Why we do not have any reliable Islamic history?

[Naushad]

Salaam alay kum,

Based on what I have read on this forum and other 'Quran only' forums the Islamic history that we have available today (for example hadith literature or Seerah of exalted Prophet by Ibn Ishaaq etc ) is not accurate.

It seems like someone just erased the correct facts about the exalted Prophet and replaced it with the conjecture that we follow today.

Our Islamic history is not even that old (only 1400 years) compared to the history of some other nations (Romans etc) but yet more accurate historic information seems to be available for other nations compared to the true history of Islam. Even in case of Romans, scholars seem to know much more accurate facts even though those events took place way before any Islamic era even began.

So I wonder how come we dont have any accurate Islamic literature at all? Was every (or most) written documents from the time of prophet Mohammad and four caliphs were burnt and replaced by conjecture? Seems like we dont have much reliable information about the Islamic era other than what is safely stored in Quran itself and hence the current chaos and debates about the true nature of Islam.

Any comments would be appreciated.

Thank you,

Naushad.

[Arnold Yasin Mol]

Have you read Dr.Shabbir's book Naushad?

http://www.ourbeacon.com/truehistory.pdf

It explains large parts of your question.

Why do we not have correct history? Because History is always written by the winners. The true history of Islam would made it very difficult for the elite of the 9th century to rule the State in the way they wanted. So many information was destroyed, many libraries burned and many knowledge hidden. All this so the elite that took power 300 years after the Prophet could rule over the people and collect wealth with their own rules.

In the Quran, rulers serve the people and not the other way around. This was turned around by the elite by creating confusing and mainly false history and destroy the rest.

[Naushad]

Arnold,

I wonder that if that is the case then why do we have any information left that says that the OTHER history is fake and these few hidden evidences are the correct ones? I mean where is the scientifically justifiable proof that compares the fake history with the supposedly true history and can tell us which one is truly the correct information? Anyone can write anything in any book from past. How can we really distinguish?

Thanks,

Naushad.

[Arnold Yasin Mol]

Logic, reason, Archeology, Quran, consistency, confirmation found in other historical records of surrounding countries.

A pattern can always be traced eventually to the most likely true account. But in the end, it does not influence the Quranic Message.

Even if we cannot find one reliable trace, we still have the Quranic Message laying in front of us with its pristine Message.

The Book of Allah is enough for us...