Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe

Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe

Yes am along those lines.
A logical epistemology forbids the existence of an all knowing, all capable and all loving Godhead.

That Godhead, is contradicted by "the problem of evil".

A logical epistemology does not accommodate contradictions.

Do you follow?
 
Mfano rahisi ni hapo hapo kwenye number line hujui number ndogo zaidi upande wa negative since negativity ni infinity na hujui number kubwa vilevile upande wa positive since positivity ni infinity,kwanini basi hujui,hujui kwasababu haina mwisho itaendelea kukuwa tu kubwa daima (no end)na itaendelea kuwa ndogo zaidi daima(no beginning) lakini hiyo hali imeshikiliwa na zero as a center ,zero defines nothing lakini hiyo zero ndo source ya both infinities both kwenye positivity na negativity.kwahiyo mahesabu yanaprove logically thinking limitation kuwa tutajua mbali zaidi kuhusu yajayo ila haiwezakani kujua mwisho ya yajayo zaidi ya kianzilishi chenyewe ambacho ni zero since ndo kimeanzisha, same applies upande wa pili tutafika mbali sana kuhusu wapi ulimwengu umeanza lakini hatutofika mwanzo maana hakuna mwanzo ,anaejua mwanzo pekee ni zero maana ndo mwanzilishi.kwa upeo wangu najua GOD EXISTS NA YUPO KWENYE EMPIRE YAKE NDANI YA ZERO,na zero ni nothing,but within nothing there is SOMETHING.
GOD EXISTS
 
Hujathinigisha uwepo wa Mungu kwa njia yoyote ile.

Umetoa assumption tu.
Nimesema siwezi kuthibitisha kwa kutumia sayansi (unayoamini) kuwa Mungu yupo, except kusema kwamba kama Bing Bang ilitokea, basi ndiye aliyesabisha itokee - maana ndiye chanzo cha kila kitu: living and non-living. Sayansi inahitaji ufanye experiment na Mungu hahitaji hiyo experiment. Ufanye au usifanye experiment - Mungu yupo. Experiment ifanikiwe au isifanikiwe, Mungu yupo. Hivyo, kuthibitisha kitu siyo msingi wa uwepo wa Mungu.
 
Mfano rahisi ni hapo hapo kwenye number line hujui number ndogo zaidi upande wa negative since negativity ni infinity na hujui number kubwa vilevile upande wa positive since positivity ni infinity,kwanini basi hujui,hujui kwasababu haina mwisho itaendelea kukuwa tu kubwa daima (no end)na itaendelea kuwa ndogo zaidi daima(no beginning) lakini hiyo hali imeshikiliwa na zero as a center ,zero defines nothing lakini hiyo zero ndo source ya both infinities both kwenye positivity na negativity.kwahiyo mahesabu yanaprove logically thinking limitation kuwa tutajua mbali zaidi kuhusu yajayo ila haiwezakani kujua mwisho ya yajayo zaidi ya kianzilishi chenyewe ambacho ni zero since ndo kimeanzisha, same applies upande wa pili tutafika mbali sana kuhusu wapi ulimwengu umeanza lakini hatutofika mwanzo maana hakuna mwanzo ,anaejua mwanzo pekee ni zero maana ndo mwanzilishi.kwa upeo wangu najua GOD EXISTS NA YUPO KWENYE EMPIRE YAKE NDANI YA ZERO,na zero ni nothing,but within nothing there is SOMETHING.
God wako ni zero?
 
Nimesema siwezi kuthibitisha kwa kutumia sayansi (unayoamini) kuwa Mungu yupo, except kusema kwamba kama Bing Bang ilitokea, basi ndiye aliyesabisha itokee - maana ndiye chanzo cha kila kitu: living and non-living. Sayansi inahitaji ufanye experiment na Mungu hahitaji hiyo experiment. Ufanye au usifanye experiment - Mungu yupo. Experiment ifanikiwe au isifanikiwe, Mungu yupo. Hivyo, kuthibitisha kitu siyo msingi wa uwepo wa Mungu.
Huwezi kuthibitisha Mungu yupo.

Kwa sababu hayupo.

Ndiyo maana unakimbilia kuwa mwanamazingaombwe ya kulazimisha mambo.
 
God wako ni zero?
You really have a shallow scope did you even got the semantic on what I was trying to relate,GOD EXISTS BUT CAN BE PROVEN BY OUTPUTS NOT OWN INPUTS BECAUSE YOU ARE CREATED WITHIN THEE BOUNDARIES AND HAVE INABILITY TO SEEK WHAT YOU WANT.
 
A logical epistemology forbids the existence of an all knowing, all capable and all loving Godhead.

That Godhead, is contradicted by "the problem of evil".

A logical epistemology does not accommodate contradictions.

Do you follow?

That is why am not confined within the theories of some scientist because i believe they do not tower above all mankind or blindly following some religious sect.

Some can be intimidated by the existence of a superior being some by ancient theories that are way past their prime.

Einstein himself had some issues with some new guys who came and challenged his work in relativity(he thought he was all knowing). It is normal and i get it.
 
Ngoja nikusaidie kusoma wewe guluguja ngumbaru usiye na ubongo wala uti wa mgongo.

Nimeandika hivi

"Kama ni kweli kichaa kinanitesa, huo nao ni ushahidi mwingine Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote hayupo.

Angekuwepo, asingeumba ulimwengu ambao kichaa kinaweza kumtesa kiumbe wake mpendwa. "

Hakuna nilipoandika kwamba mimi ni kiumbe mpendwa wa Mungu.

Nitaandikaje hivyo wakati sikubali uwepo wa huyo Mungu?

Unaelewa hypothetical question wewe?

Unaelewa immanent critique?

Unajua kusoma kwa ufahamu?
Hoja yako ni kwamba Mungu angekuwepo asingeumba ulimwengu ambao kichaa kinaweza kumtesa kiumbe wake mpendwa,umetoa maelezo hayo baada ya kuitwa kichaa,kwa hivyo Mungu hayupo ndio maana wewe kichaa unateseka hivyo angekuwepo basi wewe ungekuwa kiumbe chake mpendwa na hivyo usingekuwa kichaa na kuteseka.

Ndiyo nikakuuliza hata kufikirika tu kwamba wewe nae umejiweka kwenye kiumbe mpendwa wa Mungu?
 
Akiwepo utamjuaje wewe kama wewe kama sasa hayupo???
Hoja ya kuwepo kwake haitakuwa na logical inconsistencies na contradictions.

Ukikataa logical consistency, umekubali chaos.

Yani hata hiyo Mungu kuwepo, ili kuweza kutetea hoja hiyo, utatumia logical consistency.

Unaelewa hilo?
 
Hoja yako ni kwamba Mungu angekuwepo asingeumba ulimwengu ambao kichaa kinaweza kumtesa kiumbe wake mpendwa,umetoa maelezo hayo baada ya kuitwa kichaa,kwa hivyo Mungu hayupo ndio maana wewe kichaa unateseka hivyo angekuwepo basi wewe ungekuwa kiumbe chake mpendwa na hivyo usingekuwa kichaa na kuteseka.

Ndiyo nikakuuliza hata kufikirika tu kwamba wewe nae umejiweka kwenye kiumbe mpendwa wa Mungu?
Siyo mimi nimejiweka.

Kwa dhana ya Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, viumbe wake wote ni viumbe wapendwa.

Akiwepo kiumbe mmoja tu ambaye si mpendwa, hata shetani, basi huyo Mungu hana upendo wote.
 
[emoji3][emoji3][emoji3][emoji3] This is cruel
Cruelty kajifanyia mwenyewe kumuweka Mungu wake katika zero.

Na kama Mungu wake ni zero, anaweza kuwa anasema kitu kile kile ninachosema, kwa lugha tofauti tu.

Mimi nasema Mungu hayupo, yeye anasema Mungu ni zero.
 
GOD almighty is beyond logical consistency ,therefore he can't be proven through logical consistency rather than just own effects within our own boundaries not own Gods boundaries.utafata taratibu zake na kuprove laws zake kwa mapenzi yake bali si yeye.anajidhihirisha kwa matokeo sio yeye binafsi IF YOU WANT PROOF FOLLOW GODS RULES THATS ALL UTAPROVE YUPO.
Hoja ya kuwepo kwake haitakuwa na logical inconsistencies na contradictions.

Ukikataa logical consistency, umekubali chaos.

Yani hata hiyo Mungu kuwepo, ili kuweza kutetea hoja hiyo, utatumia logical consistency.

Unaelewa hilo?
 
Hujathibitisha Mungu, mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote yupo, acha longolongo.

Thibitisha Mungu yupo.
Wewe hapo ukiambiwa ueleze tu ni vp Mungu huyo hayupo,unaanza kuingiza habari za ulimwengu sijui Mungu huyo kuumba ulimwengu huu ni contradiction..halafu cha kuchekesha unahitimisha Mungu hayupo yani simple kiasi hicho.
 
Zero means IPO lakini haionekani
Cruelty kajifanyia mwenyewe kumuweka Mungu wake katika zero.

Na kama Mungu wake ni zero, anaweza kuwa anasema kitu kile kile ninachosema, kwa lugha tofauti tu.

Mimi nasema Mungu hayupo, yeye anasema Mungu ni zero.
 
Back
Top Bottom