Uwepo wa Mungu unadhihirika kwa alama zake na viumbe vyake

Uwepo wa Mungu unadhihirika kwa alama zake na viumbe vyake

Saad30 said:
binafsi naamini MUNGU wangu mimi kaka mimi na hizo dini sjui Islamic au Christian sijui nini nishatoka huko sababu MUNGU wa hizo dini anaubaguzi kabisa.

Lakini MUNGU wangu mimi hana ubaguzi.

staki kukujibu maswali ya kuumiza kichwa saana...sababu bado najifuza hasa pia kupitia nondo zako.

Vipi kwanza ushalipa KODI ya nyumba mkuu?
Click to expand...
Mungu wako umemuumba au umempataje. hebu tujuze kuhusu huyo mungu wako
 
Suhendra said:
Kuna jambo limenisukuma sana kuandika huu Uzi.

Mambo ambayo yanaendelea kuhusu uwepo wa Mungu.

Kuna baadhi ya watu wa amini hakuna mungu nk.

Ni ingie kwenye point.

Uwepo wa mungu una dhihirika kwa alama zake na viumbe vyake.

Hebu tutafakari kama hakuna mungu nani alieumba bahari, jua, mbingu, binadamu, wanyama hivi vitu vimetokea vipi kama hakuna alieviimba.

Leo hii hata ukimchukuwa mtoto mdogo wa miaka mitatu ukamuuliza nani kaumba mbingu atakujibu mungu.

Vipi mtu mzima mwenye akili timamu unashindwa kutambua hilo.

Yapo mambo mengi sana yana thibitisha uwepo wa mungu naweza kesha kuelezea kiufupi, Tufahamu mungu yupo na yeye ndo ametuumba sisi ili tumuabudu yeye tu.
Click to expand...
Hao wanakataa uwepo wa Mungu wakupe maelezo namna ulimwengu ulivyoumbwa
 
Blender said:
Tupe uzibitisho Kwamba hivi vitu vimeumbwa na mungu,
Mbona haendelei na huumbaji?
Click to expand...
Uthibitisho ni huu.Duniani kuna viumbe chungu mzima na kila kiumbe kuanzia virus mpaka papa kila kimoja kina DNA yake ya kipekee.
 
Kiranga said:
Yeah.

Ukisema complexity si lazima iwe imeumbwa by design, unasema Mungu si lazima awepo. Hii habari ya "Mungu ni lazima awepo kwa sababu yeye ndiye muumba wa kwanza" inatoweka.

Ukisema kwamba, complexity ni lazima iwe imeumbwa by design, kimsingi unasema Mungu hayupo, kwa sababu Mungu naye ni complexity, na ikiwa complexity inahitaji muumbaji, Mungu naye atahitaji muumba, na muumba wake atahitaji muumba, bila mwisho.

Either way, Mungu halazimiki kuwepo au hayupo kabisa.

Sijui watu wangapi wanaelewa hizi hoja.
Click to expand...
Complexity haiwezi kutokea by chance. Complexity inaamaanisha kuna creator who is a master planner
 
Infropreneur said:
Just imagine, Watoto wasio na hatia yeyote ile wala ufahamu wowote ule wanakufa kwa vita na majanga ya asili mbalimbali yaliyopo duniani.

Halafu una ambiwa, Mungu ni mwema sana mwenye huruma na upendo na huokoa watu kwenye shida na vita.

Maelfu ya watoto wamekufa huko Gaza lakini Mungu anaye daiwa ni mwema, mwenye huruma na upendo AMESHINDWA KUWA OKOA watoto hawa...

Yani kama huyo Mungu yupo ni mkatili sana na Muuaji mkubwa sana.

Murderer God. View attachment 2835493
Click to expand...
Kwa huvyo kwa vile swala analiwa na Simba basi Mungu hayupo? Ndio hoja yajo hii ??
 
Infropreneur said:
Kwa hiyo sisi Atheists ndio tuna sababisha vita?

 Hivi wewe unafikiri sawasawa kweli ?

Vita vingi vimepiganwa na vinapiganwa kwa kigezo eti kueneza neno la Mungu?

Angalia magaidi ya Islamic state,
Al-Qeida, Al-shabaab, Boko Haram n.k yakipigana vita wanapayuka payuka Allah Akbar! Allah Akbar! Allah Akbar! Kwa kigezo kwamba wana mpigania Mungu (Allah) kupata thawabu....

Hivi huyo Mungu neno lake lina enezwa kwa vita?

Halafu ndio mnadai Mungu huyo ni mwema mwenye upendo na huruma?

Wanao ongoza kusababisha maafa ni watu wanao mwamini huyo Mungu.

Kibwetere wa Uganda alichoma waumini wake wakamwone huyo Mungu, Paul Makenzie yule mchungaji wa Kenya kaua maelfu ya watu msituni shakahola kwa kuwashindisha njaa waumini wapumbavu wafia dini wakamwone Yesu...!!!!

Hivi kwa mifano hiyo tu, kati ya sisi Atheists na nyie wafia dini na Mungu wenu huyo nani ana ongoza kusababisha maafa makubwa?

Leta uthibitisho wowote ule au takwimu zikionyesha kwamba tusio mwamini Mungu tumeleta maafa.

Skia wewe, Atheists ni watu peace sana, free thinkers na tuna uwezo mkubwa sana wa kufikiri.
Click to expand...
Atheists mkifa mnazikwaje? Mnaona vipi?
 
Kiranga said:
Mungu alilazimika kuumba ulimwengu ambao evil inawezekana?

Au hakulazimika, aliumba ulimwengu wenye kuweza kuwa na evil kwa kupemda tu?

Kama alilazimika, je, ni kweli ana uwezo wote?

Kama hakulazimika, je, ni kweli ana upendo wote?

Unaona contradiction hapa? Unaelewa kuwa Mungu mwenye uwezo wote, ujuzi wote na upendo wote kuwapo pamoja na ulimwengu unaoruhusu mabaya ni contradiction, that the two are mutually exclusive?
Click to expand...
Naomba kufahamishwa how the universe was created kwa mujibu wa atheists? Na wanyama na viumbe?
 
Bulamba said:
Complexity haiwezi kutokea by chance. Complexity inaamaanisha kuna creator who is a master planner
Click to expand...
Unajuaje hilo?

Unajuaje uchaguzi ni creator au chance tu?

Na kama complexity haiwezi kutokea by chance, lazima kuna creator, unaelewa hapo unaelezea ulimwengu ambao hauna Mungu muumba vyote?

Unaelewa kuwa ikiwa kuna Mungu, tayari ni complex by definition, na kama complexity haitokei tu, inahitaji muumbaji, huyo Mungu naye atahitaji muumbaji, na muumbaji wake atahitaji muumbaji wake, ad infinitum ad nauseam?
 
Bulamba said:
Naomba kufahamishwa how the universe was created kwa mujibu wa atheists? Na wanyama na viumbe?
Click to expand...
Atheism has nothing to do with defining hiw the universe was created.

Atgeism has everything to do with the notion tgat God does not exist.

I don't have to know how the universe was created to be an atheist.

I just need to know that God does not exist.
 
Kiranga said:
Atheism has nothing to do with defining hiw the universe was created.

Atgeism has everything to do with the notion tgat God does not exist.

I don't have to know how the universe was created to be an atheist.

I just need to know that God does not exist.
Click to expand...
You need to have an alternative explanation of the origin of life so that we can understand you.
Simplly being adamant that God does without giving reasons does not make sense.
 
Bulamba said:
You need to have an alternative explanation of the origin of life so that we can understand you.
Simplly being adamant that God does without giving reasons does not make sense.
Click to expand...

Your argument is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

I am telling you, in base 10 nath, the square root of 2 cannot be 10. It nust be smaller than 2. It cannot be 10, because 10 is larger than 2.

You are asking me what is tge square root if 2. I say I don't know. I only know tgat 10 is not the square root if 2.

I don't need to know the square root if 2 to know tgat 10 is not tge square root if 2.

But you are still insisting I must shiw you what is tge square root of 2.

But I never claimed to know the square root of 2, only that it is not 10.

Your objection is a logical fallacy, logical non sequitur.

I have given reasons why I say God does not exist.

I mentioned that the all knowing, all capable and all loving God can be proved to not exist, by proof by contradiction, using Epicurean Paradox and the problem of evil.

I have eliminated that as the origin of life.

I can say this is a wrong answer without knowing the right answer.

If I know the square root if 2 must be smaller than 2, I can know that 10 is not tge square root if 2 without knowing what is the square root of 2.

Why are you forcing me to know the right answer to be able to say another answer is the wrong answer?
 
Kiranga said:
Your argument is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

I am telling you, in base 10 nath, the square root of 2 cannot be 10. It nust be smaller than 2. It cannot be 10, because 10 is larger than 2.

You are asking me what is tge square root if 2. I say I don't know. I only know tgat 10 is not the square root if 2.

I don't need to know the square root if 2 to know tgat 10 is not tge square root if 2.

But you are still insisting I must shiw you what is tge square root of 2.

But I never claimed to know the square root of 2, only that it is not 10.

Your objection is a logical fallacy, logical non sequitur.

I have given reasons why I say God does not exist.

I mentioned that the all knowing, all capable and all loving God can be proved to not exist, by proof by contradiction, using Epicurean Paradox and the problem of evil.

I have eliminated that as the origin of life.

I can say this is a wrong answer without knowing the right answer.

If I know the square root if 2 must be smaller than 2, I can know that 10 is not tge square root if 2 without knowing what is the square root of 2.

Why are you forcing me to know the right answer to be able to say another answer is the wrong answer?
Click to expand...
 
Kiranga said:
Your argument is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

I am telling you, in base 10 nath, the square root of 2 cannot be 10. It nust be smaller than 2. It cannot be 10, because 10 is larger than 2.

You are asking me what is tge square root if 2. I say I don't know. I only know tgat 10 is not the square root if 2.

I don't need to know the square root if 2 to know tgat 10 is not tge square root if 2.

But you are still insisting I must shiw you what is tge square root of 2.

But I never claimed to know the square root of 2, only that it is not 10.

Your objection is a logical fallacy, logical non sequitur.

I have given reasons why I say God does not exist.

I mentioned that the all knowing, all capable and all loving God can be proved to not exist, by proof by contradiction, using Epicurean Paradox and the problem of evil.

I have eliminated that as the origin of life.

I can say this is a wrong answer without knowing the right answer.

If I know the square root if 2 must be smaller than 2, I can know that 10 is not tge square root if 2 without knowing what is the square root of 2.

Why are you forcing me to know the right answer to be able to say another answer is the wrong answer?
Click to expand...
Putin.jpg
 
Kiranga said:
Your argument is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

I am telling you, in base 10 nath, the square root of 2 cannot be 10. It nust be smaller than 2. It cannot be 10, because 10 is larger than 2.

You are asking me what is tge square root if 2. I say I don't know. I only know tgat 10 is not the square root if 2.

I don't need to know the square root if 2 to know tgat 10 is not tge square root if 2.

But you are still insisting I must shiw you what is tge square root of 2.

But I never claimed to know the square root of 2, only that it is not 10.

Your objection is a logical fallacy, logical non sequitur.

I have given reasons why I say God does not exist.

I mentioned that the all knowing, all capable and all loving God can be proved to not exist, by proof by contradiction, using Epicurean Paradox and the problem of evil.

I have eliminated that as the origin of life.

I can say this is a wrong answer without knowing the right answer.

If I know the square root if 2 must be smaller than 2, I can know that 10 is not tge square root if 2 without knowing what is the square root of 2.

Why are you forcing me to know the right answer to be able to say another answer is the wrong answer?
Click to expand...
blah blah nyingi ila hamna chochote ulichoandiaka hahaha.

mwacheni Mungu aitwe MUNGU
 
Bulamba said:
blah blah nyingi ila hamna chochote ulichoandiaka hahaha.

mwacheni Mungu aitwe MUNGU
Click to expand...
This logical fallacy is called ad hominem attack.

This happens when the attacker cannot reply with an answer, a critique or a rebuttal on the points raised, instead, a personal attack is used.

Nimekwambia Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote hayupo.

Nimekwambia kwa nini hayupo. Logical consistency, problem of evil, Epicurean paradox.

Proof by contradiction kwamba huyo Mungu hayupo ipo.

Nimekupa mfano wa hesabu rahisi.

Hata hujaelewa naongelea nini (ndiyo maana huwezi kujibu kwa point), unakimbilia kunishambulia kwa personal attack badala ya kujibu hoja.

Discuss the problem of evil. Discuss the Epicurean paradox.

Acha kuni discuss mimi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Community

Regional Communities

Back
Top Bottom
Menu
Forums
New posts
Log in
Register