and cannot be changed is the worst delusion I've seen so far in this planet.

Xmuslim:


Well as a former sunni Muslim, our aqeeda(creed) is that Muhammad does not talk out of his own whims (as revealed in the quran). This is why we tend to follow every bit of whatever we found in his hadith. Infact, some of our scholar equate quran to hadith. It is that serious.

"Muhammad does not talk out of his own whims"
Could easily be solved by understanding it as, he doesn't talk of his own accord with regards to Allah and how to worship him and should follow his every direction in that.

And regarding the Hadith, we Muslims give Christians a lot of flak for accepting a Bible that was written only about 300 years after Jesus, but are willing to give the status of sahih (authentic) to books written about 250 years after Muhammad (SAW).

Even the compillers of the Hadith were skeptical of what they had and tried to mitigate this by creating the "science of the Hadith" weak/strong & fake(tirmidi) hadith categories, but never claimed that a strong hadith itself was actually authentic.

The shias also have a well deserved criticism of Sunni Hadith which was, they considered many Sunni transmitters of hadith to be unreliable because the majority of them were narrated through certain personalities that waged war against Ahlul Bayt or sided with those that unjustly maltreated Ali (RA) and lead to the Murder of Hussain (RA).

So, in conclusion I have an issue with the equating of the Hadith to the Quran.
Now I'm not a Quranist that wants to "trow the baby out with the bath water", but to be once again skeptical of even sahih Hadith and take only from it things with value.

We have theologically backed ourselves into a self destroying corner. (especially in Nigeria)
Rigid things break and we see this is in the rise of fanaticism in Muslim communities which is the result of following a lot of narratives and parts of the theology to it's logical extremes.

The thing is, I'm convinced Islam is more flexible and adaptable.
The religion itself isn't ever going to disappear (unless someone commits a mass genocide) and with high birthrates is growing, so there is a need to find a way to solve internal issues and live with the rest of the modern world.

I will encourage you to study the science of quranic abrogation. Although not all Muslims agree to abrogation principle despite many verses that shows contrary. I cannot disagree with them if that make more sense to them. However, there will be a lot of contradictions in the Qur'an if there is no abrogation.

At first look it is a serious mess.

IMAliyu:

"Muhammad does not talk out of his own whims"
Could easily be solved by understanding it as, he doesn't talk of his own accord with regards to Allah and how to worship him and should follow his every direction in that.

Well said. Muslim should only take hadith that conform with the good things in the Qur'an and discard others. Especially the violent, the non scientific and those that makes life difficult for individuals.

And regarding the Hadith, we Muslims give Christians a lot of flak for accepting a Bible that was written only about 300 years after Jesus, but are willing to give the status of sahih (authentic) to books written about 250 years after Muhammad (SAW).

Even the compillers of the Hadith were skeptical of what they had and tried to mitigate this by creating the "science of the Hadith" weak/strong & fake(tirmidi) hadith categories, but never claimed that a strong hadith itself was actually authentic.

Agreed. Hadith should not be taken too serious. However, some hadith were reported by multiple reliable reporters with good chains of transmission, these types of hadith are likely to be from Muhammad. So if such hadith preach violence, we can't just choose to believe that it's not from Muhammed. But we can choose not to follow it.

The shias also have a well deserved criticism of Sunni Hadith which was, they considered many Sunni transmitters of hadith to be unreliable because the majority of them were narrated through certain personalities that waged war against Ahlul Bayt or sided with those that unjustly maltreated Ali (RA) and lead to the Murder of Hussain (RA).

Majority of non-Shia Muslim never study the history of the wars that occurred during the reign of the first fives khulafaa (Muslim leaders after Muhammad) and the atrocities that took place. Especially the inhuman killing of Hussain and the amputation of his head from his body at karbala. It is unimaginable that Muslims could do that to another Muslim let alone to the grandchild of Muhammad.

Even Aisha, the widow of the prophet tainted her reputation during those periods after Muhammad. I cannot blame Shia for rejecting the hadith of those that fought ahlulbayt.

So, in conclusion I have an issue with the equating of the Hadith to the Quran.
Now I'm not a Quranist that wants to "trow the baby out with the bath water", but to be once again skeptical of even sahih Hadith and take only from it things with value.

Agreed

We have theologically backed ourselves into a self destroying corner. (especially in Nigeria)
Rigid things break and we see this is in the rise of fanaticism in Muslim communities which is the result of following a lot of narratives and parts of the theology to it's logical extremes.

Agreed.

The thing is, I'm convinced Islam is more flexible and adaptable.
The religion itself isn't ever going to disappear (unless someone commits a mass genocide) and with high birthrates is growing, so there is a need to find a way to solve internal issues and live with the rest of the modern world.

Well, the flexibility and adaptability that would lead to the reinterpretation or abandonment of some verses or extremely authentic hadith could only mean one thing "the religion is man made".

While the religion can not vanish from the planet immediately, many generations to come will eventually see the lack of merit in it as we are seing it today. The onus is on us to teach our children to be moderate and be a critical reviewer of every thing in life including religion.