Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
Umesha vurugwa dogo hhhhhhh....
Downsizing
In short order, Christian apologists fall over themselves to explain, 'But of course, no one had heard of Nazareth, we're talking of a REALLY small place.' By semantic downsizing, city becomes TOWN, town becomes VILLAGE, and village becomes 'OBSCURE HAMLET'.
Yet if we are speaking of such an obscure hamlet the 'Jesus of Nazareth' story begins to fall apart.
For example, the whole 'rejection in his homeland' story requires at a minimum a synagogue in which the godman can 'blaspheme.' Where was the synagogue in this tiny bucolic hamlet? Why was it not obvious to the first pilgrims like Helena (see below) – it would, after all, have been far more pertinent to her hero than a well? In reality, such a small, rustic community could never have afforded its own holy scrolls, let alone a dedicated building to house them. As peasant farmers almost certainly they would have been illiterate to a man.
If JC had grown up and spent thirty years of his life in a village with as few as 25 families – an inbred clan of less than 300 people – the 'multitude' that were supposedly shocked by his blasphemy and would have thrown him from a cliff, would not have been hostile strangers but, to a man, would have been relatives and friends that he had grown up with, including his own brothers. Presumably, they had heard his pious utterances for years.
Moreover, if the chosen virgin really had had an annunciation of messiah-birthing from an angel the whole clan would have known about it inside ten minutes. Just to remind them, surely they should also have known of the 'Jerusalem incident' (Luke 2.42-49) when supposedly the 12-year-old proclaimed his messiahship?
Indeed, had no one mentioned what had happened in Bethlehem – star, wise men, shepherds, infant-massacre and all? Why would they have been outraged by anything the godman said or did? Had they forgotten a god was growing up in their midst? And what had happened to that gift of gold – had it not made the 'holy family' rich?
If Nazareth really had been barely a hamlet, lost in the hills of Galilee, would not the appellation 'Jesus of Nazareth' have invoked the response 'Jesus of WHERE?' The predictable apologetic of quoting gospel John ("Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" - 1.46) implies that the questioner, Nathanael, had indeed "heard of" the vanishing small hamlet (Nathanael was supposedly a local boy from Cana). But would anyone outside of Galilee have recognized the name?
Then again, if Nazareth had really been a tiny hamlet, the nearest convenient 'mountain' from which the god-man could have been thrown – a cliff edge (Luke 4.28-30) – would have been 4 km away, requiring an energetic climb over limestone crags. Would the superman really have been frog-marched so far before 'passing through the midst of them' and making his escape?
Of course, all these incongruities exist because the 'Jerusalem incident' and the whole nativity sequence were late additions to the basic messiah-in-residence story.
Be that as it may, was there even a tiny village?
Kadi la kliniki haina nafasi humu...kama huweki your take Mimi napotezea hhhhhhh...
Kadi la kliniki haina nafasi humu...kama huweki your take Mimi napotezea hhhhhhh...
Wee unayajua matusi? Mudi ndie mtukanaji dogo...toka lini mshenga auawe?HATA MATUSI WEKA NIMEKURUHUSU, USIKIMBIE KI-STYLE
ZAWADI YAKO HII
Dodgy Story, Dodgy Geography
The original gospel writers refrained from inventing a childhood, youth or early manhood for JC because it was not necessary to their central drama of a dying/reborn sun-god. But as we know, the story grew with the telling, particularly as the decades passed and the promised redeemer and judge failed to reappear. The re-writer of the Gospel of Mark, revising the text sometime between 140 and 150 AD, introduced the name of the city only once, in chapter one, with these words:
"And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John at the Jordan."
– Mark I, 9.
Ironically, an indication that this sole reference to a town called Nazareth in Mark is a late, harmonization interpolation is to be found in the Gospel of Matthew. Copying the same baptism episode from an early edition of Mark, the author of Matthew makes no mention of Nazareth:
"Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him." – Matthew 3.13.
In the Greek New Testament no fewer than eleven variant spellings are used for Nazarene, Nazarean and Nazareth. In total the words occur thirty-one times. Though you would never guess from the English translations, on nineteen occasions Nazarene or Nazarean, not Nazareth, is intended. And in the Gospel of Mark, all four later occurences (1.24; 16.6; 10.47;14.67) the word used is Nazarene, not Nazareth.
Clearly, "Jesus the Nazarene" in the original tale became "Jesus, a resident of Nazareth" in the updated story of Matthew and Luke. Indeed, there are indications that an early layer in the development of Mark favoured Capernaum as the hometown of Jesus (home of the six most prominent disciples, venue for several key miracles, etc.).
We can trace the subsequent elevation of Nazareth in the Gospel of Luke. Luke is the writer who emphasizes JC's ties to 'Nazareth.' Luke is the writer who goes out of his way to demonstrate an anti-Capernaum stance. Scholars have concluded Luke was not a Jew himself because of his 'glaring errors in things Jewish'. He also makes mistakes in his geography. He knows little about the place and in his mini-drama describes an impossible incident:
" ... and brought him to the precipice of the mountain that their city was built upon." – Luke 4.29.
Nazareth, in fact, is located in a depression, set within gentle hills. The whole region is characterized by plains and mild rises with no sharp peaks or steep cliffs. The terrain is correctly understood as a high basin, for in one direction is the much lower Plain of Esdraelon. But there is no disguising Nazareth is built in a valley and not on a mountain. Even the mediaeval town sat below the summit – protected from the wind. Beginning only in 1957, the Jewish suburb called 'Nazerat Illit' ('Upper Nazareth') was built to the top of the hills to the east of the city.
Foreground
(below that pointy building): – supposed location of 1st century 'city' of Nazareth
Background & right:
'Mount of Precipice' (aka 'Lord's Leap')
"When they heard these things, all in the synagogue were filled with wrath. And they rose up and drove him out of the town and brought him to the brow of the hill on which their town was built, so that they could throw him down the cliff. But passing through their midst, he went away." – Luke 4.28-30.
Perhaps the Multitude might really have threatened to roll JC down the slope?
It would take quite some time to get from the downtown 'synagogue' and scramble to the top of the 'cliff'!
Mud hawez kuwa mtume wetu,Ibrahim ni Baba Wa imani ila sio mtume wetu .huyo ni Wa kwenuNdio hatukatai injili ilikuepo kabla ya mtume wetu.na yesu tunamtambua na kumuheshimu na kumuombea mema kama mtume wa mwenyezimungu alietumwa kwa watu wake. Kila mtume alitumwa kwa watu wake,mbn hamuabudu Ibrahim? Au yakobo nao si mitume? Jibu ni kua hata nyinyi hamupaswi kumfata yesu/issa bcz nyinyi sio watu wake aliotumwa kwenu. Mtume wenu ni Mohammad s.w bisha utakavyo huo ndo ukweli.kama yesu ni mungu mbn Hugo yesu alikua anaomba msaada wa mungu? Mungu gani? Anajiomba mwenyewe?? Tumia akili za kawaida.
Wee unayajua matusi? Mudi ndie mtukanaji dogo...toka lini mshenga auawe?
Wee unayajua matusi? Mudi ndie mtukanaji dogo...toka lini mshenga auawe?
Hivi wew jamaa tatizo lako ni nn?,kinachokutesa umekaririshwa huko Masjid baadh ya aya bila kuangalia context ili uje u challange wakristo kitu ambacho hakiwezekan,sisi tumesom kabla yako,NAKUJIBU TENA MARA YA PILI,Mkristo/wakristo wanaitwa "an-Nasaaraa" kwa kiarabu,ushihid soma,Nimewauliza nipewe tafsiri ya neno Mkristo kwa kiarabu, sijaambiwa . mpaka wakati huu mumekikimbia , mumebaki kuniletea ngonjera
Kweli sijui kiarabu na ndio nikawauliza nyinyi maaskofu na makardinali wa kiarabu munifahamishe
Mimi nataka tueleweshane ila sharti langu ni kwamba unapo attach verse ya Quran basi weka nijue sura gani na aya ya ngapi. Kwa mfano Quran 3:19 ......Hivi wew jamaa tatizo lako ni nn?,kinachokutesa umekaririshwa huko Masjid baadh ya aya bila kuangalia context ili uje u challange wakristo kitu ambacho hakiwezekan,sisi tumesom kabla yako,NAKUJIBU TENA MARA YA PILI,Mkristo/wakristo wanaitwa "an-Nasaaraa" kwa kiarabu,ushihid soma,View attachment 410502
Hivi una aya yoyote inayosema Ibrahim alikuwa mkristo. Nakupa hili andiko hivyo pinga kwa kunipa andiko linalosema Ibrahim alikuwa ni mkristo.Mud hawez kuwa mtume wetu,Ibrahim ni Baba Wa imani ila sio mtume wetu .huyo ni Wa kwenu
Wapo waislam watakao ingia peponi (wasio muasi Mungu) na wapo wengine watakaoingia motoni pia (waliomuasi Mungu). Quran ipo very clear usisome Quran kwa chuki bali soma kwa kupata ulinganifu hutaielewa.Hakuna yeyote kati ya waislamu atakae nusurika...wooote ni finnar jehannam halidina fiha Abadan hamtoki humo...ref; suratul Marian.71..
Mungu anatambua kila lugha. Acha kukosa maarifa. Uislam kutumia lugha moja ni jambo linaloifanya iwe unique na pia kuwa uniform. Uislam ndio dini pekee iliyobakia katika uasilia wake tokea awali. Kutafsiri lugha moja kwenda lugha nyingine ni kitendo kinachopelekea baadhi ya maneno kupungua au kuongezeka au kushindwa msamiati sahihi wa kutafsiria. Halafu kubwa zaidi ni kwamba uislam unabakia katika msingi na utaratibu mmoja. Yaani muislam mmasai, mmang'ati, n.k akienda china au uholanzi anaweza kuingia msikiti wowote ule na akaswali pasipo na shida yoyote ile maana Quran ni ile ile na utaratibu ni ule ule. Sasa mkristo akienda kanisa la wachina lazima atafute kanisa litakalomfaa maana kichina hajui. Laasivyo ujifunze kichina sasa utajifunza lugha za makabila na za nchi zote? Jitahidi kutafakari pasipo kuleta ushabiki wa kidini.Upumbavu wenu mnaamini Mungu wenu anajua lugha moja tuu(kiarabu)poa ngoj nikupeView attachment 410367
Mungu anatambua kila lugha. Acha kukosa maarifa. Uislam kutumia lugha moja ni jambo linaloifanya iwe unique na pia kuwa uniform. Uislam ndio dini pekee iliyobakia katika uasilia wake tokea awali. Kutafsiri lugha moja kwenda lugha nyingine ni kitendo kinachopelekea baadhi ya maneno kupungua au kuongezeka au kushindwa msamiati sahihi wa kutafsiria. Halafu kubwa zaidi ni kwamba uislam unabakia katika msingi na utaratibu mmoja. Yaani muislam mmasai, mmang'ati, n.k akienda china au uholanzi anaweza kuingia msikiti wowote ule na akaswali pasipo na shida yoyote ile maana Quran ni ile ile na utaratibu ni ule ule. Sasa mkristo akienda kanisa la wachina lazima atafute kanisa litakalomfaa maana kichina hajui. Laasivyo ujifunze kichina sasa utajifunza lugha za makabila na za nchi zote? Jitahidi kutafakari pasipo kuleta ushabiki wa kidini.
Hivi una aya yoyote inayosema Ibrahim alikuwa mkristo. Nakupa hili andiko hivyo pinga kwa kunipa andiko linalosema Ibrahim alikuwa ni mkristo.
Quran 3:65-67
Enyi Watu wa Kitabu! Mbona mnabishana juu ya Ibrahim, na hali Taurati na Injili hazikuteremshwa ila baada yake? Basi hamzingatii?
66. Angalieni! Nyinyi mlibishana katika yale mliyo yajua. Mbona sasa mnabishana katika yale msiyo yajua? Na Mwenyezi Mungu ndiye ajuaye, na nyinyi hamjui
67. Ibrahim hakuwa Yahudi wala Mkristo, lakini alikuwa mwongofu Muislamu, wala hakuwa katika washirikina
yesu ni mungu... tukitumia logic zenu waislam kuwa mungu hawez kufa basi yesu ni mungu tayari kwenye islam sababu qurqn 4:157 inasema yesu hakufa msalabani...case closedUNATAFUTA KUBADILISHA MADA YESI SI MUNGU
Getting a Name
The expression 'Jesus of Nazareth' is actually a bad translation of the original Greek 'Jesous o Nazoraios' (see below). More accurately, we should speak of 'Jesus the Nazarene' where Nazarene has a meaning quite unrelated to a place name. But just what is that meaning and how did it get applied to a small village? The highly ambiguous Hebrew root of the name is NZR.
The 2nd century gnostic Gospel of Philip offers this explanation:
'The apostles that came before us called him Jesus Nazarene the Christ ..."Nazara" is the "Truth". Therefore 'Nazarene' is "The One of the Truth" ...'
– Gospel of Philip, 47.
What we do know is that 'Nazarene' (or 'Nazorean') was originally the name of an early Jewish-Christian sect – a faction, or off-shoot, of the Essenes. They had no particular relation to a city of Nazareth. The root of their name may have been 'Truth' or it may have been the Hebrew noun 'netser' ('netzor'), meaning 'branch' or 'flower.' The plural of 'Netzor' becomes 'Netzoreem.' There is no mention of the Nazarenes in any of Paul's writings, although ironically, Paul is himself accused of being a Nazorean in Acts of the Apostles. The reference scarcely means that Paul was a resident of Nazareth (we all know the guy hails from Tarsus!).
'For finding this man a pest, and moving sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a leader of the sect of the Nazaraeans.' – Acts 24.5. (Darby Translation).
The Nazorim emerged towards the end of the 1st century, after a curse had been placed on heretics in Jewish daily prayer.
'Three times a day they say: May God curse the Nazarenes'.
– Epiphanius (Panarion 29.9.2).
The Nazarenes may have seen themselves as a 'branch from the stem of Jesse (the legendary King David's father)'. Certainly, they had their own early version of 'Matthew'. This lost text – the Gospel of the Nazarenes – can hardly be regarded as a 'Gospel of the inhabitants of Nazareth'!
It was the later Gospel of Matthew which started the deceit that the title 'Jesus the Nazorene' should in some manner relate to Nazareth, by quoting 'prophecy':
"And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."
– Matthew 2.23.
With this, Matthew closes his fable of Jesus's early years. Yet Matthew is misquoting – he would surely know that nowhere in Jewish prophetic literature is there any reference to a Nazarene. What is 'foretold' (or at least mentioned several times) in Old Testament scripture is the appearance of a Nazarite. For example:
"For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines."
– Judges 13.5.
Matthew slyly substitutes one word for another. By replacing Nazarite ('he who vows to grow long hair and serve god') with a term which appears to imply 'resident of' he is able to fabricate a hometown link for his fictitious hero.
So how did the village get its name?
It seems that, along with the Nozerim, a related Jewish/Christian faction, the Evyonim – ‘the Poor’ (later to be called Ebionites) – emerged about the same time. According to Epiphanius (Bishop of Salamis , Cyprus, circa 370 AD) they arose from within the Nazarenes. They differed doctrinally from the original group in rejecting Paul and were 'Jews who pay honour to Christ as a just man...' They too, it seems, had their own prototype version of Matthew – ‘The Gospel to the Hebrews’. A name these sectaries chose for themselves was 'Keepers of the Covenant', in Hebrew Nozrei haBrit, whence Nosrim or Nazarene!
In other words, when it came to the crunch, the original Nazarenes split into two: those who tried to re-position themselves within the general tenets of Judaism ('Evyonim'-Nosrim); and those who rejected Judaism ('Christian'-Nosrim)
Now, we know that a group of 'priestly' families resettled an area in the Nazareth valley after their defeat in the Bar Kochbar War of 135 AD (see above). It seems highly probable that they were Evyonim-Nosrim and named their village 'Nazareth' or the village of 'The Poor' either because of self-pity or because doctrinally they made a virtue out of their poverty.
"Blessed are the Poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven."
– Matthew 5,3.
The writer of Matthew (re-writer of the proto-Matthew stories) heard of 'priestly' families moving to a place in Galilee which they had called 'Nazareth' – and decided to use the name of the new town for the hometown of his hero.
Hivi wew jamaa tatizo lako ni nn?,kinachokutesa umekaririshwa huko Masjid baadh ya aya bila kuangalia context ili uje u challange wakristo kitu ambacho hakiwezekan,sisi tumesom kabla yako,NAKUJIBU TENA MARA YA PILI,Mkristo/wakristo wanaitwa "an-Nasaaraa" kwa kiarabu,ushihid soma,View attachment 410502[/QUOT
yesu vs allah+jibril+muhammad.. yesu alikuwa na uwezo wa kumwambia mtu ona naye akaona, mtu aliyekufa amka akafufuka, kiwete tembea akatembea, yesu alifanya prophecies zikaja kuwa real, yesu hakufanya dhambi(holy), yesu ni mzima hadi sasa, yesu ndio atakayerudi siku ya mwisho. Allah + jibril wameshindwa wanamuambia muhammad soma mara tatu mtu wapi hivi si ndo kwenye quran allah anasema akitaka kufanya kitu anasema kuwa nacho kinakuwa, tuje kwa muhammad hakumponya mtu, hakufanya miujiza, amekufa. conclusion YESU NI MUNGU, MFALME WA WAFALME... KILA GOTI LITAPIGWA.
Elewa .nimekwambia Baba Wa imani .huo uislam kauleta mud wenu .katika bible kuna Ibrahim,isaka Na yakobo ambaye ndio Israel.Hivi una aya yoyote inayosema Ibrahim alikuwa mkristo. Nakupa hili andiko hivyo pinga kwa kunipa andiko linalosema Ibrahim alikuwa ni mkristo.
Quran 3:65-67
Enyi Watu wa Kitabu! Mbona mnabishana juu ya Ibrahim, na hali Taurati na Injili hazikuteremshwa ila baada yake? Basi hamzingatii?
66. Angalieni! Nyinyi mlibishana katika yale mliyo yajua. Mbona sasa mnabishana katika yale msiyo yajua? Na Mwenyezi Mungu ndiye ajuaye, na nyinyi hamjui
67. Ibrahim hakuwa Yahudi wala Mkristo, lakini alikuwa mwongofu Muislamu, wala hakuwa katika washirikina