Tazama sasa jinsi mababa wa Kikristo walivyomlazimisha Bwana wao na Mwokozi wao, Yesu Kristo, katika Agano Jipya, uzao wa kiuzinifu wa Agano la Kale. Kwa mtu asiyekuwa na nasaba, wamemtengenezea nasaba. Na ni nasaba gani! Wazinzi sita na watoto wa uzinifu wanawekwa juu ya mtu huyu mtakatifu wa Mungu. Wanaume na wanawake wanaostahili kupigwa mawe hadi kufa kwa mujibu wa sheria ya Mungu mwenyewe, kama ilivyoteremshwa kupitia Musa, na zaidi ya hayo kutengwa na kuzuiwa kuingia Nyumba ya Mungu kwa vizazi vingi.

Watch now how the Christian fathers have foisted the incestuous progenies of the Old Testament upon their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, in the New Testament. For a man who had no genealogy, they have manufactured one for him. And what a genealogy! Six adulterers and offsprings of incest are imposed upon this holy man of God. Men and women deserving to be stoned to death according to God's own law, as revealed through Moses, and further to be ostracised and debarred from the House of God for generations. 1

1. "Mwana haramu hataingia katika kusanyiko la Bwana hata kizazi cha kumi." (Kumbukumbu la Torati 23:2 — AV). Mashahidi wamekuwa nyeti sana kupita kiasi kwa neno hili. Wanameza ngamia huku wakichuja mbu!

1. "The bastard shall not enter the congregation of the Lord even unto the tenth generation." (Deut. 23:2 — AV). The "Witnesses" have been hyper sensitive to this word. Swallowing the camel and straining at the gnat!

Kwa nini Mungu ampe "baba" (Yusufu) "mwanawe" (Yesu)? Na kwa nini nasaba duni namna hii? "Huo ndio uzuri wake wote," asema yule mpotovu. "Mungu aliwapenda wenye dhambi sana hata hakuona aibu kutoa wazazi kama hawa kwa 'mwanawe.'"

Why should God give a "father" (Joseph) to His "son" (Jesus)? And why such an ignoble ancestry? "This is the whole beauty of it" says the pervert. "God loved the sinners so much that he disdaineth not to give such progenitors for His 'son. "

Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son." To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. See below. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son." But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH, and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV). This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?

Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son." To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. See below. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son." But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV). This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?

Mathayo na Luka wanakuwa na bidii kupita kiasi katika kumfanya DAUDI kuwa mfalme, babu mkuu wa Yesu, kwa sababu ya dhana ile ya uongo kwamba Yesu angeketi juu ya "KITI CHA BABA YAKE DAUDI" (Matendo 2:30). Injili zinaikanusha unabii huu, kwani zinatuambia kwamba badala ya Yesu kuketi juu ya kiti cha baba yake (Daudi), ni Pontio Pilato, gavana wa Kiroma, mpagani, aliyeketi juu ya kiti hicho hicho na kumhukumu mrithi wake halali (?) Yesu kifo. "Hilo lisijali," asema mwinjilisti, "kama si katika kuja kwake kwa kwanza, basi katika kuja kwake kwa pili atatimiza unabii huu na mwingine mia tatu pamoja nao." Lakini kwa hamasa yao ya kupindukia ya kufuatilia nasaba ya Yesu kimwili hadi kwa Daudi (kwa maana hivi ndivyo Biblia inavyosema hasa — "KATIKA MATUNDA YA KIUNO CHAKE (cha Daudi), KWA MWILI" (kihalisi, si kwa mfano, Matendo 2:30)), waandishi hao "waliovuviwa" wote wawili hujikwaa na kuanguka katika hatua ya kwanza kabisa.

Matthew and Luke are over-zealous in making DAVID the King, the prime ancestor of Jesus, because of that false notion that Jesus was to sit on the "THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID" (Acts 2:30). The Gospels belie this prophecy, for they tell us that instead of Jesus sitting on his father's (David's) throne, it was Pontious Pilate, a Roman Governor, a pagan who sat on that very throne and condemned its rightful (?) heir (Jesus) to death. "Never mind,'' says the evangelist, "if not in his first coming, then in his second coming he will fulfill this prophecy and three hundred others beside" But with their extravagant enthusiasm to trace the ancestry of Jesus physically to David, (for this is actually what the Bible says — THAT OF THE FRUIT OF HIS (David's) LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH" (literally, not metaphorically Acts 2:30), both the "inspired" authors trip and fall on the very first step.

Mathayo 1:6 inasema kwamba Yesu alikuwa mwana wa Daudi kupitia SULEMANI, lakini Luka 3:31 inasema kwamba yeye (Yesu) alikuwa mwana wa Daudi kupitia NATHAN. Hata daktari wa magonjwa ya wanawake hahitaji kuwa na elimu ya juu ili kuona kwamba, kwa namna yoyote ile, mbegu ya Daudi haiwezi kufika kwa mama wa Yesu kupitia Sulemani na Nathan kwa wakati mmoja! Tunajua kwamba waandishi wote wawili ni waongo waliopotoka, kwa sababu Yesu alizaliwa kimiujiza, bila kuingiliwa na mwanaume yeyote. Hata kama tungekubali uzao wa kimwili kupitia Daudi, waandishi wote wawili bado wangethibitika kuwa waongo kwa sababu iliyo wazi.

Matthew 1:6 says that Jesus was the son of David through SOLOMON, but Luke 3:31 says that he (Jesus) was the son of David through NATHAN. One need not be a gynecologist to tell that by no stretch of the imagination could the seed of David reach the mother of Jesus both through Solomon and Nathan at the same time! We know that both the authors are confounded liars, because Jesus was conceived miraculously, without any male intervention. Even if we concede a physical ancestry through David, both authors would still be proved liars for the obvious reason.

Kwa urahisi wa mantiki hii, Mkristo amehusika kihisia sana hata haitaweza kuingia akilini mwake lenye chuki. Tutoe mfano unaofanana, lakini ambao yeye anaweza kuwa mkweli kwa kutopendelea upande wowote.

As simple as the above logic is, the Christian is so emotionally involved that it will not penetrate his prejudiced mind. Let us give him an identical example, but one where he can afford to be objective.

Tunajua kutokana na historia kwamba Muhammad Nabii wa Uislamu alikuwa mzao wa Ibrahimu kupitia Ismaili. Kwa hiyo, mtu fulani ambaye angejitokeza na "ufunuo" wake akidai kwamba Muhammad alikuwa mzao wa Ibrahimu kupitia Isaka, bila shaka tungemwita mwongo, kwa sababu nasaba ya Ibrahimu haiwezi kumfikia Amina (mama yake Muhammad) kupitia Ismaili na kupitia Isaka kwa wakati mmoja! Tofauti ya nasaba kati ya wana hawa wawili wa Ibrahimu ndiyo tofauti kati ya WAYAHUDI na WAARABU.

We know from history that Muhammed the Prophet of Islam, was the son of Abraham through ISHMAEL, so if some "inspired" writer came along and tried to palm off his "revelation" to the effect that Muhummed was the son of Abraham through ISAAC, we would, without any hesitation, brand such a writer as a liar, because the seed of Abraham could never reach Amina (Muhummed's mother) through Ishmael and through Isaac at the same time! The differences of lineage between these two sons of Abraham is the difference between the JEWS and the ARABS.

Katika kesi ya Muhammad, tungejua basi kwamba yeyote anayesema kwamba Isaka ni babu yake, alikuwa mwongo. Lakini katika kesi ya Yesu, Mathayo na Luka wote wawili wanatiliwa shaka. Mpaka Wakristo waamue ni mstari gani wa mababu wanaoupendelea kwa "mungu" wao, Injili zote mbili italazimika kukataliwa. Ukristo umekuwa ukipambana kwa nguvu zote na ukoo huu kwa miaka 2000 iliyopita, ukijaribu kuteguza fumbo hili. Bado hawajakata tamaa. Tunavutiwa na uvumilivu wao. Bado wanaamini kwamba "MUDA UTATATUA TATIZO." Labda miaka mingine 2000?! "KUNA MIGONGANO INAYODAIWA AMBAYO WANATHEOLOJIA HAWAJAITATUA KWA KURIDHISHA KILA MTU ASIYEAMINI KUWEPO KWA MUNGU. KUNA MATATIZO YA KIMAANDISHI AMBAYO WASOMI BADO WANAYAPAMBANIA. NI MJINGA WA BIBLIA PEKE YAKE ANAYEWEZA KUKANUSHA HAYA NA MATATIZO MENGINE" "The Plain Truth," Julai 1975.

In the case of Muhummed, we would know then that anyone who says that Isaac is his progenitor, was a liar. But in the case of Jesus both Matthew and Luke are suspect. Until the Christians decide which line of ancestors they prefer for their "god," both Gospels will have to be rejected. Christendom has been battling tooth and nail with these genealogies for the past 2000 years, trying to unravel the mystery. They have not given up yet. We admire their perseverance. They still believe that "TIME WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM." Perhaps another 2000 years?! "THERE ARE CLAIMED CONTRADICTIONS THAT THEOLOGIANS HAVE NOT RESOLVED TO EVERY ATHEIST'S SATISFACTION. THERE ARE TEXTUAL DIFFICULTIES WITH WHICH SCHOLARS ARE STILL WRESTLING. ONLY A BIBLE ILLITERATE WOULD DENY THESE AND OTHER PROBLEMS" "The Plain Truth," July 1975.

Tumeshamaliza takriban asilimia 85 ya Mathayo na Luka kwa Marko au kwa chanzo cha ajabu kinachoitwa "Q". Sasa na tumruhusu Luka atuambie ni nani "aliyemvuvia" kumsimulia "Theofilo mtukufu" (Luka 1:3) habari za Yesu. Tazama hapa chini utangulizi wa Luka kwa "Injili" yake. Anasema waziwazi kwamba alikuwa akifuata nyayo za wengine ambao hawakuwa na sifa kama zake, wengine waliothubutu kuandika simulizi kuhusu shujaa wake (Yesu). Kama tabibu, ikilinganishwa na wavuvi na watoza ushuru, bila shaka alikuwa na uwezo bora zaidi wa kuunda kazi bora ya fasihi. Na hivyo ndivyo alivyofanya, kwa sababu "IMEONEKANA NZURI PIA KWANGU" "KUPANGA KWA UTARATIBU." Haya ndiyo hoja zake kuu za kuwathibitishia watangulizi wake.

We have already nailed 85% of Matthew and Luke to Mark or that "mysterious 'Q''’. 1 Let us now allow Luke to tell us who "inspired" him to tell his "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:3) the story of Jesus. See below for Luke's preamble to his "Gospel." He tells us plainly that he was only following in the footsteps of others who were less qualified than himself, others who had the temerity to write accounts of his hero (Jesus). As a physician, as against fishermen and tax collectors, he was no doubt better equipped to create a literary masterpiece. This he did, because "IT SEEMED GOOD TO ME ALSO" to "PUT IN ORDER." These are his prominent Justifications over his predecessors.

Katika utangulizi wa tafsiri yake ya "Injili ya Mtakatifu Luka", mwanazuoni wa Kikristo J. B. Phillips anasema yafuatayo: "KWA KUKIRI KWAKE MWENYEWE, LUKA ALILINGANISHA KWA UANGALIFU NA KUHARIRI NYENZO ZILIZOKUWEPO, LAKINI INAONEKANA KWAMBA ALIKUWA NA UPATIKANAJI WA NYENZO NYINGI ZAIDI, NA TUNAWEZA KUKISIA KWA BUSARA BAADHI YA VYANZO ALIVYOTUMIA." Na bado, unaiita hii Neno la Mungu?! Pata "The Gospels in Modern English" katika jalada laini la machapisho ya 'FONTANA'. Ni toleo la bei nafuu. Lipate haraka kabla Wakristo hawajaamua kuondoa maelezo ya thamani ya Phillips kutoka tafsiri yake! Wala usishangae ikiwa waandishi wa RSV nao wataamua kuondoa "Utangulizi" 2 2 kutoka tafsiri yao. Ni tabia ya zamani sana. Mara tu wale wenye maslahi katika Ukristo wanapotambua kwamba wamefichua siri bila kukusudia, huharakisha kurekebisha. Hufanya marejeo yangu ya sasa yawe historia ya "zamani" mara moja! 1. Rejea Sura ya Sita.

In the introduction to his translation of the "Gospel of St Luke" A Christian scholar, J. B. Phillips, has this to say — "ON HIS OWN ADMISSION LUKE HAS CAREFULLY COMPARED AND EDITED EXISTING MATERIAL, BUT IT WOULD SEEM THAT HE HAD ACCESS TO A GOOD DEAL OF ADDITIONAL MATERIAL, AND WE CAN REASONABLY GUESS AT SOME OF THE SOURCES FROM WHICH HE DREW." And yet you call this the Word of God?! Obtain "The Gospels in Modern English" in soft cover by 'FONTANA' publications. It is a cheap edition. Get it quickly before the Christians decide to have Phillips' invaluable notes expunged from his translation! And do not be surprised if the authors of the RSV also decide to eliminate the "Preface" 2 2 from their translation. It is an old, old habit. As soon as those who have vested interests in Christianity realize that they have inadvertently let the cat out of the bag, they quickly make amends. They make my current references "past" history overnight! 1. Refer to Chapter Six.

2. Rejea Sura ya Tatu.

2. Refer to Chapter Three.

Mwandishi wa "Injili ya Mtakatifu Yohana" ni nani? Si Mungu wala Mtakatifu Yohana! Tazama kile "yeye" (?) anachosema kuhusu hilo "mwenyewe" (?) katika ukurasa wa 58 — Yohana 19:35 na 21:24-25. "Yeye" wake ni nani, na "wake" na "hii" ni nini? N-A-Y-E, "TUNAJUA" wake na "NADHANI" wake. Je, inaweza kuwa yule mtu asiye thabiti aliyemwacha katika bustani, wakati alipohitaji msaada zaidi, au yule mtu wa kumi na nne mezani, katika "Karamu ya Mwisho," yule ambaye "Yesu alimpenda"? Wote wawili walikuwa wanaitwa Yohana. Lilikuwa jina maarufu miongoni mwa Wayahudi wakati wa Yesu, na hata sasa miongoni mwa Wakristo. Hakuna wa wawili hawa aliyekuwa mwandishi wa Injili hii. Kwamba ilikuwa kazi ya mkono usiojulikana, ni wazi kabisa.

Who is the author of "The Gospel of St. John?" Neither God nor St. John! See what "he" (?) says about it "himself" (?) on page 58 — John 19:35 and 21:24-25. Who is his "HE" and "HIS" and "THIS?" A-N-D, his "WE KNOW" and "I SUPPOSE." Could it be the fickle one who left him in the lurch in the garden, when he was most in need, or the fourteenth man at the table, at the "last Super," the one that "Jesus loved?" Both were Johns. It was a popular name among the Jews in the times of Jesus, and among Christians even now. Neither of these two was the author of this Gospel. That it was the product of an anonymous hand, is crystal clear.

Hebu nimalizie utafiti huu wa "mwandishi" kwa hukumu ya wale wasomi 32, wakiungwa mkono na madhehebu yao 50 yanayoshirikiana. Mungu aliondolewa katika mbio hizi za uandishi zamani sana. Katika RSV ya "Collins," maelezo ya thamani kubwa kuhusu "Vitabu vya Biblia" yanapatikana mwishoni mwa chapisho lao. Ninanakili sehemu ndogo tu ya taarifa hiyo hapa chini. Tunaanza na "MWANZO" — kitabu cha kwanza cha Biblia. Wasomi wanasema kuhusu "MWANDISHI" wake: "Mmoja wa 'vitabu vitano vya Musa'." Zingatia kwamba maneno "vitabu vitano vya Musa" yameandikwa ndani ya alama za nukuu — " " Hii ni njia ya busara ya kukiri kwamba hiki ndicho watu wanachosema — kwamba ni kitabu cha Musa, kwamba Musa ndiye mwandishi wake, lakini sisi (wasomi 32) ambao tuna ufahamu zaidi, hatukubaliani na porojo hizo.

Let me conclude this "authorship" search with the verdict of those 32 scholars, backed by their 50 co-operating denominations. God had been eliminated from this authorship race long ago. In the RSV by "Collins," invaluable notes on "The Books of the Bible" are to be found at the back of their production. I am reproducing only a bit of that information on below. We start with "GENESIS" — the first book of the Bible. The scholars say about its "AUTHOR": "One of the 'five books of Moses'." Note the words "five books of Moses" are written in inverted commas — " " This is a subtle way of admitting that this is what people say — that it is the book of Moses, that Moses was its author, but we (the 32 scholars) who are better informed, do not subscribe to that tittle-tattel.

Vitabu vinavyofuata vinne, "KUTOKA, WALAWI, HESABU na KUMBUKUMBU LA TORATI": MWANDISHI? "Kwa ujumla wanasifiwa kuwa ni Musa." Hii ni kundi lile lile la kitabu cha Mwanzo.

The next four books, "EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS and DEUTERONOMY": AUTHOR? "Generally credited to Moses." This is the same category as the book of Genesis.

Nani ni mwandishi wa kitabu cha "JUDGES?" Jibu: "Huenda ni Samweli." Nani ni mwandishi wa kitabu cha "JOSHUA?" Jibu: "Sehemu kubwa inahusishwa na Yoshua." Nani ni mwandishi wa "RUTH?" Jibu: "Haijulikani kwa uhakika." NA Nani ni mwandishi wa:

Who is the author of the book of "JUDGES?" Answer: "Possibly Samuel." Who is the author of the book of "JOSHUA?" Answer: "Major part credited to Joshua." Who is the author of "RUTH?" Answer: "Not definitely known" AND Who is the author of:

1 SAMWELI?............ Jibu: Mwandishi "Hajulikani".

1ST SAMUEL?............ Answer: Author "Unknown".

2 SAMWELI........... Jibu: Mwandishi "Haijulikani".

2ND SAMUEL........... Answer: Author "Unknown".

Na hivyo ndivyo hadithi inavyoendelea. Waandishi wa vitabu hivi visivyojulikana majina yao ni "HAIJULIKANI", au ni "HUENDA" au "INAWEZEKANA" au asili yao ni "YENYE SHAKA". Kwa nini basi kulaumu Mungu kwa janga hili? Mungu Mwingi wa Rehema na Mvumilivu hakusubiri miaka elfu mbili ili wanazuoni wa Biblia watuambie kwamba Yeye si Mwandishi wa makosa madogo madogo, kiburi na chuki za Wayahudi; wa tamaa zao, malumbano yao, wivu wao na maovu yao makubwa. Yeye mwenyewe alisema waziwazi wanachofanya.

And so the story goes. The authors of these anonymous books are either "UNKNOWN" or are "PROBABLY" or "LIKELY" or are of "DOUBTFUL" origin. Why blame God for this fiasco? The Long-suffering and Merciful God did not wait for two thousand years for Bible scholars to tell us that He was not the Author of Jewish peccadilloes, prides and prejudices; of their lusts, wranglings, jealousies and enormities. He said it openly what they do:-

Tungeweza kuanza thesis ya kitabu hiki kwa aya hii ya Qur'ani hapo juu, na kuimaliza nayo, kwa kuridhika kwamba Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu Mwenyewe alikwisha kutoa hukumu yake juu ya somo hilo — "Je, Biblia ni Neno la Mungu?", lakini tulitaka kuwapa ndugu zetu Wakristo nafasi ya kulisoma somo hili kwa uadilifu kadiri watakavyo.2 Tukiwaruhusu Wakristo waumini, Wakristo "waliozaliwa upya", na Kitabu chao Kitakatifu cha Biblia washuhudie dhidi ya hukumu yao "bora" yenyewe.

We could have started the thesis of this book with the above Qur'anic verse and ended with it, with the satisfaction that God Almighty had Himself delivered His verdict on the subject — "Is the Bible God's Word?", but we wished to afford our Christian brethern an opportunity to study the subject as objectively as they wished.2Allowing believing Christians, "reborn" Christians, and their own Holy Book the Bible to testify against their "better" judgement.

Je, Qur'ani Tukufu je? Je, Qur'ani ni Neno la Mungu? Mwandishi wa chapisho hili la unyenyekevu amejitahidi kujibu swali hili kwa njia ya kisayansi kabisa katika kitabu chake "AL'QUR'AN — The Miracle of Miracles", ambacho kinapatikana bila malipo kabisa kutoka "Centre" endapo kitaombwa.

What about the Holy Qur’ân? Is the Qur’ân the Word of God? The author of this humble publication has endeavoured to answer this question in a most scientific manner in his book "AL'QUR'AN — The Miracle of Miracles" available absolutely free of charge from the "Centre" on request.

1. "BIBLIA" - "Kitabu Kinachouzwa Zaidi Duniani!" Wachapishaji wa RSV walipata faida safi ya dola 15,000,000 kwa toleo la kwanza pekee. "Ni bei duni kiasi gani kwa ajili ya umilele!" 2. Angalia rufaa ya Dkt. Scroggie katika sura ya 5.

1. "THE BIBLE" - "The World's Best Seller!" the Publishers of the RSV made a net profit of 15 000 000 dollars on the first edition alone' "What a miserable price in exchange for eternity!" 2. See Dr Scroggie's plea in chapter 5.

Msomaji sasa lazima awe ameshawishika, yaani kama ana akili iliyo wazi, kwamba Biblia si kitabu kama wafuasi wa Ukristo wanavyodai kiwe.

The reader must by now be convinced, that is if he has an open mind, that the Bible is not what it is claimed to be by the protagonists of Christianity.

Kwa karibu miongo minne watu wamekuwa wakiniuliza ni vipi nina ujuzi wa kina wa Biblia na Ukristo.

For nearly four decades people have asked me as to how I have such an "in depth" knowledge of the Bible and Christianity.

Kusema kweli, nafasi yangu ya sasa kama "mtaalamu" wa Kiislamu wa Uyahudi na Ukristo si ya hiari yangu. Nimelazimishwa kuwa kile nilicho.

Frankly speaking my present position as a Muslim "expert" on Judaism and Christianity is not of my own volition. I have been forced into being what I am.

Ilikuwa mwaka 1939 nilipokuwa nikifanya kazi kama msaidizi wa duka katika Adams Mission karibu na seminari ya Kikristo yenye jina hilo; ambayo ilikuwa ikiandaa wahubiri na mapadre, ndipo mimi na wenzangu Waislamu wafanyakazi tulipokuwa walengwa wa vijana wenye tamaa ya kuwa watumishi wa dini hiyo. Hakupita siku ambayo vijana hao Wakristo hawakuniudhi mimi au ndugu zangu wa imani, kupitia matusi ambayo waliyamiminia Uislamu, Mtume Mtukufu ﷺ na Qur'ani.

It was in 1939 when I was working as a shop assistant at Adams Mission near a Christian seminary by that name; producing preachers and priests, that I and my fellow Muslim workers were the target of young aspiring men of the cloth. Not a day passed when these young Christians did not harass me or my brothers-in-faith, through insults which they piled on Islam, the Holy Prophet and the Qur’ân.

Kama kijana nyeti wa miaka 20, nilitumia usiku zisizo na usingizi nikilia kwa sababu sikuweza kumtetea yule ambaye ni mpendwa kwangu kuliko uhai wangu mwenyewe, rehema kwa wanadamu wote, Muhammad ﷺ.

Being a sensitive young man of 20, I spent sleepless nights in tears for not being able to defend the one dearer to me than my own life, that mercy unto all mankind— Muhummed P.B.U.H.

Nilidhamiria kusoma Qur'ani, Biblia na fasihi nyingine. Ugunduzi wangu wa kitabu "IZHARUL HAQ" ulikuwa kigeuzi cha maisha yangu. Baada ya muda mfupi niliweza kuwaalika wanafunzi wa umisionari wa Adams Mission College na kuwafanya watoke jasho kwa wasiwasi hadi wakaanza kuheshimu Uislamu na Mtume wake ﷺ.

I resolved to study the Qur’ân, the Bible and other literature. My discovery of the book — "IZHARUL HAQ" was the turning point in my life. After a short while I was able to invite the trainee missionaries of Adams Mission College and cause them to perspire under the collar until they developed a respect for Islam and its Holy Apostle.

Lilinifanya nifikirie jinsi Waislamu wengi wasiokuwa makini wanavyoshambuliwa mara kwa mara na wainjilisti wa Kikristo wanaofanya kampeni ya kugonga mlango kwa mlango, na jinsi wanavyokaribishwa ndani na Mwislamu mwenye ukarimu wa kimethali. Nilifikiria jinsi mmishonari asiye na huruma alivyokula samosa na kumkatisha tamaa Mwislamu kwa kejeli dhidi ya imani yake.

It made me ponder as to how so many unwary Muslims are being constantly assaulted by Christian evangelists who carry out a door to door campaign, and being invited in by the proverbially hospitable Muslim, I thought of how the merciless missionary munched the samoosas and punched the wind out of the Muslim with snide remarks against his beliefs.

Nikiwa na azma ya kuwafikishia Waislamu haki yao ya kujilinda, na kuwapa maarifa ya kutosha ya kukabiliana na mhubiri mwenye bidii ya moto, na muuzaji wa Ukristo anayegonga mlango kwa mlango, na yule mtukanaji asiyejali aibu anayemdhalilisha Uislamu na Mtume wake Mteule ﷺ, nilijitolea kwa unyenyekevu kutoa mihadhara ili kuwaonyesha Waislamu wengi kwamba hawana cha kuogopa kutokana na mashambulizi ya Wakristo.

Determined to bring home to the Muslims their right to defend themselves and to arm them with enough knowledge to counter the hot gospeller, the door to door pedlar of Christianity and the shameless insulter of Islam and its Holy Apostle; I humbly undertook to deliver lectures to show the Muslim masses that they had nothing to fear from the assaults of the Christians.

Mihadhara yangu pia ilikuwa mwaliko kwa Wakristo kushuhudia ukweli wa Uislamu na uzushi uliopenya mafundisho ya kweli ya Yesu (amani iwe juu yake).

My lectures were also an invitation to the Christians to witness the truth of Islam and the fabrications which had penetrated the true teachings of Jesus (P.B.U.H).

Wamisionari wa Kikristo katika miaka mia moja iliyopita na zaidi wamewapa changamoto Waislamu katika mambo mengi, na nyingi za changamoto hizo, kwa ujuzi wangu, bado hazijajibiwa au zimejibiwa kwa sehemu tu. Huenda kwa mapenzi ya Allah, mchango wangu katika uwanja huu nao ukawa ni majibu au majibu ya sehemu kwa changamoto za wale wanaoupinga Uislamu. Ni jambo la umuhimu mkubwa kwamba tusiende kwa kufuata mkondo tu.

Christian Missionaries in the past hundred years and more have challenged Muslims on many aspects and quite a number of these challenges have, to my knowledge, gone answered or have been partly answered. Perhaps by the will of Allah my contribution in this field can also be answers or part answers to the challenges of the detractors of Islam. It is of supreme importance that we do not go by default.

Changamoto moja inanijia akilini ni ile ya Geo G. Harris, mwandishi wa kitabu "How to lead Muslims to Christ". Mmishonari huyu, aliyejaribu kuwageuza Waislamu wa China, anasema kwa namna ile ile ya kiburi na kudharau ya Mzungu katika ukurasa wa 19, chini ya kichwa "NADHARIA AU MASHTAKA YA UHARIBIFU." "SASA TUNAFIKIA MASHTAKA MAZITO ZAIDI KUTOKA ULIMWENGU WA KIISLAMU, DHIDI YA MAANDIKO YETU YA KIKRISTO. KUNA VIPENGELE VITATU VYA MASHTAKA HAYA."

One such challenge comes to mind viz. Geo G. Harris the author of "How to lead Muslims to Christ". This missionary who tried to convert the Muslims of China says in the usual arrogant and condecending manner of the Westerner on page 19 under the heading — "THE THEORY OR CHARGE OF CORRUPTION." "WE NOW COME TO THE MOST SERIOUS CHARGE BY THE MOSLEM WORLD, AGAINST OUR CHRISIIAN SCRIPTURES. THERE ARE THREE ASPECTS OF THIS CHARGE.

1. Kwamba maandiko ya Kikristo yamebadilishwa na kuharibiwa kiasi kwamba yanafanana kidogo sana, au hayafanani kabisa, na Injili tukufu inayosifiwa katika Qur'ani. Hili linaweza kujibiwa kwa kuuliza mojawapo ya maswali yafuatayo: Maandiko haya yamebadilishwa au kuharibiwa wapi? Je, unaweza kupata nakala ya Injili halisi na kuionyesha ili niilinganishe na yangu? Ni wakati gani katika historia ya zamani Injili isiyobadilishwa ilikuwa ikisambazwa?

1. That the Christian scriptures have been so changed and altered that they bear little, if any, resemblance to the glorious Injil praised in the Qur’ân. This can be answered by the asking of one of the following questions: Wherein have these been so changed or altered? Can you obtain a copy of a true Injil and show it that I may compare it with mine? At what date in past history was the unaltered Injil in circulation?

2. Kwamba Injili zetu zimeharibiwa. Maswali yafuatayo matano ni ya uhakika, na tuna haki kamili ya kuyauliza: (a) Je, uharibifu au mabadiliko hayo yalifanyika kwa makusudi?

Je, sisi Waislamu hatuna majibu kwa maswali haya? Ikiwa wewe, msomaji mpole, umesoma kitabu hiki utakubali kwamba Ceo G. Harris hana msingi wa kusimama. Nimeweza kutoa kurasa halisi kutoka Biblia kukanusha madai yake.

Have we as Muslims no answers for these questions? If you, gentle reader have read this book you will admit that Ceo G. Harris has no feet to stand on. I have been able to give actual pages from the Bible to disprove his assertions.

Kwenye ukurasa wa 16 wa kitabu cha Geo G. Harris, anawafundisha wenzake kanuni ya msingi ya kimisionari ili wamnase Mwislamu mtarajiwa:

On page 16 of Geo G. Harris' book he teaches his comrades a basic missionary rule in order to corner the Muslim prospective:

"Katika sura hii inadhaniwa kwamba swali la uhalisi na ukweli wa maandiko yetu limeibuliwa na Mohammedan. Hali hii inapotokea, kabla ya kuanza kutetea msimamo wetu tunapaswa kukumbuka kanuni moja ya msingi. MZIGO WA KUTHIBITISHA UNAMWANGUKIA MWISLAMU."

"In this chapter it is assumed that the question of the authenticity and genuineness of our scriptures has been raised by the Mohammedan. When this is the case, before we undertake defense of our position we should bear in mind a basic rule. THE BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS WITH THE MOSLEM." 1

Sifa zote ni za Allah kwamba katika miaka yangu 40 ya kuthibitisha kutokuwa halisi kwa Biblia, jambo ambalo Wakristo wamekuwa wakilitaka kwa ujasiri mkubwa, nimeweza kushinda siku hiyo.

Praise be to Allah that in my 40 years of disproving the authenticity of the Bible which the Christians have so boldly asked for, I have been able to win the day.

Kumbuka, sisi Waislamu hatuzunguki nyumba kwa nyumba tukiuza dini yetu. Ilhali Wakristo wa madhehebu mbalimbali huingilia faragha na amani yetu, na kutumia fadhila ya ukarimu wetu kuwasumbua Waislamu wasiojihadhari.

Remember, we Muslims do not go door to door peddling our religion. Whereas Christians of different denominations encroach upon our privacy and peace and take advantage of our hospitality to harass the unwary Musalman.

Wale wanaoogopa kuutangaza ukweli wanapochochewa na Wakristo hawa, ambao hata wanafikia kiwango cha kumtukana Nabii wetu mpendwa Muhammad ﷺ, wanapaswa kupitia upya imani yao.

Those who are afraid to project the truth when they are provoked by these Christians, who even go to the extent of insulting our beloved Nabee Muhummed (S.A.W.) should re-examine their Eemaan.

Mihadhara ninazotoa ni kuwachunguza wamishonari hao wanaojificha, ambao "wanashambulia" nyumba na makao ya Mwislamu asiyeshuku anayeendelea na mambo yake kwa amani.

The lectures I hold are to sound out these slinking missionaries who "attack" the home and hearth of the unsuspecting Muslim who goes about minding his own business.

Mihadhara hii pia inalenga kurejesha heshima iliyoharibika ya Mwislamu ambaye ameudhiwa na mashambulizi ya kikatili ya mhubiri wa Kikristo. Waulizeni Waislamu maskini wa Chatsworth, Hanover Park au Riverlea2 jinsi wanavyodhulumiwa na dhuluma za wamisionari fulani.