I don’t understand the issue here really, can you help?
Feigned ignorance is not a good strategy for agitprop if the remainder of your statements end up merely unmasking your agenda. Any lawyer worth his/her salt would have taken you to the cleaners had you attempted the following in a court of law:
In summary, you have attempted the following:
- Presented yourself as being very knowledgable about Islam;
- Mocked the very concept of Heaven as described by Islam as a fallacy;
- Applied coercive tactics to get someone, anyone, to confess belief in 72 hoors as a reward for martyrs;
- Sowed confusion between the concept of hoors (confirmed from most authentic Islamic sources) and 72 hoors for martyrs (not confirmed from authentic Islamic sources).
Okay. If you say that Sunan Ibn Majah 4337 is not authentic. Then it’s fine by me
Of the six major Hadith collections, Ibn Majah's ranks lowest in terms of authenticity, and has been severely and consistently criticized by Sunni scholars for the large number of unreliable narrations it includes. 4337, in particular, is universally classified as having a very weak chain of narration and is therefore untrustworthy, at best, and outright fabricated if one takes into account Ibn Majah's hallmark emphasis on utility over authenticity in his collection.
But after 9/11, when your Zio-buddies went all out in their MSM war on Islam, 4337 was the single narration most used to promote the "72 virgins" myth. Never mind that the Arabic word hoor (a life form that is known from other authentic sources to not even be from the lineage of Adam, and therefore not even human by definition) does not translate into "virgin". But hey, it makes for great propaganda when your aim is to frame the following narrative: that those who sacrifice themselves in fighting the nonbelievers are doing so out of a desire for "72 virgins", rather than as an act of worship to please God.