And They called His Name Sananda

[Kiby]

another silly stunt beating around the bush.

.
Huh, is it?
.

 

[Kiby]

Sijasoma hiyo fiction lakini kwa jinsi mada inavyopelekwa ni kwa namna ya Kiranga and co theory. Hivyo kwa upande wa Muumba kama wanenavyo manabii zake kwa yale machache yaliyonukuliwa ni kwamba Mungu muumba sii tatizo.

Tatizo ni kile kilichoumbwa kwa maana kuwa kila kiumbe amekiumba kwa kusudi lile kinacho-serve ila kinapodai haki ya kusudi lisichoumbiwa.

Shetani angekubali kuwa yeye ni shetani na makazi yake ya milele ni jehanamu tusingekuwa na matatizo tulio nayo sasa. Hujitahidi sana kuthibitisha ukinyume wa kile alicho na kujaribu kulikana kusudi la kuwepo kwake.

 

[Kiranga]

Sijasoma hiyo fiction lakini kwa jinsi mada inavyopelekwa ni kwa namna ya Kiranga and co theory. Hivyo kwa upande wa Muumba kama wanenavyo manabii zake kwa yale machache yaliyonukuliwa ni kwamba Mungu muumba sii tatizo.

Tatizo ni kile kilichoumbwa kwa maana kuwa kila kiumbe amekiumba kwa kusudi lile kinacho-serve ila kinapodai haki ya kusudi lisichoumbiwa.

Shetani angekubali kuwa yeye ni shetani na makazi yake ya milele ni jehanamu tusingekuwa na matatizo tulio nayo sasa. Hujitahidi sana kuthibitisha ukinyume wa kile alicho na kujaribu kulikana kusudi la kuwepo kwake.

Kwa nini mungu muumba, mwenye upendo usio kikomo na uwezo usioisha (whatever that means), hata wa kuumba ulimwengu ambao matatizo hayawezekaniki (Judeo-Christian tradition's godhead at least) si tatizo wakati kaumba ulimwengu ambao matatizo yanawezekanika?

Wengine watasema mungu muumba si tatizo tu, bali ni baba wa matatizo yote.

After all, mungu si muumba wa yote?

The more you look at this deeply, the more the personal godhead idea seems ridiculous.

 

[mwananthropolojia]

Kwa nini mungu muumba, mwenye upendo usio kikomo na uwezo usioisha (whatever that means), hata wa kuumba ulimwengu ambao matatizo hayawezekaniki (Judeo-Christian tradition's godhead at least) si tatizo wakati kaumba ulimwengu ambao matatizo yanawezekanika?

Wengine watasema mungu muumba si tatizo tu, bali ni baba wa matatizo yote.

After all, mungu si muumba wa yote?

The more you look at this deeply, the more the personal godhead idea seems ridiculous.

hapo kweny e nyekundu hapo nahisi kuna ukweli fulani nilisoma article moja inayoitwa 'we are the other people' ambao wenyewe wanasisitiza kuna uumbaji zaidi ya moja ulitokea ukisoma genesis kwenye uumbaji kuna stori 2 za uumbaji tofauti, stori ya 1 inaonyesha binadamu aliumbwa baada ya kila kitu (hii stori inaanzia gen 1 na stori ya 2 inaanzia gen 2;inaonyesha binadamu aliumbwa kwanza kabla ya viumbe wengine ambao waliumbwa kuja kuwa msaidiz wa binadamu,pia majukumu waliyopewa hawa wa 1 ni tofauti na aliyeanguka kwenye dhambi wa stori ya pili'original sin' ,hawa wengine hawakuanguka kwenye dhambi(the other people)

 

[Kiranga]

hapo kweny e nyekundu hapo nahisi kuna ukweli fulani nilisoma article moja inayoitwa 'we are the other people' ambao wenyewe wanasisitiza kuna uumbaji zaidi ya moja ulitokea ukisoma genesis kwenye uumbaji kuna stori 2 za uumbaji tofauti, stori ya 1 inaonyesha binadamu aliumbwa baada ya kila kitu (hii stori inaanzia gen 1 na stori ya 2 inaanzia gen 2;inaonyesha binadamu aliumbwa kwanza kabla ya viumbe wengine ambao waliumbwa kuja kuwa msaidiz wa binadamu,pia majukumu waliyopewa hawa wa 1 ni tofauti na aliyeanguka kwenye dhambi wa stori ya pili'original sin' ,hawa wengine hawakuanguka kwenye dhambi(the other people)

Kwa nini mtu yeyote mwenye ku reason deeply aamini kwamba account ya genesis inafaa kuaminiwa, na si mythologies tu za Wayahudi?

Naomba utumie uanaanthropolojia.

Watu wa Cape Verde wanaamini kwamba baada ya mungu kuumba dunia nzima, alinawa maji baharini, vikaanguka vipande fulani baharini na kufanya visiwa vyao, hivyo visiwa vyao vimeumbwa kwa njia tofauti na dunia nzima (by the way some african peoples of the Indian Ocean Islands have the same myth, making the story non unique).

Sasa kwa nini niwaamini Wayahudi na nisiwaamini wa Cape Verde?

Au kwa nini niamini dunia iliumbwa na mungu at all?

Au kwa nini niamini kuna mungu at all?

Na nikisema sitaki kuamini, nataka kujua, naweza kujua kama kuna mungu?

 

[mwananthropolojia]

Kwa nini mtu yeyote mwenye ku reason deeply aamini kwamba account ya genesis inafaa kuaminiwa, na si mythologies tu za Wayahudi?

Naomba utumie uanaanthropolojia.

Watu wa Cape Verde wanaamini kwamba baada ya mungu kuumba dunia nzima, alinawa maji baharini, vikaanguka vipande fulani baharini na kufanya visiwa vyao, hivyo visiwa vyao vimeumbwa kwa njia tofauti na dunia nzima (by the way some african peoples of the Indian Ocean Islands have the same myth, making the story non unique).

Sasa kwa nini niwaamini Wayahudi na nisiwaamini wa Cape Verde?

Au kwa nini niamini dunia iliumbwa na mungu at all?

Au kwa nini niamini kuna mungu at all?

Na nikisema sitaki kuamini, nataka kujua, naweza kujua kama kuna mungu?

nimetumia mfano wa mythologies za wayahudi kwenye genesis kwa sababu ina relate na swali lako kwa nini mungu ameumba dunia yenye matatizo, cause kuna two creations kama ukiisoma vizur genesis utaiona na kwenye hizo creations moja haikua complete nyingine ilikua complete,ningeweza kutoa mythologies za sumeria za enki na enlil lakin watu wengi watakua gizan na kitu nachokiongea kwani wengi hawatumii holistic approach katika kuangalia hivi vitu wanakua biased with religion and culture


na unaweza kuamini mungu yeyote kwan katika anthropolojia tunaamin myth ni hadithi za kwel ambazo zimeathiriwa kutokana na upokeaji wake kutoka jamii moja kwenda nyingine kwa njia ya mdomo, kila mtu aliyemsimulia kizaz chake kinachofuata aidha kuna vipande alisahau au ameongeza kutokana na mazingira ya wakati huo au upungufu wa maneno kumbuka lugha ni kitu kichanga binadamu hakuanza tu kuongea alijifunza lugha kutokana na mazingira aliyokutana nayo na kazi yetu anthropologist ni kudecipher the real message ndio mana hadithi za uumbaji na matukio mengi ya zamani zinataka kufananafanana kidogo ila kila sehemu zinapinda mahali kutokana na kuathiriwa na lugha,fanan,hadhira,mazingira na wakati aliopewa mtu kama ni mwaka 1800 au 1900 mfano hadithi ya mkwawa aliyepewa mtu wa miaka ya 1890 au 1900 haifanan na ambayo tunapewa sasa kuna information nyingi hazipo na zingine zimetiwa chumvi ila ni kazi yetu kudig the truth

suala la mungu kuumba dunia is just a human reasoning katika kuelewa chanzo chake ni nini?kwani ukiangalia kila kitu ambacho tunakiona tunajua kina mwanzo,kuanzia wewe ulipozaliwa unajua baba yako na mama yako walifanya tendo la ndoa na kukupata wewe,hivyohivyuo babako nae alipatikana kwa bibi yako na babu yako na kuendelea, lakini mwisho wa siku utajiuliza nan alikua basi chanzo cha wote ?je ni cycle isiyoisha?imeanzia wapi?ndipo watu walipoanza kuangalia wanyama na wadudu suala ni hilohilo,ukiangalia miti na maua suala ni hilohilo lazima seeds zianzie sehemu,na lazima kuna sehemu hizo seeds zitakua na mazingira muafaka ili kuweza kukua,kama kupata maji,jua,udongo mzuri ili kuweza kujiumba,swali litarudi palepale nini kilianza basi?hapo ndipo kila mtu anapogawanyika kutokana na experience aliyonayo,wacape verde watasema yao,wayahudi watasema yao and you are also welcome to give your opinion on the matter whether scientific or mythological because it is the law of nature to have a cause and effect and human reasoning is based on cause and effect,na ww pia upo subjected to the law as you are looking for the cause and effect.

kumjua mungu ni lazima utoke kwenye cycle ya cause and effect(think out of the box) or else kujaribu kuprove kwa cause and effect is like subjecting God to birth,growth and death as everythingi in that cycle goes through that scenario and if its true naye yupo subject na cause and effect basi kuna uwezekano ameshakufa kitambo au ndio dunia or the living world we are inside, living inside him

 

[Kiranga]

mwananthropolojia

Ukifuatilia quantum physics uta question validity ya "cause and effect".

Ukiamini kwamba kuna mungu muumba vyote kwa sababu kila kitu kina mwanzo, utakuwa unajidanganya kwa kutumia a fallacious self defeating argument.

Argument yako itasema ni lazima kuwe na mungu muumba wa vyote, kwa sababu kila kitu kina mwanzo.

Ukitumia argument hiyo hiyo ya "kila kitu kina mwanzo" basi mungu hawezi kuwa muumba yote kwa sababu hata na yeye atakuwa ana mwanzo.

Na ukisema yeye hana mwanzo utakuwa kimsingi umekubali kwamba si kweli kwamba kila kitu kina mwanzo, unaacha mlango wazi kwa vingine kutokuwa na mwanzo.

Maswali mengine kama hatujui majibu ni vizuri tu kusema hatujui, tukachunguza zaidi, kuliko kusema mythologies ni ukweli halafu wakati huo huo tunaji contradict kwa kusema hadithi za mythologies zinabadilishwa na kila generation, na kila utamaduni una hadithi zake za uumbaji, ina maana hii dunia imeumbwa mara ngapi?

Unfortunately what makes for a nice and politically correct anthropology hardly makes sense as truth, because the truth, at least as far as we know, cannot accommodate certain contradictions we see in the wide varying mythologies.

I understand the need for some social studies to make everything hunky dory for everyone, but that to me is akin to pacifying discordant children than answering serious adult questions.

You are basically saying the truth is whatever your mythology is, because every mythology is true, even if someone comes with an inherently self contradicting mythology telling us that a triangle has four angles.

How do you reconcile these obviously incongruous falsities into respectable truths beats me.

Halafu usipende ku condescend watu kwamba "ningeweza kutoa mythologies za sumeria za enki na enlil lakin watu wengi watakua gizan..." wakati watu washaenda mpaka Dharamsala hapa wakaona dark matter kwenye quinine, wewe unafikiri watashangaa old mythologies walizosoma zamani.

 

[Gaijin]

Did life emerge by chance or necessity?

 

[Kiranga]

Did life emerge by chance or necessity?

I take it by necessity you mean that there was no other option but for life to emerge? What exactly do you mean by "necessity"? Whose necessity? Necessity points to an end, as in "this is necessary for that", then necessity for what?

Do you mean to ask if life emerged as a chance event or an unavoidable event given the laws of physics/ conditions?

By which frame of reference are you posing the question? What is your cosmogony? Which other cosmogonies are you entertaining, if any?

 

[Gaijin]

I take it by necessity you mean that there was no other option but for life to emerge? What exactly do you mean by "necessity"? Whose necessity? Necessity points to an end, as in "this is necessary for that", then necessity for what?

Do you mean to ask if life emerged as a chance event or an unavoidable event given the laws of physics/ conditions?

By which frame of reference are you posing the question? What is your cosmogony? Which other cosmogonies are you entertaining, if any?

Since the universe is equipped with everything necessary to support and nurture life, was it unavoidable/necessary to make life to meet the conditions?

Or even though the conditions to make life were there, it was just chance that life was formed?

Is it possible to know the mechanism behind life in the universe while living in it?

 

[Kiranga]

Since the universe is equipped with everything necessary to support and nurture life, was it unavoidable/necessary to make life to meet the conditions?

I can't claim to have definitive answers on these matters, show me anyone who claims so and I will show you a liar, I don't expect the experts to know, much less this humble student of life.

Nevertheless I am not one to be shy to share what I came across and consider worthy of discussion at the very least.

There is a school of thought that posits it that, given enough time and space, the multiverse (not to be confused with the universe, which is a mere subset of the former) makes anything conceivable consequential, and an infinity of infinities of the humanly inconceivable possible. Books such as the Sakurai winner's Leonard Susskind's "The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory And The Illusion of Intelligent Design" or David Deutsch's "The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform The World" or alternatively "The Fabric of Reality" delve into this mind boggling concept deeper. In short the claim is, our Universe is just one among many, and there are an infinite number of universes with no life out there, while there is an equally number of infinite universes supporting an infinity of infinite types of life, not only carbon based, but including for example, one in which everything is the same as ours, but life is silicon based and you are the first president of Malawi, called Joyce Banda, getting ready to obliterate Tanzania out of the map. I plead with theee just in chance that that universe will somehow miraculously develop a technology to communicate with this one, and Joyce Banda will be the first one to read our internet, and this post will humanize her heart so much that she will not choose to obliterate Tanzania.

This has happenned in some universe, and will happen in another except in the other case Joyce Banda will be wearing a blue dress instead of the white she was wearing originally, and she is not you, she is your cousin sister you love to hate!

So you will see, according to this school of thought, when you talk about "the universe" the question will be asked to you, which universe? If you answer this one, the answer is yes, because, the answer is "anything is possible anywhere, given enough time and space".

Or even though the conditions to make life were there, it was just chance that life was formed?

What is chance but the fruition of space and time? Play the lotto enough time and you will win, with the winning number 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

nevertheless

Is it possible to know the mechanism behind life in the universe while living in it?

Let alone the mechanism behind life in the universe.

It is impossible to know anything for sure, because the process of verification interferes with the knowledge itself, you will just have to choose what level of margin of error is reasonable and acceptable.

By the way, it is also impossible to know for sure that it is impossible to know for sure, for the same reason.

 

[Pascal Mayalla]

Kumjua mungu ni lazima utoke kwenye cycle ya cause and effect(think out of the box) or else kujaribu kuprove kwa cause and effect is like subjecting God to birth,growth and death as everythingi in that cycle goes through that scenario and if its true naye yupo subject na cause and effect basi kuna uwezekano ameshakufa kitambo au ndio dunia or the living world we are inside, living inside him

Mungu wa kweli is "The Living God" hawezi kufa, na ni "Alfa na Omega", hana mwanzo, hana mwisho, we are noli living inside him, He is living inside us!, He is in US, He is US! yaani "I".

Jina la Mungu is just a concept ya kuwawezesha wanadamu ku open up gates za kuruhusu "powers of will" "I" powers to be released!. Mungu wa kweli ni ile "I" ndani ya kila mtu!, yaani "the Supreme Being!".

Enzi nina access na jukwaa la dini, niliwahi kuweka theory yangu kule, ingawa ilishambuliwa lakini bado inasimama na inasema hivi.

Mungu yupo, na Mungu ana nguvu, na ni yupo popote!, "omnipresence". Shetani pia yupo, ana nguvu na yupo popote!.
Simulizi zinaeleza hapo mwanzo shetani alikuwa na Mungu, na alipoasi ndipo akageuka shetani. Simulizi hizo hazikueleza kama Mungu ndiye aliyemuumba shetani, hivyo nika reach conclusion kuwa mwanzo wa Mungu ndio mwanzo wa Shetani!, Mungu ana uwezo ambao hata shetani anao!, hivyo japo Mungu anaweza uwezo zaidi ya shetani lakini hana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani! kwa sababu alikotoka Mungu, ndiko alikotoka shetani, Mungu alikozipatia nguvu za Kimungu, ndiko huko huko shetani alikozipatia nguvu za kishetani!.

Baada ya uasi wa shetani, Mungu na timu yake, wakasemezana na "tuumbe kiumbe kitakacho tutii" wakamuumba binadamu!. Shetani akasema nitakijaribu ili kuupima utii wake, na japo Mungu aliweka malaika wenye upanga wa moto kulinda lango la bustani ya Aden ili shetani asiingie, shetani alipenya na kumdanganya mwanadamu hivyo kutomtii Mungu!. Kama Mungu alikuwa na uwezo wa kumdhibiti shetani, angemzuia!.

Baada ya auasi, Mungu akauliza "nimtume nani aende kuuokoa ulimwengu?", "Yesu akasema, unitume mimi!", huyu Yesu tunaelezewa, yeye ni "Neno", alikuwepo tangu mwanzo, naye ni Mungu!, haikuelezwa popote kama Yesu aliumbwa na Mungu, bali tunaelezwa yeye ni nafsi ya Mungu, yeye ni Mungu Mwana, aliyekuja duniani kwa uwezo wa Roho Mtakatifu akawa mwanadamu!. "Kwa maana hiyo, jinsi Mungu aliupenda ulimwengu, hata akamtoa mwanae mpendwa wake ili kila amwaminiye, asipotee bali awe na uzima wa milele".

Akiwa duniani pia alijaribiwa na Shetani (yaani anamjaribu Mungu), na madhila yote yaliyomkuta, kupigwa, kuteswa hadi kifo msalabani ni kazi ya shetani, ili "kwa kupigwa kwake", sisi tuliponywa!". Lakini hata baada ya kifo na ufufuko, bado hakuna uzima wa mimile na shetani anaendelea na kazi zake hapa duniani kawa kawa!. Kama Mungu ana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani, kwanini asingemuangamiza jumla hata akamtoa mwanae asulubiwe?!.

Na hata baada ya ujio wa Masiya, jee ulimwengu umeokolewa?!. Bado!, ni kwa nini?!, ni kwa sababu shetani yupo na ana nguvu kama za Mungu, japo Mungu ananguvu zaidi ya shetani, lakini hana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani jumla!. Wale wote ambao huwa mnawaona kwenye TV wakitolewa mapepo, amini usiamini, pale huwa yanatulizwa tuu na wakishaondoka, huwarudia kwa sababu shetani pia ana nguvu!.

Conclusion.

Mungu na shetani its a concept, the true powers lies on you "I" power ambapo ikitumika vizuri, inafanya mambo mema, (ya Mungu). ikitumika vibaya, inafanya mambo mabaya ya (shetani), hata wale wanaofanya miujiza kwa jina la Bwana, Yesu, Mungu, wanafanya yote hayo kwa "I" Powers from within, hivyo hata bila kutumia majina hayo, they can still perform!, ila miujiza yote sio kazi ya Mungu, mingine ni kazi ya shetani posing as God just to make you belive, hivyo kuna mamia kwa maelfu wanaoamini Mungu wakijua kuwa wanaamini Mungu kumbe sii Mungu bali ni Shetani!.
Imani ya kweli ni belive in "I", Mungu wa kweli yuko ndani yako!, then its you!, "I" ila pia na shetani wa kweli pia yuko within!.
Heri ya Mwaka Mpya.
Pasco.

 

[Kiranga]

Mungu wa kweli is "The Living God" hawezi kufa, na ni "Alfa na Omega", hana mwanzo, hana mwisho, we are noli living inside him, He is living inside us!, He is in US, He is US! yaani "I".

Jina la Mungu is just a concerpt ya kuwawezesha wanadamu ku open up gates za kuruhusu "powers of will" "I" powers to be released!. Mungu wa kweli ni ile "I" ndani ya kila mtu!, yaani "the Supreme Being!".

Enzi nina access na jukwaa la dini, niliwahi kuweka theory yangu kule, ingawa ilishambuliwa lakini bado inasimama na inasema hivi.

Mungu yupo, na Mungu ana nguvu, na ni yupo popote!, "omnipresence". Shetani pia yupo, ana nguvu na yupo popote!.
Simulizi zinaeleza hapo mwanzo shetani alikuwa na Mungu, na alipoasi ndipo agageuka shetani. Simulizi hizo hazikueleza kama Mungu ndiye aliyemuumba shetani, hivyo nika reach conclusion kuwa mwanza wa Mungu ndio mwanzo wa Shetani, Mungu ana uwezo amvao pia shetani anao, hivyo Mungu anaweza kuwa na uwezo zaidi ya shetani lakini hana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani kwa sababu alikotoka Mungu, ndiko alikotoka shetani.

Baada ya uasi wa shetani, Mungu na timu yake, wakasemezana na "tuumbe kiumbe kitakacho tutii" wakamuumba binadamu!. Shetani akasema nitakijaribu ili kuupima utii wake, na japo Mungu aliweka malaika wenye upanga wa moto kulinda lango la bustani ya Aden ili shetani asiingie, shetani alipenya na kumdanganya mwanadamu hivyo kutomtii Mungu!. Kama Mungu alikuwa na uwezo wa kumdhibiti shetani, angemzuia!.

Baada ya auasi, Mungu akauliza "nimtume nani aende kuokoa ulimwengu?", "Yesu akasema, unitume mimi!", huyu Yesu tunaelezewa, yeye ni Neno, alikuwepo tangu mwanzo", haikuelezwa popote kama Yesu aliumbwa na Mungu, bali tunaelezwa yeye ni nafsi ya Mungu, yeye ni Mungu Mwana, aliyekuja duniani kwa uwezo wa Roho Mtakatifu akawa mwanadamu!. "Kwa maana hiyo, jinsi Mungu aliupenda ulimwengu, hata akamtoa mwanae mpendwa wake ili kila amwaniniye, asipotee bali awe na uzima wa milele".

Akiwa duniani pia alijaribiwa na Shetani (yaani anamjaribu Mungu), na madhila yote yaliyomkuta, kupigwa, kuteswa hadi kifo msalabani ni kazi ya shetani, ili "kwa kupigwa kwake", sisi tuliponywa!". Lakini hata baada ya kifo na ufufuko, bado hakuna uzima wa mimile na shetani anaendelea na kazi zake hapa duniani kawa kawa!. Kama Mungu ana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani, kwanini asingemuangamiza jumla hata akamtoa mwanae asulubiwe?..

Na baada ya ujio wa Masiya, jee ulimwengu umeokolewa?!. Bdo, ni kwa nini?, ni kwa sababu shetani yupo na ananguvu kama za Mungu, na Mungu ananguvu zaidi ya shetani, lakini hana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani!. Wale wote ambao huwa mnawaona kwenye TV wakitolewa mapepo, amini usiamini, pale huwa yanatulizwa tuu na wakishaondoka, huwarudia kwa sababu shetani pia ana nguvu!.

Conclusion.

Mungu na shetani its a concerpt, the true powers lies on you "I" power ambapo ikitumika vizuri, inafanya mambo mema, (ya Mungu). ikitumika vibaya, inafanya mambo mabaya ya (shetani), hata wale wanaofanya miujiza kwa jina la Bwana, miujiza yote sio kazi ya Mungu, mingine ni kazi ya shetani posing as God just to make you belive, hivyo kuna mamia kwa maelfu wanaoamini Mungu wakijua kuwa wanaamini Mungu kumbe sii Mungu bali ni Shetani!.
Imani ya kweli ni belive in "I", Mungu wa kweli yuko ndani yako!, then its you!, "I"!.
Heri ya Mwaka Mpya.
Pasco.

Mungu wa kweli ni "The Living God" hawezi kufa au ni concept tu?

Mbona unajichanganya?

Unajua kama ni concept tu si lazima awepo kweli, maana hata mimi naweza kuwazua tu concept ya "pembetatu yenye pembe nne" lakini kwa sababu naweza kuwazua hiyo concept haimaanishi kwamba kuna hii "pembetatu yenye pembe nne" mahali.

Make up your mind, ni concept tu au yupo kweli na hawezi kufa?

You can't eat your cake and have it too.

 

[Pascal Mayalla]

Mungu wa kweli ni "The Living God" hawezi kufa au ni concept tu?

Mbona unajichanganya?

Unajua kama ni concept tu si lazima awepo kweli, maana hata mimi naweza kuwazua tu concept ya "pembetatu yenye pembe nne" lakini kwa sababu naweza kuwazua hiyo concept haimaanishi kwamba kuna hii "pembetatu yenye pembe nne" mahali.

Make up your mind, ni concept tu au yupo kweli na hawezi kufa?

You can't eat your cake and have it too.

Narudia tena, na ikibidi nitarudia na kurudia na kurudia mpaka kieleweke!

Mungu ni concept!, concept hiyo ndiyo ipo na lengo lake ni kurelease "I" powers!. Hizo I powers ambazo ndizo "alfa na Omega, ni living with no end!. Wewe unazo, mimi ninazo na kila mtu anazo ndizo Mungu!.
Heri ya Mwaka Mpya!
Pasco.

 

[Kiranga]

Narudia tena, na ikibidi nitarudia na kurudia na kurudia mpaka kieleweke!

Mungu ni concept!, concept hiyo ndiyo ipo na lengo lake ni kurelease "I" powers!. Hizo I powers ambazo ndizo "alfa na Omega, ni living with no end!. Wewe unazo, mimi ninazo na kila mtu anazo ndizo Mungu!.
Heri ya Mwaka Mpya!
Pasco.

Hujarudia, umesema kitu tofauti.

Hapo mwanzo umesema "Mungu ni concept tu" sasa umebadili unasema "mungu ni concept" big difference.

Which is which? Mungu ni concept au ni concept tu?

Unajua tofauti yake?

Mwaka mpya wangu bado mie.

 

[Gaijin]

I can't claim to have definitive answers on these matters, show me anyone who claims so and I will show you a liar, I don't expect the experts to know, much less this humble student of life.

Nevertheless I am not one to be shy to share what I came across and consider worthy of discussion at the very least.

There is a school of thought that posits it that, given enough time and space, the multiverse (not to be confused with the universe, which is a mere subset of the former) makes anything conceivable consequential, and an infinity of infinities of the humanly inconceivable possible. Books such as the Sakurai winner's Leonard Susskind's "The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory And The Illusion of Intelligent Design" or David Deutsch's "The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform The World" or alternatively "The Fabric of Reality" delve into this mind boggling concept deeper. In short the claim is, our Universe is just one among many, and there are an infinite number of universes with no life out there, while there is an equally number of infinite universes supporting an infinity of infinite types of life, not only carbon based, but including for example, one in which everything is the same as ours, but life is silicon based and you are the first president of Malawi, called Joyce Banda, getting ready to obliterate Tanzania out of the map. I plead with theee just in chance that that universe will somehow miraculously develop a technology to communicate with this one, and Joyce Banda will be the first one to read our internet, and this post will humanize her heart so much that she will not choose to obliterate Tanzania.

This has happenned in some universe, and will happen in another except in the other case Joyce Banda will be wearing a blue dress instead of the white she was wearing originally, and she is not you, she is your cousin sister you love to hate!

So you will see, according to this school of thought, when you talk about "the universe" the question will be asked to you, which universe? If you answer this one, the answer is yes, because, the answer is "anything is possible anywhere, given enough time and space".

First thing first, the other universe is lucky, its Joyce Banda is cute :rolleyez:

What is chance but the fruition of space and time? Play the lotto enough time and you will win, with the winning number 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

nevertheless

So basically what it is saying is life was "doomed" to happen due to chance

Which might also mean that those believing in the existence of angels and demons are not off the mark

Let alone the mechanism behind life in the universe.

It is impossible to know anything for sure, because the process of verification interferes with the knowledge itself, you will just have to choose what level of margin of error is reasonable and acceptable.

By the way, it is also impossible to know for sure that it is impossible to know for sure, for the same reason.

Is it possible for a fetus in its mother's womb to know by a reasonable and acceptable margin of error the source and mechanism of its life?

 

[Kiranga]

First thing first, the other universe is lucky, its Joyce Banda is cute :rolleyez:




So basically what it is saying is life was "doomed" to happen due to chance

Which might also mean that those believing in the existence of angels and demons are not off the mark




Is it possible for a fetus in its mother's womb to know by a reasonable and acceptable margin of error the source and mechanism of its life?

A cute Joyce Banda, looolest!

By this logic it is conceivable There is a universe with a "god" somewhere (not this one, he would probably have done a better job ), some mad scientist played with some black holes and invented one, he is just not omniscient/ omnipotent/ omnipresent.

It is possible for a fetus in it's mother's womb to know by a reasonable and acceptable margin of error the source and mechanism of it's life.

In a universe of negative time, where people are born in their graves and die in their mothers wombs.

 

[Gaijin]

........ni kwa sababu shetani yupo na ana nguvu kama za Mungu, japo Mungu ananguvu zaidi ya shetani, lakini hana uwezo wa kumuangamiza shetani jumla!.

Hueleweki unachotaka kusema; shetani ana nguvu kama Mungu au Mungu ana nguvu zaidi ya shetani?

 

[Pascal Mayalla]

Hueleweki unachotaka kusema; shetani ana nguvu kama Mungu au Mungu ana nguvu zaidi ya shetani?

Mkuu Gaijin, hata wewe?!, Sasa ni kipi hasa hicho usichoelewa?!.

Kwa kusaidia tuu

Mungu ana nguvu, na shetani ana nguvu!, japo Mungu ana nguvu zaidi ya shetani, lakini hawezi kumuangamiza shetani simply because the mwanzo wa Mungu ndio mwanzo ule ule wa shetani na the source of power ni ile ile source ya powers za Mungu!.

Tofauti katika ya nguvu za Mungu na shetani ni kidogo tuu, "uhai" ambapo ni nguvu za Mungu tuu ndizo zenye iwezo wa kuleta "uhai" na kuuondoa!. Ndio maana kila kifo kinaitwa ni kazi ya Mungu hata kama kimekuwa initiated na shetani, ajali, uchawi, ugoni, wizi, ujambazi, vita etc, punzi ya uhai inaondoka kwa kibali cha Mungu pekee!, vivyo hivyo kwa mwanzo wa maisha hata mimba ikitungwa kwa vitendo vya ushetani, ubakaji, ukahaba, uzinifu, uasherati, mwenze uwezo wa kutia uhai hicho kiumbe, ni Mungu tuu!.

Ukiondoa uhai, everything God can do, a devil can do!. Kuna watu wanasali makanisa ya wakovu, kutokana na nguvu za miujiza za viongozi wa makanisa hayo, watu wanawaamini wakijua ndio kumtumikia Mungu, kuna wanamtumikia shetani is disguise as God!.

Kama bado hujaelewa, kamwe hutakaa uelewe kwa sababu haya ni mambo ya imani!. Ukishaamini water ni colorless hata ukiambiwa it has color which has no name, hutaamini!, kwa sababu macho ya binadamu yana uwezo wa kuona colors only yana uwezo wa kuona colorless, upepo ndio colorless na ndio maana hauonekani, ila ukiyapa mazoezi maalumu, macho ya kawaida yanaweza kuona colorless hivyo kuona "spirits" na "auras" ikiwemo kuoona wanga na wachawi!.
Heri ya Mwaka Mpya!
Pasco

 

[Gaijin]

By this logic it is conceivable There is a universe with a "god" somewhere, some mad scientist played with some black holes and invented one, he is just not omniscient/ omnipotent/ omnipresent.

And the gods invented by the mad scientists play chess with human beings as their pawns :A S 39:

(not this one, he would probably have done a better job )

What's there to be perfected about this world?

It is possible for a fetus in it's mother's womb to know by a reasonable and acceptable margin of error the source and mechanism of it's life.

In a universe of negative time, where people are born on their graves and die in their mothers wombs.

I feel sorry for the mothers but probably they feel sorry for us too having to grow life inside of us :confused2:

Taking the concept to represent the multiverse, is it possible for a person living in this universe to know with reasonable margin of error the source and mechanism of life in the universe or should we then wait for "chance" to give us a person in a negative time universe who happened to see our universe created (or should it be creating itself?)