...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Religion
»
The Apostle Paul, founder of Christianity
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by unfinished thought.: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Ayisha: [qb] Also interesting that you claim these oral traditions are so close to the real time to have been tampered with but when repeatedly told that Bukhari was BORN 200 years after the death of Muhammed you STILL claim these are the true words of Muhammed?? [/qb][/QUOTE]The traditions of Bukhari have always been part of Orthodox Islam. The SAME sources that preserved the Quran also preserved the traditions of Muhammad. The collections of Bukhari were accepted as true and authentic from the very beginning. These hadithes are ALL WE HAVE about the life of the Prophet. They should not be taken as a substitute to Quran (assuming that this is a revealed book) but they are the biography of the Prophet. Without the Hadith, we know nothing of Muhammad, his life and his history.;With out hadithes, Muslims have no way to know how to perform their prayers or fast. These are pillars of Islam. These hadiths were collected by Muhammad's followers who gave their life for him and his cause. They were preserved by the very ones who preserved the Quran. The early Muslim scholars accepted a hadith as Sahih only when its authenticity was established on the basis of both Fann-i-Riwaayat (The art of sequence of narration) and Fann-i-Daraayat. The reason the Church rejects the gnostic gospels is because they were written by people who had no connection with the congregations formed by the apostles and also they were all written centuries after the canonical Gospels were already in common use. Many of gnostic doctrines were abhorant (i.e. that the God of Israel was the menstrual discharge of the goddess Sophia, or that God raped Eve, both from the Secret Gospel of John). None of them were read publicly in any ancient Church. Many of them were virtually unknown outside of limited Gnostic communities (because the Gnostics refused to discuss their doctrines with outsiders). I used to be very interested in Gnosticsism, but then I actually read a Gnostic text. I will briefly summerise it from what I remember: In the afterlive there are several gates and each one is guarded by some sort of animal. Like a snake or crocadile or lion. And the final one is guarded by Jesus who is in the shape of a bird or something. Now this was just one text of many, but this forms a trend. Gnosticism didn't really add anything to the faith. Most of what I have read, its actually quite irrelavent to the Christian message. All these people looked at Christianity a little differently, alot of their theories come pretty close to crossing the line. The main reason most people think Scientology is a little dumb, is why gnosticism was considered dumb, it was created by a science fiction author, claims to have a secret truth that they wont tell you, it requires payment to be allowd in (gnostic sects seem to have required payment to attain the secret "knowledge" or gnosis in greek.) Really gnosticism was regarded by the ancients the same way we regard scientology. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3