Kifo hakipangwi na Mungu

[Mish Albert]

Very simple!

He/she who claims must prove.

You are right on money Ngabu

And that is what fundamental rules of logic tell us

But even himself,he made the claim that God does not exist

So the same principle is applicable to him too?

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

You are right on money Ngabu

And that is what fundamental rules of logic tell us

But even himself,he made the claim that God does not exist

So the same principle is applicable to him too?

By him you mean Kiranga, right?

Anyhow, whoever that is, it's important to bear in mind the context in which the claim [that god doesn't exist] is made.

Was it made in response to the claimed existence and its subsequent proffered evidence of existence or did he just out of nowhere say god doesn't exist?

If he made the claim based on the presented evidence by those who claim god exists, then the principle doesn't apply to him.

The ones who claim that god exists are responsible for proving his existence. Those who don't believe that god exists have the right to examine that evidence and reach a conclusion.

If they conclude, based on the presented evidence, that god doesn't exist, you can't then turn around and ask them to prove to you that he doesn't exist. Your evidence didn't pass muster [to them].

On the other hand, if he makes an unsolicited claim that god doesn't exist, we have all the rights to question him about how he came to that conclusion.

So, in a nutshell, proper context matters a lot when discussing these things.

You can't afford to lose site of it lest you get off track.

Context is everything, Mishy.

 

[Salumu Mohamedi]

Kama hauamini uwepo wa kifo na Mungu kamwe kifo kinapompata MTU usiseme kuwa sisi tulikupenda ila Mungu amekupenda zaidi ikiwa kifo hakitoki kwa Mungu , Mungu atampendaje MTU huyo?