Kwanini Nchi nyingi zenye asili ya Uislam zinakumbwa na Vita sana?

[511]

The New Testament letters – 1








Earliest extant "epistles"?
3rd century copies!

Chester Beatty Papyrus "P46" – Romans


The conventional claim is that the earliest Christian writings are the letters of St Paul, and these are said to date from between 48 and 60 AD.


But NO original documents exist and the authenticity of Paul's epistles has been doubted since the 18th century.


The earliest copies extant are from the 3rd century, the trophies of a 1930s American copper millionaire, Chester Beatty. Beatty bought parts of eleven biblical codices from dealers in Cairo. One codex contains the four gospels and Acts, another the letters of Paul, and a third a late 3rd century copy of Revelation.


Significantly, the Pauline letters in the "P46" papyri are arranged in an unusual order and exclude the pastorals.


Was the Pauline corpus still a work-in-progress in the 3rd century?

 

[Jagina]

Nimekuuliza unaitaka hiyo Ayah wewe kama nani??

kama mtafutaji wa ukweli

 

[Jagina]

Taking the epistle?


"The text which has been misused to support a literal view of the entire Bible's inspiration is itself the work of an author who has lied about his identity."


– Robin Lane Fox (The Unauthorized Version, p136)

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."


– 2 Timothy 3.16.

 

[Jagina]

Bold, Catholic and Fake

Epistles of Peter, James, John, and Jude

"Love NOT the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.' – 1 John 2.15.

Several of the New Testament epistles are known as "Catholic" because there is no pretense that they are correspondence to an individual or even an individual church. They are addressed to the "whole church". Many authorities regard these seven works as "pseudepigraphical" (in plain English, fake). Put aside the distorting lens of Christian faith and it becomes obvious why: they belong in that period of fractious debate that characterised Christianity of the 2nd not the 1st century.



1 & 2 Peter, Jude

"The two letters of Peter are damned by their style and by their references to Paul's collected letters and pagan persecution."
– Robin Lane Fox (The Unauthorized Version, p136)

Just what did Peter,"Prince of the Apostles", record for posterity? Some welcome insights into the early days with his Lord? Perhaps an allusion to his faux pas in the Garden of Gethsemane or a reminiscence of that awesome resurrection appearance? Not a bit of it. "Peter" writes as a church manager, anxious to keep the organisation under control.


1 Peter is not so much a letter as a baptismal sermon, written in a Greek milieu. It claims to originate in "the church that is at Babylon", understood as a coded reference to Rome, and apparently is addressed to Jewish Christians ("strangers") scattered across Rome's Asian provinces. They are a "chosen generation", facing "manifold temptations". Submission is the watchword. The brethren are urged to be "as obedient children"(1.14), as "newborn babes" (2.2), to "submit to every ordinance of man ... unto governors ... for the Lord's sake." (2.13,14). Slaves are urged to be subject to masters "with all fear" (2.18), wives to be subject to husbands "chaste and with fear" (3.2), the younger to "submit to the elder" (5.5). All this subservience, it seems, is in the sight of God "of great price." The end of all things is "at hand" (4.7).


Yet none of this can originate with an "unlearned and ignorant" fisherman called Peter (Acts 4.13). Its excellent Greek, use of the Septuagint for scriptural references, including a description of JC's death drawn from Isaiah 53 – odd for an eye-witness! – betrays a different origin. The reference to Rome as "Babylon" is an obvious anachronism (Rome was only so-called after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 yet Peter we are told died at the hands of Nero around 64! 1 Peter is late and fake.


2 Peter purports to be the last testament of a man facing a martyr's death (so why doesn't Peter feature in Paul's "prison letters"?). Its intent is to warn against "false teachers" and play down end-time hopes. A real howler is verse 3.16 which refers to Paul's epistles as "scripture"! It dates, of course, to a time when the Church was warming to the idea of secular power.


2 Peter actually borrows from the epistle of Jude and Jude itself – a mere 25 verses – claims to be the work of the "brother of James", that is the apostle Judas named in Luke 16.6 and Acts 1.13. And yet the apostle lists of Mark and Matthew name no such character. Instead, the only brother of James they know is a John! A Judas is named later by both evangelists but this time as "the brother of Jesus" (Matthew 13,55, Mark 6.3). More fakery.

 

[511]

kama mtafutaji wa ukweli

Mohammed said that women are stupid and most of the people in hell are women. Kind of funny, considering that a terrorist suicide bomber or someone martyred in jihad is promised 72 virgins in heaven.


Katafute ukweli wa huu uongo wa shoga mud we kafiri

 

[Jagina]

Epistles of James, 1,2 & 3 John


This "letter of James" was not included in the early canon and it most certainly is not from the pen of a brother of Jesus. Its mixed bag of themes and inconsistent vocabulary betray that it has actually been composited from several earlier sources. Probably the date of composition was the late 2nd century, when Pauline theology was being expropriated by the church in Rome. One concern expressed in the letter was opposition to "faith without works", a point made without mentioning Paul by name. Luther called James "an epistle of straw" – but then Luther was the apostle of "sole fide".



All three "John" epistles are actually anonymous but "tradition" (and certain affinities with the 4th gospel) assign a spurious authorship to the famous apostle. But content clearly indicates the furious doctrinal and factional conflicts best identified in the 2nd century.


1 John has none of the salutations of a letter. It warns the "children" (a word used no fewer than 14 times) to resist the "many antichrists" (2.18) and "false prophets" (4.1).


What heinous messages have "the seducers" (2.26) been spreading that merits the fatherly missive? Such shockers as "Jesus was not Christ or Son of God" (2.22, 5.5), that "we have no sin" (1.8), that God does not incarnate as flesh (4.3) – all of which sounds terribly "modern" but which were issues crucial to the disputes between Hellenisers, Judaizers, Gnostics, Docetists and those who emerged as "orthodox" towards the end of the 2nd century.


2 and 3 John are perhaps the most honest of all the epistles. They are brief enough to have actually been a letter (each would fit on a single leaf of papyrus), are sent by someone calling himself "the elder" (NOT John!) and are addressed to a "Gaius" and to an "elect lady". They betray a certain frantic concern that the recipients remain true to the "original message" and not be seduced by "deceivers", who quite obviously are very active. The "false teacher" targeted by 2 John has a startling perspective: Jesus never existed!

"For many deceivers are entered into the world, WHO CONFESS NOT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." – 2 John 1.7.

3 John actually names the object of its wrath, a reprobate called Diotrephes, chief honcho of a church somewhere and rival to "the elder":

" who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not ... prating against us with malicious words ... neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church." – 3 John 1.9,10.

Such brotherly love, such Christian fellowship!

 

[Jagina]

Mohammed said that women are stupid and most of the people in hell are women. Kind of funny, considering that a terrorist suicide bomber or someone martyred in jihad is promised 72 virgins in heaven.


Katafute ukweli wa huu uongo wa shoga mud we kafiri

Exit "Hebrews"


Setting aside the seven dubious "Catholic" items, the fourteen remaining letters are said to be the work of Paul. Surely, we have something genuine here?


Well, we better make that thirteen. Nobody with any knowledge at all about the anonymous "Hebrews" subscribes to the ungrounded "tradition" that Hebrews is Paul's handiwork.


In fact, even Evangelicals welcome the reassignment of Hebrews to another hand. In their impoverished logic it gives them “another witness” to Jesus!

 

[511]

Bold, Catholic and Fake

Epistles of Peter, James, John, and Jude





Several of the New Testament epistles are known as "Catholic" because there is no pretense that they are correspondence to an individual or even an individual church. They are addressed to the "whole church". Many authorities regard these seven works as "pseudepigraphical" (in plain English, fake). Put aside the distorting lens of Christian faith and it becomes obvious why: they belong in that period of fractious debate that characterised Christianity of the 2nd not the 1st century.



1 & 2 Peter, Jude





Just what did Peter,"Prince of the Apostles", record for posterity? Some welcome insights into the early days with his Lord? Perhaps an allusion to his faux pas in the Garden of Gethsemane or a reminiscence of that awesome resurrection appearance? Not a bit of it. "Peter" writes as a church manager, anxious to keep the organisation under control.


1 Peter is not so much a letter as a baptismal sermon, written in a Greek milieu. It claims to originate in "the church that is at Babylon", understood as a coded reference to Rome, and apparently is addressed to Jewish Christians ("strangers") scattered across Rome's Asian provinces. They are a "chosen generation", facing "manifold temptations". Submission is the watchword. The brethren are urged to be "as obedient children"(1.14), as "newborn babes" (2.2), to "submit to every ordinance of man ... unto governors ... for the Lord's sake." (2.13,14). Slaves are urged to be subject to masters "with all fear" (2.18), wives to be subject to husbands "chaste and with fear" (3.2), the younger to "submit to the elder" (5.5). All this subservience, it seems, is in the sight of God "of great price." The end of all things is "at hand" (4.7).


Yet none of this can originate with an "unlearned and ignorant" fisherman called Peter (Acts 4.13). Its excellent Greek, use of the Septuagint for scriptural references, including a description of JC's death drawn from Isaiah 53 – odd for an eye-witness! – betrays a different origin. The reference to Rome as "Babylon" is an obvious anachronism (Rome was only so-called after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 yet Peter we are told died at the hands of Nero around 64! 1 Peter is late and fake.


2 Peter purports to be the last testament of a man facing a martyr's death (so why doesn't Peter feature in Paul's "prison letters"?). Its intent is to warn against "false teachers" and play down end-time hopes. A real howler is verse 3.16 which refers to Paul's epistles as "scripture"! It dates, of course, to a time when the Church was warming to the idea of secular power.


2 Peter actually borrows from the epistle of Jude and Jude itself – a mere 25 verses – claims to be the work of the "brother of James", that is the apostle Judas named in Luke 16.6 and Acts 1.13. And yet the apostle lists of Mark and Matthew name no such character. Instead, the only brother of James they know is a John! A Judas is named later by both evangelists but this time as "the brother of Jesus" (Matthew 13,55, Mark 6.3). More fakery.

 

[511]

Exit "Hebrews"


Setting aside the seven dubious "Catholic" items, the fourteen remaining letters are said to be the work of Paul. Surely, we have something genuine here?


Well, we better make that thirteen. Nobody with any knowledge at all about the anonymous "Hebrews" subscribes to the ungrounded "tradition" that Hebrews is Paul's handiwork.


In fact, even Evangelicals welcome the reassignment of Hebrews to another hand. In their impoverished logic it gives them “another witness” to Jesus!

 

[Jagina]

Mohammed said that women are stupid and most of the people in hell are women. Kind of funny, considering that a terrorist suicide bomber or someone martyred in jihad is promised 72 virgins in heaven.


Katafute ukweli wa huu uongo wa shoga mud we kafiri

The Pauline Corpus - a compendium of fraud


NOT mentioned in dispatches



Of the thirteen letters that bear the name of Paul, nine of them are addressed to churches and four to individuals. Do they ring true?


Curiously, the four Gospels neither mention nor even hint at a pioneering apostle called Paul. For the gospel writers, Paul does not exist. Equally curious is that Paul's letters reciprocate the ignorance of the gospellers by betraying NO knowledge of apostolic writings. Indeed the evangelist Matthew, the tax collector so good at teasing prophesies for the coming of Jesus out of Jewish scripture, is not so much as named in any Pauline epistle.


The evangelist John, son of Zebedee and the only other disciple credited with a gospel, is dismissed by Paul in a single phrase from his entire corpus:

" James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars .. ".

Even then, the occasion was seventeen years after Paul's miraculous conversion, when the apostle proudly declared he "learned nothing" from the purported companions of the godman (Galatians 2.6,9), and that included John, "the one Jesus loved"! Even the central drama of Jesus is referenced so obliquely and fleetingly in Paul's letters that one realizes that the author's "risen Christ" is a different entity entirely from the Nazarene carpenter of the gospels.


According to Acts, the evangelist Mark (aka John Mark) did feature in the adventures of Paul: he deserted the apostle's first mission at Perga and became the cause of an acrimonious falling out between Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15.38,39). Yet Paul makes no reference to this altercation in his own letters and his three passing references to Mark are inconsequential and dubious. Mark's references to Paul are non-existent. Even the dubious Epistle of Barnabas, supposedly the work of Paul's first companion, never mentions Paul.


Not even the book of Acts – written, we are told, by Luke, Paul's long-time travelling companion and with him even in the condemned cell (2 Timothy 4.11) – makes any reference to, or even hints at the existence of the Pauline epistles, the seminal work that defines Christian theology and makes up one third of the entire New Testament! The silence is startling from the supposed "biographer" of the foremost apostle.

 

[Jagina]

"Inauthentic" – a polite word for fraudulent


Actually, for quite some time, biblical scholars of all stripes have divided even the Pauline epistles into the "authentic" and the "inauthentic", the litmus test being the "unique and powerful voice" said to speak through the genuine article. Perhaps as few as four, or as many as seven, of the whole collection are deemed "authentic".

 

[511]

Bold, Catholic and Fake

Epistles of Peter, James, John, and Jude





Several of the New Testament epistles are known as "Catholic" because there is no pretense that they are correspondence to an individual or even an individual church. They are addressed to the "whole church". Many authorities regard these seven works as "pseudepigraphical" (in plain English, fake). Put aside the distorting lens of Christian faith and it becomes obvious why: they belong in that period of fractious debate that characterised Christianity of the 2nd not the 1st century.



1 & 2 Peter, Jude





Just what did Peter,"Prince of the Apostles", record for posterity? Some welcome insights into the early days with his Lord? Perhaps an allusion to his faux pas in the Garden of Gethsemane or a reminiscence of that awesome resurrection appearance? Not a bit of it. "Peter" writes as a church manager, anxious to keep the organisation under control.


1 Peter is not so much a letter as a baptismal sermon, written in a Greek milieu. It claims to originate in "the church that is at Babylon", understood as a coded reference to Rome, and apparently is addressed to Jewish Christians ("strangers") scattered across Rome's Asian provinces. They are a "chosen generation", facing "manifold temptations". Submission is the watchword. The brethren are urged to be "as obedient children"(1.14), as "newborn babes" (2.2), to "submit to every ordinance of man ... unto governors ... for the Lord's sake." (2.13,14). Slaves are urged to be subject to masters "with all fear" (2.18), wives to be subject to husbands "chaste and with fear" (3.2), the younger to "submit to the elder" (5.5). All this subservience, it seems, is in the sight of God "of great price." The end of all things is "at hand" (4.7).


Yet none of this can originate with an "unlearned and ignorant" fisherman called Peter (Acts 4.13). Its excellent Greek, use of the Septuagint for scriptural references, including a description of JC's death drawn from Isaiah 53 – odd for an eye-witness! – betrays a different origin. The reference to Rome as "Babylon" is an obvious anachronism (Rome was only so-called after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 yet Peter we are told died at the hands of Nero around 64! 1 Peter is late and fake.


2 Peter purports to be the last testament of a man facing a martyr's death (so why doesn't Peter feature in Paul's "prison letters"?). Its intent is to warn against "false teachers" and play down end-time hopes. A real howler is verse 3.16 which refers to Paul's epistles as "scripture"! It dates, of course, to a time when the Church was warming to the idea of secular power.


2 Peter actually borrows from the epistle of Jude and Jude itself – a mere 25 verses – claims to be the work of the "brother of James", that is the apostle Judas named in Luke 16.6 and Acts 1.13. And yet the apostle lists of Mark and Matthew name no such character. Instead, the only brother of James they know is a John! A Judas is named later by both evangelists but this time as "the brother of Jesus" (Matthew 13,55, Mark 6.3). More fakery.

Another Anecdote, Mohammed first said kill all dogs then he relented and said don't kill all dogs but it's okay to kill the black ones.

Sahih Muslim 1572 - The Book of Musaqah - كتاب المساقاة - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) in English and Arabic

sunnah.com

Wait, wut? Now we're being racist to dogs? Mohammed certainly was. The supreme creator of the universe Allah had nothing to do except tell humans to kill black dogs (which I assume the supreme creator also designed.) But apparently the black dog is by the devil. Thank god or thank dog that he stopped at dogs and not people or Africa would be genocided by now.

All i’ll say is “cool story bro”.

 

[Jagina]

"The Pastorals" – not quite the ticket

"The two epistles of Timothy are set suspiciously apart by style and are damned by their content and setting (the single bishop; Timothy's lack of knowledge and his awkward whereabouts).

– Robin Lane Fox (The Unauthorized Version, p136)

The most dubious of the Pauline letters are the so-called "pastorals" – 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus.


The biggest problem is that 2 Timothy purports to be written from a prison cell shortly before the apostle's martyrdom yet Paul says "Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick" (2 Timothy 4.20). Paul's last recorded presence in Miletum (Miletus, near Ephesus) was on the return leg of his 3rd journey (Acts 20.15), not on his voyage to Rome, and Trophimus was NOT left behind. In fact, in Jerusalem Trophimus plays a crucial if passive role in the eventual fate of the apostle.

"Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place. For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple." – Acts 21.28,29

Apart from the chronological slip one may well ask, Why did the great healer not heal his own playmate?


Titus presents its own problems. Within the opening address we learn that Paul has been to Crete yet the "classic" Pauline itinerary says nothing about a mission to the island:

"To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee." – Titus 1.4,5.

Titus also anticipates a get together of the saints on the Adriatic coast of Greece – so Paul is obviously not in a Roman jail.

"When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, be diligent to come unto me to Nicopolis: for I have determined there to winter. Bring Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their journey diligently, that nothing be wanting unto them." – Titus 3.12,13.

The pious mind, being what it is, papers over the rather serious cracks with quite a bizarre claim: that Paul served not one but two prison terms in Rome, with a year's vacation in between, probably spent in Spain and/or Crete! Such a wildly inventive story becomes necessary to keep the so-called "Pastoral" epistles "authentic".


Even without the "two term" jail record, Paul had a curious imprisonment in Rome. Apparently, he spent two years in his own hired house, summoning the Jewish elders (Acts 28.17, 20), receiving all who came to him, and preaching without hindrance from "morning till night" (Acts 28.23). Sounds more like a sabbatical year than a term in prison.


OK - so excluding the dodgy "pastorals", do we have ten genuine letters?


Not quite.

 

[Wandugu Masanja]

Moderator
Tafadhali ufupishe au uufungie Mara moja huu mjadala kwani hauna faida kwa upande wowote ule, huu mjadala umekuwa wa kukashifiana na kutukanana,
Ahsante

 

[511]

"Inauthentic" – a polite word for fraudulent


Actually, for quite some time, biblical scholars of all stripes have divided even the Pauline epistles into the "authentic" and the "inauthentic", the litmus test being the "unique and powerful voice" said to speak through the genuine article. Perhaps as few as four, or as many as seven, of the whole collection are deemed "authentic".

Here is a rather funny Quranic verse (i’m not making this up, it literally tells people not to blab after eating food but kindly get the f*ck out of the tent without annoying Mohammed)

“O believers! Do not enter the homes of the Prophet without permission ˹and if invited˺ for a meal, do not ˹come too early and˺ linger until the meal is ready. But if you are invited, then enter ˹on time˺. Once you have eaten, then go on your way, and do not stay for casual talk. Such behaviour is truly annoying to the Prophet, yet he is too shy to ask you to leave” Surah Al Ahsab - 33/53

Mohammed is so shy to ask you to leave, so the almighty creator of the universe decreed a verse for all of eternity through an angel who made an illiterate man write. How much hashish do you need to smoke to believe this stuff? Know where I can get some of that?

 

[Jagina]

An

The "Prison Epistles"


The so-called "prison" or "captivity" letters – Philippians, Philemon, Colossians and Ephesians – far from establishing the veracity of Pauline authorship, expose such authorship as bogus.


They are discussed in detail here.


Suffice it to say that the prison letters do nothing to establish the notion that Paul was either in Rome or in prison. They are, as they say, "inauthentic".





What, then, of the half-dozen "core" Pauline letters? Surely they at least are "authentic"?


Well actually ...

 

[511]

"The Pastorals" – not quite the ticket





The most dubious of the Pauline letters are the so-called "pastorals" – 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus.


The biggest problem is that 2 Timothy purports to be written from a prison cell shortly before the apostle's martyrdom yet Paul says "Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick" (2 Timothy 4.20). Paul's last recorded presence in Miletum (Miletus, near Ephesus) was on the return leg of his 3rd journey (Acts 20.15), not on his voyage to Rome, and Trophimus was NOT left behind. In fact, in Jerusalem Trophimus plays a crucial if passive role in the eventual fate of the apostle.





Apart from the chronological slip one may well ask, Why did the great healer not heal his own playmate?


Titus presents its own problems. Within the opening address we learn that Paul has been to Crete yet the "classic" Pauline itinerary says nothing about a mission to the island:





Titus also anticipates a get together of the saints on the Adriatic coast of Greece – so Paul is obviously not in a Roman jail.





The pious mind, being what it is, papers over the rather serious cracks with quite a bizarre claim: that Paul served not one but two prison terms in Rome, with a year's vacation in between, probably spent in Spain and/or Crete! Such a wildly inventive story becomes necessary to keep the so-called "Pastoral" epistles "authentic".


Even without the "two term" jail record, Paul had a curious imprisonment in Rome. Apparently, he spent two years in his own hired house, summoning the Jewish elders (Acts 28.17, 20), receiving all who came to him, and preaching without hindrance from "morning till night" (Acts 28.23). Sounds more like a sabbatical year than a term in prison.


OK - so excluding the dodgy "pastorals", do we have ten genuine letters?


Not quite.

 

[511]

The "Prison Epistles"


The so-called "prison" or "captivity" letters – Philippians, Philemon, Colossians and Ephesians – far from establishing the veracity of Pauline authorship, expose such authorship as bogus.


They are discussed in detail here.


Suffice it to say that the prison letters do nothing to establish the notion that Paul was either in Rome or in prison. They are, as they say, "inauthentic".





What, then, of the half-dozen "core" Pauline letters? Surely they at least are "authentic"?


Well actually ...

 

[Heron]

Nchi nyingi zenye mlengo wa uislamu au majimbo mengi ya nchi yenye mlengo wa uislamu uwa ni kitovu cha ugaidi na maeneo hayo usifika kwa kuzalisha makundi mengi ya Kigaidi.

Sisemi tu kwa sababu nasema bali nasema kwa sababu zipo nadharia nyingi zinazoonesha kuwa ni kweli maeneo hayo ukumbwa na matukio ya kigaidi ama Vita.

Hata Tanzania miaka kadhaa ya nyuma kulikuwa na tetesi za matukio ya kigaidi maeneo ya Kibiti na jirani na maeneo hayo ambayo kwa wingi ukaliwa na watu wa Dini ya uislamu kitendo kilichopelekea Jeshi la Tanzania kuwekeza nguvu huko Kibiti na kutokomeza ugaidi huo ambao ulikuwa umeanza kumea katika maeneo hayo ya pwani ya Tanzania. Hata kijana mmoja wa kitanzania mwenye mlengo wa Dini ya kiislamu aliwahi kukamatwa Kenya akitumikia kikundi cha kigaidi cha Al-Shabab.

Ukiachilia mbali hayo, Duniani ukitamka neno ugaidi alafu ukasema tutajie dini yenye kuhusishwa na ugaidi moja kwa moja hata mtoto atakutajia Uislamu. Na hii ni kwa sababu Watu wote wanaokamatwa katika matukio hayo basi ujinasibu kama wanapigania Dini ama maslahi yao ya kidini. Ukiachilia mbali kupigania Dini au Maslahi ya Kidini. Nchi hizo hizo au maeneo hayo hayo yamekuwa yakikumbwa na Mapinduzi ya kijeshi na watu hao wakitaka kusimika dola la kiislamu.

Alikadharika maeneo hayo uwa yanakumbwa na vurugu za kivita za mara kwa mara.

Hapa Afrika ukitoa Congo DRC tu ambayo haina waislamu wengi, nchi nyingi zilizobaki zenye vita za mara kwa mara maeneo hayo yenye vita ukaliwa na waislamu kwa idadi kubwa.

Ukanda wote wa Sahel, yani kusini mwa mpaka wa jangwa la Sahara, nchi kama Sudan, Niger, Mali, Burkinafaso, Chad na nyinginezo na nchi zinazokumbwa na vikundi vya kigaidi mara kwa mara. Na ni nchi zenye uislamu mwingi na kama unavyoona zinapakana na nchi za waarabu wa kiafrika ambazo kwa asilimia 90 raia wa nchi hizo ni waislamu.
View attachment 2943395
Nigeria pia ni miongoni mwa nchi inayokumbwa na matukio ya kigaidi sana hususani Maeneo ya kaskazini ya nchi hiyo ambayo ukaliwa na waislamu wengi. Nchini Nigeria wakristo wengi wanapatikana Kusini katika majiji kama Lagos, na Abuja, na waislamu wengi upatikana maeneo ya Kaskazini mwa nchi ambayo mara nyingi majimbo ya Maeneo hayo uongozwa kwa Sheria za kiislamu, pia nadhani juzi kati katika mfungo wa ramadhani watu wa maeneo hayo walikamatwa kwa kutokufunga Mfungo wa Ramadhani na waliadhibiwa. Maeneo hayo hayo ndio kituo cha Kundi la Boko Haram na vikundi vingine vya namna hiyo.

Tukiama barani Afrika tukaamia bara la Asia ukanda ya Middle East (Mashariki ya Kati) ambapo ndiko uislamu umeanzia huko ndiko kuna vikundi vingi vya kigaidi, na karibia kila nchi ina vikundi vyake. Nadhani wengi mnavifahamu vikundi kama Hamas kilichoishambulia Israel na kuteka na kuua watu katika tamasha la mziki, na kupeleka vita ambayo imeigharimu ardhi ya Palestina ukanda wa Gaza. Vilevile haikupita miezi mingi kuna kikundi kutoka Yemen nacho kinaitwa Hauthi kikaanza kulipa mashambulizi kwa kupiga meli zinazopita ukanda wa bahari ya sham bila kujali kuwa anaepigwa ni raia wa nchi gani.

Ukiachilia mzozo huo wa Israel na maadui zake, hakuna asiyejua kundi la kigaidi lenye mlengo wa kiislamu lililotikisa Dunia kwa matukio ya kutisha kwa kuchinja, kupiga risasi au kujitoa Mhanga. Hii ya kujitoa mhanga ikapelekea Waislamu hasa waliojifunika mwili mzima kuogopwa sana kuhisi labda wamebeba mabomu ya kujitoa mhanga. Chini ya Osama Bin Laden, kundi hili liliisumbua Dunia hasa Marekani kwa kuipa Jeraha lisilosahaulika la Septemba 11.

Kwa kifupi huko Middle East (Mashariki ya Kati) kuna vikundi vingi sana vya kigaidi, vingine vinakuwaga vimelala tu, vinakuwa (Inactive) lakini viko tayari kwa mashambulizi. Na vikundi hivi ndivyo vinafanya Dola za kiislamu zinaendelea kusimama na sheria kali za kiislamu zifatwe, mfano moja wapo ni Kundi la Taliban kutokea pale Afghanistan ambalo baada ya kushika dola tu likaweka sheria kali za kiislamu ikiwemo wanafunzi kusoma madarasa kwa kuzingatia jinsia mpaka chuo kikuu yani mtoto wa kike na wakiume kila mtu darasa lake.

Kundi jingine la Kigaidi ni kundi la ISIS yani Islamic State. Kundi hili juzi kati limekiri kupiga Tukio pale Russia kwa kumimina Risasi katika Mall moja pale Moscow kwenye tamasha la mziki na kuua watu zaidi ya 150 na kuchoma jengo kwa vilipuzi. Lakini Rais wa Russia Vladimir Putin hajawaacha salama, kawadaka watu kadhaa ambao wanahusika na tukio hilo ambao wengi wao wanasema wamekodiwa kutokea nchi ya Uturuki ambayo ni yenye mlengo wa kiislamu.

Kwa ufupi makundi haya ni mengi sana na yana uhusiano wa moja kwa moja, kwa sababu mengi yanakuwa na link au uhusiano.

Kwani ndugu zetu waislamu mnapokuwa mnafundishwa Dini uwa mnapewa maelezo gani yanayowatia baadhi yenu mioyo ya kikatili, kutaka kumwaga Damu?

Unaweza kuisaidiwa ukajua hasa chanzo cha hizi saga,
Nilitaka kujiaminisha kuwa wewe ni Mvivu sana hadi ukashindwa kufuatilia kujua nani Founder wa hizi groups na nani anazi Finance.

Lkn inawezekanaje mtu mvivu kisha aweze kuweka andiko refu kiasi hichi?
Huyu si Mvivu bali ni Mtu Jaahili Mkorofi.

Haya kafuatilie mwenyewe kwanini hizo Nchi hukumbwa na Machafuko,
Nani anaanzisha hayo makundi?
Sababu za kuanzishwa kwake?
Na kwanini ni katika Nchi ambazo hasa zenye utajiri wa Mafuta na Gas?

 

[Accumen Mo]

Tulia we kafiri.
Kwa nini mud alibaka mpka maiti ya shangazi yake. ?
Mtume wa mnyaziiView attachment 2944196

Mzee wa vibonzo ,ukweli ndio huo dini inayotambua mashoga haswa viongozi wake ,papa ndio kaanzisha dini hiyo🤣🤣