Machache yanayonifanya niamini uwepo wa Mungu: Hatari ya kuamini hakuna Mungu

Kwahiyo wewe unakiri MUNGU HAYUPO, sindio?
 
Key Tactics of the Naturalist Atheists
There are a number of high-level operational tactics employed by atheist evolutionists. We will mention three main ones here:

First: The deliberate, calculated separation between:

a) the origin of life, termed abiogenesis.
This refers to the process of biological life arising from non-living matter which violates the law of biogenesis, [life only ever arises from life], which has never been proven false to date*, and
*No scientific refutation of the law of biogenesis has been embarked upon to date.
If there have been attempts of which we are unaware, they have failed.
Many objections have been made by evolutionists and atheists about asserting that life only coming from life being a law, but they are of zero empirical value.

b) the process of evolution after biological life has appeared.

Atheists treat them as two different non-related fields pretending as if the scientific status of the first has no impact upon the scientific status of the second.

This is because evolutionary theory rests upon the unproven assumption that encoded information, then biological life arose from inert inorganic molecules through purely physico-chemical processes.

Put another way, they require a #miracle upon which their naturalist storytelling can be embarked upon.

Without this miracle - the appearance of encoded information followed by a self-replicating cell - the wagon does not move and remains stuck in the warm muddy pond.

Hence, their response: “Abiogenesis isn’t part of the theory of evolution anyway.”

The two fields are inseparable and the scientific status of the first affects the scientific status of the second because the first is an unproven assumption of the second.

The first self-replicating cell must have as much digital, communications, engineering and data storage sophistication as cells today in order for all future alleged “mutation” and “selection” evolutionary processes to take place leading to the gradual increase
of prescriptive information and biological complexity and diversity.

Using mutation and natural selection to account for the arrival of the first self-replicating cell is not possible because these processes cannot kick in unless there is something to “mutate” and “select” for which is the first self-replication cell.

Hence, sagacious believers require a tremendous amount of faith in a miracle of astounding proportions which violates physico-chemistry and natural law.

Francis Crick, the atheist and molecular biologist who codiscovered the structure of DNA wrote in a 1981 book:
“An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.”
Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature. New York: Simon & Schuster. 1981. p. 88.

The question would also arise as to whether life originated more than once.

Since we are dealing with the micro-level scale, then relatively large areas (such as warm ponds, oceans and large rock surfaces) must have experienced the same circumstances and made multiple origins of biological life possible.

This is a question that plagues evolutionists and atheists and it is amusing to see how they address this matter.

We find articles in the New Scientist magazine: “Life may have emerged not once, but many times on Earth” with the subtitle:
“Far from being a miracle that happened just once in 4 billion years, life’s beginnings could have been so commonplace that it began many times over”
Source: https://www.newscientist .com, 17 August, 2016

Years earlier, another article, “Why complex life probably evolved only once”.52
Source: https://www.newscientist .com, 21 October, 2010.

They also speculate that there may have been as much as ten different separate origins of life - each of which would have its own peculiar system - but only one survived.

One can refer to the paper “Multiple origins of life”* by way of example wherein the authors present this conjecture on the basis of mathematical models
- the same scam used in modern cosmology wherein the existence of imaginary forces, particles and fields which just happen to patch and save their empirically
and observationally falsified cosmological models is made possible through mathematical models and equations.
*Source: Raup, D.M. & Valentine, J.W. Multiple origins of life. Proc. Natt Acad. Sci.Vol. 80; pp. 2981-2984, May 1983.

They literally write imaginary entities into existence.

In accordance with the principle of proof being commensurate with the claim, in order to argue for their religion
  • upon the strict standards of the scientific method-then observable, repeatable and testable empirical evidence must be shown in which random events, physico-chemistry or the laws of nature
  • lacking choice with intent
  • are able to produce a self-replicating cell, complete with its information, communications and engineering architecture.

The proof must be commensurate with the claim.

Merely showing thatmamino-acids or small peptides can be produced within controlled laboratory conditions and then extrapolating from the results is not allowed because the proof is not commensurate with the claim and does not meet scientific standards.

Conjectures about metabolismfirst, RNA-first, lipid-first scenarios do not amount to empirical evidence, as they are mere conjectures and storytelling exercises.

Sagacious evolutionary clergymen are masters of extrapolation.

To extrapolate means: To project beyond the range of known values on the basis of values already determined; to infer a possibility beyond the strict evidence of a series of facts, events, observations, and so on.

Evidences for abiogenesis and neo-Darwinian evolution employ extrapolation and do not meet the standards of empirical science which include observation, testability and repeatability.

When pressed for satisfactory answers in this topic of the origin of life and knowing that humanity does not possess the knowledge, ingenuity and skill to general life,
Atheists like Richard Dawkins are forced to seek refuge in the possibility that advanced intelligent aliens seeded life on Earth, but then beg the question by claiming that these aliens must themselves have come about through some type of Darwinian evolution, thus only pushing the problem one step back and not answering the question in substance at all.

A Muslims guide to Naturalism, Evolution and Atheism, by Abu Iyaad Amjad Rafeeq (May Allah preserve him) www.AboutAtheism.Net @Abuiyaad

====================
The knowledge of the existence of someone, something or some entity does not have to based upon sense-perception alone.

What are “evidence” and “knowledge” and what are the routes through which they can be attained?

As Muslims we believe the routes are many and they include:
-fitrah (innate disposition),
-mushāhadah (observation or witness),
-ḥiss (sensory perception),
-ʿaql ṣarīḥ (sound reason),
-tajribah (experience or experimentation) and
-riwāyah (transmisssion) and others.
 
Atheists:
call religious people backward

Also atheists:
believe in the outdated Darwinian evolution from the 1800s

The theory was penned before DNA was discovered, or the complexity of biological cells were even understood.
 
Wewe inabidi ueleweshwe, China kuotesha mmea angani sio issue ni kitu common sana ,science experiments nyingi zinakuwa na matokeo ya haraka na uhakika zikifanyika sehemu yenye gravity ndogo ndio maana wenzetu wana space station ambako kazi yake kubwa ni kufanya hizo experiments, space station ina cost billions of dollars kila mwaka unafikiri yale ni mapambo? vitu vingi sana kwenye agriculture, medicine, technology etc vimegunduliwa kutokana na hiyo space station
 
Vitisho ni silaha ya mwisho ya mjinga
KM ni hivo basi Ulimwengu woote!! including weye, wana sayansi, Rais wako, waalimu wako nk! ni wajinga kwa sababu wanaogopa siraha za USA/Russia!....km siyo Mujinga jaribu uone moto!!....

Najua unampongeza Shetani haogopi vitisho vya kuchomwa moto!...pia ana watoto humu Duniani wasiyo ogopa kile wanacho amini ni vitisho hilo tunalijua........
Huna tofauti na mtoto anayeenda shule kwa hofu ya viboko.
Tofauti ni kuwa yule mtoto anaye enda shule kwa kuogopa viboko bila kuhoji uhalali wa viboko, ni Mjinga, Muoga, mnafiki wa kesho, hafai, siyo mdadisi, viboko ni siraha ya kukuza udadisi wa mtoto, kitaaluma!.......

mtoto mzuri na mwenye uelewa ni yule atakae tafuta suruhisho la kudumu au kuhoji uhalali wa yeye kupigwa viboko!...kama ulienda shule kwa kuogopa viboko basi hufai kuwa kiongozi bora!!

kwa sababu ulishindwa kufikia muafaka wa kudumu kwa yule aliye kupatia Elimu kwa kukutisha kwa viboko!..japo yeye alikuwa sahihi!.....

Aliye kutishia kwa viboko ili uende shule alikuwa sahihi, sababu alikuwa anakuza uwezo wako wa kufikiri, kujitetea, kutafuta suruhu, usiwe na nidhamu ya uoga,

Bali uwe jasiri, uwe na uwezo wa kuhoji na kufikia muafaka!...ina maana weye hata ulipo umwa ulienda tu sababu ulikuwa mwoga! wa viboko?! sasa hu ni ujinga uliopitiliza!!

Mzazi anaweza kukutuma peku mbaaali sana kijiji cha pili, mchana wa jua kali akijua wazi kabisaa kuwa una njaa, kiu. uchovu, hapa ukienda tu, na ukishindwa kujitetea anajua sina mtoto hapa!

Ndo km hiyo yako, weye ukisikia! km hujaelewa hapa ''obvious you need fire!
 
Umesema akili ya kawaida haiwezi kutambua, vipi kama hata swala lako la kusema Mungu yupo sio majibu potofu ya akili yako?
amaepata nguvu za ziada kutoka kwa roho mtaka tifu
 
Hiyo nguvu ameitambuaje na kujua ni roho mtakatifu na sio kama anapitia paranoia tu?
''Imani si mali ya kila Mtu!'' Paranoia ni jibu rahisi kwa swali tata! utazunguka weee! lkn hutapata jibu rahisi ivo!
 
Hayo manyota makubwa yazinidi kua formed mpaka leo... yani nyota zinazaliwa na kufa. Mfano hili jua letu (likiwa nalo ni nyota) linategemewa kufa baada ya miaka billion tano. Makadirio haya yanafanywa kwa kuangalia nyota nyingine zenye mfanano na jua. Mpaka sasa bado ziko nyota zinazidi kutengenezwa na bado ziko nyota zinazidi kufa.
Universe ni kubwa sana na inazidi kupanuka mpaka leo. Hatuwezi kuona mwisho wa universe kwa teknologia yetu ya sasa kwasababu inapanuka kwa kasi zaidi ya kasi ya mwanga... hivo huwezi kuona mwisho.
 
Kiyasansi Mungu hayupo. Lakini kwa elimu zingine zinathibitisha Mungu yupo.
Sayansi haina uwezo wa kujibu KILA kitu, hadi SAsa imejibu asilimia 10 tu ya mambo yaliyopo. 90 ya mambo imeshindwa yamejibiwa na elimu zingine.
 
Kiyasansi Mungu hayupo. Lakini kwa elimu zingine zinathibitisha Mungu yupo.
Sayansi haina uwezo wa kujibu KILA kitu, hadi SAsa imejibu asilimia 10 tu ya mambo yaliyopo. 90 ya mambo imeshindwa yamejibiwa na elimu zingine.
Sayansi imejibu 10% tu ya maswali? Hapana... labda kama ni vinginevyo, dini ndo imejibu 10%, ambapo pia hata izo 10% zimethibitishwa kua sio ukweli, na kuna sababu za kwamba sio kweli

Baadhi ya maswali yaliojibiwa na elimu ya sayansi (na hayajajibiwa na elimu nyingine, kama unavosema);
1. Kwanini anga linaonekana lina rangu ya blue ukiwa ndani ya dunia
2. Kuna viumbw vya aina ngapi (at species level)
3. Namna sayari zinavotengenezeka
4. Kwanini ukiruka unarudi chini
5. Kwanini baadhi ya viumbe vilitoweka. Mfano tuseme, dinosaurs.
6. Nini kinafanya kuepo kuna usiku na mchana
7. Mvua inatokea wapi
8. Umbali wa mwezi kutoka dunian
9. Kwanini tunaugua, na dawa zinatibu vipi
10. Na hili la mwisho, popo ni mnyama au ndege? [emoji16]

Ukiangalia haya maswali yote, either kidini hayana majibu au yamejibiwa lakini ukienda kiuhalisia unaona kabisa tumepigwa...
 
1.Sayansi haina majibu kuhusu maisha ya ulimwengu usioonekana.
2.Kuhusu Ndoto
3.Nguvu ya mawazo
4.Roho
5.Maisha baada ya kifo
6.Viumbe vilivyopo katika sayari zingine
7.Asili ya mwanadamu
8.Nini asili ya chuki, wivu, hasira, wema, upendo,
9.Sayansi haina majibu juu ya Mungu ni nani na Shetani ni nani plus viwango vyao vya kuzidiana nguvu
10.Sayansi haiwezi dhibiti uchawi
KILA tatizo ujibiwa kwa elimu yake
 
Lengo la dini si kuelezea Mambo ya kisayansi, lengo kubwa la dini ni kumuelekeza binadamu namna ya kuishi na watu wengine. ingawa Kuna Mambo kadhaa ya kisayansi yapo katika vitabu vya dini ila wewe kwa kuwa mbali na dini ndio maana hata hufahamu.

Hapo mwanzo wanasayansi waliamini kuwa jua liko stationary. Vitabu vya dini vinasema jua nalo linatembea, ni hivi karibuni wanasayansi wamegundua kuwa jua nalo linazunguka milkyway Galaxy

Mambo ambayo vitabu vya dini imevisema na ni sahihi ni mengi
Mfano
°Ulimwengu kutanuka
°Drifting
°lightning kuwa ni umeme
°meeting of two seas that does not mix
°isostatic adjustment
°na vingine vingi

Sayansi ni kweli na imetusaidia kuwa vitu kama TV's, ndege, simu n.k lakini hi sayansi ina limit, Kuna baadhi ya vitu haviwezi kuwa proved scientifically.

NB: Wanasayansi wanaamini kuwa hi bahari imechunguzwa kwa asilimia 5 tu na kwa asilimia 95 bado binadamu hajagundua Kuna nini
 

1. Hakuna ushaidi wowote kuhusu ulimwengu usionekana wala huwezi kuleta ushahidi wowote ivo basi kisayansi hakuna kitu kama ulimwengu usioonekana.
2. Sayansi inamajibu kuhusu ndoto
3. "Nguvi ya mawazo" unamaana gani kusema ivo? Ukiwa na msongo wa mawazo unajirisk kupata matatizo ya akili...
4. Roho? Hakuna uwezekano wa kuprove existence ya roho, ivo hakuna kitu kama roho
5. Hakuna maisha baada ya kifo
6. Viumbe vilivo katika sayari nyingine havijagunduliwa. Kama vipo, vipi sayari gani? Itakua rahisi kuprove uwepo wao...
7. Asili ya mwanadamu, kuna theories nyingi zinazo suggest asili yetu. Uumbaji ikiwa far off from the truth...
8. Chuki, wivu, hasira, upendo? Hivi vitu vinategemea sana na jinsi mtu alivokizwa toka utotoni, mazingira aliopo na vitu kama ivo
9. Sayansi haiamini katika mungu, muumba wa ulimwengu wote. Inategemea unadefine vipi neno "mungu"
10. Kwenye uchawi tumepigwa, hamna kitu kama icho[emoji38]
 
Bado sana naona umejifungia kwenye box la kutegemea only sayansi ya darasani ndio KILA kitu.
Roho ndio inayoongoza MWILI inaongoza vipi sayansi haitokupa jibu
 
Bado sana naona umejifungia kwenye box la kutegemea only sayansi ya darasani ndio KILA kitu.
Roho ndio inayoongoza MWILI inaongoza vipi sayansi haitokupa jibu
Sayansi ina majibu. Sayansi ipo kwaajili ya kutafuta majibu. Ww ndio umejifungia kwenye box... nilishawahi kua muamini. Ila kwenye dini fix tu zimejaa. Nimesoma biblia yote, ninesoma baadhi ya aya za quran. Hamna kitu humo...
 
Sayansi ina majibu. Sayansi ipo kwaajili ya kutafuta majibu. Ww ndio umejifungia kwenye box... nilishawahi kua muamini. Ila kwenye dini fix tu zimejaa. Nimesoma biblia yote, ninesoma baadhi ya aya za quran. Hamna kitu humo...
Hizo elimu zingine zimekuwepo kabla ya sayansi.Vipi kuhusu nguvu za asili mfano negative na positive energy na jinsi zinavyoathiri watu je sayansi inayo majibu?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…