UFAFANUZI: Mtume Mohamad amewahi kutenda muujiza gani?



"Tricks and simulated miracles"


"Many are those who trade in tricks and simulated miracles, duping the foolish multitude; and if nobody unmasked their subterfuges, they would impose them on everyone."



Leonardo da Vinci


(Manuscript F, Institut de France, 5v)
 
Waking the Dead

Did Jesus really "raise" anyone?

Dawn of the Dead?





"And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,"


– Matthew 27.50.



Not a verse that gets much attention from the "historical Jesus" school.


Ancient Jewish lore said that the Lord would split open Mount Olivet and the righteous dead would rise.


This scenario crept into Matthew 27 but the other evangelists prudently ignored this challenging "historical event".
 


Bwana Paulo anatwambia katika Waebrania 9:27

Na kama ambavyo mwanadamu ameandikiwa kufa mara moja tu, na baada ya hapo kukabili hukumu


Unaweza kutuambia hao aliowafufua Yesu , Elisha, Eliya na wale waliofufuka wakati Yesu alipotundikwa msalabani wako nchi gani hivi sasa wakisubiri hukumu ???
 
Hizo story hata Zumaridi anatusimulia


Outwitting the Grim Reaper – Luke's tale

The son of the Widow of Nain


The Hill of Moreh lies at the eastern end of the Jezreel plain. On its southwestern slope once stood the town of Shunem. It was here that the Old Testament prophet Elisha restored to life a woman's dead son. On the northern slopes of the same hill, about a mile away, stood the town of Nain. And it was here, according to the writer of Luke (though no one else), that Jesus Christ performed exactly the same trick.* To the rational mind, the Christian fable merely copies the Old Testament tale, ensuring that the new hero JC meets and exceeds the power of the earlier prophet. To the pious mind, the rehashed yarn achieves "fulfilment" in Christ.


Elisha's miracle is itself a reprise of a stunt performed by his mentor Elijah. In the "original" story, Elijah is hiding from King Ahab somewhere near Sidon. He is fed by a poor widow who is under "God's command" and miraculously her barrel of meal never runs out. But her son dies, and this affords Elijah an opportunity to restore him to life.




In the updated Elisha version, the scene is transferred from Phoenicia to Galilee and the story is broken into two parts. In the first part a poor widow is rewarded with the multiplication of food miracle (this time it's oil). In the second part a childless woman is granted a child who, as a boy, inexplicably dies. Again, this presents an opportunity for a restoration of life miracle and Elisha, like Elijah, lays upon the child and breathes new life into him.




In Luke's version of the same story there are, it seems, "original" elements, as well as the repeated motifs of "location", "widow" and "only son". JC meets the funeral procession on its way to the grave. Crying is mentioned and Jesus does not lie on the corpse but rather touches the burial casket and speaks to the body.




Historically authentic? Hardly. Consider the evidence from another funeral and another wonder-worker, Apollonius of Tyana.




Note that Philostratus' report of the 1st century Apollonius "raising the dead" refers back to an even earlier Greek myth(Euripides Alcestis) told of another demigod, Hercules!


In other words, in the Lucan tale we have not "history" but a classical "raising the dead" yarn which adapts elements of Greek myth to Jewish prototypes, filtered through a story told about a Pythagorean sage! We might also note that not only is "Luke" the sole gospel writer to mention the Widow of Nain tale but that "Luke" was the supposedly part-time travelling companion of Paul and certainly no "eye-witness" of Jesus.
 
Hizo story hata Zumaridi anatusimulia


Outwitting the Grim Reaper – John's tale



The Raising of Lazarus




The most famous of JC's "raisings" is the one reported by John. It is the most detailed and dramatic – which makes it all the more curious that it goes unrecorded in any of the synoptic gospels. But then, in a sense, it does appear, not as a miracle but as parable. A complex web is woven in which the threads are a place (Bethany), two sisters (Mary and Martha), a Simon, a jar of expensive ointment, Jesus' feet, a corpse and a return to life.


Early in Luke, after the incident at Nain and an exchange of messages with John the Baptist, Simon the Pharisee invites Jesus to dinner. As he eats, an unnamed prostitute "stood at his feet behind him" (!) and in some curious contortion manages to wash his feet with her tears, wipe them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment from an alabaster box. JC uses the occasion to pontificate on degrees of sin and love. (Luke 7.36,40).


A little later in Luke, JC finds himself in "a certain village" with "a certain woman" named Martha and a sister called Mary. To Martha's chagrin, Mary, rather than help with the dishes, "sat at Jesus' feet" to hear his words. The great man tells Martha to chill out, or words to that effect, declaring that Mary's action is "the good part". (Luke 10.38,42).


Luke's final contribution comes in chapter 16. JC has wended his way "through the cities and villages towards Jerusalem", telling a multitude of parables. One of the last he relates is the story of "a certain rich man" and a sick beggar called Lazarus, who has fed on crumbs from the rich man's table. Both die, the beggar taken up to heaven, the rich man down to hell. The pleas from the rich man for Lazarus to cool his thirst are in vain. It's payback time. The crunch line is delivered by JC:




In these words Jesus mouths a rebuttal to any suggestion that a reanimated corpse might be a good way to convince unbelievers of his mighty power. Belief must come from scripture, not physical evidence. This rather nicely gets the priests out of a hole. Luke's parable is the only reference to a Lazarus in any of the synoptic gospels and there is no suggestion that the two sisters might have a brother of that name.


Matthew (and Mark) conflate Luke's first two stories into one. The village is now named as Bethany and the house is that of Simon the Leper. As Jesus eats, an unnamed woman anoints his head by pouring "very precious ointment" from an alabaster box. The disciples protest at the waste (not to mention the mess) but JC declares that the woman has "wrought a good work". (Matthew 26.3,13; Mark 14.1,9).


John's gospel now completes the wondrous yarn by weaving all three of Luke's tales into one. Lazarus is no longer the hero of a parable but is the flesh-and-blood brother of Martha and Mary. The opening verses of chapter 11 make clear that the unnamed prostitute with such versatile hair that featured in Luke 7 in fact is Mary of Bethany.




The sisters have not hitherto been mentioned in John so clearly the writer is working from the other gospels. Apparently, Jesus loves the whole family (note the emphasis – but doesn't he love everybody?) – Lazarus "he whom thou lovest", Martha and her sister "Jesus loved". The sisters "sent unto him" (does everybody have a servant?) but Jesus dallies. It seems he already knows Lazarus is sick but is unconcerned, events will all reflect "to his glory":




Where exactly is Jesus at this point? He has "escaped" out of Jerusalem and is beyond the Jordan "where John first baptized." John says in 1.28 that this is "Bethabara" but no such place is known to history. Many Bibles "correct" this (confusingly) to read Bethany to flow with the following verses (well, it is all a fiction, after all!). After an affected delay Jesus deigns to visit his now dead friend, in his grave four days and "stinking". The motif of "four days" is chosen in deference to the Jewish notion that the soul hovers at the grave for three days. Lazarus is really dead.


Martha goes out to meet the approaching holy man and affirms her faith in both resurrection "at the last day" and Jesus as the Son of God. Inexplicitly Jesus again dallies, this time allowing Martha to "secretly" tell her sister Mary that "the Master" has called for her. Mary rushes out to fall at JC's feet (love those feet!) and Jesus, who knows everything, asks where Lazarus is buried. The crowd of Jews who have gathered in sympathy question whether Jesus could have saved the life of his "loved friend" (the one that we have never heard of before). Jesus groans and weeps.


At the cave where Lazarus is buried Jesus orders the removal of the stone door and very publicly prays, explaining his motive for this to God himself (who surely knows everything?).




Finally, Jesus shouts "Lazarus, come out!" and the dead man emerges, grave clothes and all.


At this point, "Lazarus", loved friend and restored dead man, is all but entirely dropped from the story (what? no tales from the grave?). Instead, John's focus is back on JC and a repeat of the "costly ointment/hair wiping feet" scene from the synoptic gospels referred to briefly at verse 11.2. History is about to repeat itself.


But there is no possibility this could be a a second, similar instance. John picks up the precise value of the ointment ("spikenard") used at Mark 14.4 ("three hundred pence"). John reiterates identical Jesus dialogue to justify his indulgence of costly ointment "because the poor are always with you". And John has Jesus issue the same instruction to his disciples to "Let her alone!" The only difference is that John has shifted the indignation of the disciples (Matthew 26.8, Mark 14.4) to one disciple alone. Judas Iscariot, son of Simon (the Pharisee or is that the Leper?!) has been fingered as the bad guy.




What are we to make of a "historical" event that both begins and ends at the same moment in "history", a pastiche of borrowed elements and recycled names? The answer is NO HISTORY AT ALL. The "raising of Lazarus" is as bogus as the flying pigs of Gadara and the birthing of a god from a Jewish virgin. The rehashed story does not even have its origins with fiction from the synoptic gospels but rather with a rabbinic tale of Bar Majan the tax collector, itself copied from Egyptian funeral texts of El-Azar, an ancient prototype for the Lazarus parable of judgement in the afterlife.


But then, why waste a good yarn?
 
Hizo story hata Zumaridi anatusimulia


Outwitting the Grim Reaper – Jairus' daughter

All three synoptic gospels tell the story of a 12-year-old girl who had died in her bed and was visited by Jesus. The child it seems was the daughter of "a ruler of the synagogue" called Jairus. Jesus took hold of the girl's hand and told her to get up. That's all it took to return the girl to life. One presumes that the dire malady which had caused her premature death had been cured at the same time and the girl didn't just die the next day!
A simple tale, which, significantly, in each gospel is interrupted by a second story, of a woman having a 12-year issue of blood, who is cured by touching JC's garment, "cured by faith". Note the contrast: JC's healing hands perform miracles but so does faith in the Lord. The message is clear: don't expect miracles, your faith will cure you.


Who were the witnesses to this little drama of outwitting the grim reaper? Mark tells us it was three disciples and the parents:




Luke
agrees:




What pulls the carpet from under this shaggy-dog story is that only one of the witnesses wrote a testimony – Johnand he says not a word about it! Perhaps that is why both Mark and Luke add that JC's performance was kept secret: "He charged them straitly that no man should know it" – Mark 5.43; "He charged them that they should tell no man" – Luke 8.56. Unfortunately this instruction does not seem to have reached the ears of Matthew. This evangelist reports the exact opposite:


"The fame here of went abroad into all that land."

– Matthew 9.26.


What we have here, then, is not eye-witness testimony to a reality but inconsistent "testimony" from non-witnesses. Their tale is especially suspect because it is not confirmed by the only purported "witness" to the drama. As Robert Price suggests, "We ought to catch the hint that it is fictional, as the name 'Jairus' means 'He will awaken."! (The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, p152) It is also possible that the evangelists were browsing through their well-thumbed copy of Josephus for good ideas.
 
Hizo story hata Zumaridi anatusimulia


Outwitting the Grim Reaper – Matthew's Tale


When the Saints come marching in



This primitive piece of holy moonshine did not really make it into "mainstream" Christianity. It's there in Matthew (and gains some support in the so-called epistles of Ignatius) but the other gospellers prudently avoid repeating such nonsense. If they had, we would surely be entertained by apologists claiming that this mass rising had really happened and that it represented "fulfilled prophecy": the verses in Matthew are a crib from the soothsayer Zechariah, complete with "earthquake cleaving the Mount of Olives" and the dead saints rising and repopulating Jerusalem.




The three orphaned verses of Matthew are the residue of this very early notion that cosmic upheaval would accompany the coming of the Messiah. The chronology is uncertain but implicitly judgement day has begun, and with it the separation of the righteous from the godless.


But the melodrama has an obvious basis in the mundane. Separating the old walled city of Jerusalem from Mount Olivet to the east is a depression which has been known variously as the Valley of Jehoshaphat, Wadi en Nar (Valley of Fire) and the Kidron Valley. Its extension running immediately south west of the old city was the Valley of Hinnom, which originally enjoyed the name Gehenna. It was here that ritualistic burning of human sacrifices occurred (well, according to Jeremiah and 2 Chronicles, that is). No doubt the real burning of enemies led to the prophetic notion that on the Day of the Lord faithful Jews would gloat on the godless in torment below from the sanctuary of their holy mountain.




Gehenna
superceded the older (and less terrifying) Sheol as the underworld of the Jews and would in time become the Hell so beloved by the Christians. In a "first draft" for the End Time, their Messiah's arrival would signal a general resurrection of the saints who would emerge from the graves of Mount Olivet. The entire apocalyptic landscape of Judgement, Heaven and Hell reflects nothing other than the localized topography of the hills and valleys of Jerusalem!


The "loose end" of many walking dead in Matthew led the other evangelists to adopt an alternative scenario that JC was the "first fruit" of resurrection and that the "general resurrection" would have to wait.


Smart move, or everyone might have asked, What happened to those raised saints strolling about Jerusalem?
 

Deception


Thus by small steps a complex weave of fantasy is woven. As indeed the Church Fathers cheerfully admit:




Was Saint Paul an unabashed liar? From this verse in Romans it would appear so:




However in context Paul is actually censuring other Christians who say "Let us do evil, that good may come" (that is, from God's judgement). But like Paul we can "take the passage captive" to make a point.
 

Luminaries of Deception



Jerome is not alone in his candour. Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine, entitles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation:




Eusebius is notoriously the author of a great many falsehoods – but then he does warn us in his infamous history:




Clement of Alexandria was one of the earliest of the Church Fathers to draw a distinction between "mere human truth" and the higher truth of faith:




John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople, is another:




'Golden Mouth' John is notable for his extensive commentaries on the Bible which emphasized a literal understanding of the stories; the style popular at Alexandria until then was to acknowledge an allegorical meaning of the text.


Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened, borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits. As we shall see, god’s immutable laws became as flexible as putty.


The 5th and 6th centuries was the 'golden age' of Christian forgery. In a moment of shocking candour, the Manichean bishop (and opponent of Augustine) Faustus said:




In the ferocious battle for adherents, the propagandists sought to outdo each other at every turn. One example: by the 5th century, four very different endings existed to Mark's gospel. Codex Bobiensis ends Mark at verse 16:8, without any post-crucifixion appearances; it lacks both the 'short conclusion' (of Jesus sending followers to 'east and west') or the 'long conclusion' – the fabulous post-death apparitions, where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be immune to snake bites and poison.


Once the Church had grabbed mastery of much of Europe and the middle-east, its forgery engine went into overdrive.






Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the tireless zealot for papal authority – he was the founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) – even wrote:




The Reformation may have swept away some abuses perpetrated by the priesthood but lying was not one of them. Martin Luther, in private correspondence, argued:


 


All Liars


'Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which there is nothing of any avail!'


– Jeremiah 16.19.



A Lying Prophet


'And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him, "Thou mayest certainly recover": howbeit the LORD hath shewed me that he shall surely die.'


– 2 Kings 8.10.


 


Father of Lies?


"All scripture is given by inspiration of God"

– 2 Timothy 3.16.


"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."
– 2 Thessalonians 2.11




It's Official – White is Black!





Ignatius Loyola – Jesuit Fuhrer
 


Born under star' from soothsayer with talking donkey!


And if you've ever wondered where the "born under a star" nonsense began it actually comes from the mouth of an Arab wizard supposedly hired to curse the Israelites.




"And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.


And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay."



– Numbers (22.29,30)


A little later Balaam utters the words wrenched out of context centuries later by Christian novelists:


"And Balaam said unto Balak ... there shall come a Star out of Jacob."


– Numbers (24.12,17)
 
Ukitaka kujua Miujiza aliyotenda bado una fursa ya kusoma Vitabu vinavyomtaja, baadhi ya Watu wameweza kukusaidia kukwambia Miujiza aliyotenda.
 
Astaghfirullah! Ewe ndugu yangu muogope Mwenyezi Mungu na usiseme isipokuwa ya haki tu. Usimsingizie Mtume wa Mwenyezi Mungu mambo ya uongo. Nakushauri kabla ya kumtukana Mtume Muhammad SAW usome kuhusu maisha yake. Tafuta vitabu usome usikariri tu unayosikia kwa wapuuzi.

Mtume Muhammad SAW ni mpole sana na mkarimu sana. Nilipoisoma historia ya maisha yake na mateso aliyopitia na jinsi alivyokuwa mpole na msamehevu nilijikuta ninatokwa na machozi. Muhammad ni mtu mwema sana.
Nakuombea Mwenyezi Mungu akusamehe kwani unasema hivyo kwa sababu tu hujui
 
Hiyo Quran ndio muujiza wenyewe ukiisoma ndio utajua.

Ni sawa Mitume wa zamani walipewa miujiza kama ilivyoelezwa lakini pamoja na miujiza yote je watu waliamini? Huyo Firauni ndio alionyeshwa miujiza tena mikubwa mikubwa na mbona hawakuamini pamoja miujiza waliyopewa.? Si walisema Musa AS ni mchawi? Hata Muhammad SAW ndio hivyo hivyo hata angewaleta Malaika live wakawaona still bado binadamu wasingeamini vile vile wangesema ni uchawi.

Anaye amini ni yule anayesikia maneno ya Mwenyezi Mungu kwa hivyo fungua masikio na akili yako na usome Quran Mwenyezi Mungu atakuongoza kwenye imani.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…