OUR MISSION AS A TEAM

REACHING PEOPLE OF OTHER FAITHS FOR CHRIST

Mission

TO PREACH TRUE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST TO ALL NON CHRISTIAN

Description

Injili Timilifu (Full Gospel) is a young non-denominational ministry that is focused to reach out to people of other Faiths through various channels and strategies.

STATEMENT OF FAITH

That Great commission is the heartbeat of Injili Timilifu.

Injili Timilifu (Full Gospel)’s philosophy is predicted upon the fact that we are theologically and thus ideologically rooted in historic Christian orthodoxy.
We stand for the whole of scripture as the all-sufficient rule for faith and practice.
The standard of all Biblical and theological interpretations and the basis of all philosophy and practices taught and exemplified, shall be constituted in the following Doctrinal Statement:

a. The Bible to be inspired by God and the only infallible and authoritative Word of God and the only rule for Christian faith and conduct.
b. That there is one God, eternally existent in three persons; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
c. In the Deity of Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, in His virgin birth, in His resurrection, in His ascension to the right hand of the Father, and His personal future return to this earth in power and glory to rule over the nations.
d. That the only means of salvation (for both Jew, and gentile) is through repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and that this results in regeneration by the Holy Spirit.
e. That the redemptive work of Christ on the cross provides healing in the human body in answer to believing prayer.
f. That there is a Baptism of the Holy Spirit to all believers in Christ as in acts 2.
g. In the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit by whose indwelling the Christian is enabled to live a holy life.
h. In the resurrection of both the saved and the lost, the one to everlasting life and the other to everlasting damnation.

KUZALIWA KWA YESU MASIHI

KUZALIWA KWA YESU KRISTO

Somo la 18 Luka 1 na 2

Matukio yahusianayo na kuzaliwa kwa Yesu Kristo yameandikwa katika kumbukumbu mbili za Injili. Yanapatikana katika Mathayo 1 na 2 na katika Luka 1 na 2. Luka atwambia kwamba matukio haya yalitokea katika utawala wa Kaizari Augustus (Luka 2:1-2), ambayo inatuwezesha kuthibitisha kwa usahihi kuwa Yesu alizaliwa mwaka wa nne kabla ya Kristo. Injili ya Luka pia imeweka kumbukumbu ya kuzaliwa kwa Yohana Mbatizaji, na kujitokeza kwake katika taifa, ikiweka jambo hili katika sura ya ki-historia pia (Luka 3:1)
Tunapotafakari matukio haya tunafurahishwa na habari kamili zinazotokana na manabii wanaotabiri makusudi ya Mungu ya kumleta Yesu na kazi ambayo angefanya.

Unabii wa Isaya kuhusu kuzaliwa kwa Yesu

Isaya ndiye nabii aliyepeleka ujumbe dhahiri kwa nyumba ya Daudi akisema “Tazama bikira atashika mimba na kuzaa mwana ambaye ataitwa Immanueli (maana yake, ‘Mungu yu nasi’)” (Isaya 7:14). Hili lilitimizwa mara Mariamu, wa ukoo wa Mfalme Daudi alipomzaa mwanawe kifungua mimba Yesu kama alivyotabiriwa katika Mathayo 1:21-23.
Pia Isaya alitabiri kazi ya baadaye ya huyu ambaye angezaliwa akisema: “Kwa maana mtoto amezaliwa kwetu, kuna mwana ambaye tumepewa, na ufalme utakuwa begani kwake. _ _ _ _ kuhusu utawala wake na amani hakutakuwa na mwisho, kwenye kiti cha enzi cha Daudi na juu ya ufalme wake ili kuufanya imara na kuutegemeza kwa njia haki na kwa njia ya uadilifu kuanzia sasa hata milele” Isaya 9:6-7). Kutokana na utabiri huu hatuwezi kushindwa kuelewa kuwa yesu alizaliwa ili atawale katika kiti cha Daudi wakati ufalme wake utakaposimikwa duniani, milele.

Ujumbe wa Malaika Gabrieli kwa Mariamu.

Malaika Gabrieli alipomtokea Mariamu, alimwambia kuhusu kazi maalum ambayo Yesu angefanya. Maneno yake yanamtambulisha Yesu kama uzao wa Daudi uliotabiriwa katika 2 Samweli 7:12-16: “Na tazama utashika mimba na kuzaa mtoto wa kiume ambaye utamwita YESU. Atakuwa mkuu na ataitwa Mwana wa Aliye Juu Zaidi: na Bwana Mungu atampa kiti cha Enzi cha Daudi, baba yake: na atatwala juu ya nyumba ya Yakobo, milele na kuhusu utawala wake hakutakuwa na mwisho (Luka 1:31-33).
Tutafakari maana ya ujumbe wa Malaika Gabrieli kwa Mariamu.
“Utamwita YESU”, Neno Yesu katika Kigiriki ni sawa na neno Yoshua linalopatikana katika Agano la Kale ambalo maana yake ni “Yah (Mungu) ataokoa.” Kupitia Yesu Mungu alikuwa analeta uokovu kutoka kwenye dhambi na mauti kwa watu wote (Linganisha na Mathayo 1:21)
“ataitwa Mwana wa Aliye Juu Zaidi.” Angekuja kuwa “Mwana wa Mungu” aliyeahidiwa kwa Daudi katika 2 Samweli 7:14 (linganisha na Waebrania 1:5; Zaburi 2:7.
“Bwana Mungu atampa kiti cha enzi cha Daudi, baba yake.” Yesu ni “mzao” au mjukuu aliyeahidiwa kwa Daudi ambaye ataanzisha upya kiti cha enzi na ufalme wa Daudi duniani (2 Samweli 7:12-16; linganisha Isaya 9:6-7)
“Kuhusu ufalme wake hakutakuwa na mwisho” ufalme wake hautakuwa na mwisho kwa sababu Yesu Kristo ambaye atkuwa mfalme hafi (2 Samweli 7:16, Danieli 2:44, Ufunuo 11:15).
Katika mbiu fupi ya Malaika Gabrieli tunapata maelezo dhahiri ya kazi itakayofanywa na mtoto huyu ambaye alikuwa karibu kuzaliwa:
 Angewaokoa binadamu katika dhambi na mauti
 Angekuwa Mwana wa Mungu
 Angekuwa mwana wa Daudi, na kwa hiyo
o Angekalia kiti cha enzi cha Daudi
o Angetawala Waisraeli waliojikusanya upya
o Angeanzisha ufalme wa Mungu usio na mwisho duniani.

Jibu la Mariamu kwa mbiu ya Gabrieli lilikuwa la unyenyekevu na ukunjufu kwa matakwa ya Mungu. Aliuliza: “Hili litakuwaje? Maana simjui mwanaume?
Jibu la Gabrieli likawa; “Roho Mtakatifu atakujia na uwezo wa Aliye Juu Zaidi utakufunika: kwa hiyo hicho kitu kitakatifu kitakachozaliwa na wewe kitaitwa Mwana wa Mungu” Luka 1:34). Kupitia uwezo wa Roho Takatifu ya Mungu mtoto huyu angezaliwa na kuitwa “Mwana wa Mungu” kwa utimizo wa unabii wa Agano la kale (2 Samweli 7:14, Zaburi 2:7, angalia Matendo 13:32-33, Mwanzo 3:15).

Kuzaliwa Kwake Bethlehemu

Kuzaliwa kwa Yesu Bethlehemu kulikuwa kumetabiriwa na Nabii Micah (Micah 5:1-2) lakini Yusufu na Mariamu waliishi Nazareti kilometa 110 kaskazini mwa Bethlehemu. Mariamu alikuwa amekaribia kujifungua na katika hali ya kawaida ya kibinadamu ilionekana kwamba angejifungulia Nazareti. Walakini tunaona mkono wa Mungu ukifanya kazi miongoni mwa binadamu, kuonyesha makusudi yake (angalia danieli 4:17), kwa maana wakati huu Kaizari Augustus alitoa amri kwamba dunia nzima ilipe kodi (yaani watu wote waorodheshwe). Hili lililazimu Yusufu na Mariamu wafanye safari ndefu kwenda kwa mji wa babu zao, Bethlehemu kwa madhumuni hayo (Luka 2:1-6) kilichoonekana kama uamuzi wa mbali wa mtawala wa Kipagani, kilikuwa kwa kweli kimeongozwa na mkono wa Mungu katika mashauri ya wanadamu kwa maana Yesu alikuwa azaliwe Bethlehemu (Luka 2:4-7, Mathayo 2:4-6). Pia Micah alitabiri kazi ya baadaye ya Yesu akisema angekuwa “Mtawala Israeli” Hili litatimizwa mpaka mpaka atakaporudi kuja kusimika ufalme wa Mungu duniani.

Habari zenye kufurahisha za kuzaliwa kwake.

Tukio hili lililosubiriwa kwa muda mrefu na vizazi na vizazi vya wacha Mungu wa kuume na kike liltangazwa na malaika kwa wachunga kondoo katika nyanda za Bethlehemu. “Msiogope; kwa maana, tazameni, nawaletea habari njema za furaha kuu kwa watu wote. Kwenu leo hii amezaliwa Mwokozi ambaye ni Kristo Bwana katika mji wa Daudi” (Luka 2:10-11).

Aya ya 10:
“Habari njema” Hii ni tafsiri ya neno lilelile ambalo mahali pengine limeandikwa “Injili”.
“Kwa watu wote” Habari njema inayohusiana na Yesu Kristo Bwana si kwa Wayahudi peke yao bali kwa watu wote, Wayahudi na watu wa mataifa sawia. Hizi habari njema ni mbiu ya uwokovu ambao Mungu ametoa kupitia kwake (Marko 16:15-16, Wagalatia 3:26-27)

Aya ya 11:
“Katika mji wa Daudi” Ndiyo kusema Bethlehemu, mji alipozaliwa Daudi (1 Samueli 16:1) Israeli ilitarajia mtawala ajaye atokee katika mji huu (Micah 5:1-2).
“Mkombozi” Mwanadamu ni mwenye mauti na dhambi na anahitaji kukombolewa kutoka katika kifo. Kupitia kwa Yesu Kristo Mungu ametupatia msamaha wa dhambi na matumaini ya kuchangia kutokufa na kristo wakati atakaporudi duniani (2 Timoteo 1:10; 1 Wakorinto 15:21-23, 51-54) kwa hiyo Yesu ni “Ukombozi wa mwanadamu utokao kwa Mungu.”

Wanajimu Kutoka Mashariki.

Miongoni mwa wale waliokuwa wamesoma unabii na kutarajia kuzaliwa kwa Kristo wakati huo ni “Wanajimu kutoka sehemu za Mashariki.” Mara tu walipofika Yerusalemu walianza kuuliza. “Yuko wapi yule aliyezaliwa akiwa mfalme wa Wayahudi?” (Math. 2:2) walielewa kutokana na Manabii kuwa hatima ya mtoto aliyezaliwa ni kuwa Mfalme wa Wayahudi akikalia kiti cha enzi cha Daudi (2 Samweli 7:12-14; Isaya 9:6-7)
Herode aliposikia udadisi wa Wanajimu alifadhaika na kuita Makuhani na Waandishi na “kuwataka wamwambie ni wapi Kristo alipokuwa amezaliwa” (Math. 2:4), walijua jibu mara moja kutokana na Nabii Micah wakamjibu: katika Bethlehemu ya Yuda (Micah 5:2; Math. 2:5-6).
Kutokana na hili twaona kuwa Wayahudi walifahamu kwamba:
 Kristo angezaliwa
 Katika Bethlehemu
 Na angetawala “watu wangu Israeli.”

Yesu Mwana wa Mungu na Mwana wa Binadamu.

Majina haya mawili, “mwana wa Mungu” na “Mwana wa Binadamu” yanatumika katika kumbukumbu zote za Injili. Yanaonyesha kuwa Mungu alikuwa baba yake na wakati huo huo akiwa mzao wa Adam alihusiana na mwanadamu ambaye yeye alikuja kuokoa. Tunaona hizi nasaha mbili zikitangazwa na Gabrieli katika maneno yake kwa Mariamu. Angekuja kuwa “Mwana wa Aliye Juu Zaidi” yaani wa Mungu na angekalia “kiti cha enzi cha Daudi, baba yake” (Luka 1:32; 2 Samweli 7:12-14; Matendo 2:30).
Paulo asema “Wakati ulipotimia “Mungu alimtuma mwanaye aliyezaliwa na mwanamke katika sheria” (Wagalatia 4:4) kuhusu mwanae Mungu aliweza kusema “Wewe ni mwanangu, leo hii nimekuzaa” (Zaburi 2:7, Waebrania 1:5; 5:5)
Ingawa kuzaliwa kwa Yesu kulibashiriwa muda mrefu na manabii kuwepo kwake kulianza mara Mungu kupitia Roho Yake Takatifu aliposababisha Mariamu kubeba mimba, miaka 2000 iliyopita (Luka 1:35)
Nabii Isaya anataja kuzaliwa kwa Yesu Kristo Bwana kwa jinsi hii: “Na yeye (mungu) aliona kuwa hapakuwa na yeyote, na kuwaza kwamba hapakuwa na mtetezi: kwa hiyo mkono wake ukaleta uwokovu kwake” (Isaya 59:16).

Mungu kwa kuona hali ya dhambi za binadamu na kwa kujua kwamba hapakuwa na yeyote ambaye angeonyesha utii mkamilifu au kumwokoa mwanadamu katika utumwa wa dhambi na mauti, alichukua hatua ya kumpata mtu ambaye kwa kupitia kwake angeleta uokovu. Alimtia nguvu huyo aliyezaliwa na mwanadamu ili ashinde dhambi na mauti na hiyo kufungua njia ya wokovu na uhai kwake mwenyewe na wengine wote ambao wangekuja kwa mungu kupitia kwake, “ kazi ya mwana wa Adamu imeainishwa katika Waebrania 2:6-18.

Ulazima wa mungu kujihusisha na wokovu wa mwanadamu kutoka katika dhambi ulitabiriwa tangu mwanzo, Aliposema “uzao wa mwanamke” ungekiponda kichwa cha “nyoka” kuonyesha kwamba Mungu angemfunika mwanamke kwa kivuli chake ili azae mwana ambaye angevunja nguvu ya dhambi ya nyoka Mwanzo 3:15; Waebrania 2:14, Wagalatia 4:4)

Uhusianao wa Yesu na Baba yake.

Yesu, kwa uangalifu aliueleza uhusiano wake na Baba yake, kila mara akitambua udogo wake kwake katika kila jambo, yesu alisema: “Baba yangu ni mkuu kuliko mimi” “Yoh.14:28 linganisha na Yoh 5:19, 30). Uhusiano huu wa Baba na Mwana ulionyesha umoja au mwafaka katika makusudio yao (Yoh 10:30) Alikuja kutekeleza matakwa ya Baba yake Yoh 5:30; Waeb 10:7) na kwa njia ya kupendeza alionyesha tabia ya Baba (Yoh 14:9)

Uhusiano huu mkuu ulieleweka wazi na kwanza kabisa kuandikwa akiwa na umri wa miaka 12: “Hamjui kwamba ni lazima niwe katika nyumba ya Baba yangu?” Alitambua kuwa Baba yake alikuwa amemlea kwa ajili ya kazi maalum na alikuwa amedhamiria kuifanya. Maisha yake yalikuwa ya kujitoa na utii kwa Baba yake, yakuishia katika mateso na kifo msalabani ambapo watu wangekombolewa katika dhambi na mauti.

Katika uhai wake wote aliweza kusema “Chakula changu ni mimi kufanya mapenzi yake aliyenituma na kumaliza (Yoh 4:34) Na hivyo katika zile saa za mateso kuelekea kutundikwa kwake msalabani aliomba apate nguvu katika bustani ya Gelsemane kwa maneno haya: Baba kama inawezekana, naomba kikombe hiki kinipite; hata hivyo sikulingana na mapenzi yangu lakini kulingana na mapenzi yako. “(Mathayo 26:39) mapenzi ya Baba yake yalikuwa na nguvu zaidi na ilibidi yatimizwe. Mateso yake ya kutisha msalabani yalipokwisha alipaza sauti kwa kuridhika na afueni: “Imekwisha “akainamisha kichwa na kukata roho akijua kuwa kazi yake ilikuwa imekamilishwa (Yoh 19:30) Aliweza kusema “Nimemaliza kazi uliyonipa kufanya” (Yoh 17:4).

Tunapotafakari mapenzi na utii ambao mwana alimfanyia Baba yake wakati wote tunaweza kuelewa kwa nini mungu alibainisha mara mbili: “Huyu ni mwanangu nimpendaye nipendezwaye naye” (Math. 3:17, 17:5)

Kwa heshima, tuelewe kwamba, Yesu, japo mwanaume aliyezaliwa na hulka ya kibinadamu alikuwa pia mwana wa Mungu, ambaye kwa kushinda dhambi na mauti alifufuliwa katika wafu na kupazwa mbinguni na kukalishwa upande wa kulia wa Baba yake.

Ni muhimu kwamba tunaelewa wazi uhusiano wa Baba na Mwanae ili kuifahamu kazi ya Yesu Kristo Bwana wetu. Kukosa kuelewa kumesababisha dhana potofu ya utatu kwamba yesu alikuwa mungu, sawa na wa milele kama Baba. Fundisho kama hilo halipatikani mahali popote katika Biblia, Kuwa ushahidi wa kutosha kabisa kuthibitisha kuwa fundisho hilo ambalo limekuja kuwa la msingi kwa imani za kikristo siku hizi halikuundwa hadi miaka 300 baada ya Kristo.

Maneno yanayotumiwa kwa kawaida na wale wanaoshikilia fundisho la utatu kama, Mungu Mwana “aliyesawa” na mwenye “umilele” na hata Utatu”, hayapatikani mahali popote katika Biblia. Hata wafuasi wa kanisa wanaoheshimika wanatambua kuwa fundisho hilo halimo katika Biblia, lilijengwa kama fundisho la lazima na watu walioongozwa na falsafa ya Kigiriki na kulishushia kwenye mafundisho rahisi ya Biblia. Kwa kuwa inakubalika kuwa hakiwezikueleweka kinaitwa “fumbo”, Na hili limewavunja wengi moyo wa kutafuta ukweli.

Yesu mwenyewe, kwa upande mwingine alisema ni suala la uzima wa milele kumjua Mungu: “Uzima wa milele ndio huu, waendelee kupata ujuzi juu yako wewe, Mungu wa pekee wa kweli na yule uliyemtuma Yesu Kristo (Yohana 17:3).

Mtume Paulo anaandika juu ya jambo hili kwa uwazi kabisa: kuma Mungu mmoja na mtetezi mmoja kati ya Mungu na wanadamu, Yesu Kristo (I Timotheo 2:5).


Yesu – neno lililogeuzwa kuwa Mtu

Mungu alimtangazia Musa na wana wa Israeli “Nitawainulia nabii kutoka katikati ya ndugu zao kama wewe; nami nitaweka maneno yangu katika kinywa chake, naye atawaambia maneno yote nitakayomwamuru na itatukia kwamba mtu ambaye hatasikiliza maneno yangu ambayo atayasema kwa jina langu mimi mwenyewe nitamtaka ajibu” (kumbukumbu 18:18 – 19, Hapa Mungu anatueleza mapema jinsi atakavyo ingilia kati masuala ya duniani na kumuinua mwana ambaye atamwagiza kunena maneno yake kwa taifa. Kwa kuwa aya hizi zimo katika mfumo wa wakati ujao Yesu, japo alikuwa katika mpango wa Mungu, hakuwepo wakati huo. Kwa kuwa Mungu alimuamuru mwanae kuweka maneno kinywani mwake, Yesu, pia aliitwa “Neno lililofanywa Mtu.
Tunasoma: “Neno lilifanywa Mtu na kuishi miongoni mwetu (na tuliona utukufu wake, utukufu kama wa mwana wa pekee wa Baba) uliojaa neema na ukweli” Yoh.1:14). Neno la Mungu halikuwa jambo la kinadharia tu bali lilokuwa na mwongozo wa kimaadili kwake ili kwamba alionyesha tabia halisi ya Baba yake akiwa amejaa neema na kweli. Hivyo yesu aliweza kumwambia Filipo; “yule aliyeniona mimi amemwana Baba na wewe utasemaje tuonyeshe baba yako?” Yoh. 14:9) Yesu hasemi kuwa yeye ndiye Baba, Anachosema ni “Ninafanya kile Mungu alichotaka nifanye na nina sema kile ambacho mungu amenitaka niseme kama umeniangalia utakuwa umeona kuwa ninewaonyesha tabia ya Baba yangu kwa sababau mimi ni mwanawe na siku zote ninatekeleza mapenzi yake” kabla ya kusulubiwa alimwomba Baba yake akisema “Nimelitambulisha jina lako kwa watu ulionipa duniani” (Yoh. 17:6)

Kila mara Yesu alikiri kuwa maneno aliyo kuwa akisema hayakuwa yake mwenyewe bali aliyofundishwa na Mungu: Sijajisemea Mwenyewe; bali Baba aliyenitumia akinipa amri, ninachotakiwa kusema na ninachopaswa kunena. Na ninajua kuwa amri yake ni uzima wa millele. Chochote ninachosema kwa hiyo ni kile Baba alichoniambia kwa hiyo ninasema (Yoh 12:49-50, 7:17, 8:28) Yesu alisisitiza siku zote kuwa alikuwa Mwana wa Mungu na mdogo kwa Baba yake.
Alisisitiza hivi: “Baba yangu ni Mkuu zaidi kuliko mimi” (Yoh.14:28) Wayahudi waliposema Yesu “anajifanya kuwa hawezi kufanya lolote peke yake,” na tena “Mimi peke yangu siwezi kufanya chochote” Yoh 5:18 – 19, 30)

Uhusiano huu mzuri kati ya Mungu na Mwanae ni wa msingi kueleweka kama tunataka kuamini ukweli. Yesu alisema “Huu ni uzima wa milele kwamba waweze kukujua wewe Mungu pekee wa kweli na Yesu Kristo uliyemtuma (Yoh. 17:3)


Maisha ya Yesu ya awali

Kumbukumbu za injili za twambia machache sana kuhusu maisha ya yesu kwanzia alipozaliwa hadi alipofikisha umri wa miaka 30, wakati alipotambulishwa katika taifa lake kwenye ubatizo wake na Yohana Mbatizaji (Luka 3:23)

Tukio peke yake lililoandikwa ni pale alipoandamana na Yusuf na Mariamu kwenda Yerusalemu kwenye sikukuu ya Pasaka alipokuwa na umri wa miaka 12, hapa tunasoma: “Yesu aliongezeka katika hekima na urefu na katika kupendwa na Mungu pamoja na wanadamu” (Luka 2:41 – 52)


MUHTASARI

 Kuzaliwa kwa Kristo kulikuwa kumetabiriwa na Nabii Isaya (Isaya 7:14; 9:6–7).
 Neno “Yesu” maana yake ni “Mungu (Yah) ataokoa”. Ni Mungu ndiye aliyemtoa Mwanae kwa wokovu wa Wanadamu katika dhambi na mauti (Math 1:21, linganisha na Isaya 45:21 – 22).
 Malaika Gabrieli alimtokea Mariamu na kumwambia kuwa angezaa mwana wa Mungu ambaye pia Mwana wa Daudi (Luka 1:31 – 33; 2 Samweli 7:12 – 14).
 Yesu alizaliwa akiwa yule aliyeahidiwa kukaa kwenye kiti cha Daudi, Yerusalemu mara kitakaporudishwa na atatawala milele (Luka 1:31 – 33, 2 Samweli 7:12 – 16).
 Bethlehemu ni mji ule ambapo Yesu angezaliwa (Micah 5:2, linganisha na Math 2:4 – 6, Luka 2:4 – 11 )
 Tabia ya Mungu ilidhihirishwa katika maisha ya Mwanae (Yoh 14:9,17:6) kwa kuwa siku zote alinena maneno ya Mungu aliitwa Neno lililofanywa mtu Yoh 1:14, Kumbukumbu 18:18 – 19; Yoh 12:49 – 50; 7:17; 8:28)
 Yesu ana tajwa kama “Mwana wa Mungu” Hakuna mahala popote katika Biblia alipotajwa kama “Mungu Mwana” wala hadai kuwa sawa na Mungu au wa milele na Mungu kama mafunzo ya utatu yanavyodai, Siku zote alikiri kuwa Baba yake alikuwa Mkuu kuliko yeye, (Yoh 14:28 Linganisha na 5:18 – 19, 30)

SOMO LA 18 – MASWALI

1. Jina “Yesu” lina maana gani?
2. Maneno ya Malaika Gabrieli yalibashiri nini kuhusu kazi ya Yesu Kristo?
3. Maneno haya yatatimizwa lini?
4. Yesu alizaliwa katika mji gani wa Israeli?
5. Kwa nini Yesu anaitwa Mwana wa Binadamu?
6. Mungu alimsema Yesu “Nitakuwa Baba yake nae atakuwa Mwanangu” (2 Samweli 7:12 – 14 na Waebrania 1:5) Je Yesu alikuwepo kabla ya kuzaliwa na Mariamu huko Bethlehemu?
7. Je Yesu alidhihirishaje Jina la Mungu katika maisha yake?
8. Yesu hakudai kuwa sawa na Mungu katika maisha yake. Nukuu kifungu kinacho sema Baba yake ni Mkuu kuliko yeye.

WAS MUHAMMAD SURE OF HIS DESTINY?!

Mohammad was not sure about his destination:
Mohammad Wasn't Sure about his destination while all the Bible prophets were surely knew that they were going to heaven after death.
Jabir reported that the Prophet of Islam said: "No good works of yours can ever secure heaven for you, nor can they save you from hell -- not even me, without the grace of God."
Abu Huraira related that when the verse, "Cause thy near relatives to fear," was revealed to the Prophet of Islam, the Prophet arose and began to proclaim: "Oh people of the Quraysh, and you sons of Abdul Manaf, and you Abbas, son of Abdul Muttalib, and you, Safiyyah my aunt, I cannot save you from the punishment of the Day of Resurrection. Take care of yourself, O my daughter Fatimah; you may use my property, but I cannot save you from God. Take care of yourself" (Bukhari).
Abu Huraira reported that the Prophet of Islam said: "No one of you will enter Paradise through his good works." They said: "Not even you, O Apostle of God?" "Not even I," he replied, "unless God cover me with His grace and mercy. Therefore be strong, and morning and evening, nay every moment, try to do good."
Mohmmad's prayer asking forgiveness:
Volume 1, Book 12, Number 711:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle used to keep silent between the Takbir and the recitation of Qur'an and that interval of silence used to be a short one. I said to the Prophet "May my parents be sacrificed for you! What do you say in the pause between Takbir and recitation?" The Prophet said, "I say, 'Allahumma, ba'id baini wa baina khatayaya kama ba'adta baina-l-mashriqi wa-l-maghrib. Allahumma, naqqim min khatayaya kama yunaqqa-ththawbu-l-abyadu mina-ddanas. Allahumma, ighsil khatayaya bil-ma'i wa-th-thalji wal-barad (O Allah! Set me apart from my sins (faults) as the East and West are set apart from each other and clean me from sins as a white garment is cleaned of dirt (after thorough washing). O Allah! Wash off my sins with water, snow and hail.)"
is Heaven promised in Islam?
Allah Promised hell for his followers:
Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)
Sura 3:185, "Every soul shall have a taste of death: And only on the Day of Judgment shall you be paid your full recompense. Only he who is saved far from the Fire and admitted to the Garden will have attained the object (of Life): For the life of this world is but goods and chattels of deception."
This Suras from Quran very clearly says that after death everyone will go to hell fire then judgment.. When a person went to hell fire then how and why it is possible that he/she can come out from hell fire and go to paradise.. no way.. This verse does not say anything about eternal life. This verse very clearly says that every believer in Allah is tasting death means they did not get the life while Jesus promised eternal life and heaven as we read in
John 10:10 "The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
And also every soul is going to hell fire till the day of judgment means they are not reaching heaven. So of course Allah promised hell fire for his believers. I said "no way" for coming out from the hell fire and go to heaven. There is no chance to go to heaven once you go to hell fire... But yes, Jesus can save you when you are still in this world as He said in John 3:15 "that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

How a person can save himself/herself from hell fire when he/she is already in hell fire? And this verse says that they will be there till the time of Day of Judgment. Do you think a person who is already in hell fire will get a seat in heaven after judgment? Judgment is a day when people get their sentence and verdict.. no reward my friend that day.
Allah promised hell fire for his followers but contrary to it Jesus promised heaven for His followers.


Mohammed foretold destination - Hell
The greatest difference between Allah and Elohim is that Allah promised hell fire and torture for his follower while Elohim promised heaven and eternal life for his followers! Mohammed could portrait and visualize it while he was in this world as we read in this Hadith:
Volume 1, Book 12, Number 770:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?" He replied, "Do you have any doubt in seeing the full moon on a clear (not cloudy) night?" They replied, "No, O Allah's Apostle!" He said, "Do you have any doubt in seeing the sun when there are no clouds?" They replied in the negative. He said, "You will see Allah (your Lord) in the same way. On the Day of Resurrection, people will be gathered and He will order the people to follow what they used to worship. So some of them will follow the sun, some will follow the moon, and some will follow other deities; and only this nation (Muslims) will be left with its hypocrites. Allah will come to them and say, 'I am Your Lord.' They will say, 'We shall stay in this place till our Lord comes to us and when our Lord will come, we will recognize Him. Then Allah will come to them again and say, 'I am your Lord.' They will say, 'You are our Lord.' Allah will call them, and As-Sirat (a bridge) will be laid across Hell and I (Muhammad) shall be the first amongst the Apostles to cross it with my followers. Nobody except the Apostles will then be able to speak and they will be saying then, 'O Allah! Save us. O Allah Save us.'

There will be hooks like the thorns of Sa'dan in Hell. Have you seen the thorns of Sa'dan?" The people said, "Yes." He said, "These hooks will be like the thorns of Sa'dan but nobody except Allah knows their greatness in size and these will entangle the people according to their deeds; some of them will fall and stay in Hell forever; others will receive punishment (torn into small pieces) and will get out of Hell, till when Allah intends mercy on whomever He likes amongst the people of Hell, He will order the angels to take out of Hell those who worshipped none but Him alone. The angels will take them out by recognizing them from the traces of prostrations, for Allah has forbidden the (Hell) fire to eat away those traces. So they will come out of the Fire, it will eat away from the whole of the human body except the marks of the prostrations. At that time they will come out of the Fire as mere skeletons. The Water of Life will be poured on them and as a result they will grow like the seeds growing on the bank of flowing water......
Let us analyze this Hadith and see what does it say?
This Hadith says that Mohammed is not in heaven right now but he is waiting for the 'Day of Judgment' to go into heaven and he will be the first to cross the bridge to go to heaven as we read this, "Then Allah will come to them again and say, 'I am your Lord.' They will say, 'You are our Lord.' Allah will call them, and As-Sirat (a bridge) will be laid across Hell and I (Muhammad) shall be the first amongst the Apostles to cross it with my followers. Nobody except the Apostles will then be able to speak and they will be saying then, 'O Allah! Save us. O Allah Save us.' "
Hadith Volume 1, Book 8, Number 345 also says that while Mohammed was in this world he ascended into heaven and saw many prophets and other Bible characters like Adam, Moses, Jesus and Abraham. And he saw the paradise while he was still alive and on this earth but why he should wait to go to heaven after his death? I asked many Muslims where Mohammed is right now and why he is waiting for the 'Day of Judgment? Why he could not reach heaven while he saw many ancient prophets and the first human of this planet earth - Adam who lived many thousands of years before Mohammed. All are in heaven but Mohammed says, he will reach heaven on the Day of Judgment, why? But no Muslim could reply these questions.
Yes, my friend, death is not the end of your life. There is a life after death and the God of the Bible promised heaven for those whose sins are forgiven. All the Bible prophets were dead sure that they are going to heaven after death but Mohammed was not. It is because Allah does not promise eternal life for anybody. The Hadith further says that Mohammed will say, 'O Allah! Save us. O Allah Save us.' But the Bible says that there is no hope after death for our salvation. We have to get salvation in this world itself as we read in Isaiah 38:17-18, "Indeed it was for my own peace That I had great bitterness; But You have lovingly delivered my soul from the pit of corruption, For You have cast all my sins behind Your back. For Sheol cannot thank You, Death cannot praise You; Those who go down to the pit cannot hope for Your truth.
When David sinned against God, he asked God to restore the joy of salvation as we read in Psalms 51:12, "Restore to me the joy of Your salvation, And uphold me by Your generous Spirit."
David was saved when he was in this world itself. Isaiah got the forgiveness of his sins while he was in this world itself. So Bible makes it clear that we have to get saved in this world itself and that after death there is no hope to know God or to get salvation.
The same Hadith that I quoted above says this, "He will order the angels to take out of Hell those who worshipped none but Him alone. The angels will take them out by recognizing them from the traces of prostrations, for Allah has forbidden the (Hell) fire to eat away those traces. So they will come out of the Fire, it will eat away the whole of the human body except the marks of the prostrations. At that time they will come out of the Fire as mere skeletons. The Water of Life will be poured on them and as a result they will grow like the seeds growing on the bank of flowing water....."
This Hadith clearly says that the followers of Allah are going straight to hell fire as this Hadith says that Allah will order the angels to take out of Hell those who worshipped none but Allah alone. And angels will recognize them by the marks of prostrations.
But how sad it is that Muslims are waiting to go to this horrible place. How sad it is that they are following a god who promised hell fire for them. How sad it is that they put all their trust and belief on Allah with all their heart and with all their passion just to go to Hell fire! But no, there is a way out, there is a God who gives eternal life and heaven to His followers whose name is Jesus. Jesus said in John 5:24 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.
Yes, after death there is no chance to come out of hell fire but you can have assurance of heaven in this world itself through Jesus. Further this Hadith says, "So they will come out of the Fire, it will eat away from the whole of the human body except the marks of the prostrations. At that time they will come out of the Fire as mere skeletons. The Water of Life will be poured on them and as a result they will grow like the seeds growing on the bank of flowing water"
But this is not true saying! Jesus came to give the "living water" or 'Water of Life' while we are in this world itself. Jesus said to the Samaritan woman in John 4:10, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water."
We can receive this living water i.e. Holy Spirit in this world itself. When Jesus was about to go from this world He promised to send His Holy Spirit and He fulfilled His promise. After 50 days of His ascension to heaven He sent His Holy Spirit and filled them. (Acts 2:4) And Jesus also said in John 7:38 "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water."
Yes, my friend, you need not to wait till the 'Day of Judgment' and after being removed from hell fire as the Hadith says, but living water is available freely for you when you are still in this world. You can receive this living water and live forever and forever in heaven!
So we can clearly draw a line between Allah and Elohim and we can say that Allah and Elohim are not same God but opposite to each other. If they are the same God then why did they promise two different things? Both of them should have promised heaven and eternal life. But we can see that Allah promised hell fire and eternal doom for his followers but Elohim/Yahweh/Jesus promised heaven and eternal life for His followers!
If you want this eternal life and if you want to go to heaven please pray this prayer with me:
Loving Jesus, I am a sinner and I know that by my own efforts I can not achieve forgiveness of my sins or salvation. Please save me from my sins and hell fire and please give me eternal life so that I may never go into hell fire but have eternal life and live in peace and joy with you. Please save me Lord. I confess all my sins before you and I invite you to come into my life. Please come into my life and give me assurance of heaven. Thank you for listening to my prayers. I give you all the glory. I pray in the mighty name of Jesus, Amen.

HAKUNA MABADILIKO KATIKA MANENO YA ALLAH

HAKUNA MABADILIKO KATIKA MANENO YA ALLAH:

DIBAJI

Fikira na mawazo yetu ni kipaji kutoka kwa Mungu.lakini kwa kuwa mawazo yetu yana kikomo ni kosa kufikiri mawazo yetu yanaweza kufahamu yote kuhusu Mungu aliye mkuu.Msingi wa kitabu hiki kwa kuhusiana na imani ya kikristo ni kwamba Biblia ndiyo msingi wetu juu ya imani na matendo.

Kwa vile haja yakutafsiri kitabu hiki ilikuwa kubwa mno, niliombwa kufanya kazi hii nzito nami namshukuru Mungu kwa kuniwezesha.

Wayahudu kwa uangalifu mkubwa wameweza kuhifadhi maandiko yote katika lugha ya kiebrania na kiaramu hadi hivi leo.Wakristo tumekubali kupokea agano la kale kutoka mkononi mwa Wayahudi kwa mamlaka ya bwana Yesu Masihi mwenyewe.Vitabu vilivyopokelewa na Wakristo vilibakia vivyo hivyo kama vilivyokuwa wakati wa wayahudi waliokuwa wakiishi zamani za Masihi na vingali hivyo katika nchi zote hata hivi leo.

Sheikh Muhammad kamal anabainisha wazi ni kwa nini Wakristo hatuamini kuwa Bibilia imegeuzwa.Uamuzi huu si wa kihisia tu bali inatoa hoja thabiti inayotokana na Uchunguzi wa mambo kwa makini.Ni upuuzi kwa mtu yeyote kujidai kuwa anaweza kuelewa kila jambo kuhusu ufunuo wa mungu tuliopewa katika maandiko ya Biblia.Hata hivyo ninaamini hivi ni kuonyesha upungufu katika vitabu vilivyofunuliwa.

Ndugu yangu naamini utayathamini aliyoyaeleza humu, kuwa Biblia ni yenye kuaminika na kwamba utajisomea ushahidi uliomo.

Ni imani yangu kwamba,ewe ndugu yangu mwislamu utakaposoma kitabu hiki kwa makini na kwa moyo wa uwazi utaweza kutambua,kweli kwamba Biblia takatifu iliyo kusanya vitabu vya Taurati ,Zaburi na Injili na vitabu vya manabii wengine haijachafuliwa wala kuharibikacwala kufutwa aya zake.Bali Mungu anayelinda maneno yake na atayalinda daima dawamu kama alivyoahidi.

Asante nyingi kwa Sheikh Muhammad na hasa wote mlio kubali kusoma na kufanya masahihisho ya mwisho kabla ya kupiga chapa kwa tafsiri hii ya Kiswahili iliyofanywa nami Mwalimu Chaka wa Musa.














HAKUNA MABADILIKO KATIKA MANENO YA ALLAH:


Kwa jina la Mwenyezi Mungu Mwingi wa Rehema Mwenye kurehemu.

Kwanza yanipasa nimshukuru Mola wetu mlezi ambaye ametupa uwezo wa kununa na kutumia karama ya fikra na kututenganisha na viumbe wengine wote. Baada ya kuipokea na kuikubali njia ya Bwana, na mwongozo wake, matokeo yake ni makuu na yametimizwa na ahadi ya uzima wa milele mbinguni. Kutakuwa na baraka tele na furaha kwani ALLAH amesema: ‘kwa wale wafuatao imani, kutakuwa na zawadi tele zaidi ya chochote chenye kufikiriwa, zaidi ya chochote kionekanacho au kinachosikika.’

Ebu tutumaini kuwa miongoni mwa hao watao bahatika.

Mola wetu aliyetupa akili timamu na fikra safi pia atatuongoza na kutuelekeza, kuona mwanga na kweli utakaotuongoza kwa usalama. Bwana uufanye mkono wetu unyoke kufikilia uwongofu.

Mungu mkuu amefanya tangazo hili:
“Msiliongeze neno niwaamuru wala msilipunguze, mpate
kusishika amri za BWANA, Mungu wenu mwaamuzi’ Kumb 4:2

Na mwishoni kwa injili tukufu, tunasoma onyo kali.

‘Namshuhudia kila mtu ayasikiaye maneno ya unabii wa kitabu hiki, mtu yeyote akiyaongeza, Mungu atamwongezea hayo mapigo yaliyoandikwa katika kitabu hiki. Na mtu yeyote akiondoa lolote katika maneno ya unabii wa kitabu hiki,Mungu atamwondelea sehemu yake katika ule mti wa uzima na katika ule mji mtakatifu ambao habari zake zimeandikwa katika kitabu hiki.’ Ufunuo 22:18-19.

Baada ya amri hizi nzito namna hii, Je pana mtu yeyote mwaminifu atakayeleta changamoto kwa neno la Mungu au kulibadilisha neno la BWANA?

Imefikiriwa na baadhi ya Waisilamu wengi kwamba Biblia (Yaani Taurati, Zabur na Injili) imechafuliwa na kubadilishwa mara nyingi wakati tofauti tofauti , ima kwa kuongeza jambo ndani yake au kwa kuondoa jambo humo ndani. Kwa muda mrefu watu wenye mawazo haya wamejaribu kuleta hoja dhidi ya Biblia ijapo kwa kweli bado hawajafaulu kuleta ushindi kamilifu kwao basi ni wazi kwamba wamepoteza msingi wote kwa madai yao.


Ndungu yangu Muislamu,ni jambo la ajabu kwamba watu leo hii bado wangali wanadai kwamba Biblia (Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) imefanyiwa mabadiliko ambayo yanaleta utata kati ya Biblia halisi ya awali na Quran. Ni jambo lakusikitisha kwani Quran inashuhudia Biblia, kwamba Biblia kwa kweli ni maneno ya ALLAH, Yaliyoletwa na Mola wetu mwema kuwa nuru , muongozo na rehema. Biblia kwa kweli ni neno la ALLAH ambalo halijawahii kubadilishwa au kuletewa ushindani. Qurani inashuhudia ukweli huu, kwamba hapana mabadiliko katika maneno ya ALLAH.

Ushahidi wa kuunga mkono usahihi wa Biblia ni mwingi zaidi ya uvuli wowote wa shaka. Qurani inatupa ushahidi , Ndungu yangu Muislamu , unaushuhudia ukweli kwamba , Taurati ni kitabu kilicholetwa kutoka kwa Mola wetu mlezi kwa bwana wetu Musa, kuwa muongozo na rehema kwa walimwengu.

‘Hakika sisi tuliteremsha Taurati yenye uwongofu na nuru…
Q 5:44

Ni wazi kuwa Taurati imetoka kwa BWANA:

‘Sema : Nani aliyoteremsha kitabu alicho kuja nacho Musa,
chenye nuru na uwongofu kwa watu.’ Q6:9


Pasi na shaka ni wazi kuwa Taurati tumepewa kutoka kwa BWANA wetu MLEZI. Mwenyezi .

‘Na hakika tulimpa Musa kitabu na tukafuatisha baada yake
Mitume wengine” Q 2:7

Ni vyema tukumbuke kwamba Taurati aliyokabitiwa Musa:imeitwa “kitabu”

‘Na tulipo mpa Musa kitabu na pambanuo (baina ya haki na
baatili) ili mpata kuongoka.’’ Q 2:53


Hapo pia pana kiashiria ina ukweli kwamba. Taurati alipewa Musa (kitabu na kipambanuzi) Al – Baidwawi anasema katika ufafanuzi wa aya hii:
(Yeye ni miongoni mwa wafafanuzi wazuri na wanaokubalika) kwamba pambanuo inamaanisha kwamba Taurati iljumuisha maana ya kitabu kilicho weka utofauti bayana baina ya halali na haramu, haki na baatili.

“Na kwa yaini tuliwapa Musa na Haaruni kipambanuzi na
mwangaza, na makumbusho kwa wachamungu” Q 21:48


Al – Baidwawi alisema katika ufafanuzi wake kwamba Taurati ni mwangaza, ni nuru ya kuwaongoza watu wafuate njia ya kheri kuwatoa kwenye kufa moyo na ujinga wa kutofahamu, kuwaongoza watu kwenye kweli ambao ndio utakaowaokoa.


MUKHUTASARI: Ni bayana kwetu , ndungu yangu Muislamu, kutokamana na ufafanuzi huu wote , kwamba Taurati ni kitabu alichopewa Musa na Mola mlezi kama mwongozo, nuru na rehema kwa ulimwengu. Kwa maana hiyo: kwa kuwa Taurati ililetwa na ALLAH.(Quran inapeana ushahidi wa kutosha). Basi ni wazi kuwa Taurati ni maneno ya ALLAH mtukufu.

“Na tulikwisha andika katika zaburi – nacho ni kitabu cha David baada ya Taurati kwamba nchi watairithi waja wangu walio wema wapate kuitengeneza na kuusahilisha njia za maisha bora humo.”
(Bali wenye upole watairithi nchi.” Zaburi 37:11

wenye haki watairithi nchi, nao watakaa humo milele.” Zaburi 37:29


Na sasa kwako ndungu yangu Muislamu, huu hapa ushahidi wa Qurani, unaoshuhudia kwamba zaburi alipewa Nabii Daudi.


‘Na hakika tumewafadhilisha baadhi ya manabii kuliko wengine; na Daudi tulimpa zaburi.’ Q 17:55

“Na hakika tulikwisha andika katika zaburi baada ya kumbukumbu, ya kwamba nchi watairithi waja wangu walio wema.’’21:105



MUKHTASARI: Ni wazi sasa kwako ndungu yangu Muislamu, kwamba Mwenyezi Mungu amepeana Zaburi kwa mja wake Daudi na ALLAH ( Qurani inashuhudia jambo ili) hivyo basi Zaburi ni neno la ALLAH.


Sasa ndungu yangu Muislamu, ukweli huko bayana kwamba injili pia ililetwa kutoka kwa ALLAH wa Bwana wetu Isa Massihi kuwa nuru mwongozo na mfano kwa wachamungu.

‘Na wahukumu watu wa injili kwa yale aliyoteremsha Mwenyezi Mungu ndani yake.’ Q 5: 47


Na huu ndiyo ushahidi wa ukweli kwamba kila kilichomo ndani ya injili kilipeanwa na Bwana wetu.


“ Na sisi tuliwaamrisha wafuasi wa Isa yaani . Watu wa injili , wakristo, wahukumu kwa hukumu alizo teremsha mwenyezi Mungu. Na wasio hukumu kwa musibu wa alivyo teremsha Mwenyezi Mungu basi hao wameiacha sharia ya mwenyezi Mungu, ni waasi.”

“Amekuteremshia kitabu kwa haki, kinacho sadikisha yaliyo kuwa kabla yake. Na aliteremsha Taurati na Injili Kabla yake, ziwe uwongofu kwa watu. Na akateremsha Furqani (Upambanuo)”



Kutokamana na ushahidi huu, ni bayana kuwa injili imetoka kwa Bwana kuongoza ulimwengu wote kama vile Qurani ilivyotambua Taurati na Biblia kuwa kipambanuzi. Ni vyema pia kutambua usawa uliopo baina ya Taurati , Injili na Quran


“Enyi watu wa kitabu, mbona mnabishana juu ya Ibrahim, na hali Taurati na Injili hazikuteremshwa ila baada yake” Q3: 65


Twaweza kuona kwa uhakika, jinsi gain ilivyo bayana kwamba Taurati na Injili zote zilipeanwa na ALLAH.


“Na tukawafuatishia hao Isa bin Maryamu kuyahakikisha yaliyo kuwa kabla yake katika Taurati , na tukampa injili ilyomo ndani yake uwongofu, na nuru na inayo. Sadikisha yaliyo kuwa kabla yake katika Taurati, na uwongofu na mawaidha kwa wachamungui.’’ Q 5:46


Kwa mara nyingine tena, twaona kuwa injili aliyopatiwa kwa bwana wetu Isa iwe muongozo na nuru.



‘Tena tukafuatisha nyuma yao mitume wengine, na tukamfuatisha Isa bin Mariamu, na wengine tukampa injili. Na tukajaalia katika nyoyo za waliomfuatia upole na rehema.”


Tena kwa mara nyingine Quran inatuakikishia kuwa injili imetolewa kwa Allah kwa Bwana wetu Issa


MUKHUTASARI: Kutokamana na haya yote, ni wazi kwetu sote ndungu yangu Muislamu, kwamba injili imepeanwa na ALLAH mtukufu, kwa bwana wetu Issa kama mwongozo na nuru ya ulimwengu . Na hivyo basi kwa kuwa injili ni kitabu kilichopeanwa na ALLAH.( Quran inashuhudia hili) hivyo basi injili ni neno la Allah.

Ndungu yangu Muislamu, hapa pia utapata ushahidi mwingi zaidi kuhusu uhalali na usafi wa Biblia Tkatifu ( Taurati, Zaburi na injili katika sehemu zake zote.

“Nasi hatukuwatuma kabla yako ila watu wanaume tulio wapa wahyi (ufunuo). Basi waulizeni wenye ukumbusho kama nyinyi hamjui.” Q 16:43

“ Tungependa tungeli wateremshia kutokamana na aya hizi mbili za Bwana wetu mlezi kwa yeyote yule muisilamu ni wazi kuwa:

1.Unabii wote kutoka kwa ALLAH ambao ulipewa kwa hao watu wa Mungu kabla ya Muhammad kwa kweli na bila shaka ulitoka kwake Allah. Mola wao. Zingatia neno,Kabla yako ewe Muhamad na vilevile neno ‘uliopewa wewe ewe Muhammad.

2.Kwa kuwa Musa na Daudi ni miongoni mwa manabii wakuu walioshi kabla ya Muhammad vitabu vyao vilitoka kwa Mola mlezi. Na kwa vile Musa alihubiri Taurati, Daudi Zaburi na Isa Injili , vitabu hivi vitatu vitakuwa vimetoka kwa ALLAH.

3. Neno “Alipewa” linammanisha kwamba yote waliyopewa yalikuwa ni maneno ya ALLAH kwa maana hiyo;Taurati Zaburi na Injili vyote ni maneno ya ALLAH mtukufu.


“Hakika sisi tumekuletea wahyi wewe kama tulivyo wapelekea wahyi Nuhu na Manabii walio kuwa baada yake. Natulimpelekea wahyi Ibrahim na Ishmail na Is – haka, na Yaakub na wajukuu zake, na Isa na Ayub na Yunus na Harun na Suleiman, na Daudi tukampa Zaburi” Q 4 :163

Kutokamana na haya twaweza fikia hatima hii:

a. Maneno yaliyoshushwa kutoka kwa ALLAH kwa Muhamad yalikuwa sawa kama yale ya Nuhu na manabii wengine waliomfuata (kumbuka na zingatia neno uliyopewa ewe Muhammad)
b. Kwa vile Musa Daudi na Isa wote walikuja baada ya Nuhu, mafundisho yao yalitoka kwa Mola wao Mlezi .Ivyo pia vitabu vyao vyote (Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) yalitoka kwa Mola kulingana na uisilamu yalikuwa ni maneno ya ALLAH yaliyopewa kwa Musa , Daudi na Isa.


MUKHTASARI: Kutokamana na haya, ni wazi kwa Muisilamu yeyote kwamba Qurani kwa bayana inatangaza kwamba Biblia Takatifu (Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) imetoka kwa mwenyezi Mungu. Tazama (Q 26: 3:16:43, 4:163)


Ndungu yangu muisilamu haya ndiyo majina ya sifa ya Taurati na Injili kama yalivyotajwa ndani ya Qurani :

1. Qurani inavipa Taurati na Injili jina la “KITABU”

“Sema:Enyi watu wa kitabu! hamna lenu jambo mpaka muishike Taurati na Injili na yote mlio teremshiwa kutokamana na Mola wetu mlezi.” Q 5:68
“Ewe mtume! Waambie watu wa kitabu (yaani Biblia). Hakimka ninyi hamtakuwa mnafuata dini sahihi ila mtazitangaza hukumu zote za Qurani”
Q 25:63

“Wala msijadiliane na watu wa kitabu ila kwa njia iliyo nzuri kabisa.”Q 29:46


“Enyi mlio pewa kitabu ! Aminini tuliyo yateremsha yenye kusadikisha yale mliyo nayo” Q:4:47


“Watu wa kitabu wanakutaka uwateremshie kitabu kutoka mbinguni. Q 4 : 153

Kutokamana na haya twaona wazi kuwa Qurani inaipa Taurati na Injili neno ‘kitabu” ushahidi huu unaungwa mkono pale Qurani inapowatambua wayahudi na wakristo kama “Watu wa kitabu” neno ambalo limerejelewa mara 20 ndani ya Qurani.


2. Qurani inaipa Taurati na Injili sifa ya kuitwa “Dhikr”(Ujumbe wa Mungu)


“Na kabla yako hatukuwatuma watu ila wanaume tulio wapa wahyi (ufunuo). Basi waulizeni wenye kumbukumbu ikiwa ninyi hamjui” Q 21:7


Nukuu hii imetajwa katika ufafanuzi wa AL-Jalaleen (uk357) akihitimiza kuwa Qurani inatambua Taurati na Injili kama ‘Al-Dhikir’


MUKHUTASARI: Maneno haya “kitabu” na “Al-Dhikir” ni majina ambayo pia Qurani inajitambua kwao.Kwa kuwa Qurani inaipa Biblia Takatifu jina lilelile lake, huu ni ushahidi tosha kwamba Taurati na Injili vimetoka kwa Bwana Mungu.


“Amekuteremshia kitabu kwa haki, kinacho sadikisha yaliyokuwa kabla yake. Na aliteremsha Taurati na Injili. Q 3:3


Haya yote yana dhihirisha wazi kuwa Qurani inatambua Taurati na Injili kuwa na uongozi , nuru, Rehema na Ufunuo.Qurani pia inatuhakikishia kuwa Taurati na Injili vimetoka kwa Mola wetu mlezi



UHAKIKA KUTOKA KWA QURANI:

1. Taurati, Zaburi na Injili vyote ni vitabu vya kibinguni tulivyo pewa na Mola wetu mlezi (Q5:46,17:55,3:3)
2. Taurati, Zaburi na Injili vyote ni sawa sawa na Qurani. (Q 16: 43, 4:163)
3. Qurani vilevile inatambuliwa kwa majina yaleyale ya Taurati na Injili (“kitabu” na “Al – Dhikir) Taz Q 21: 7, 20:99,113
4. Qurani inaelezea kuwa Taurati na injili ni vitabu vitakavyostahiki kuwa vitabu vya mwenyezi Mungu.

Kutokamana na haya yote, Ndungu yangu muisilamu, twaona wazi kuwa Qurani inanakiri kuwa Biblia Takatifu ( Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) ni maneno ya Mungu mkuu.

Huenda kweli utakubali kuwa Biblia Takatifu (Taurati,Zaburi na Injili) ni neno la Mola mlezi kwa kuwa Qurani inashuhudia jambo hilo. Lakini unaweza kusema kwamba baadaye imefanyiwa mageuzi na kubadilishwa. Pia waweza kuwa na fikira kama za ndungu zetu wengine kuwa kweli Taurati ni kitabu kilichotoka kwa Mola wetu kwa kuwa Qurani inashuhudia hilo, lakini Taurati ilifanyiwa mageuzi baada ya Musa na kwa sababu hiyo Mola wetu akampa Injili bwana wetu Isa mwana wa Mariamu. Hata hivyo watu hawa husema pia kwamba injili nayo imefanyiwa mageuzi na ndio maana Allah akaleta Qurani kuwa ukurasa wa Mwisho wa ufunuo wake.

Ebu nikwambie ndungu yangu muisilamu , kwamba Qurani yenyewe inashuhudia ukweli kwamba hapakuwa na mageuzi au mabadiliko yoyote katika maneno ya ALLAH baada ya kupitiwa Musa , Daudi na Isa.

“Hakika sisi ndio tulio teremsha ukumbusho huu na hakika sisi ndio tutaoulinda” Q 15:9

Nukuu hii inadhihirisha bayana kuwa Taurati na Injili vyote vimetoka kwa Allah na vimelindwa bila mabadiliko yoyote. Waweza ukadhani ndungu yangu muisillamu;kwamba Qurani ndiyo inayo ashiria kinapotajwa kitabu kitakatifu (Al – Dhikr) wala za Taurati na Injili. Lakini tukumbuke kuwa Qurani yenyewe ndio iliyo vipa kitabu hivi viwili sifa ya Al – Dhikr.”

“Na hakika tulikwisha andika katika Zaburi baada ya kumbukumbu, ya kwamba nchi watairithi waja wangu walio wema” Q 21: 105

Ni wazi kwako sasa kwamba kitabu kitakatifu (Al – Dhikr) kinamaanisha Taurati na wala sio Qurani: ushahidi ukiwa kwamba Zaburi imekuja baada ya Taurati, wala sio baada ya Qurani.

“Na kabla yako hatukuwatuma watu ila wanaume tulio wapa wahyi (ufunuo). Basi waulizeni wenye kumbukumbu ikiwa ninyi hamjui.” Q 21: 7


Wataalamu na wanavyioni akiwemo Al – Jalaleen (uk 357) na Ibn Kathir (uk 502) wanashikilia maoni kuwa watu waliotajwa katika Al – Dhikr ni wayahudi na wakristo. Sasa utakubaliana nami, ndungu yangu muisilamu, kwamba Taurati na Injili vimetolewa kwa Allah na vyote vimelindwa kutokamana na mageuzi na mabadiliko yoyote yale.

MUKHTASARI: Sote twatambua wazi kwamba Qurani inashuhudia ukweli kwamba hapajakuwa na mabadiliko katika maneno ya Allah na kwamba Biblia ( yaani Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) ni neno la ALLAH kama tulivyotibitisha kwa aya mbalimbali za Qurani.

HATIMA:

Maneno ya Allah yaliyokuja katika Biblia yamesalia bila mageuzi au mabadiliko, kama vile kila muisilamu mwenye ujuzi wa kitabu awezavyo kuona. Kwa hivyo ndungu yangu muisilamu unaposema hata sasa kuwa Biblia ( Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) vimechafuliwa na kufanyiwa mabadiliko; kwa maneno mengine unasema hivi:

1. Qurani sio sahihi

Ni wazi kuwa Qurani inatuhakikishia kuwa maneno ya Mola wetu mlezi hayabadiliki ila bado wewe washikilia kuwa Biblia Takatifu imefanyiwa mabadiiko.

2. Allah anadhunishwa

Kwa kuwa unaashilia kuwa ALLAH alishindwa kuyalinda maneno yake, ingawaje Qurani imeshuhudia kwamba hapatakuwa na mabadiliko katika maneno ya Allah.

3. Qurani imefanyiwa mabadiliko

Ikiwa Biblia Takatifu (Yaani Taurati, zaburi na Injili vimewahi kubadilishwa; waeweze kufikria kinachoweza kufanyika kuhusiana na Qurani Takatifu.

Ebu nikuuleze swali ewe ndungu yangu muisilamu , ikiwa kweli iliwezekana Biblia Takatifu kufanyiwa mabadiliko: Je mabadiliko haya yalifanywa lini? Je ilikuwa kabla au baada ya kuja uisilamu? Ikiwa undisi kwa mageuzi haya yalifanywa kabla ya uisilamu; Je inakuwaje basi kwamba Qurani inashuhudia na kuisifu Taurati na Injili? Badala ya mashambulizi kutoka kwa Qurani kuhusu Taurati na Injili hapana chochote ila sifa na kuvitakasa.

Ndungu yangu Muisilamu, sote twaweza kuona wazi kuwa ni yule mtu asiyekuwa na ujuzi wa Qurani tu awezaye kuwa na mawazo kama hayo ; kwani pamekuwepo na ushahidi mwingi wa kuthibitisha kwamba Biblia Takatifu ilikuwepo kabla na hata baada ya kuja ka uisilamu na imebakia vile vile bila mageuzi au mabadiliko.

“Na huwaje wakufanye wewe hakimu nao wanayo Taurati yenye hukumu za mwenyezi Mungu? Q 5:43

Utagundua kwamba kuna tukio la kiajabu lililotokea zamani za Nabii Muhammad ( Tazama Ibn Kathir, uk 517-518).

Inasemekana kwamba kundi la wayahudi walikuja kwa Mtume Muhammmad wakimtaka kuhukumu baina ya wawili mume na mwanamke walioshikwa katika tendo la zinaa. Mtume akawaamuru wairejelee Taurati. Walipojaribu kuificha sehemu iliyotaja kwamba adhabu ya wazinifu ni kuuwawa kwa kupigwa mawe , mtume Muhammad alitambua hiana zao na akawaingiza waifuate Taurati. Hivyo basi wale wazinifu wawili wakapigwa mawe hata kufa.Huu ni ushahidi bayana kwako ndungu yangu muisilamu, kwamba Taurati ilikuwa bado haijachafuliwa wala kufanyiwa mageuzi.

“Sema Enyi watu wa kitabu! Hamna lenu jambo mpaka muishike Taurati na Injili na yote mlioteremsiwa kutoka na Mola wenu mlezi.”Q 5:68

“Ewe mtume! Waambie watu wa kitabu (yaani Biblia) hakika nyinyi hamtakuwa mnafuata dini sahihi ila mtapo zitangaza hukumu zote za Taurati na Injili ni mkazitenda.”

Tazama Ibn Kathir, uk 535. Utaona kuwa Taurati na Injili sote zilikuwepo sawia na Qurani na bila mabadiliko yeyote.Laiti sivyo, basi Qurani isingeli wataka wayahudi na wakristo wote pamoja, waambatane, waishike na waifuate Taurati na Injili.

“Na wahukumu watu wa Injili kwa yale aliyoteremsha mwenyezi Mungu ndani yake na wasio hukumu kwa yale aliyo yateremsha mwenyezi Mungu, basi hao ndio wapotofu.’

Tena tazama Ibn Kathir uk 523 utagundua kwamba Quraniiliwaamurisha wakristo wajihukumu kwa hukumu za Biblia maishani mwao. Litakuwa jambo lisilo wezekana kwa Qurani kuagiza jambo ili ikiwa Biblia yenyewe imefanyiwa mageuzi ya namna yeyote wakati wowote.

“Huwaoni wale waliopewa sehemu ya kitabu? Wanaitwa kukiende kitabu cha mwenyezi Mungu ili kuwahukumu baina yao; kasha baadhi yao wanageuka wanakikataa” Q3:23

Swali la muhimu hapa, ndungu yangu muisilamu ni hili: Inamkinikaje, inawezekanaje kwa Qurani kuwataka Wayahudi wairejee Taurati ili wapate hukumu ya Mumgu ? Lazima sote tukubaliane kwamba haiwezekani jambo ili ikiwa Taurati ingelikuwa kweli imegeuzwa na kwamba mabadiliko haya yalikuwepo hata zamani za uteremsho wa Qurani.

Ukweli kuwa Qurani inawaita wayahudi na wakristo kufuata hukumu za Taurati na Injili mtawalia , ni ishara na ushahidi mwingine kuonyesha kuwa Taurati na injili havijafanyiwa mabadiliko . Mwana historia Al – Badwawi amenakiri kuwa mtume Muhammad alikuwa na mazoea ya kutembelea shule za wayahudi ambamo Taurati ilifundishwa. Wakati mtufulani (Naiem bin Amir) alipomuuliza kuhusu, imani ipi aliyoishika alijibu “Mimi n ijitolea Ibrahimu na Taurati”
“Enyi mliopewa kitabu! Aminini tuliyoyateremsha yenye kusadikisha yale mlio nayo”
Q 4:47

Hapa utaona kuwa Ibn Kathir aliufikia ule uelekevu kwamba Qurani inaiunga mkono Taurati na injili.

“Na aminini ndiyo yateremsha ambayo yanasadikisha ndiyo nayo” Q 2: 41

“Kisha akakujieni mtume mwenye kusadikisha mliyo nayo” Q 3:81

“Na wanapo ambiwa: Yaaminini aliyo yateremsha mwenyezi Mungu. Wao husema tunaamini tuliyo teremshiwa sisi na kuyakataa yasiyo kuwa hayo. Na hali yakuwa hii ndiyo haki inayo thibitisha yale waliyo nayo wao” Q 2:91

Kwa mara nyingine Ibn Kathir uk 89, utagundua kuwa Qurani inashuhudia ukweli na usafi na usahihi wa Taurati na injili jambo ambalo lisingeli wezekana ikiwa vingekuwa vimechafuliwa.

Pia pana maelezo mengi tofauti tofauti ya mwanawachuoni Ibn Kathir akipeana matukio kadhaa yanayoonyesha jinsi gain mtume Muhammad alivyoenzi na kuvutiwa na Taurati na Injili katika zama zake duniani.

“Na ukiwa unayo shaka katika tuliyo kuteremshia, basi waulize wasomao kitabu kabla yako.”

Vilevile Al – Baidhawi alihitimshwa pale Qurani iliponakiri “ Na ukiwa unayo shaka (ewe nabii Muhammad) Waulize wale wasomao kitabu kabla yake (yaani wayahudi na wakristo)

Nasi pia twafika hatima hiyo kwamba Taurati na Injili vyote viwili vilijulikana na nabii Muhammad na vilikuwa salama kutokamana na mageuzi na mapinduzi , Natumai sasa, ndungu yangu muisilamu kwamba wakubaliana nami kwamba Taurati na Injili havijawahi fanyiwa machafuko, mageuzi au mapinduzi yoyote yale wakati wowote kabla ya uisilamu, zama za nabii Muhammad wala hata baada ya kuja kwa uisilamu duniani.

HATIMA YA UTAFITI

Taurati na Injili zote zilikuwepo ulimwnguni zamani zile alipokuwa analetewa mtume Muhammad Qurani tukufu na vilikuwepo bila ya mabadiliko ushahidi wa haya ni kama ufuatavyo:

1. Nabii wa Uisilamu (Muhammad) aliwataka Wayahudi wairejeree Taurati iwe kitabu cha kuhukumu baina ya wayahudi (Tazama Q 3:23) Ni wazi kuwa mtume asingeli pendekeza watu wairejeree Taurati na Injili ambavyo vimekorogwa.
2. Qurani inawangaa wayahudi ambao licha ya kutoiamini Quarini walijaribu kuitumia kama hakimu kwao. Niwazi kuwa mtume Muhammad aliwashangaa , na kwa kuwa alikubali Taurati basi aliwataka waitumie Taurati kama hakimu wao, kwani ndani yake mna uongofu na mwelekeo. Q: 47 – 52

3. Kwa kuwa nabii wa uisilamu aliwataka watu wa injili (yaani wakristo) waamini kila kitu kilichokuja ndani yake na waifuate (Qu 5:47) Na wazi pia kuwa mtume Muhammad asingali pendekeza wakristo wakirejeree kitabu kilicho korogwa na kubadilishwa. Huu ni ushahidi tosha wa kuthibitisha kuwa injili ilikuwa safi kipindi cha kuteremshwa Qurani.

4. Wakati Nabii wa uisilamu aliposisitiza ya kwamba wayahudi na wakristo wote waishike Taurati na Injili, kwa kuzingatia hukumu zilizokuja ndani yake (Tazama 54:5 2-52. Je wadhani hata kiufupi tu, kwamba mtume Muhammad angalifanya haya ikiwa Taurati au Injili zingelikuwa zimekorogwa na kubadilishwa?

5. Ukweli ni kwamba Qurani inatupa ushahidi wa kutosha kuthibitisha kuwa Taurati na Injili view safi na bila dosari yeyote. (Tazama Su 3:81, 5: 47 – 52, 4:47 na Qu 2: 89-91)

6. Qurani ilimshauri mtume wa uisilamu kutafuta msaada kutoka kwa watu wasomao Taurati na Injili wakati wowote akiwa na shaka yeyote katika maswali ya dini. (Ikiwa unayo shaka ewe Muhammad.)hauwezi kamwe kupendekeza kuwa Allah angemshauri mtume wake kwenda kwa watu wenye kitabu kilicho korogwa na kubadilishwa. Au jee waweza kupendekeza kinyume?Je angemrejesha katika Taurati na Injili zilizo badilishwa tayari?

7. Qurani yenyewe inawataka wayahudi na wakristo wawe na imani katika Taurati na Injili.

“Enyi mlio amini !Muaminini mwenyezi Mungu na mtume wake, na kitabu alicho kiteremsha juu ya mtume wake, na kitabu alichokiteremsha kabla yake. Na anaye mkataa mwenyezi Mungu, na malaika wake, na vita vyake, na mitume wake, na siku ya kiyama, basi huyu amekwisha potelea mbai.” Q 4: 136

Ni jambo la kushangaza na wala haliingi akilini kwamba Qurani itawataka waislamu waiamini Biblia ilyoteremshwa kabla ya Qurani kama Biblia ingelikuwa sio kitabu chenye haki. Huu ni ushahidi kamili wa usafi na ukweli na uhakika wa Biblia, kwani Qurani isingeliwataka waislamu waiamini ikiwa ingelikuwa imebadilishwa na kugeuzwa

Sasa basi ni wazi kwako ndungu yangu muisilamu, baada ya utafiti huu wote na ushahidi huu kutoka kwa Qurani; ni dhahiri na zaidi ya uvuli wowote wa shaka kwamba Taurati na Injili vilihifadhiwa katika zama za kuteremshwa Qurani (kwa kuwa Qurani imetupa ushahidi huo) mageuzi yalifanywa baadaye wakati mwingine.Wacha nikwambie ndungu yangu, kwamba Qurani yenyewe inakanusha jambo hili kwa sababu zifuatazo.

1.Katika Su 5:48 inasaema:
“Na tumekuteremshia wewe wa haki, kitabu hichi nacho sadikisha yaliyokuwa kabla yake katika vitabu na kuyalinda”

Maana ya “kuyalinda” ni kuwa maandiko ya Mungu yatasalia na kuwa salama kutokamana na mabadiliko na mageuzi na kukologwa.Inamaana wazi kuwa ikiwa Taurati au injili vimebadilishwa baada ya Muhammad au Qurani ni kusema kuwa Qurani ilishindwa katika kazi yake kama “mlinzi” juu ya Taurati na injili kwa maneno mengine ikiwa Taurati na injili vilibadilishwa baada ya kuteremshwa Qurani, basi watu wa Qurani wameshindwa kuhifadhi kulinda na kuchunga angalau nakala moja au zaidi ya Taurati na injili safi kama mlinzi juu yake.

Wakati wakristo walipotambua kwamba Taurati ina aya nyingi zilizomhusu masihi Yesu, walichukua jukumu la kuwa walinzi wake, na wakaisambaza Taurati na injili kote ulimwenguni. Imekadiliwa kuwa Taurati imetafsiriwa karibuni lugha zote zinazo julikana na wanadamu.Kwa nini basi waisilamu hawakufanya kazi kama hii kwani waliamini kuwa Taurati na Injili ilikuwa na aya nyingi tu zinazo mhusu mtume Muhammad na Qurani?

2 Kwa kuwa tayari tumethibithisha ukweli kwamba Taurati na injili vilihifadhiwa safi kutokamana na mageuzi yeyote zamani za uteremsho wa Qurani: basi ili litatupeleka kufikia hatima hii:

3a) Wakristo wa kweli – zamani za uteremsho wa Qurani walihifadhi nakala ya Taurati maana ndani yake mlikuwepo maandiko mengi yaliyomhusu Yesu na injili.Zaidi ya hayo Yesu mwenyewe alishuhudia usafi na uhaki wa Taurati. Pia imenakiriwa ndani ya Qurani:

“Natuka wafuatisha haio Isa bin Maryamu kuyahakikisha yaliyo kuwa kabla yake katika Taurati , na tukampa injili iliyomo ndani yake uwongofu na nuru na inayo sadikisha yaliyokuwa kabla yake katika Taurati, na uwongofu na mawaidha kwa wachangamfu.’ Q 5:46

Hivyo basi ikiwa kuwa vyovyote vile wayahudi wahgelijaribu kubadilisha Taurati, wakristo wangegundua hilo na kutambua mageuzo hayo mara moja kwani walihifadhi nakala halisi ya Taurati.

b) Vilevile kwa mawazo yaleyale, ikiwa wakristo nao wangeli jaribu kubadili chochote ndani ya Taurati , wayahudi wasingeli



8. Qurani yenyewe inawataka wayahudi na wakristo wawe na imani katika Taurati na Injili.

“Enyi mlio amini !Muaminini mwenyezi Mungu na mtume wake, na kitabu alicho kiteremsha juu ya mtume wake, na kitabu alichokiteremsha kabla yake. Na anaye mkataa mwenyezi Mungu, na malaika wake, na vita vyake, na mitume wake, na siku ya kiyama, basi huyu amekwisha potelea mbai.” Q 4: 136

Ni jambo la kushangaza na wala haliingi akilini kwamba Qurani itawataka waislamu waiamini Biblia ilyoteremshwa kabla ya Qurani kama Biblia ingelikuwa sio kitabu chenye haki. Huu ni ushahidi kamili wa usafi na ukweli na uhakika wa Biblia, kwani Qurani isingeliwataka waislamu waiamini ikiwa ingelikuwa imebadilishwa na kugeuzwa

Sasa basi ni wazi kwako ndungu yangu muisilamu, baada ya utafiti huu wote na ushahidi huu kutoka kwa Qurani; ni dhahiri na zaidi ya uvuli wowote wa shaka kwamba Taurati na Injili vilihifadhiwa katika zama za kuteremshwa Qurani (kwa kuwa Qurani imetupa ushahidi huo) mageuzi yalifanywa baadaye wakati mwingine.Wacha nikwambie ndungu yangu, kwamba Qurani yenyewe inakanusha jambo hili kwa sababu zifuatazo.

1.Katika Su 5:48 inasaema:
“Na tumekuteremshia wewe wa haki, kitabu hichi nacho sadikisha yaliyokuwa kabla yake katika vitabu na kuyalinda”

Maana ya “kuyalinda” ni kuwa maandiko ya Mungu yatasalia na kuwa salama kutokamana na mabadiliko na mageuzi na kukologwa.Inamaana wazi kuwa ikiwa Taurati au injili vimebadilishwa baada ya Muhammad au Qurani ni kusema kuwa Qurani ilishindwa katika kazi yake kama “mlinzi” juu ya Taurati na injili kwa maneno mengine ikiwa Taurati na injili vilibadilishwa baada ya kuteremshwa Qurani, basi watu wa Qurani wameshindwa kuhifadhi kulinda na kuchunga angalau nakala moja au zaidi ya Taurati na injili safi kama mlinzi juu yake.

Wakati wakristo walipotambua kwamba Taurati ina aya nyingi zilizomhusu masihi Yesu, walichukua jukumu la kuwa walinzi wake, na wakaisambaza Taurati na injili kote ulimwenguni. Imekadiliwa kuwa Taurati imetafsiriwa karibuni lugha zote zinazo julikana na wanadamu.Kwa nini basi waisilamu hawakufanya kazi kama hii kwani waliamini kuwa Taurati na Injili ilikuwa na aya nyingi tu zinazo mhusu mtume Muhammad na Qurani?

2 Kwa kuwa tayari tumethibithisha ukweli kwamba Taurati na injili vilihifadhiwa safi kutokamana na mageuzi yeyote zamani za uteremsho wa Qurani: basi ili litatupeleka kufikia hatima hii:

3a) Wakristo wa kweli – zamani za uteremsho wa Qurani walihifadhi nakala ya Taurati maana ndani yake mlikuwepo maandiko mengi yaliyomhusu Yesu na injili.Zaidi ya hayo Yesu mwenyewe alishuhudia usafi na uhaki wa Taurati. Pia imenakiriwa ndani ya Qurani:

“Natuka wafuatisha haio Isa bin Maryamu kuyahakikisha yaliyo kuwa kabla yake katika Taurati , na tukampa injili iliyomo ndani yake uwongofu na nuru na inayo sadikisha yaliyokuwa kabla yake katika Taurati, na uwongofu na mawaidha kwa wachangamfu.’ Q 5:46

Hivyo basi ikiwa kuwa vyovyote vile wayahudi wahgelijaribu kubadilisha Taurati, wakristo wangegundua hilo na kutambua mageuzo hayo mara moja kwani walihifadhi nakala halisi ya Taurati.

b) Vilevile kwa mawazo yaleyale, ikiwa wakristo nao wangeli jaribu kubadili chochote ndani ya Taurati , wayahudi wasingeli kubali na wangewazuia mara moja kwa tendo la kuleta nakala halisi ya Taurati.

c) Vilevile, kama wayahudi wangelijaribu kubadilisha injili, wakristo wangali wazima kwa kuileta nakala safi na halisi ya injili.

4. Ni –bayana kuwa uisilamu asilia kama ulivyo, umekuja karibuni miaka 570 baada ya ukristo. Wakati wa kabla ya uisilam, zama za ujinga, ukristo ulikuwa umezaenea takriban kote ulimwenguni ikiwemo Afrika , uabeshi, Irani, India na Uropa.

Hii ilipelekea ugumu kwa watu wa sehemu moja ulimwenguni kubadilisha injili kuwa kazi nzito na isiyo wezekana.

5. Na sasa ndungu yangu muisilamu, lazima tujiulize wenyewe basi: Ni lini ni wapi mageuzi hayo yalifanywa? Ni nani aliyeyafanya mageuzi hayo?Hakuna yeyote ambaye anaweza kutoa na kuthibithisha jina hata moja tu la mwana historia. Myahudi au mkristo anayeweza kudhihirisha jambo hilo.Tena kama basi mageuzi na mabadiliko yeyote yalifanywa kwa makubaliano ya makundi yote mawili, wayahudi na wakristo; basi itakuwa ina maana pana mgongano, kwani Qurani inashuhudia kwamba – Hapana mabadiliko katika maneno ya Allah.

“Nasoma uliyofunuliwa katika kitabu cha Mola wako mlezi. Hapana awezaye kubadilisha maneno haya.”Q 18 :27

Hapana shaka kwamba neno “kitabu” lililotajwa katika ayah ii inaashiria Qurani lakini tamko Maneno yake” Yanaashiria Biblia Takatifu (Yaani Taurati, Zaburi na injili). Vitabu hivi vyote ni maneno ya Allah na tunaamini hapana yeyote awezaye kubadilisha maneno yake.

“Hapana mabadiliko katika maneno ya mwenyeziMungu.” Q 10:64

“Na hakuna abadilishaye maneno ya mwenyezi Mungu.”

HITIMISHO:

1. Biblia (Taurati, zaburi na injili) ni neno la Allah alilopeana Allah kwa waja wake, mitume kabla yenu injili ni mwongozo, nuru na rehema kwa ulimwengu.
2. Qurani anajenga usawa baina yake na Biblia (Yaani Taurati, Zaburi na Injili) kwani zote zililetwa na Allah kwa wajumbe wake kabla yenu.
3. Qurani inajipa jina la sifa kama lile lile inaloipa Biblia – Yaani “kitabu”
4. Maneno ya Allah yaliyopeanwa kwa wajumbe wake yalisalia hivyo na wala bado hayajafanyiwa mabadiliko

“Hakika sisi ndio tulioteremsha ukumbusho huu na hakika sisi ndio tutao ulinda” Q 15 : 9
5. Biblia Takatifu ilikuwepo kipindi ambapo Qurani inateremshwa. Ushahidi ni kuwa , mtume Muhammad aliwataka wayahudi wailete Taurati kuwa hakimu katika mjadhalo baina yao.
6. Ni jambo la kustaajabisha kudhai kuwa kitabu chochote katika vitabu vitakatifu vya mwenyezi Mungu mlezi viliwahi kufanyiwa mabadiliko kwani ukweli ni kwamba Taurati na injili vilikuwa vimekwisha tapakaa kote ulimwenguni katika lugha mbali mbali.

NDUNGU YANGU MUISILAMU:

Utafiti huu wote unaungwa mkono na maandiko na dalili kutoka kwa Qurani na pia unaungwa mkono na mabingwa miongoni mwa wanavyuoni wakubwa w kiislamu kama vile Ibn Kathir, Al – Baidhwawi, Al – jalaleen na Al – Bukhari.

Nimeenda umbali huu wote ili kumfanya kila muisilamu wa kweli atosheke kuwa utafiti huu ulifanywa katika uwazi na ukweli. Nimekuwa mwangalifu kutumia Qurani kama haswa kitabu rejeshi ili kukuhakikishia kwamba, wakati utakapokuwa umehitimisha kusoma utafiti huu ,utaweza kukubaliana nami kuwa, Biblia Takatifu (Yaani Taurati, zaburi na injili) vimehifadhiwa kutokamana na mageuzo yeyote au mabadiliko yeyote. Hivi vyote ni vitabu vya Allah nani maneno yake, na tunaamini hakuna yeyote awezaye kubadilisha maneno ya mwenyezi Mungu.

“ Hapana mabadiliko katika maneno ya mwenyezi Mungu” Q 10:64

“Hakika sisi ndio tulio teremsha ukumbusho huu, na hakika sisi ndio tutaolinda.” Q 15:9

Ndungu yangu muisilamu, ikiwa una maswali yeyote kuhusu haya niliyoandika au ikiwa unatamani kupata nakala yako ya Biblia Takatifu, tafadhali niandikie kwa anwani zifuatazo:

Al Shaikh Muhammad Kamal

WHAT WAS THE SIGN OF JONAH

By CHAKA IBN MOOSA

THE SIGN OF JONAH

• 1 Was Jesus Dead or Alive in the Tomb?
• 2 Three Days and Three Nights
• 3 Jonah a Sign to the Men of Nineveh
• 4 No Sign but the Sign of Jonah
• 5 "Destroy this Temple and in Three Days"
• 6 The Ultimate Significance of the Sign of Jonah
• THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS
• WHO MOVED THE STONE?

THE SIGN OF JONAH

According to the Bible Jesus Christ performed many mighty miracles during his brief three-year ministry in the land of Israel. Many of the Jews were led to believe in him when they saw such signs and wonders being performed. The Jewish leaders, however, refused to believe in him and although his miracles were widely known they often pressed him hard to perform signs or, indeed, even give them a sign from heaven (Matthew 16.1). On one occasion Jesus answered them by saying that he would give them only one sign:

"An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth".

Matthew 12.39-40.

Jonah was one of the great prophets of Israel and he had been called out by God to preach to an Assyrian city named Nineveh and to proclaim its pending doom. Jonah fled on a ship to Tarshish, however, and when a great storm began to rock the boat he was thrown overboard and swallowed by a large fish. After three days in the fish, however, he was brought up alive and duly went into the city.

Jesus spoke of this three-day internment in the stomach of the fish as "the sign of Jonah" and said that it was the only sign he was prepared to give to the unbelieving Jews.some people have endeavoured to refute the Ressurrection story,their arguments are based entirely on two suppositions, namely that if Jonah had been alive throughout his sojourn in the fish, then Jesus must have been alive in the tomb after being taken down from the cross; and if Jesus was crucified on a Friday and rose on the following Sunday morning, then he could not have been three days and three nights in the tomb. We shall consider these two objections in order and will thereafter proceed to analyse the whole subject to see what the Sign of Jonah really was.

1. WAS JESUS ALIVE OR DEAD IN THE TOMB?

It is an accepted fact in Christian commentaries on the book of Jonah in the Bible that Jonah was kept miraculously alive during the time that he was in the stomach of the fish in the sea. At no time throughout his ordeal did he die in the fish by and so came ashore as much alive as he was when he was first thrown into the sea.Although Jesus had only said that the likeness between him and Jonah would be in the period of time they were each to undergo an internment - Jonah in a fish, Jesus in the heart of the earth – the so called scholars omits this qualifying reference and claims that Jesus must have been like Jonah in other ways as well, extending the likeness to include the living state of Jonah inside the fish. When Jesus' statement is read as a whole, however, it is quite clear that the likeness is confined to the time factor. As Jonah was three days and three nights in the stomach of the fish, so Jesus would be a similar period in the heart of the earth. One cannot stretch this further.To say that as Jonah was ALIVE in the fish, so Jesus would be alive in the tomb. Jesus did not say this and such an interpretation does not arise from his saying but is read into it. Furthermore, in speaking of his coming crucifixion, Jesus on another occasion used a similar saying which proves the point quite adequately:

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up". John 3.14

Here the likeness is clearly in being "lifted up". As Moses LIFTED UP the serpent, so would the Son of man be LIFTED UP, the one for the healing of the Jews, the other for the healing of the nations. In this case the brass serpent Moses made never was alive and if their logic is applied to this verse we must presume that it means that Jesus must have been dead before he was lifted up, dead on the cross, and dead when taken down from it. Not only is this illogical, the contradiction between the states of Jonah and the brass serpent (the one was always alive through his ordeal, the other was always dead when used as a symbol on a pole) shows that Jesus was only drawing a likeness between himself and Jonah and the brass serpent respectively in the matters he expressly mentions - the THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS and the LIFTING UP on a pole. It does not matter whether Jonah was alive or not - this has nothing to do with the comparison Jesus was making.By omitting the qualifying reference to the time period in Jonah's case,the so called scholar makes the saying of Jesus read "As Jonah was ... so shall the Son of man be" and it is from this unrestricted likeness that he seeks to extend the comparison to the state of the prophet in the fish. But if we follow the same method with the other verse quoted, we come to the exact opposite conclusion. In this case the statement would read: "As the serpent ... so shall the Son of man be" and the state of the serpent was always a dead one. This shows quite plainly that in each case Jesus was not intending to extend the likeness between himself and the prophet or object he mentions to the question of life or death but solely to the very comparisons he expressly sets forth. So we see that their first objection falls entirely to the ground. A contradictory conclusion automatically results from his line of reasoning and no objection or argument which negates itself can ever be considered with any degree of seriousness.

2. THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS.

It is universally agreed among Christians, with a few exceptions, that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and that he rose from the dead on the Sunday immediately following. Some accordingly argue that there was only one day on which Jesus was in the tomb, namely Saturday, and that this period covered only two nights, namely Friday night and Saturday night.They thus endeavour to disprove the Sign of Jonah in respect of the time factor that Jesus mentions as well and so concludes:

We Discover that Jesus failed to fulfil the time factor.The greatest mathematician in Christendom failed to obtain the desired result - three days and three nights.

(Deedat, What was the Sign of Jonah, p.10).

Unfortunately Deedat here overlooks the fact that there was a big difference between Hebrew speech in the first century and English speech in the twentieth century. We have found him inclined to this error again and again when he sets out to analyse Biblical subjects. He fails to make allowance for the fact that in those times, nearly two thousand years ago, the Jews counted any part of a day as a whole day when computing any consecutive periods of time. As Jesus was laid in the tomb on the Friday afternoon, was there throughout the Saturday, and only rose sometime before dawn on the Sunday (the Sunday having officially started at sunset on the Saturday according to the Jewish calendar), there can be no doubt that he was in the tomb for a period of three days.

Deedat's ignorance of the Jewish method of computing periods of days and nights and their contemporary colloquialisms leads him to make a serious mistake about Jesus' statement and he proceeds to make much the same mistake about his prophecy that he would be three nights in the tomb as well. The expression three days and three nights is the sort of expression that we never, speaking English in the twentieth century, use today. We must obviously therefore seek its meaning according to its use as a Hebrew colloquialism in the first century and are very likely to err if we judge or interpret it according to the language structure or figures of speech in a very different language in a much later age.

We never, speaking English in the twentieth century, speak in terms of days and nights. If any one decides to go away for, let us say, about two weeks, he will say he is going for a fortnight, or for two weeks, or for fourteen days. I have never yet met anyone speaking the English language say he will be away fourteen days and fourteen nights. This was a figure of speech in the Hebrew of old. Therefore right from the start one must exercise caution for, if we do not use such figures of speech, we cannot presume that they had, in those times, the meanings that we would naturally assign to them today. We must seek out the meaning of the prophecy Jesus made in the context of the times in which it was given.

Furthermore we must also note that the figure of speech, as used in Hebrew, always had the same number of days and nights. Moses fasted forty days and forty nights (Exodus 24.18). Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights (Jonah 1.17). Job's friends sat with him seven days and seven nights (Job 2.13). We can see that no Jew would have spoken of "seven days and six nights" or "three days and two nights", even if this was the period he was describing. The colloquialism always spoke of an equal number of days and nights and, if a Jew wished to speak of a period of three days which covered only two nights, he would have to speak of three days and three nights. A fine example of this is found in the Book of Esther where the queen said that no one was to eat or drink for three days, night or day (Esther 4.16), but on the third day, when only two nights had passed, she went into the king's chamber and the fast was ended.

So we see quite plainly that "three days and three nights", in Jewish terminology, did not necessarily imply a full period of three actual days and three actual nights but was simply a colloquialism used to cover any part of the first and third days.

The important thing to note is that an equal number of days and nights were always spoken of, even if the actual nights were one less than the days referred to. As we do not use such figures of speech today we cannot pass hasty judgments on their meaning, nor can we force them to yield the natural interpretations that we would place on them.

There is conclusive proof in the Bible that when Jesus told the Jews he would be three days and three nights in the earth, they took this to mean that the fulfilment of the prophecy could be expected after only two nights. On the day after his crucifixion, that is, after only one night, they went to Pilate and said:

Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, 'After three days I will rise again'. Therefore order the sepulchre to be made secure until the third day.

Matthew 27.63-64.

We would understand the expression "after three days" to mean anytime on the fourth day but, according to the colloquialism, the Jews knew this referred to the third day and were not concerned to keep the tomb secured through three full nights but only until the third day after just too nights. Clearly, therefore, the expressions "three days and three nights" and "after three days" did not mean a full period of seventy-two hours as we would understand them, but any period of time covering a period of up to three days.

If someone told anyone of us on a Friday afternoon in these days that he would return to us after three days we would probably not expect him back before the following Tuesday at the earliest. The Jews, however, anxious to prevent any fulfilment of Jesus' prophecy (whether actual or contrived), were only concerned to have the tomb secured until the third day, that is, the Sunday, because they knew that the expressions "after three days" and "three days and three nights" were not to be taken literally but according to the figures of speech that they used in their times.

The important question is, not how we read such colloquialisms which have no place in our figures of speech today, but how the Jews read them according to the terminology of their times. It is very significant to note that when the disciples boldly claimed that Jesus had risen from the dead on the third day, that is, on the Sunday after only two nights had passed (e.g. Acts 10.40), no one ever attempted to counter this testimony as Deedat does by claiming that three nights would have to pass before the prophecy could be deemed to be fulfilled. The Jews of those times knew their language well and it is only because Deedat is ignorant of their manners of speech that he presumptuously attacks the prophecy Jesus made, simply because he was not in the tomb for an actual three-day and three-night period of seventy-two hours. (This means that Jonah's sojourn in the fish also only covered a partial period of three days and was not necessarily three actual days and nights either).

Having therefore adequately disposed of Deedat's weak arguments against the sign Jesus offered to the Jews we can now proceed to find out exactly what the Sign of Jonah really was.

REMEMBER

1.Among the Jews to whom The Messiah spoke,a day begun at sunset to sunset,unlike us who begin to count the day from midnight to midnight.Gen1:5,As Christ was Buried that Friday evening before sunset It was Preparation day,and the Sabbath was about to begin”Lk23:54

2.a)Thursday night----------1^st night Friday----------------1^st day

b)Friday night----------------2^nd night Saturday-----------2^nd day

c)Saturday --------------------3^rd night Sunday--------------3^rd day

After The Ressurrection of Christ on that blessed Sunday,this was the testimony of the disciples

But we trusted that it Had been He Who should have redeemed Israel:And besides all this,today is the third day since these things were done.”Lk24:21

3. JONAH A SIGN TO THE MEN OF NINEVEH.

Two momentous events occurred when God sent Jonah to Nineveh to warn the people of that city that God was about to destroy it for its wickedness. The first we have already briefly considered, namely the casting of the prophet into the sea and his sojourn in the stomach of the fish over a period of three days. It will be useful at this stage, however, to record the story as it is. It is in the Book of Jonah in the Bible, however, that one finds the whole narrative properly knit together. Jonah agreed to join in the throwing of lots with the other soldiers on the boat to discover who was the cause of the storm which threatened to drown them all. The lot fell on him and so he was thrown into the sea where he was duly swallowed up by a large fish. After three days the fish coughed him up on dry land and he duly went to Nineveh, proclaiming that the city would be overthrown in forty days.

The other great event was the total repentance of the whole city, from its king to all its slaves, when they heard the ominous warning. Jonah, surprisingly, was angry when he saw the people turn from their sins for he knew that God was merciful and would probably spare the city. As a patriotic Hebrew he had hoped for its overthrow for it was the main city of Assyria and a constant threat to the people of Israel. In the heat of the day he went up a mound hoping to see its demise, and God caused a gourd (a large plant) to grow up and give him shelter. The next day, however, God appointed a worm to consume its stem and thus cause it to wither. Jonah was very upset about this but God said to him:

"You pity the plant, for which you did not labor, nor did you make it grow, which came into being in a night, and perished in a night. And should not I pity Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?"

Jonah 4.10-11.

The second great event in this story, that is, the repentance of the whole city of Nineveh, was all the more remarkable when one considers that the Assyrians neither knew nor feared God and had no obvious reason why they should heed the word and warning which Jonah brought. There was no sign that the city would be destroyed in forty days as Jonah warned as life was just going on normally from day to day without any suggestion from the weather or the elements that any danger was near.

No thunderclouds formed over the city as had happened at the time of Noah when the great flood burst on the earth. Nineveh was a mighty city and was in no way under any military threat. All that the city heard was the solitary voice of a Jewish prophet who came proclaiming: "Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown" (Jonah 3.4).

We often see cartoons of bearded old men carrying placards "the world ends tonight" and such men are always a source of amusement when they appear on the streets with such messages. Indeed the Ninevites might have considered that Jonah was just one of these religious freaks and while being amused at his apparent earnestness, they might have become somewhat indignant at the content of his warning.

When the Apostle Paul went to the city of Athens he was met with such a reception. In response to his preaching some said "What would this babbler say"? (Acts 17.18). The people of Nineveh listening to the Hebrew prophet Jonah might well have mused as the Athenians did about the Apostle Paul, "He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities" (Acts 17.18). We discover, however, that:

The people of Nineveh believed God; they proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them to the least of them.

Jonah 3.5

>From the throne of the king down to the least of the common folk the hundreds of thousands of Ninevites took Jonah in all seriousness, repented in great earnest, and desperately sought to remove the imminent judgment from their city. Jonah in no way endeavoured to persuade them of the truth of his short, simple warning - he just proclaimed it as a matter of fact. He also gave them no assurance that God would spare the city if they repented. It was, on the contrary, his wish and expectation that the city would be destroyed in terms of God's warning whether the Ninevites took him seriously or not.

Why then did the whole city repent and do so in the hope that God would not cause them to perish? (Jonah 3.9). Jewish historians were fascinated by this story and concluded that the only possible explanation was that the Ninevites knew that Jonah had been swallowed up by a fish as God's judgment on his disobedience, and also knew that while he would normally die in such circumstances, God in mercy kept him alive and delivered him from the stomach of the fish on the third day. This alone could explain the seriousness with which they listened to Jonah and their hope of mercy if they repented.

The Jewish historians concluded that the Ninevites reasoned that if God treats his beloved prophets so severely when they disobey him, what could they expect when the city was in the gall of bitterness against him and in the bond of iniquity and sin?

The reasoning of the Jews was correct. Jesus confirmed that Nineveh's repentance came about as a result of their full knowledge of Jonah's ordeal of the preceding days. He made this quite plain when he said: "Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh". Luke 11.30

In saying this Jesus put the seal of authenticity on the story of Jonah's ordeal and Nineveh's repentance and confirmed that it was historically true. At the same time he also gave credence to the theory that the people of Nineveh had heard of Jonah's ordeal and remarkable deliverance and as a result of this took his message in all seriousness, hoping for a similar deliverance in turning from their wickedness in repentance before God. By saying that Jonah had become a sign to the men of Nineveh he made it plain that the city knew of the recent history of God's dealing with the rebellious Jewish prophet. This explained the earnestness with which the Ninevites repented before God.

It was not Jesus' intention merely to confirm Jewish speculations, however. He wished to show that what had happened at the time of Jonah and its sequel was applicable to the people of Israel in his own generation and that a similar sign was about to be given which would likewise lead to the redemption of those who received it and the destruction of all those who did not.

4. NO SIGN BUT THE SIGN OF JONAH.

According to both the Qur'an and the Bible, Jesus performed many signs and wonders among the people of Israel (Surah 5.110, Acts 2.22). Even though they could not deny these works (John 11.47), they nevertheless refused to believe in him and that right to the very end of his course. As he was completing his ministry we read of their response to all that he had done among them:

Though he had done so many signs before them, yet they did not believe in him.

John 12.37

Time and again we read that the Jews came to him seeking signs (Matthew 12.38) and on one occasion they expressly asked him to actually show them a sign from heaven itself (Matthew 16.1). On other occasions they taxed him with questions like these:

"What sign have you to show us for doing this?"

John 2.18

"What sign do you do, that we may see, and believe you?"

John 6.30

While the Greeks of that age were primarily philosophers, the Jews wanted every claim proved by the ability to do and perform signs. As the Apostle Paul rightly said in one of his letters:

For the Jews demand signs and the Greeks seek wisdom.

1 Corinthians 1.22

The Jews knew full well that Jesus was, in his own way, claiming to be the Messiah. If so, they reasoned, he must do signs to prove his claim. A1though he had already done many great signs, they still were not satisfied. They had seen him feed up to five thousand men with only five barley loaves and two fishes (Luke 9.10-17) but they reasoned that Moses had done similar miracles (John 6.31). In what way could he prove that he really was the chosen Messiah, they reasoned? What sign could he do to show them that he was greater than Moses?

In those days people were not readily persuaded by great signs. When Moses turned his rod into a serpent, Pharaoh's magicians did likewise. They also emulated his feat of turning water into blood and bringing swarms of frogs from the Nile. It was only when Moses brought out thousands of gnats from the dust that the magicians conceded: "This is the finger of God" (Exodus 8.19), for they were finally unable to do likewise. So also the Jews were only prepared to consider Jesus' claims when he could outdo the signs of the prophets of old. They saw him feed five thousand men and heal lepers and men born blind; raise up paralytics, cast out demons; and ultimately raise a man from the dead even though the man had already been dead for four days. They conceded these miracles.

All this did not satisfy them, however, for other prophets had performed similar miracles. What sign did Jesus have for them which outweighed them all? Surely if he was the Messiah he could do greater things than these? Why, Moses gave their forefathers bread from heaven to eat. As it was predicted of the Messiah that he would do similar signs (Deuteronomy 18.18,34.10-11), they therefore came to Jesus eventually and "asked him to show them a sign from heaven" (Matthew 16.1). Jesus absorbed their earnest quests for signs and said to them:

"This generation is an evil generation: it seeks a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so will the Son of man be to this generation". Luke 11.29-30.

They wanted a sign that would prove beyond all shadow of doubt that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, the Saviour of the world. Here Jesus gave them a clear answer and set before them just one sign by which they could be assured of his claims, namely, the Sign of Jonah. Although we have mentioned it already, it will be useful at this point to refer to it once again:

"For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth". Matthew 12.40

Here Jesus quite plainly outlined the proof of his claims. Jonah had been three days and three nights in the stomach of the fish. Not only was this a sign to Nineveh, it also prefigured the sign Jesus was to be for his people and not for them alone but for all people in all ages. He would be in the "heart of the earth" for a similar period. What did this mean? Would he be dead? Why would he be there three days? Assuredly the Jews must have been very perplexed about this claim but every time they asked Jesus for a sign, he promised them no other sign but the Sign of Jonah. During one incident with them he plainly told them its meaning.

5. "DESTROY THIS TEMPLE AND IN THREE DAYS ..."

When Jesus saw that the Jews were transforming the Temple (the great place of worship where God's glory was in the centre of Jerusalem, from a house of prayer into a place of trade, he drove out the moneychangers and those who sold sheep, oxen and pigeons. The Jews then said to him:

"What sign have you to show us for doing this?" John 2.18

In other words, by what authority do you, a man, enter the Temple of the living God and act as if you are the Lord of it? Once again they requested a sign and again the same sign was promised by Jesus:

"Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up". John 2.19

Once again Jesus gave them the Sign of Jonah. Again there came the period of three days but now something more is added. He challenges the Jews to destroy the temple and whereas he earlier spoke of being himself in the heart of the earth for three days, now he speaks of the temple of God being destroyed for three days and thereafter being restored. So the Jews said to him:

"It has taken forty-six years to build this temple and will you raise it up in three days?" John 2.20

Now that was a silly question. They asked for a sign of supernatural source to validate the action Jesus had taken. If he had said "Destroy this temple and in forty-six years I will build another", what sort of sign would that be? But he said he would do it in only three days. That would assuredly be a sign for them to see and behold, proving that he was indeed all that he claimed to be.

This was one of the most momentous statements Jesus ever made and if ever there was a remark of his that made an indelible impression on the minds of the Jews, it was this one.

When Jesus was brought to trial years later, the two witnesses brought to testify against him both mentioned this remarkable claim. One said, "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days"' (Matthew 26. 61). Another said, "We heard him say, 'I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another not made with hands"' (Mark 14.58). Both of these men twisted his statement primarily through a total misunderstanding and inability to perceive the meaning of it. But that it was a claim of great import they realised!

Indeed even when Jesus was nailed to the cross some of the Jewish priests mocked him, saying, "You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself!" (Matthew 27.40). Even some time after Jesus had ascended to heaven the Jews were still talking about his challenge and imagined that it was Christian belief that Jesus would yet come to destroy their holy place (Acts 6.14).

The tremendous attention paid by the Jews to this statement, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up" shows how important it was. Even as these Jews mocked him, however, they were unaware that they themselves were doing just that they were destroying it by putting Jesus on the cross; and on the third day thereafter they would know that he had risen again. When Jesus said "Destroy this temple" he was not referring to the great building in the city but to his own body. In his Gospel John comments on the reply of the Jews about the number of years it took to build the Temple, "But he spoke of the temple of his body" (John 2.21).

Jesus said that it was he, the Son of man, who was to be in the heart of the earth for three days and when he addressed the Jews he spoke obviously not of the Temple in Jerusalem which he had just purified but of himself. But why did he refer to himself as the temple? It requires only a little perspective on his ministry and identity to obtain the answer. The Jews wanted him to prove that he was the Messiah and to do this they expected him to show by signs that he was greater than all the other prophets. In his answer Jesus set out to show them that he was no ordinary prophet. The Temple in Jerusalem contained only the presence of a manifestation of the glory of God, but of Jesus we are told:

In him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell. He is the image of the invisible God. For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily. Colossians 1.19,15; 2.9

What Jesus was saying then was this: Destroy me, in whom the whole fulness of God dwells bodily, put me to death, and by raising myself from the dead three days later I will give you all the proof you will ever require that I am the Lord of this Temple, the house of God.

6. THE ULTIMATE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SIGN OF JONAH.

Now it becomes clear why Jesus gave the Jews this one sign, the Sign of the prophet Jonah. His death, burial and resurrection from the dead would surely prove to them that he was the Messiah.

We have seen already that the Jews sought a sign from heaven, a greater feat than that performed by any other prophet in history to prove his claims; and as one looks at the miracles of the former prophets one sees all the more the significance of the Sign of Jonah. As mentioned earlier, prior to the e trial and arrest of Jesus his greatest sign was to raise Lazarus from the dead after he had been dead for four days. But this did not persuade the Jews (John 12. 911). Such things had been done during the time of the prophet Elisha.

But what greater feat can a man perform than to raise a dead man to life again? Only one possibly greater sign can be done. If that man after dying is able to raise himself from the dead and live again, this will surely be a greater sign and this sign was performed by no prophet before Jesus.

Living prophets had raised the dead but the sign Jesus was promising them was that the Messiah would raise himself from the dead. This is the Sign of Jonah. The Jews had stood at the foot of the cross mocking Jesus, "You who would destroy the Temple of God in three days", but they did not know that, after expiring a few hours later, Jesus would t raise himself from the dead on the third day in overwhelming proof that he was indeed the Messiah and the ultimate temple of God, the one in whom the living God of all creation fully dwelt. As Jonah had come back from the stomach of a fish in the very depths of the sea to yet live on the earth, so Jesus was to die, be buried, only to raise himself to life on the third day. On one occasion Jesus made this quite plain to the Jews, saying:

"For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father". John 10.17-18.

Not only did Jesus make it plain that he would raise himself from the dead on the third day but he also often showed that he was greater than all the prophets who had gone before him. When the Jews asked him "Are you greater than our father Abraham?" (John 8.53), Jesus made it plain that he was, saying that Abraham had looked forward to his day (John 8.56) and added, "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8.58). In the same way a Samaritan woman said to him: "Are you greater than our father Jacob?" (John 4.12) to which Jesus replied that, whereas Jacob had left a well in the land of Samaria from which people could drink, only to thirst again, he could put within people a well of living water from which no one would ever thirst (John 4.14).

He showed that he was greater than Moses, for Moses had written of him (John 5.46). He was greater than David, for David, he said, "inspired by the Spirit, calls the Messiah Lord" (Matthew 22.43). He openly stated that he was greater than the prophets Solomon and Jonah (Luke 11.31,32) and that he was even greater than the very Temple of God (Matthew 12.6), for the Temple contained only a manifestation of God's presence but in him the whole fulness of God dwelt bodily.

No man had ever had greater wisdom than Solomon but Jesus is the very wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1.24). Jonah became a source of reprieve for the people of Nineveh but Jesus is the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him (Hebrews 5.9).

Although there had been many prophets, there was to be only one Messiah. And whereas the prophets had performed many signs, the Messiah reserved to himself the greatest sign of all. As Jonah's ordeal in the stomach of the fish in many ways foreshadowed this sign, namely the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, Jesus therefore set forth this sign alone as a proof that he was indeed the Messiah

On the other hand, if we take the narratives of the crucifixion in the Bible at face value and accept that Jesus died on the cross, only to raise himself from the dead on the third day, then we have indeed a sure sign and manifest proof that all his claims were true. Other living prophets had raised dead men to life but Jesus alone raised himself from the dead, and that to eternal life, for he ascended to heaven and has been there for nearly twenty centuries. It is in this alone that we find the true meaning of the Sign of Jonah and are able to perceive why Jesus singled it out as the only sign he was prepared to give to the Jews.

We see, therefore, that Deedat's final argument in favour of the theory that Jesus survived the cross is actually the very strongest evidence one can find against it. Although his booklets are thus easy to refute, the matter cannot be left here for the sign Jesus gave has implications for all men in all ages. As Jonah's sojourn in the stomach of a fish in the depths of the sea for three days authenticated his word to Nineveh, so the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ put the stamp of authenticity on his mission of salvation to all men in all ages. If you miss the import of this sign, Jesus gives you no other. No further proof that he is the Saviour of all men need be given to those who refuse to believe in him as their Lord and Saviour.

Nevertheless we have a wonderful assurance for those who perceive the meaning of this sign and who are prepared to believe in Jesus and follow him all their days as Saviour and Lord: just as no soul in repenting Nineveh perished, so neither will yours if you will commit your whole life to Jesus who died for you and rose from the dead on the third day that you too might live with him forever in the kingdom of heaven to be revealed when he returns to earth.

WHY JONAH ?

At one time the Jews,the( Pharasees and Chief Priests) knowing that Jesus came from Galilee Claimed that no Prophet came from there!these are people who were beleaved know the Scriptures.They said to Nicodemus:They replied,Are you from Galilee,too?look into it,and you will find that a Prophet does not come out of Galilee.”Jn7:52Galilee a dispised place was refed to as Galilee of the Gentiles,a peole who dwelled in darkness.Nazareth was city in Galilee.Nathanael wondered if really a good thing would come out of Nazareth.Jn1:46Jesus choose to point out Jonah son of Amittai,the prothet from Gath Hepher,in Galilee!2kings14:25.Gath Hepher was( is) located in the tribe of Zebulun,northeast of Nazareth.Jos19:13The other key statement of jesus that we ought to keep in mind is.The Men of Nineveh will stand the nt with this generation and condemn it;for they repented at the preaching of jonah,and now one greater than Jonah is here”Mat12:41Jonah a Jew send to the Gentile city of Nineveh,but Jesus was the lamb of God that takes the sin of the World,His message is to all mankind.Jonah was a unwilling messenger but Christ laid down is life willingly for our salvation.Jn10:11-18For the sea to calm Jonah was thrown into the waters,but Christ greater than him only spoke a word!Jonah needed 3 days to cover the city of Nineveh and the son of man conqured Death in 3 days.Jonah was bodly alife in the belly of the fish but the one greater than him was put to death in the body but quickened by the spirit,by which He also went and preached unto the spirits in prison.What an awosome man,even in death still preached!

THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS

During 1978 Deedat published another booklet entitled 'Resurrection or Resuscitation?' which, like his booklet on the Sign of Jonah, attempts to prove that Jesus came down alive from the cross - a theory with no foundation in the Bible Early on in this booklet, as in others he has written, Deedat promotes arguments which are based on nothing but his own ignorance of the Bible and to some extent of the English language. He speaks of a conversation he once had with a "reverend" and boldly says of Luke 3.23:

I explained that in the "most ancient" manuscripts of Luke, the words '(as was supposed)' are not there. (Deedat, Resurrection or Resuscitation?, p.7).

Very significantly he gives no authority for this statement and we are amazed at it for it is absolutely false. This man seems to think he can say what he likes about the Bible, no matter how factually absurd his statements are. Every manuscript of Luke's Gospel, including all the most ancient manuscripts, begins the genealogy of Jesus by saying that he was the son, as was supposed, of Joseph (meaning that he was not his actual son, having been born of his mother Mary alone). There is just simply no evidence for Deedat's fatuous claim. He Appears to believe that the words quoted are missing from the oldest texts because they appear in brackets in some English translations. But any scholar will know that the use of brackets is a common form in the English language by which passing comments and personal notations are characterised. There are no such brackets in the Greek text but as the words in Luke 3.23 are clearly a comment, some translations place them in brackets. In the Revised Standard Version this form appears often where brackets are used for passages where no such brackets are used. in the original Greek simply because, such forms are not used in Greek to identify comments or personal remarks. (The same goes for inverted commas to identify a quotation. Inverted commas were not used in classical Greek). Examples are Acts 1.18-19, Romans 3.5, Galatians 1.20 and 2 Peter 2.8. Deedat's argument is based entirely on false premises and erroneous suppositions. His attempts to prove that Luke 24.36-43 shows that Jesus must have come down alive from the cross are equally unfounded. He bases his whole argument on a complete misconception of Biblical teaching about the resurrection. It is widely accepted that every man has a body and a spirit. At death the body dies and the spirit leaves the body. The Bible teaches plainly that the body and spirit will again be united at the resurrection but that the bodies of true believers will be changed and that they will be raised in spiritual bodies (1 Corinthians 15.51-53). This means that the spirit will be clothed with a body that will reveal the true character of the spirit and will be eternal. Deedat, however, completely misunderstands this and erroneously takes "spiritualized" to mean that the body itself will not be raised from the dead and transformed but that the spirit alone will be "raised". When Jesus appeared to his disciples after coming out of the tomb they were "startled and frightened and supposed that they saw a spirit" (Luke 24.37). Deedat argues that this means that they had believed that Jesus was dead and so thought it must be his ghost, but the Bible makes it plain why they were so amazed. The doors had been locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews and yet Jesus suddenly stood among them (John 20.19). Having been raised from the dead in a spiritualised body he could appear and disappear at will and was no longer bound by physical limitations (cf. also Luke 24.31, John 20.26). Nevertheless, because Jesus called on the disciples to handle him and because he ate a piece of a fish before them (Luke 24. 39-43), Deedat suggests that this shows that Jesus had not risen from the dead. He bases this argument on the assumption that a spiritualised body cannot be material in any way but must only be a spirit. He argues that Jesus was trying to show his disciples that he had therefore not risen from the dead and says:

He is telling them in the clearest language humanly possible that he is not what they were thinking. They were thinking that he was a spirit, a resurrected body, one having been brought back from the dead. He is most emphatic that he is not!

(Deedat, Resurreetion or Resuscitation?, p. 11).

So, according to Deedat, Jesus is stating in the "clearest language humanly possible" that he had not been raised from the dead. Yet, in the very next thing that Jesus said to his disciples, we find him stating quite plainly that this was in fact precisely what had happened - that he had indeed been raised from the dead. He said to them:

"Thus it is written that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations". Luke 24.46-47.

In the "clearest language humanly possible", therefore, we find that Jesus told his disciples immediately after eating before them that he had just fulfilled the prophecies of the former prophets that he should rise from the dead on the third day. So once again we find Deedat's argument falling to the ground and that purely because he is not a genuine scholar of the Bible and has no reasonable grasp of Biblical theology. The Bible plainly teaches that it is the body itself - a material substance - that will be raised at the resurrection (see Jesus' own teaching in John 5.28-29), but that it will be transformed. Today two men can be ploughing the same field. If they are identical twins it will be almost impossible to tell them apart. Yet the one may be righteous and the other wicked (Matthew 24.40). The difference is not outwardly apparent but it will be in the resurrection. A spiritualised body means that the condition of the body will be determined by the state of the spirit. If the man is righteous, his body will shine like the sun (Matthew 13.43); if he is wicked he will not be able to hide his rottenness as he can do now, but it will be exposed in all its misery in the state of his body. This is what we mean when we say people will have "spiritualised bodies" in the resurrection. Note clearly that the resurrection thus leads to a spiritualised body and not just to a risen spirit. The Bible puts it like this:

So it is with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15.42-44.It is the body itself that is buried in a perishable state and it is the same body that is raised imperishable. This passage shows quite plainly that it is the same physical body, buried as a seed - is sown into the ground, which will be raised as a spiritual body. This is plain Biblical teaching which Deedat so obviously misrepresents.

In 2 Corinthians 5.1-4 the Bible again makes it clear that it is not the wish of true believers to become exposed spirits without bodies. Rather they long for their mortal bodies to be replaced by spiritual bodies which are immortal.

Once again we find that Deedat's efforts to discredit Christianity come purely from suppositions based on his own inadequate knowledge of the Bible, and he appears to be one of those who are guilty of "reviling in matters of which they are ignorant" (2 Peter 2.12). Jesus' own statement that he had appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies that the Messiah would rise from the dead on the third day shows quite plainly that there is no foundation whatsoever for Deedat's attempts to prove that Jesus had come down alive from the cross. Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day and in his own body ascended to heaven not long thereafter. He has gone to prepare a place for those who love him and who will follow him all their days as Lord and Saviour of their lives. When he returns he will raise them too from the dead and will clothe them with immortal bodies, granting them access to his eternal kingdom which he waits to reveal at the last time. True Christians can confidently say: But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself. Philippians 3.20-21.

WHO MOVED THE STONE?

During 1977 Deedat also published a small booklet which plagiarised the title of a book written by Frank Morison entitled 'Who Moved the Stone?' Much of this booklet attempts once again to prove the theory that Jesus came down alive from the cross, and as we have already seen that this theory has no substance, it does not seem necessary to deal at any length with the points Deedat raises to promote it. We need only show, yet again, that he has had to resort to obvious absurdities to try and make his theory stick. For example, he endeavours to prove that Mary Magdalene must have been looking for a live Jesus when she came to anoint his body. Although anointing a body was part of the normal burial custom of the Jews, he cannot accept this as it refutes his argument, so he suggests that the body of Jesus would have already been rotting within if he had died on the cross, saying "if we massage a rotting body, it will fall to pieces" (Deedat, Who Moved the Stone?, p.3), even though Mary came to the tomb only some thirty-nine hours after Jesus had died. It is absolute scientific nonsense to say that a body will fall to pieces within forty-eight hours of a man's decease! If there was any merit in his argument, Deedat would hardly have found it necessary to resort to such a ridiculous statement. He likewise has to overlook obvious probabilities when he says that, when Mary Magdalene sought to take away the body of Jesus (John 20.15), she could only have been thinking of helping him to walk away and could not have intended to carry away a corpse. He claims that she was a "frail Jewess" who could not carry "a corpse of at least a hundred and sixty pounds, wrapped with another 'hundred pounds weight of aloes and myrrh' (John 19.39) making a neat bundle of 260 pounds" (Deedat, Who Moved the Stone?, p.8). There is a far more probable explanation for Mary's statement that she would carry away the body of Jesus. There is nothing to say that she intended to carry it away all by herself. When she first found the body removed from the tomb she rushed to Jesus' disciples Peter and John and told them:

"They have taken the Lord out of the tomb and we do not know where they have laid him". John 20.2

The other Gospels make it plain that Mary was not alone when she first went to the tomb that Sunday morning and that among the women who accompanied her were Joanna and Mary the mother of James (Luke 24.10). This is why she said "WE do not know where they have laid him". As it was only after Peter and John had gone to the tomb that she first saw Jesus there is no reason to suppose that she did not intend to enlist the help of these two disciples or of the other women to help her carry the body away. In any event there is concrete evidence in the Bible that Mary Magdalene believed that Jesus had risen from the dead and this brings us to the whole theme of Deedat's booklet, namely "who moved the stone?". His conclusion is that it was removed by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, two of Jesus' disciples who belonged to the party of the Pharisees. He says in his booklet:

It was Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, the two stalwarts who did not leave the Master in the lurch when he was most in need. These two had given to Jesus a Jewish burial (?) bath, and wound the sheets with the 'aloes and myrrh', and temporarily moved the stone into place, if at all; they were the same two real friends who removed the stone, and took their shocked Master soon after dark, that same Friday night to a more congenial place in the immediate vicinity for treatment. (Deedat, Who Moved the Stone?, p.12).

He begins his booklet with an expression of hope that he would be able to give "a satisfactory answer to this problem" (p.1) and the cover of his booklet carries a comment by Dr. G.M. Karim which describes the moving of the stone as a "problem besetting the minds of all thinking Christians". The impression is thus given that the Bible is silent on this subject and that Christians are beset with a problem and have to speculate as to who moved the stone. This is sheer nonsense for the Bible plainly says (to use Deedat's words, in the "clearest language humanly possible"):

An angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. Matthew 28.2

Can there really be any "problem" about this matter? Is it too hard to believe that an angel from heaven could roll back the stone? According to the Bible it took just two angels to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19.13) and it took only one angel to wipe out Sennacherib's whole army of a hundred and eighty-five thousand soldiers (2 Kings 19.35). On another occasion a single angel stretched forth his hand to destroy the whole city of Jerusalem before the Lord called on him to stay his hand (2 Samuel 24.16). So it should surprise no one to read that it was an angel who moved the stone. Why then does Deedat overlook this plain statement in the Bible and falsely suggest that the identity of the person who moved the stone is a "problem"? Why is there no mention in his booklet of the verse which plainly states that it was an angel who moved the stone? The reason is that his theory that Jesus was taken down alive from the cross and that Mary was looking for a live Jesus is flatly contradicted by what this same angel immediately said to Mary:

"Do not be afraid; for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. Lo, I have told you".Matthew 28.5-7.

The angel plainly told Mary and the other women to tell the disciples that Jesus, who had been crucified, had also now risen from the dead. They immediately fled from the tomb with "trembling and astonishment" (Mark 16.8). If they had thought that Jesus had survived the cross they would have been anything but surprised to find him gone from the tomb. But they had come to find a dead body and were absolutely amazed to find an angel telling them in the "clearest language humanly possible" that Jesus had risen from the dead. So we find that Deedat not only has to promote absurdities to support his arguments but also has to suppress plain statements in the Bible which refute them completely.

God bless you as you continue to study more of His Word