Anachofanya huyu Setfree ni Circular reasoning fallacy.Ngoja Infropreneur aje kupinga
Hii english hapana😂
Huyo MUNGU Alishindwaje kukujalia wewe Nomadix hizo neema tele, Akawajalia wachache?ila nipenda sana nyuzi zako sana yani ni sana.
Mwenyezi MUNGU azidi kukujalia neema tele uzidi kutupa masomo mazuri kama haya.
The claims of Jesus Christ’s divinity and resurrection lack empirical verification, relying on theological assertion rather than historical certainty, making belief in them a leap of faith rather than a rational conclusion.A contingent multitude repudiates the plausibility of a Supreme Being, yet the meticulous orchestration of cosmic mechanics inexorably intimates an omniscient Architect. Empirical inquiry elucidates the immutable axioms governing the natural order—whence originates such profound exactitude? The convoluted architecture of deoxyribonucleic acid, the unfathomable expanse of the firmament, and the profundity of human introspection bespeak an ontological reality transcending stochastic happenstance.
If existence is devoid of an intelligent Primum Movens, whither derives its intrinsic teleology? What rationale undergirds the universal human proclivity toward moral rectitude, aesthetic appreciation, and existential inquiry—facets inexplicable through mere Darwinian utility? The sacred writ articulates, “The benighted in his innermost cogitation avers, ‘There is no Deity.’” (Psalm 14:1). Yet, Divinity does not impose credulity by coercion; rather, He proffers an epistemological summons.
Jesus Christ constitutes the apotheosis of divine self-disclosure. Historical exegesis corroborates His corporeal manifestation, thaumaturgical exploits, and verifiable resurrection. If His attestations hold veracity, to eschew His ontological implications is the quintessence of folly.
Dare you venture the audacious entreaty, “Omniscient One, should You veritably subsist, unveil Thyself unto me?” A solitary, unfeigned supplication may well recalibrate the trajectory of your eternal ontos.
CC: Infropreneur; Kiranga; Satan
Exactly 💯.The claims of Jesus Christ’s divinity and resurrection lack empirical verification, relying on theological assertion rather than historical certainty, making belief in them a leap of faith rather than a rational conclusion.
The complexity of the universe does not necessitate an intelligent designer. Rather, natural laws and evolutionary processes sufficiently explain cosmic and biological intricacies without invoking supernatural causation. DNA, the vastness of space, and human cognition arise through observable, naturalistic mechanisms, not divine intervention.
Hapa nmefika tamati ngoja wengine wajeAnachofanya huyu Setfree ni Circular reasoning fallacy.
Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy that occurs when the evidence used to support a claim is the same as the claim itself.
Nitakupa mifano hapa..👇View attachment 3243391
A belief that defends itself with itself isn't the truth, it's a trap.
At the root of every theological argument is circular reasoning fallacy.
View attachment 3243392
Cc Qashy Lilith
Bravo DeepSeek !The claims of Jesus Christ’s divinity and resurrection lack empirical verification, relying on theological assertion rather than historical certainty, making belief in them a leap of faith rather than a rational conclusion.
The complexity of the universe does not necessitate an intelligent designer. Rather, natural laws and evolutionary processes sufficiently explain cosmic and biological intricacies without invoking supernatural causation.
DNA, the vastness of space, and human cognition arise through observable, naturalistic mechanisms, not divine intervention.
blah blah blah..Atheistic repudiation of divine agency often hinges upon the fallacy that complexity can arise autonomously from chaos, yet such a proposition flounders beneath the weight of logical scrutiny. The entropic proclivity of matter dictates that absent an external actuating force, disorder prevails. How, then, does the cosmos exhibit an inviolable structure wherein celestial bodies harmoniously traverse their orbits, biospheric conditions coalesce to sustain life, and mathematical precision undergirds the fabric of existence? A rational mind must concede that such an intricately woven reality is neither the progeny of fortuitous happenstance nor the arbitrary consequence of unguided material processes.
Moreover, moral objectivity presents an insurmountable dilemma for the atheistic worldview. If existence is a mere concatenation of biochemical reactions devoid of intentional authorship, on what foundation does one ascribe value to concepts such as justice, benevolence, or even truth itself? The very impulse to differentiate virtue from vice presupposes an absolute standard beyond human subjectivity. Even those who decry divine authority implicitly invoke moral axioms whose genesis they cannot account for. Does not the universal compunction against malevolence, even in disparate cultures, evince an ingrained moral law? And does not a law necessitate a Lawgiver?
To reject Christ’s verifiable historical presence is to deny the overwhelming attestation of antiquity’s most rigorously documented figure. His advent, His teachings, and, most significantly, His resurrection defy naturalistic reductionism. If skeptics dismiss the supernatural on principle, let them present an alternative hypothesis that withstands forensic examination. The empty tomb, the radical transformation of His disciples, and the subsequent proliferation of faith under persecution—all demand an explanation. What conceivable rationale remains apart from the reality of the divine?...
Sijawahi kutumia Deepseek ila ngoja niireview. So far, kwenye shughuli za kawaida, GPT na Perplexity were sufficient.Bravo DeepSeek !
Hapa atatosha, alidhani ni yeye tu anajua kucheza na hizi akili mnemba.....
Nachoona unataka ubishiHuyo MUNGU Alishindwaje kukujalia wewe Nomadix hizo neema tele, Akawajalia wachache?
Huyo Mungu kwa nini amjalie Setfree neema tele, Na hajakujalia wewe Nomadix neema tele kama za Setfree?
Kwa nini huyo Mungu anagawa hizo neema tele kwa upendeleo?
Kwa nini huyo Mungu ajalie wengine neema tele, na wengine awape neema kiduchu?
Kwa nini wewe Nomadix huna neema tele kama za Setfree?
Au huyo Mungu wako ana ubaguzi na upendeleo?
Mungu aliumbaje binadamu wenye ubishi?Nachoona unataka ubishi
Pliz rirait it in swahili!!!A contingent multitude repudiates the plausibility of a Supreme Being, yet the meticulous orchestration of cosmic mechanics inexorably intimates an omniscient Architect. Empirical inquiry elucidates the immutable axioms governing the natural order—whence originates such profound exactitude? The convoluted architecture of deoxyribonucleic acid, the unfathomable expanse of the firmament, and the profundity of human introspection bespeak an ontological reality transcending stochastic happenstance.
If existence is devoid of an intelligent Primum Movens, whither derives its intrinsic teleology? What rationale undergirds the universal human proclivity toward moral rectitude, aesthetic appreciation, and existential inquiry—facets inexplicable through mere Darwinian utility? The sacred writ articulates, “The benighted in his innermost cogitation avers, ‘There is no Deity.’” (Psalm 14:1). Yet, Divinity does not impose credulity by coercion; rather, He proffers an epistemological summons.
Jesus Christ constitutes the apotheosis of divine self-disclosure. Historical exegesis corroborates His corporeal manifestation, thaumaturgical exploits, and verifiable resurrection. If His attestations hold veracity, to eschew His ontological implications is the quintessence of folly.
Dare you venture the audacious entreaty, “Omniscient One, should You veritably subsist, unveil Thyself unto me?” A solitary, unfeigned supplication may well recalibrate the trajectory of your eternal ontos.
CC: Infropreneur; Kiranga; Satan
English diseaseAtheism, in its ardent quest for empirical certitude, paradoxically erects an epistemological barrier to discovering ultimate truth. The finite mind, confined within the limitations of temporal perception, is ill-equipped to dictate the parameters of the infinite. It is not an absence of evidence that renders atheism tenable, but rather the willful circumvention of its implications. To demand proof while rejecting all metaphysical premises is akin to expecting ocular confirmation of ultraviolet light—an epistemic contradiction.
Therefore, let the skeptic issue an honest challenge, not to men, but to the Divine Himself. If truth be the object of inquiry, then dare to petition, "If You exist, reveal Yourself unto me." It is a proposition that carries no cost but harbors eternal consequence. Should you fear that such a prayer will return void? If so, what does that fear betray? Atheism contends there is no one to answer—but what if you are mistaken?
Atheism, in its unwavering adherence to materialism, demands empirical verification for all claims yet paradoxically accepts the unobservable axioms of its own framework. It posits that consciousness, that ineffable seat of reason, emotion, and volition, is reducible to neural firings and chemical interactions—an assertion that collapses under scrutiny. If thought is merely an electrochemical event devoid of intentionality, then the very act of reasoning is rendered illusory, a deterministic cascade of biological impulses rather than an exercise in objective analysis. How then can the atheist trust his conclusions, if even his cognition is the byproduct of blind, indifferent forces? The very ability to recognize logical coherence presupposes a transcendent rational order, an order reflective of the Divine intellect.
Furthermore, the fine-tuning of the universe presents a formidable challenge to the atheist’s naturalistic paradigm. Physical constants—gravitational force, electromagnetic interaction, nuclear cohesion—are so precisely calibrated that even an infinitesimal deviation would render existence untenable. If the cosmos emerged through sheer happenstance, why does it operate with such meticulous regularity, as though inscribed with mathematical elegance? Probability dictates that an undirected process should result in chaos, yet we find ourselves in a world of breathtaking order. Is this not indicative of an intelligent mind governing creation? The multiverse hypothesis, often posited as a counterpoint, merely defers the question—who, then, established the parameters enabling these hypothetical realities?
Likewise, human existential longing refutes the materialist thesis. The soul, despite its bodily constraints, yearns for the infinite, the immutable, the eternal. Why should creatures evolved for mere survival possess an insatiable thirst for transcendence? No beast contemplates eternity, no brute agonizes over moral dilemmas, yet mankind is haunted by an innate awareness that he is meant for more than dust and decay. This inexplicable ache, this relentless pursuit of purpose, is not an evolutionary misfire but a divine imprint—a homing signal beckoning us back to our Creator. Even the staunchest atheist cannot fully silence this whisper; though he may deny God with his lips, his soul protests with every unfulfilled longing.
The rejection of the divine often masquerades as intellectual rigor, yet beneath the veneer of skepticism lies a deeper impetus—an aversion to accountability. For if God exists, then man is not sovereign, and his deeds bear consequence beyond the grave. This is the crux of the matter: atheism does not merely reject God’s existence; it rebels against His authority. To acknowledge Him is to concede that morality is not self-determined, that life is not a fleeting indulgence but a sacred stewardship. It is no wonder, then, that atheism flourishes in societies where hedonism is enthroned, where man seeks not truth but autonomy, not wisdom but pleasure.
Yet even the most ardent denier is not beyond redemption. History is replete with skeptics who, upon honest examination, found their disbelief shattered—C.S. Lewis, once an avowed atheist, became one of Christianity’s greatest defenders; Antony Flew, a lifelong champion of atheism, ultimately conceded that reason compelled him to acknowledge a divine mind. The invitation remains open: let the skeptic, if he truly seeks truth, lay aside his presuppositions and pray—not to men, nor to intellect, but to the Almighty Himself.
Tofauti kubwa kati ya faith (Imani) katika imani tayari una majibu unachofanya ni kujaribu (in hindsight which is normally 20/20) kuverify au kucheza na data ili zikubaliane na imani yako, tena hizi Imani ukipinga tu unaonekana unakufuru..., wakati Sayansi / au what am championing for ni kutafuta ukweli kulingana na data au kilichopo wakati huo yaani am Set Free na sipo chained na kitu chochote kile wala sijawa indoctrinated (kwahio hata wewe leo ukija ukasema kwamba kumbe kuna huyu jamaa ndio alifanya haya yote kwa kutumia magic wand hii hapa na nikaona beyond any reasonable doubt basi what you say shall be the truth, wala hakuna shida. Lakini watu wa Imani wanaweza hata wakasema hio ni illusion au unachodhani kwa wakati huo sicho (sababu hakiendani na Imani zao au vitabu vyao) au watatumia loophole kwamba huenda hicho kitabu kimechakachuliwa au msomaji hakuelewa...My friend Logikos, it is intellectually disingenuous to reduce faith to mere subjective perception while simultaneously asserting that empirical inquiry—however noble—monopolizes truth.
Yap..., and that is the beauty of it, continuous pursue of the truth / facts without being chained or indoctrinated of what is truth, hence using your precious commodity (time) trying to defend and explain what you believe is the truth instead of finding and challenging what is know...; That's why I champion this kind of thinking, knowing that we do not know thus continuously finding things, not by faith but by evidences thus changing the theories to facts.... and if new evidence come along we don't defend what we used to know but we welcome the new findings and give Kudos to the finder as a motivation to continue the pursuit of knowledge (that's why we have been evolving as a specie and been able to conquer / manage other species)The very foundation of epistemology recognizes that human understanding is shaped by axioms, be they scientific postulates or theological doctrines. To dismiss faith as "not factual" is, ironically, a presupposition, one that ignores the fact that even the most rigorous scientific paradigms evolve and, at times, collapse under the weight of new evidence.
I had rather use my time thinking about infinity which at the end of the day I can prove my theory mathematically than pursue something which in the end I can never find any truth if am right or wrong (unless am doing it for self fulfillment / feel good factor); but to me I can get that fulfillment in other things in which If I start the journey, I will know when am lost or on the right track (tofauti na hapo in my opinion it will be a fools errand) by as I always say to each their own...;Regarding the concept of "onus," it is misplaced to suggest that belief must be substantiated within the confines of materialist empiricism to be deemed legitimate. The nature of metaphysical truth claims does not conform to the reductionist demands of empirical verification alone. Just as axiomatic truths in mathematics are not "factual" in a materialist sense but remain indisputable within their logical frameworks, so too do theological constructs hold weight within their own epistemic paradigms.
I always try to deal with the points / Hoja at hand.., kilichowekwa mezani kwa wakati husika na sio nani kasema hivi au vile..., Being Chained in one set of belief hinders you to see the bigger picture or pursue other avenues.., I don't know about those so called Atheists; but am sure those people today if you came with evidence about what you are proposing they will happily agree with you (but that evidence should not come from another non verified source);Furthermore, the argument that labeling (e.g., "atheists") dilutes discourse is self-refuting, as the individual making this claim engages in a parallel act of labeling by categorizing believers as "indoctrinated hypocrites." If intellectual inquiry is truly the aim, then fairness demands an acknowledgment that ideological biases exist on all sides, and dismissing faith as an intellectual dead end is as dogmatic as the fundamentalism one claims to oppose.
If faith is the truth from Alfa to Omega.., so its has never swayed from the right pass, while science and other things are pursuit of knowledge sometimes by try and error..., Je uoni kwamba kwa sayansi kufanya makosa ni kawaida (means to an end) katika kutafuta ukweli..., LAKINI Ukweli ambao ni UKWELI na haujawahi kubadilika wala haupaswi kubadilika sababu unatoka kwa a Know it All being..., Kama hapo katikatika ulikosea njia, then maybe it was never the truth at all....; How can a Know it All make a Mistake ?!!!Finally, the invocation of historical atrocities as a cautionary tale against faith is an overused and historically selective argument. While religious institutions have undoubtedly been complicit in dark chapters of history, so too have secularist ideologies—Stalinism, Maoism, and other aggressively anti-theistic regimes—perpetrated atrocities under the guise of human progress. The issue, therefore, is not faith itself, but the human proclivity for dogma, be it religious or secular.
Bring irrefutable truth and your truth will become our truth..., no need to convince us just show us....The real question is this: if truth is the ultimate pursuit, is it intellectually honest to dismiss the epistemic foundations of billions merely because they do not conform to one's preferred framework? True seekers of knowledge do not merely refute—they engage, analyze, and acknowledge the limitations of their own paradigms.
Nitamuona wapi huyo Lazaro ?!!! Achana na Lazaro hata Jesus mwenyewe hizo evidence alizofanya kwamba alifanya zaidi ya hearsay ni nani aliona...Are you sure hakuna...? Kamuulize Lazaro wa Bethania aliyekufa kisha akafufuka siku ya nne
I don’t believe we evolved as a species in the way you describe. Humanity's ability to manage other species is not a result of evolution, but of intelligence and purpose given by our Creator. We were designed with the ability to reason, innovate, and steward creation—not just as a product of natural selection.(that's why we have been evolving as a specie and been able to conquer / manage other species)
Why did it take time and death of millions to find that truth, hivi unajua nikichukua tu kafika field ya medicine wangapi walikufa au kuuliwa ili kuja kupata dawa ? Unajua watumwa walikuwa wanatumika kama guinea pigs ? Kwahio that had the stamp of creator ?I don’t believe we evolved as a species in the way you describe. Humanity's ability to manage other species is not a result of evolution, but of intelligence and purpose given by our Creator. We were designed with the ability to reason, innovate, and steward creation—not just as a product of natural selection.
Hata kama unachosema kingekuwa kweli kimetokea (sababu wewe evidence yako ni hadithi) ni kwamba basi kungekuwa kuna trick imefanyika au alikuwa ni muongo...Lazaro alikuwa kaburini, mkuu, sio kwenye mashine!!