Pisslam is globalist religion

[Deleted member 51576]

L claim

Muhammad is in hellfire alongside Allah

 

[ka_cnt]

Muhammad is in hellfire alongside Allah

May Allah guide you to Islam

 

[MiroslavBulldosex]

 

[Deleted member 51576]

May Allah guide you to Islam

Never in a million billion years will I join the goyslop equivalent of religions. Your 72 virgins will be pegging you in hellfire.

 

[ka_cnt]

Never in a million billion years will I join the goyslop equivalent of religions. Your 72 virgins will be pegging you in hellfire.

BuT mOslEms r viOlent unLike uS chRistiaNS

 

[Hardrada]

Least obvious bait thread

 

[Deleted member 51576]

BuT mOslEms r viOlent unLike uS chRistiaNS

Christians aren’t violent. I’m just typing words. Christians aren’t beheading others or suicide bombing every few business days. Christians aren’t on CIA & FBI & INTERPOL watchlists either. I cannot say the same for muslimcels

 

[ka_cnt]

Christians aren’t violent. I’m just typing words. Christians aren’t beheading others or suicide bombing every few business days. Christians aren’t on CIA & FBI & INTERPOL watchlists either. I cannot say the same for muslimcels

I was trying to be respectful at first be you let me no choice but to be aggressive

 

[SecularIslamist]

That isn’t true. The only people who disregard most if not all ahadith are Quranists.

Otherwise the majority of Muslims accept a Hadith as long as it’s sahih/Hasan which is most Hadith.

JFL it is "most". Even Ahmad ibn Hanbal accepted like 10-15% of hadiths as reliable. He is the founder of the most hadith-reliant school of thought too. Hanbalis would still take a weak hadith over analogical reasoning of a authentic one.

"After examining more than 750,000 Hadiths, Imam Hanbal selected only around 30,000 Hadiths narrated by 904 companions and they were organized on the basis of individual companions"

@Baban

 

[Fiqh]

View attachment 2773108subhumans

Classic Pajeet cope, you will always be the lowest of the low

 

[Fiqh]

Death to Islam

Did an immigrant cuck your father?

 

[Fiqh]

BuT mOslEms r viOlent unLike uS chRistiaNS

 

[IndraBC]

Even Ahmad ibn Hanbal accepted like 10-15% of hadiths as reliable

That isn’t true

If a Hadith is sahih then you can’t deny it (unless there’s some other underlying issue which doesn’t even apply to most Hadith)

So the majority of ahadith are acceptable. You can even argue that weak ahadith can still be accepted but that’s a debate for another time. But most ahadith should be accepted, otherwise what’s the point of Hadith?

 

[IndraBC]

JFL it is "most". Even Ahmad ibn Hanbal accepted like 10-15% of hadiths as reliable. He is the founder of the most hadith-reliant school of thought too. Hanbalis would still take a weak hadith over analogical reasoning of a authentic one.

"After examining more than 750,000 Hadiths, Imam Hanbal selected only around 30,000 Hadiths narrated by 904 companions and they were organized on the basis of individual companions"

@Baban

What do salafis/atharis have to say about this? I feel like they’d disagree

I’m asking because I try to follow them the most.

 

[SecularIslamist]

That isn’t true

If a Hadith is sahih then you can’t deny it (unless there’s some other underlying issue which doesn’t even apply to most Hadith)

So the majority of ahadith are acceptable. You can even argue that weak ahadith can still be accepted but that’s a debate for another time. But most ahadith should be accepted, otherwise what’s the point of Hadith?

No retard not even the most conservative wouldnt ever say that.

Wtf you talking about bukhari authenticated 7500ish out of a broader collection of like 600,000

Sahih al-Bukhari - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Fiqh]

No retard not even the most conservative wouldnt ever say that.

Wtf you talking about bukhari authenticated 7500ish out of a broader collection of like 600,000

Sahih al-Bukhari - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Why are you using Wikipedia as a source in Islamic matters?

Same website that refers to Al-Bukhaari as a follower of the Kullabi school, therefore calling him a disbeliever.

 

[Fiqh]

What do salafis/atharis have to say about this? I feel like they’d disagree

I’m asking because I try to follow them the most.

Read this:

• Usool al-Hadeeth - The Methodology of Hadith Evalutation

It's only 166 pages.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Why are you using Wikipedia as a source in Islamic matters?

Is what is said true or not?

These guys are acting like all the millions of several hundred thousands of hadiths are accepted.

All that matters are bukhari, Muslim, Abu dawood, tirmidhi, ibn majah - probably in that order too. There collections were only a few thousand.

 

[IndraBC]

No retard not even the most conservative wouldnt ever say that.

Wtf you talking about bukhari authenticated 7500ish out of a broader collection of like 600,000

Sahih al-Bukhari - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Whatever the case. We accept any Hadith that is sahih or Hasan. But whenever you see a Hadith that’s sahih you always deny it with the same excuse

 

[SecularIslamist]

Whatever the case. We accept any Hadith that is sahih or Hasan. But whenever you see a Hadith that’s sahih you always deny it with the same excuse

What are you talking about? If it's part of one of those collections I don't deny it.

 

[Fiqh]

Is what I said true or not?

Yes, there just seems to be a misunderstanding between you two.