Obeying Mohammed = Obeying God. (rejection of Hadith)

[Paradox Uncreated]

I have posting this logic elsewhere aswell, but I thought I`d make a post on it`s own about the subject.

We all know the quranic statement that "Obeying Mohammed is Obeying God".
How can then the hadithist state that obeying Mohammed in hadith, which are not inspired by God, to be Obeying God?

Several verses deal with this logic of Mohammed voices God. "He speaks not of his own desire."
That means hadith, can ultimately only deal with God, but they do not.

How is it that so much litterature, can then speak of a personal Mohammed? From Quranic Logic we can see that he does not exist!

The quranic logic, fits only, when we talk about a fulltime messenger. A person who voices only God, whom obeying, is obeying God.

Conclusion: There is no personal Mohammed to be obeyed. All tales of him, after he entered messengerhood, stating what is deemed uninspired by God, must be false. If there has been fabricated this large extent of hadith, then all of them are subject to extreme questioning of validity.

[Student of Allah]

Salam,

Nice post. From my study of comparative religion. Their history makes it clear, why there is a final hour. From what I have been studying, I observed that every time God sends a messenger to guide people, they forget the message and concentrate on the messenger and testimonies about the messenger. Idol worshiping under the banner of monotheism.

Here is a funny story about me and a sunni brother. He was praising me for keeping a beard, I made it very clear to him that the only reason I have a beard is that I look too much like my mom, so it adds to my masculinity as far as I can see it. He was pretty surprised to hear that. He said to me, that I should never shave it because even though its not "compulsory" to have a beard like Muhammad(pbuh), shaving it off is a sin .

lol


PEACE

----------------------- Student of Allah 

[Meteora]

I have posting this logic elsewhere aswell, but I thought I`d make a post on it`s own about the subject.

We all know the quranic statement that "Obeying Mohammed is Obeying God".
How can then the hadithist state that obeying Mohammed in hadith, which are not inspired by God, to be Obeying God?

Several verses deal with this logic of Mohammed voices God. "He speaks not of his own desire."
That means hadith, can ultimately only deal with God, but they do not.

How is it that so much litterature, can then speak of a personal Mohammed? From Quranic Logic we can see that he does not exist!

The quranic logic, fits only, when we talk about a fulltime messenger. A person who voices only God, whom obeying, is obeying God.

Conclusion: There is no personal Mohammed to be obeyed. All tales of him, after he entered messengerhood, stating what is deemed uninspired by God, must be false. If there has been fabricated this large extent of hadith, then all of them are subject to extreme questioning of validity.

That's the thing. They're saying they ARE inspired by God, which they aren't even according to the criteria told by Bukhari & co. by which they compiled the literature. Mainstream muslims can't prove it with the Quran at all. In fact, it disproves them telling strictly which hadith to obey - the Quran itself.