Did you that if gravity was slightly more powerful the universe would collapse into a ball?
And if gravity was slightly less powerful the universe would fly apart, there would be no stars or planets?
What do I mean?
It's just that gravity is precisely as strong as needs to be, to support creation and life.
And if the ratio between the electromagnetic force to the strong force wasn't one percent, life wouldn't exist.
What are the odds that all would happen by itself?
I'm not trying to convince you that there is a god, I can't prove it, tuelewane hapo, but the precision of the universe at least makes it logical to suggest there is a creator.
Misunderstanding, sijasema "the universe suggest" hapana, "the complexity of the universe, suggests".
Hio koma(,) hapo ni ya muhimu sana, nadhani ushanielewa.
Na kuhusu contradictions, sawa umesema vyema, ni swali zuri nimelipenda, lakini umeacha point ya msingi umechukua point nyingine inayokufaa kweny kuleta hoja zako zingine, sawa tuendelee hukohuko.
Kabla hatujaingia ndani zaidi kweny hili swali inabidi ubadilishe kwanza mtazamo wako, tuishi kweny dhana kwamba mungu ameumba ulimwengu maana swali ulilouliza lazima tuweke hio assumption. Umekubali?
Swala la mungu kuumba ulimwengu unaopinga uwepo wake yeye mwenyew ni maamuzi yake, its not coincidental, alijua itatokea hivo and he still did proceed, angetaka kuumba ulimwengu usiokuwa na contradictions angetuumba kama marobot, tusiokuwa na utashi wa kifikra na uwezo wa kuchanganua mambo, lakini hakufanya hivo, kwann? Kwasababu moja tuu, upendo wa dhati, upendo wa dhati unakuja from free will and free choice, kuna mwana falsafa mmoja alisema "if you really love something, set it free, if it comes back it's yours forever, if it doesn't, it wasn't yours to begin with" sasa hapo ndo linapokuja swala la kwann katupa free minds and choices.
Lucifer was the first being to rebel from God because he had free will and a free mind to choose whether to serve God or serve himself.
So there you have it, free-will, free-will is a gift from god, angetaka angeumba marobot programmed kumwabudu na kumwinamia 24/7 lakini hapana hakufanya hivo(and that would have been very easy for him(stress-free), but there is no true love without free will.
Regarding the preciseness of the constants of nature and the apparent design it posits, I am very familiar with that concept. Perhaps to a greater degree than just gravity, electromagnetic forces and strong force as you put it here.
I read Martin Amis' (The UK's Astronomer Royal) "Just Six Numbers : The Deep Forces That Shape The Universe".
I read John D. Barrow's "The Constants of Nature: From Alpha To Omega , The Numbers That Encode The Deepest Secrets of The Universe".
I just finished Philip Goff's "Why : The Purpose of The Universe".
So, I am very familiar, not only on gravity, but down to the nitty gritty of the weak and strong nuclear forces that hold matter together and allow stars to burn, and many many even more complex things that we can learn from those books, and others.
But you either seem to not understand some very basic critiques I provided, or, if you understand them, you must be in some kind of cognitive dissonance that it is worth repeating these critiques.
Let me repeat this.
Do you not see that a universe in which complexity cannot arise on its own, one in which complexity must be designed, forbids the existence of a God who designs all?
You have two strict options.
1. Complexity does not need a grand designer.
2. Complexity cannot happen without a grand designer.
Let us examine these two options.
1. Complexity does not need a Grand designer. Complex systems can evolve from simpler systems. Perhaps these simpler systems are always there with no beginning, they can just evolve into more complex systems, with billions of years, the systems become so complex that when a mere human being looks at it, he sees ckear marks of definite deliberate design, even when there is no actual deliberate design.
This system does not need God to exist.
2. Complexity cannot happen without a grand designer. On the surface, this may seem like an argument for the existence of God. You made this argument.
The universe seem to be finetuned. Therefire there nust be a finetuner who started it all.
But there is a problem in the basic logic of this argument. A problem I posed above, one you did not address.
If complexity must be created, it cannot arise onnits own, and God created this universe, therefore Gid humself is complex, then that God too must be created, and cannot be the first mover of all, so your God will need his Gid to create him, and his God will need another God to create him, and tge chain will go on and on.
Because, complexity cannot arise on its own, it must be created.
You will see that, in this wirld, God the creatir of all cannot exist.
So.
1. If complexity can arise out if simplicity, we do not need God to explain a complex world.
2. If complexity cannot arise out if simplicity, we cannot have God who creates all to explain the world.
Either way, God is either not needed or impossible.
On contradiction and the problem of evil, I will post a chart with the Epicurean Paradox for you to explain.