Mtume Muhammad: Jamii isipotoshwe; Jua huzama katika Chemchemu ya matope Meusi na Mazito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kwani sio mwili MMOJA [emoji350] Hii ilimu ghaibu kwako wewe mzee WA kukariri usie na ilimu ya Roho hapo ndipo tunaona mapungufu ya wewe masudi kuikosa Ilimu hiyo [emoji4]
 
Sasa ukitaka Timotheo asemeje ktk HALI YA UBINADAMU KAMILI WA YESU [emoji350] [emoji344] Timotheo ni Msomi na MchaMungu [emoji123] [emoji106]


Are these Paul's words or GOD Almighty's Divine Revelations????


Christian theologians have created the lie and myth about the Bible being GOD Almighty's Divine Words. Let us see just how true this bogus claim is:

The following verses were sent to me by brother Haytham, may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

2 Timothy 4:9-13

9 Do your best to come to me quickly,

10 for Demas, because he loved this world, has deserted me and has gone to Thessalonica. Crescens has gone to Galatia, and Titus to Dalmatia.

11 Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry.

12 I sent Tychicus to Ephesus.

13 When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments.


Titus 3:12-14

12 As soon as I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, because I have decided to winter there.

13 Do everything you can to help Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their way and see that they have everything they need.

14 Our people must learn to devote themselves to doing what is good, in order that they may provide for daily necessities and not live unproductive lives.


He decided to winter there???


Are these Paul's own opinions and commands or are they truly GOD Almighty's UNCOMPROMISED Divine Revelations:

1 Timothy 2:11-15

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.

12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

15 But women[a] will be saved through childbearing–if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.


1 Corinthians 14:34

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.


I think the nationally-known Church Minister, Mrs. Joyce Meyer, should resign and repent according to uncle Paul.


So, were the above truly Paul's opinions or GOD Almighty's Divine Commands?

If the Bible is truly GOD Almighty's UNCOMPROMISED Revelations, then why do we have Paul's personal nonsense in the book???

How can any sane person then say that the Bible is ALL GOD Almighty's Divine Revelations and is error-free?
 



Paul's blasphemous statement:


Let us read what Paul said in the corrupted Bible:


"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"


Here are the countless English translations of this verse. Literally, almost 100% of all of the English translations agree:


  1. Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
  2. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New American Standard Bible)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  3. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Amplified Bible)
    25[This is] because the foolish thing [that has its source in] God is wiser than men, and the weak thing [that springs] from God is stronger than men.

    Because the stupid thing in GOD???
  4. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New Living Translation)
    25 This foolish plan of God is wiser than the wisest of human plans, and God’s weakness is stronger than the greatest of human strength.
  5. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (King James Version)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  6. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (English Standard Version)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  7. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Contemporary English Version)
    25 Even when God is foolish, he is wiser than everyone else, and even when God is weak, he is stronger than everyone else.

    Even when GOD is stupid???
  8. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New King James Version)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  9. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (21st Century King James Version)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  10. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (American Standard Version)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  11. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Young's Literal Translation)
    25 because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;
  12. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Darby Translation)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
  13. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
    25 because God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength.
  14. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Reader's Version)
    25 The foolish things of God are wiser than human wisdom. The weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

    The stupid things of GOD???
  15. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Wycliffe New Testament)
    25 For that that is folly thing of God, is wiser than men; and that that is the feeble thing of God [and that that is the
    sick thing, or frail, of God], is stronger than men.

    The folly things of GOD???
  16. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version - UK)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
  17. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Today's New International Version)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.




Let us analyze this foolish and blasphemous verse from Paul:


1- Regardless of how smart and stupid GOD and us humans are, our intelligence will never reach even the stupidity of GOD!


2- GOD is a fool.


3- GOD is weak.


4- Man is more foolish and weaker than GOD.


5- The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty. It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited intelligence and strength were compared to His infinite Attributes.
 
Sasa ukitaka Timotheo asemeje ktk HALI YA UBINADAMU KAMILI WA YESU [emoji350] [emoji344] Timotheo ni Msomi na MchaMungu [emoji123] [emoji106]



Paul did clearly insult GOD Almighty, and I challenge any polytheist trinitarian pagan to disprove it!


GOD Almighty in the Old Testament punishes to death those who curse His Holy Name:


Let us look at the following verses from the Bible's Old Testament:


Leviticus 24:16

anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

Leviticus 22:32

Do not profane my holy name. I must be acknowledged as holy by the Israelites. I am the LORD, who makes you holy

Yet, Paul said that GOD Almighty is a fool and weak! If cursing GOD Almighty's Holy Name even in the absolute least was not big deal to GOD Almighty in the Bible, then GOD Almighty would not have ordered the killing of those who profane His Holy Name.

Paul clearly violated that Law in the Bible by calling GOD Almighty a fool and weak.
 
utasubiri sana kuona KANISA KATOLIKI USHARIKA WA WATAKATIFU MAONDOLEO YA DHAMBU UFUFUKO WA MIILI NA UZIMA WA MILELE lifiiye [emoji12] itakuwa kama fisi akifuatia mkono udondoke aule [emoji15] [emoji12]


THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.

The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.

Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.

The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible.

In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is “God’s word expressed in human language” and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.

They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.

The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”

They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.

“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”

Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, “His blood be on us and on our children”, a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt.

Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had “tragic consequences” in encouraging hatred and persecution. “The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians.”

As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.”

In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew’s and Edinburgh, explain its context.

They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.
The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. “We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new.”

A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It’s a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: “There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.

That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching.”
 
Nimesoma sijaona hoja yenye mashiko,kupangua hoja uliyotaka kuipangua.kwahiyo mudi hakusema hayo maneno? Na hayajaandikwa kwenye kitabu tukufu?
 
It's quality not quantity [emoji106]
 










Utasubiri sanaaà [emoji38] [emoji38] [emoji38] kabla hata baba kasimu hajamtoa allah mfukoni, WAKRISTO WALIKUWA WANASOMA BIBLIA TAKATIFU MAKANISANI NA NJE YA MAKANISA NA KUHUBIRI UPENDO WA YESU! baba kasimu kafa KAYAACHA MAKANISA YANASOMA BIBLIA TAKATATIFU NDANI NA NJE YA MAKANISA YAKIENDELEA KUHUBIRI UPENDO WA YESU [emoji123] [emoji106] WEWE NAWE UTANUNA UTAWAACHA MAKANISANI WANAHUBIRI KUPITIA BIBLIA TAKATIFU UPENDO WA YESU MFUFUKA...HADI MWISHO WA DAHARI...TUTAENDA KTK MAKAZI ALIYO TUANDALIA YESU [emoji106] NA WALE WOÓTE MAKAFIRI WENYE ALAMA USONI MOTONI [emoji117]
 
Hapo uliponukuu pana siri nzito sana, ingawa Roho Mtakatifu amekwisha watahadharisha wanadamu.
Waislamu wanapaswa kuisoma hiyo sura ya kitabu cha Ufunuo kwa tafakari ya hali ya juu sana.
Na kujiuliza,
Nini hasa Asili na Maana ya Chapa ya kovu katika Paji la Uso na Mkononi, Viganjani mwao, au SIGIDA, iwe inaonekana au imejificha.
 
Hoja yako ya msingi hapa ni kitu gani? inaonyesha hata kusoma huwa husomi kwasababu unaandika mambo mengi lakini yanajirudia rudia tu , Mungu alishamsifu Mohamadi kuwa ana tabia bora kabisa
Because..
Allah is a mohammad fiction's character. Katika biography ya Mohammad, Mo anajisifu kwa kufanya uovu Mwingi. Na pia anajivunia kufanikiwa kupitia uovu huo. Fahamu tu, Hii ni mbali kabisa na vile tunavyomlaumu.

Lakini hapohapo unagundua kua, amefanana na Baba wa nyumba, ambaye Hairuhusiwi watoto wake waseme uovu wake bali wausifie.

Mo alikua idealistic sana, kwa kila baya analotenda, allah anakuja na verse ili kuhalalisha ikiwemo ile ya kumuoa mtoto wake. Kumkataa Mama yake mzazi, kuwaua wazazi wa Safiyah nk.Na hapa kuna volumes and volumes of proofs.

Mohammedanism is practical, social, UNSPIRITUAL, concerned to win the empire of this world.
Like devotees of all cults, his followers rose to champion his cause with dedication. By defying death and butchering others they made Islam the world's second largest religion, and now the biggest threat to human civilization.

When you read the character of allah, you'll found out, we have been fooled. Allah is not even exists in the world of ours. And This DOES NOT MEAN GOD IS NOT EXISTS.

Mo alikua akipeleka jeshi lake kupigana Vita, ikitokea Jeshi lake limeshindwa. anawaambia watu wake kua kwasababu allah alichukia. Ikitokea wameshinda anawaambia wameshinda kwasababu allah kafurahi kawapatia ushindi.

Kuna vita jeshi lake lilienda likamletea Mali. Mwanzo alikataa akiwaambia wana dhambi wamekwenda kinyume na kalenda. Alipogaiwa nyara zilizopatikana na vita hiyo. Akasema allah karuhusu(sources zipo).

Mo alikua anaanguka kifafa na kuweweseka. Hii inamuweka kwenye question mark kama alikua sawa mentally. Ukizingatia kua aliyemuambia kua yeye amekua Mtume ni mkewe. Sio mohammad mwenyewe.

Mo aliishi kwa kuvamia na kupora mali za kwenye misafara ya Wafanyabiashara mabedui. Alitajirika sana.

Pia inasemekana Mo alikua capable of
Bewitched. Hii inaleta wasiwasi zaidi kwa Mtu anayejiita Mtume wa allah.
 
Nimekujibu kitambo.
Mungu alikuwepo na aliona. Hiyo ilikuwa kazi ya ADAM. Yeye ndiye alipewa jukumu la kumfundisha, no matter what, don't even touch this tree. Mwisho wa yote naye alikula. Angalia vizuri Mungu alipokuja kwanini alimuuliza Adam na siyo hawa aliyekula mwanzo? na kwanini maongezi yote yalikuwa ni Mungu na Adam?

Kuhusu 1Samwel 16:14 -15.
Soma kisa kuanzia mwanzo utaona nini kinamtokea Saul. Acha kurukia mistari ya kati na kuja na stupid conclusion.

Evil Spirits are those whom Thee Lord Cursed and kicked them from Heaven. And He promised them Hell fire is their destiny.
According to scriptures, Satan/Lucifer is Lord of this World.
Alipoondoka ROHO wa Mungu fasta kaingia Iblis na kuanza kumtesa. Kisha amemuasi Mungu na Iblis ndiyo raha yake ili ajipatie wafuasi.

Anyway, do you believe in Christian Bible or Allah's Bible?
 



The Broken Promise Of Revelation


Revelation 22:18


18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

John is basically giving out a threat in order to reassure the readers that this book (Revelation) will stay intact and uncorrupted...


The integrity of the book is preserved by a solemn warning of the danger of losing a part in the tree of life. (John Darby's Synopsis of the New Testament, Commentary on Revelation Chapter 22, Source)


The supplication of John (which is the third part of the confirmation) joined with a curse of abhorrence, to preserve the truth of this book entire and uncorrupted in two verses. (The 1599 Geneva Study Bible, Commentary on Revelation 22:18, Source)

However, we see that there was a corrupted verse inserted into the book of Revelation before. That verse is Revelation 1:11. The verse is found in the King James Version of the Bible...


Revelation 1:11


[11] Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. (KJV)


However, when one reads the NIV Bible...


Revelation 1:11


which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea." (NIV)


We can clearly see that the phrase, " Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is an interpolated verse.


Taken from Commentary


This wording at the beginning of the KJV's version of Rev. 1:11 is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation or in Bruce Metzger's definitive A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition (New York: United Bible Societies, 1994, phone: 800-322-4253).

  • (The New King James Version [NKJV] does include this wording; but the NKJV is not a modern translation; it is only a modern-English rewording of the the original KJV, minus the Aprocrypha, since the Aprocrypha was in the original KJV.)



    John in Revelation 22:18 basically promised that no one would be able to add anything to this book by threatening anyone who did do so. However, we do see that a verse was indeed falsely added to this book. So that means that the promise was broken to stop these additions. Now reading this verse does not give me any 100% assurance that this book is truly indeed 100% the word of God.
 


The Book of Revelation:


"The author of the book calls himself John, who because of his Christian faith has been exiled to the rocky island of Patmos, a Roman penal colony. Although he never claims to be John the apostle, he was so identified by several of the early church Fathers, including Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Terullian, Cyprian, and Hippolytus. This identification, however, was denied by other Fathers, including Denis of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom. Indeed, vocabulary, grammar, and style make it doubtful that the book could have been put into its present form by the same persons responsible for the fourth gospel. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1373)"


"Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8).....In the third century, however, an African bishop named Dionysius compared the language, style and thought of the Apocalypse (Revelation) with that of the other writings of John and decided that the book could not been written by the apostle of John. He suggested that the author was a certain John the Presbyter, whose name appears elsewhere in ancient writings. Although many today follow Dionysius in his view of authorship, the external evidence seems overwhelmingly supportive of the traditional view. (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1922)"


Again, we don't know who wrote the Book of Revelation. It is certainly highly doubtful that it was written by Apostle John. The Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible seem to agree with the invalidity of this book from the above quote. So are you now going to consider the other John's words as the Words and Inspirations of GOD Almighty?


As we see, the style of writing in the book of Revelation is different from the books that are believed to be from John which are the Gospel of John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John.

The book of Revelation's style seems to be closer to John the Presbyter's writings. This man is known in ancient writings. There are also many Christian theologians today that hold the same view about the falsety of the book of Revelation.


Isn't this sufficient enough to prove that the book is doubtful?


Notice that in the sections of "Gospel of John" and "Gospels of 1, 2 & 3 John" above, the author did not identify himself and it was ASSUMED without actual proofs that it was Saint John who wrote them. Notice how they said that if he were to identify himself, then it would be hard for them to explain it.


Now, notice the author in the Book of Revelation does identify himself as John, but he has a complete different language and style of writing from the other books, which created much uncertainty about its validity in the Church.


My questions here are: Who wrote the Books?

And is or is not Saint John supposed to identify himself in his books?

And where are his books that have his name on them?


Again, keep in mind that the NT was not even documented on paper until 150 to 300 years after Jesus (depending on what Christian you talk to).

So the dating is way too long for us to be assuming books to belong to certain people. Let alone considering their nonsense (contents) as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…