Note: I've given this as an answer to another question, but since it is very likely to get downvoted (for reason stated below), and as it deserves to be discussed I'm making this as a "discussion" question.

I'm a Muslim, specifically what they call "Quranist", those who follow the book of God alone (the Last testament, while strongly believing in the Bible and the Torah) and giving no importance to Hadiths or any religious authority beside God and the given ability to tell what is right fron what is not. This being said, I used my knowledge to the best of my ability to answer many questions, with the Quran and the Reason as a back-up. And everytime I'd get "booed" by the majority that is mainly Sunni people.

We (Those who Follow God Alone) are already called out as "disbelievers" i.e we’re going to hell in this question and its answers: The sins of hadith rejections Of course, such questions and answers coming from these people do not surprise me...In fact, everyone that doesn't follow what their scholars are preaching is going to Hell. Whether you believe in Allah only, or not believe at all.

No problem, I might just do the same and question some of their belief on Hadiths in a much more reasonable way:

Another example which led to my suspension: I was called as "non-Muslim" for my view.

In this example Judgement day, the waiting period , I did my best to answer the question using the Quran and the God-given logical reasoning (that's what "Quranist" do anyways), and then as usually I get someone downvoting me and telling me that "the hadiths say otherwise" and then later on adds that " MUSLIMS believe that hadiths are authoritative texts"* implying that my views are of a non-Muslim therefore incorrect and deserve a downvote.

some stupid comments

  • So basically, if your question/answer uses Quranic based Logic while there are Other ruling by their scholars then it is very likely to be downvoted or just not upvoted at all, or even flagged & closed, or just called out as being wrong .
  • They are allowed to take a jab or two at your posts but once you do the same to them expect a load of downvotes/closing/flagging and strikes from goldPseudo.

And I've been getting a ton of grudge. A small example from couple days ago:

something very stupid

Bottom line is if your view don't really match or follow the Sunni view you are likely to get a bad experience in this place, simply because they are the majority.

Quranists a.k.a "God Alone followers" have no place in SE Islam.

Edit: Question in case one cannot see the question raised, how does the provided evidences prove that SE Islam is pluralistic ? It doesn't seem so.

  • 3
    For what it's worth, I upvoted this question. Ssomewhere a line has to be drawn; are the views of Ahmadis considered islamic here? Universal sufism? Bahai? For more than a thousand years in all of the muslim world, the hadith was considered foundational by all muslim scholars. This is not really a question about sectarianism in as much as it is a question about whether views that purposely exclude a large part of the foundational texts of islam are supposed to be given the name "islam".
    – G. Bach
    Oct 6, 2016 at 23:15
  • 1
    And of course, muslims of the mainstream traditions (so mainstream that they are almost exclusive) of sunnism, shiism, and ibadism will downvote quranists because they do not recognize them as representing a valid islamic position. I would expect that someone who says the old testatement is made up bogus would be downvoted on christianity.SE too, and I don't see how that would be controversial.
    – G. Bach
    Oct 6, 2016 at 23:17
  • Sufficient to say: [Quran 7:185] Have they not looked at the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all the things God has created? Does it ever occur to them that the end of their life may be near? Which HADITH, besides this (Quran) do they believe in?
    – user19208
    Oct 7, 2016 at 11:01
  • Only you, and them (I don't care if they are the majority) decided to make the Quran(1) and Hadith(2) (Tradition-collections) and scholars' rulings(3) one big mix and call it "foundational texts of islam" and then blame Quranist for not taking part to this. As a Quranist, I find this controversial, and calling us "disbelievers" is controversial too. What if I called you "associators" ? Believe me I can and I have every Quranic, historical, logical evidence to say so. Why does SE Islam have to compare itself with Christianity.SE everytime ? most of them are reasonable and scientifical people.
    – user19208
    Oct 7, 2016 at 11:37
  • If that matters, I'm an atheist. What I write is what I see, describing as faithfully as I can without ulterior motives. I have no skin in this game.
    – G. Bach
    Oct 7, 2016 at 11:40
  • It doesn't matter if you are atheist, a Sunni muslim, or a hypocrite troll, I answered you based on what you said.
    – user19208
    Oct 7, 2016 at 11:42

1 Answer 1


Quranists a.k.a "God Alone followers" have no place in SE Islam.

Okay. And what are you doing about it? Because your current strategy of "Yell at everyone who disagrees with me" doesn't seem to be working.

It is common for minorities here to claim sectarian bias when their posts are ill-received. In many cases, they take this apparent bias as a form of hostility and respond by digging in, sticking to their proverbial guns, and responding with hostility in kind: This typically ends up with moderators stepping in with the diamond hammer and nobody's happy.

And in many cases, the hostility (alleged and actual) masks the fact that there were very obvious problems with the posts and behaviour that flies in the face of the Stack Exchange model. By refusing to cede any ground to "the enemy", the actual issues remain unaddressed. The cycle continues anew.

Stack Exchange is not like a typical Internet forum. We have a very particular system which is not only explicitly designed to encourage constructive Q&A, but also explicitly designed to discourage behaviours that are common on other types of sites. If you're encountering difficulties, there's a good chance that's intentional and you're just doing things wrong.

You mention, for example, what is apparently a case of targetted voting. You don't, however, seem to notice that the system rescinded a number of those votes the very next day, exactly as it is designed to do to prevent exactly the sort of "grudge" you're worrying about.

The system works if you let it. We have meta here for discussing site policy and potential problems with the community so that we can make the site work with a pluralistic community. Part of that is treating others with respect, exactly the same respect you would want to be treated with, whether you agree with them or not. The Stack Exchange model works when everyone assumes good faith and actively engages the community to deal with problems, rather than lashing out and dividing the community with sectarianism.

If, however, you insist on fighting the system just because of some perceived slight and stomping on everyone's toes because you think they're trying to stomp on yours, and things get unpleasant for you as a result, that's not our fault.

Case in point: Putting aside the issue of whether any of these votes were targetted or fraudulent, let's look at some of the posts alluded to in OP and the feedback they did receive, in detail:

Judgement day - the waiting period

  • This goes against numerous ahadith that describe the waiting period in some detail.

  • Nowhere in your answer do you mention that it is a "Quranist" answer. Neither does the questioner ask for a "Quranist" answer.
  • As-written, it's apparently presenting one interpretation as if it is "the" answer for Islam (which, for the purposes of this site, includes all groups that identify themselves as Muslim.)
  • The criticism the commenter left clearly asserts that your answer, in fact, does not speak for "all groups that identify themselves as Muslim".
  • No attempt was made to improve the post since.

Do people who never convert to islam still go to hell even if they believe in God?

  • Upon reading this again, I fail to see how it addresses the question.

  • The question is asking about people who don't accept Islam. All you really do here is redefine what "accepting Islam" is but don't actually bring that back to the actual question asked.
  • By all appearances, this is an irrelevant conclusion rather than a real answer.
  • No attempt was made to improve the post since.

Does God in the Quran calls out Sectarian muslims as Mushrikeen

  • As-written, this is just going to attract argument and debate, which is not what this site is for.

  • The post was closed for being unclear. You arbitrarily decided that it wasn't unclear and just focussed on making it less broad instead.
  • As-written, it still looks like rhetoric to promote a particular point of view rather than an honest question.

In Quran 2:34, what does Iblees not believe in?

  • We can't tell if you're an erudite scholar or random crackpot. As such good answers are backed up, i.e., the reasoning behind the answer is explained. The difference to the reader is "I understand how you came to that conclusion" vs. "some random person on the Internet said so". Link-only answers are also poorly received, as they do not contribute to the quality of the site.

  • This "answer" consists of nothing but an unsubstantiated assertion and a link which would generally be considered low quality across the Stack Exchange network. The feedback received accurately describes this problem.
  • No attempt was made to improve the post since.

In almost every case, rather than accept the feedback provided and attempt to improve your post, you argued with the user which eventually needed moderator intervention to be purged. The original problems with the posts remain, and then you receive more downvotes.

You claim this is due to some sort of sectarian bias, that the community is not welcoming to Quranists, but all I see here is the community not welcoming to you. And given that you don't appear to play well with others or show any interest in what the community actually wants, that really should come as no surprise.

If you want the community to be welcoming to Quranists, I would strongly recommend you go about demonstrating that Quranists are willing and able to work well with the community. If there's actual problems that make the site unsuitable for Quranists, bringing those up as actual issues to be discussed rationally is far more likely to get results than just lashing out at everything.

  • Nevertheless, I guess portraying me as the bad guy by digging through a small portion of my contribution to this place works too.However, Anyone going through my answered question can see that I'm not what you try to portay me to be. But who cares the point is to deflate the raised issue right ?
    – user19208
    Oct 7, 2016 at 1:06
  • This question is a good occasion to discuss the reception of quranist (among others) answers and questions. It is not a fight against the system itself, but against behaviour of the users. Despite the annulation of abusive votes, the reception of non-conformist views with rational argumentation rather than with invocations of satan/hell/shirk/disbelief seems to be an issue. Jan 5, 2017 at 10:17

You must log in to answer this question.