Response to Mueen, Hadiths and Siras had witnesses

Submitted by A.A (United States), Dec 19, 2005 at 12:59

Response to Mueen Ud Deen
Mr.Mueen ,You are denying hadiths of Bukhari , the most trusted of them all, just because you dont like what it says? But that is exactly what Mohammed's earliest siras by Ishaq, Tabari, Waqqidi and Saad say. Did they all lie?

Mr Mueen you seem to trust a book compiled from the statements of an illiterate man who supposedly talked with an angel with no witness whatsoever, but do not trust the chronicles of historians and scholars about the events witnessed by thousands.

Mr Mueen I dont say that what hadiths and SIras say is 100% but must of it are facts since it was witnesses and chroncled by thousands of witnesses. Hadiths and Siras are facts of history. Quran is creation of one person"s imagination without any witness or proof. It consists of a hodge podge of disjointed self serving ayas, plagiarised stories from bible, arabian folk lores, and religious practises from zoraostrians, jews christians and pagans.It is full of contradictions, scientific blunders, absurdities and violence towards nonmuslims and women.

I believe in hadiths, and siras say because they were written by pious muslim scholars based on thousands of witnesse but I reject quran right way because it was authored by a very violent man who had not a single witness of his chronicles.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".