Copernicus reburied, Catholics Apologizes

[PlanckScale]

Dear Jamii, I want to invite you onto an intellectual discussion concerning a string of apologies that the catholic church has been making, with regards to its past mistakes.

Last week, the church reburied the great Copernicus and restore his rightful place with a symbolic "golden sun encircled by six of the planets" decorated on his new tomstone. Before that, in 1996, the church formally accepted the theory of evolution (with some reservation, of course). And before that, in 1992, the church also issued a public apology to Galileo, cleared him of any wrongdoing.

My interest here is to raise awareness of the possible implication on the church's theological standpoint in an increased "educated" society. What does it mean if a religious organization keeps accepting the ideas of the opposing view (in this case, of the scientific viewpoint). It seems to me that one of the strength and survivability of any religious organization lays on its ability to oppose any change towards modernity. Therefore, by making these apologies, the church is indeed losing its core value in the name of progress.

Sasa, wewe kama mtu wa mungu in general, or mkatoliki in particular, unanaona hii trend ya kuomba misamaha imekaa vizuri?



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to believe that JF is "open" enough to allow free discussion on supernatural and/or the lack of it. In a secular society, such discussions are healthy and help to build a generation of different mindsets, while inspiring others to think "outside the box"
Do not fear FEAR. Let those who fear it continuing fearing it and they will perish …"Country Man, the Movie"

 

[Nkamangi]

The leaders of the catholic church are humans, they are not heavenly beings.

 

[paradox]

An organized religion begins to accept the ideas of an opposing view in an effort to attract the younger generation, who would most likely find a religions teachings to be outdated.

Think of it this way, if the Catholic church was still following the rules and laws it was using in the 16th century then I don't think they would have many followers today, over the years the Church has accepted things it would have once considered sacrilegious as well as adding new rules in an effort to adapt to the rapid changes taking place in modern societies and to attract the more intellectually enlightened people to join their ranks.
I was very amused when the Vatican added seven more deadly sins for the age of globalization, seriously that was one of their more extreme changes. ( Of course the public apology to a man who is three centuries dead might be considered as a more extreme change)
I honestly don't see how adding polluting, genetic engineering, being obscenely rich, drug dealing, abortion, pedophilia and causing social injustice as deadly sins helps the society today.
Are the people who commit these 'sins' supposed to tremble in fear at the thought of eternal damnation??
But who can blame them, they gotta find some way to survive in this age of globalization I guess.

 

[Kiranga]

The church simply realizes that it's old lies cannot stand up to established scientific truth.

In Copernican's and Galileo's day, it was possible to argue whether the sun goes around the earth or the earth goes around the sun.Today this question is settled.

There are many more lies that are not that obvious today.If the catholic church is gonna survive another 500 years, it will still be apologizing for the lies it is telling us today.And one day it will apologize for the propagation of an even central idea, that of a personal godhead deity.

 

[Ruge Opinion]

An organized religion begins to accept the ideas of an opposing view in an effort to attract the younger generation, who would most likely find a religions teachings to be outdated.

Think of it this way, if the Catholic church was still following the rules and laws it was using in the 16th century then I don't think they would have many followers today, over the years the Church has accepted things it would have once considered sacrilegious as well as adding new rules in an effort to adapt to the rapid changes taking place in modern societies and to attract the more intellectually enlightened people to join their ranks.
I was very amused when the Vatican added seven more deadly sins for the age of globalization, seriously that was one of their more extreme changes. ( Of course the public apology to a man who is three centuries dead might be considered as a more extreme change)
I honestly don't see how adding polluting, genetic engineering, being obscenely rich, drug dealing, abortion, pedophilia and causing social injustice as deadly sins helps the society today.
Are the people who commit these 'sins' supposed to tremble in fear at the thought of eternal damnation??
But who can blame them, they gotta find some way to survive in this age of globalization I guess.

This proves that the Catholic Church unlike Islam is dynamic. It is ready to revisit its doctrines to fit the times. That is why it will probably survive. By adding those 7 sins to its list the Church is in rhythm with the modern world. The mighty US has been fighting drugs for more than 50 years without any sign of success. If anything the business has flourished. What is wrong with the Church lending a hand? In some geographical locations it might help.

 

[Kituko]

Kanisa la kweli lazima likubaliane na mabadiliko ya ukweli yenye evidence za ukweli na wala sio dhana, kimsingi mambo ambayo wakatoliki wanayasimamia na hawawezi kuyabadilisha ni yale yaliyopo ndani ya Bible, kimsingi hakuna andiko kwenye biblia ambalo lilikuwa linapingana na uelewa wa Galileo, lakini by that time kulikuwa na mapokeo na imani ambayo ilikuwa ni kinyume na mtazamo na uelewa wa Galileo, na kweli alipata shida kukubalika kwa hilo, lakini kama kanisa limekuja kuprove kama Galileo alikuwa yuko sahihi basi wana kila sababu ya kuomba msamaha,
kuna iisue nyingi ambazo ziko kwenye imani lakini hazina sababu ya maana kuzipinga, tuchukulie mfano wa mwanamke mjamzito, nadhani ilikuwa si rahisi kwa mama kujua atazaa mtoto wa aina gani na siku gani, na kiimani ilkuwa ni kama dhambi kubwa tu, lakini kwa sasa mwananmke kwa kutumia Utrasound ana uwezo wa kujua jinsia ya mtoto/watoto aqlionao tumboni na kama kuna watu walipinga mwanzo lakini hakuna mantiki ya kidini ya kupinga mtu kujua jinsia ya mtoto mtarajiwa

 

[Ruge Opinion]

Kituko, nadhani kwa mfano huo wa Ultrasound Kanisa linapinga matokeo na siyo kujua aina ya mtoto atakayezaliwa hasa. Kwa mfano Uchina ambapo familia hairuhusiwi kuzaa zaidi ya watoto wawili na upendeleo wa wengi ni kupata angalao mtoto mmoja wa kuime, matokeo ya kujua huko ni matukio mengi ya kutoa mimba (abortion). Watu wakijua watazaa mtoto wa kike wanatoa ili wasipunguze chance zao za kupata mtoto wa kiume. Halafu mambo mengine ya kiimani ni ya muda tu. Usisahau kuwa hata Ukristu wakati unaingia Ulaya ulipata misukosuko mingi. Ili ukubalike ulilazimika kukubali mambo mengi kutoka kwenye imani za 'kipagani' za ulaya na kuziingiza katika taratibu za Kikristo. Kwa mfano, siku ya kuabudu enzi za Yesu mwenyewe, kwa mila za Kiyahudi, ilikuwa ni siku ya Jumamosi (Sabato) lakini Ukristu ulipofika Ulaya ulilazimika kufanya siku ya kuabudu kuwa Jumapili kwa sababu huko ndiyo ilikuwa siku ya kuabudu mungu wao mkubwa, mungu wa jua (si unajua baridi ya Ulaya?). Sunday maana yake ni Siku ya kuabudu mungu wa Jua. Kwa hiyo kuna mambo mengi katika Ukristu ambayo hayako kwenye Biblia. Ni kanisa kujaribu kwenda na wakati/na mahali. Hata Krismasi haimo kwenye Biblia. Kwa mfano kama Yesu alizaliwa tarehe 25 December basi mwaka ungekuwa unaanza tarehe hiyo kwa vile tunadai kuwa tulianza kuhesabu miaka ya kileo kuanzia siku hiyo.

 

[Magobe T]

Kuomba msamaha ni kitendo cha uungwana hata kama wewe binafsi hujatenda kosa. Nasema hivi nikitolea mfano familia yangu mwenyewe. Huwa kuna wakati naomba radhi kwa kitu ambacho ninajua sitenda kosa as such lakini naona kuomba kwangu radhi kutaleta amani zaidi kwenye familia - ambayo bado napenda tuendelee kuishi pamoja - kuliko kutomba radhi kwa vile mke wangu huenda ametafsiri vibaya nilichosema au mimi mwenyewe sikuwa mwangalifu katika kuwasilisha ujumbe wangu. Kwa hiyo, inapotokea mmoja kati yetu ameudhika au ameumia ni vizuri kuombana radhi ili kuanza tena maisha upya.

Vilevile huwa ninamtia moyo mke wangu ajenge utamaduni wa kuomba radhi hata kama yuko sahihi kwa sababu kuomba radhi kunamfanya mtu awe mnyenyekevu na mwangalifu zaidi kwa siku zijazo. Na kwa kufuata 'scale of preference' kuomba radhi ni vizuri zaidi kuliko kukaa kimya na kujenga hisia mbaya dhidi ya mwenzi wako wa ndoa.

Nije kwenye Kanisa: Kwanza siyo kweli kwamba Kanisa linaogopa 'modernity' ila linalinda hekima, ambayo imejengwa kwa muda mrefu sana linaona haliwezi kuiharibu kwa kufuata maoni ya watu fulanifulani. Mfano, Kanisa limekuwa likilaumiwa kwa kuwa na msimamo mkali dhidi ya kuhalalisha matumizi ya kondomu, ushoga, utoaji mimba, euthenesia, human cloning, contraceptives, nk.

Haya niliyoyataja ni 'moral dilemmas' - hayana jibu moja kwa watu wote na hivyo Kanisa linakuwa na uangalifu mkubwa kutoa jibu la pamoja. Kanisa linaona ni heri lilaumiwe kuliko kupotosha waumini wake kwa mambo, ambayo kama wamejenga dhamira njema wanaweza kuamua wao wenyewe kulingana na dhamiri yao njema (informed & certain conscience).

Ujue pia viongozi wa Kanisa hawaamui tu mambo inabidi wafanye 'consultation'. Hoja mojawapo ni 'discipline ya useja' - as far as I am aware baada ya 'consultation' mapadre na watawa walio wengi walisema useja ubaki na kama utaondolewa uondolewe kwa mapadre wa jimbo na siyo watawa.

Watu wengine wanadhani Kanisa halisikii vilio vya watu, linasikia sana! Nilipokuwa Uingereza katika ya 1995 na 1998, tayari mapadre wenye wake na watoto zaidi ya 200 waliokuwa Anglikani walikuwa wameshakuwa mapadre Wakatoliki tayari na familia zao (wake na watoto). Na idadi imeshaongezeka sana. Pengine hii ni ishara nzuri ya kutafakari discipline ya useja, ambayo kwa Kanisa si amri ya Mungu na inaweza kubadilishwa muda wowote kwani hapo awali mapadre walikuwa wakioa. Kuna mambo mengi sana ambayo yamebadilika katika Kanisa kulingana na kukua kwa imani na kupanuaka kwa uelewa na tafsiri.

Na kwa kawaida, wanaomba radhi mara kwa mara wanaweza kuishi pamoja zaidi kuliko wale wasioomba radhi. Siku moja mtu mmoja alimwuliza Yesu: "Mwalimu mwenzangu akinikosea natakiwa nimsamehe mara ngapi?" Yesu alijibu: "Hata 7x70 (as much as you can)." Hivyo, unaweza kuomba radhi kama mtu moja au kama taasisi... Pengine sisi hatuna utamaduni huo na ndiyo maana hata tukimkosea mtu tunanyamaza tu kwa vile tunadhani tukisema "sorry" ni kujidharirisha au kujishusha. Rais hata aseme kitu mbaya hawezi kuomba radhi, raia wakionewa na jeshi la wananchi au polisi, majeshi hayo hayawezi kuomba radhi na pia mawaziri wetu wakivurunda hawawezi kuomba radhi!

 

[Magobe T]

Kituko, nadhani kwa mfano huo wa Ultrasound Kanisa linapinga matokeo na siyo kujua aina ya mtoto atakayezaliwa hasa. Kwa mfano Uchina ambapo familia hairuhusiwi kuzaa zaidi ya watoto wawili na upendeleo wa wengi ni kupata angalao mtoto mmoja wa kuime, matokeo ya kujua huko ni matukio mengi ya kutoa mimba (abortion). Watu wakijua watazaa mtoto wa kike wanatoa ili wasipunguze chance zao za kupata mtoto wa kiume. Halafu mambo mengine ya kiimani ni ya muda tu. Usisahau kuwa hata Ukristu wakati unaingia Ulaya ulipata misukosuko mingi. Ili ukubalike ulilazimika kukubali mambo mengi kutoka kwenye imani za 'kipagani' za ulaya na kuziingiza katika taratibu za Kikristo. Kwa mfano, siku ya kuabudu enzi za Yesu mwenyewe, kwa mila za Kiyahudi, ilikuwa ni siku ya Jumamosi (Sabato) lakini Ukristu ulipofika Ulaya ulilazimika kufanya siku ya kuabudu kuwa Jumapili kwa sababu huko ndiyo ilikuwa siku ya kuabudu mungu wao mkubwa, mungu wa jua (si unajua baridi ya Ulaya?). Sunday maana yake ni Siku ya kuabudu mungu wa Jua. Kwa hiyo kuna mambo mengi katika Ukristu ambayo hayako kwenye Biblia. Ni kanisa kujaribu kwenda na wakati/na mahali. Hata Krismasi haimo kwenye Biblia. Kwa mfano kama Yesu alizaliwa tarehe 25 December basi mwaka ungekuwa unaanza tarehe hiyo kwa vile tunadai kuwa tulianza kuhesabu miaka ya kileo kuanzia siku hiyo.

1. Siyo kweli kuwa Kanisa linapinga 'utrasound'. Maaskofu, mapadre, watawa na wakristo wanafanyiwa 'ultrasound' na sijawahi kusikia katazo lolote kimaandishi kuwa mtu akifanyiwa hivyo anatenda kosa.

2. Sabato maana yake ni siku ya kumwabudu Mungu na haina maana ya kuhesabu 1-7. Na kama maana yake ni ya kuhesabu unaweza kuhesabu kuanzia silku yoyote na kupata siku ya saba (ikiangukia siku mojawapo kuanzia Jumatatu hadi Jumapili).

3. Siku ya Jumapili haikuchaguliwa kwa vile ilikuwa Siku ya Jua ila ime'coincide' na siku hiyo. Ilichaguliwa kama sabato kwa Wakristo kwa vile siku hiyo ndiyo Yesu alifufuka (siku ya tatu baada ya kufa kwake) na pia siku ambayo Roho Mtakatifu aliwashukia mitume (siku ya 50 baada ya kufufuka). Kufufuka kwa Yesu (ambaye ndiye centre ya Ukristo kulichukuliwa kuwa na maana ya pekee na pia siku ambayo Roho Mtalkatifu aliwashukia mitume na kuwaimarisha na kuanza kutenda kazi ya pekee ndani ya Kanisa, vilileta maana ya pekee kwa Kanisa na ndiyo maana Wakristo wakaona kuliko kufuata desturi ya Wayahudi tu ya kuabudu siku ya Jumamosi (sabato), wao wakaifanya siku ya Jumapili (sabato). Kwa hiyo, sabato haina maana ya kuhesabu siku, ina maana siku rasmi ya kumwabudu Mungu na kukumbuka matendo yake makuu.

4. Kuhusu Krismasi: siyo lazima kila kinachofanywa na wanakanisa kiwe kimeelezewa vilevile kama ilivyo kwenye biblia inagwa mizizi yake inatokana na biblia. Ingekuwa hivyo, basi tungekuwa na sababu za kuhoji vitu vingi sana - mfano, je ni wapi kwenye biblia imeandikwa Kanisa lijengwe Dar es Salaam, Mwanza, Mbagala nk na kuwe na ibada kama tunavyofanya, wahubiri wasimame mbele na wawe wamevaa viatu au saa na kuchana nywele? Kimsingi, Krismasi nayo iliwekwa kama kumbukumbu ya kuzaliwa kwa Yesu kutokana na mahitaji ya waumini. Mahitaji ndiyo yanayozaa huduma fulani au ibada fulani na kumbukumbu inaweza kuwekwa kulingana na matakwa ya waumini wenyewe kwa vile siku na wakati gani mwumini anatakiwa afanye nini ni juu yake na si lazima Mungu aseme. Mfano, wapi imeandikwa misa ianze saa 2 na isiwe saa 12 au saa 1? Na ujue kuwa hata kilichoandikwa kwenye biblia japo kimeongozwa na Mungu lakini kimeandikwa na binadamu waliopata huo mwanga na bila kulazimishwa kufanya hivyo. Mfano, Mungu au Yesu hakumwambia mtu aandike biblia; mbona hujakosoa hilo kama kila kinachofanywa lazima kiwe kimeandikwa kwenye biblia?

 

[Kiranga]

Bottom line, kanisa lilichemka, lilisema jua linazunguka dunia.

Kanisa lilichemka, lilisema Papa hawezi kukosea.

Clearly tunaona kanisa lilichemka, na dunia inazunguka jua.

Clearly Papa alikosea.

Swala muhimu kwa leo, je kanisa linaendelea kuchemka na kudanganya watu kwa namna gani?

Isije kuwa kesho keshokutwa kanisa hili hili litakuja kutuomba radhi kwa kutuaminisha katika mungu asiyekuwapo.

Maana siku za Copernicus watu walikuwa wanaamini jua linazunguka dunia bila second thoughts.Kwa kuamini kanisa na long held traditions.Sasa mnaoliamini kanisa na traditions zake na kumuamini mungu angalieni msije kuwa kama wale waliokuwa wanaamini jua linaizunguka dunia.

 

[Magobe T]

Bottom line, kanisa lilichemka, lilisema jua linazunguka dunia.

Kanisa lilichemka, lilisema Papa hawezi kukosea.

Clearly tunaona kanisa lilichemka, na dunia inazunguka jua.

Clearly Papa alikosea.

Swala muhimu kwa leo, je kanisa linaendelea kuchemka na kudanganya watu kwa namna gani?

Isije kuwa kesho keshokutwa kanisa hili hili litakuja kutuomba radhi kwa kutuaminisha katika mungu asiyekuwapo.

Maana siku za Copernicus watu walikuwa wanaamini jua linazunguka dunia bila second thoughts.Kwa kuamini kanisa na long held traditions.Sasa mnaoliamini kanisa na traditions zake na kumuamini mungu angalieni msije kuwa kama wale waliokuwa wanaamini jua linaizunguka dunia.

1. 'Knowledge is a result of experience'. Process ya kuthibitisha ukweli inafuata - thesis - antithesis - sythesis. Lilichofanya Kanisa ni 'antithesis' na hatimaye kumepatikana synthesis.

2. 'Papal infallibility' haina maana kuwa papa hawezi kukosea. Ina maana kwamba katika kusimamia mafundisho sahihi ya Kanisa, papa hakosei. Yaani, papa akisimamia kitu ambacho ni kweli - kinachotokana na ufunulio wa Mungu basi papa anakuwa hajakosea/hakukosea/hakosei.

3. Siyo sahihi kwamba Kanisa likisimamia maadili linadanganya watu. Sidhani kama wanakanisa wote ni wajinga. Ndani ya Kanisa kuna wataalamu wengi sana - kuna wanasayansi pia. Kwa hiyo, kusema Kanisa linadanganya - ni 'blanket judgement' yenye lengo la kuwashawishi watu wadhani Kanisa likisema kitu ni kwa sababu halina elimu ya kisayansi. Kufanya hivi ndio udanganyifu wenyewe. Mbona hata wanasayansi watofautiana katika kusema kitu fulani?

Hata kama awali Kanisa lilisema dunia ni mviringo, ilikuwa ndio uelewa wa watu kwa wakati huo. Unadhani zamani wanasayansi waliweza kusema mimea inawasiliana na kiini cha mawasiliano kiko kwenye mizizi (wakati wa Galileo)? Lakini leo hii, wanasayansi wanasema mimea inawasiliana (na ina feelings). Mbona haya hayakugunduliwa zamani za kale bali siku hizi?

 

[PlanckScale]

1. 'Knowledge is a result of experience'. Process ya kuthibitisha ukweli inafuata - thesis - antithesis - sythesis. Lilichofanya Kanisa ni 'antithesis' na hatimaye kumepatikana synthesis.

2. 'Papal infallibility' haina maana kuwa papa hawezi kukosea. Ina maana kwamba katika kusimamia mafundisho sahihi ya Kanisa, papa hakosei. Yaani, papa akisimamia kitu ambacho ni kweli - kinachotokana na ufunulio wa Mungu basi papa anakuwa hajakosea/hakukosea/hakosei.

....

Hata kama awali Kanisa lilisema dunia ni mviringo, ilikuwa ndio uelewa wa watu kwa wakati huo. Unadhani zamani wanasayansi waliweza kusema mimea inawasiliana na kiini cha mawasiliano kiko kwenye mizizi (wakati wa Galileo)? Lakini leo hii, wanasayansi wanasema mimea inawasiliana (na ina feelings). Mbona haya hayakugunduliwa zamani za kale bali siku hizi?

Mkuu, nadhani Kiranga anamaanisha kwamba neno la dini halitakiwi kuwa na makosa maana linatoka kwa mungu ambaye ni "PERFECT". Kwahiyo ikiwa kanisa lina kosea kosea na kuomba msamaha, basi inamaana mkubwa wa kanisa (Yaani Mungu) maelezo yake sio yauhakika. Kama god's word ingekuwa kamilifu, basi the church wasinge kuwa wana kosea kosea.

Swali nikwamba je mungu neno lake linatangazwa ipatavyo? Hau binadamu ni wazushi tuu? Maana kwa mujibu wa dini, kazi ya mungu haitakiwi kuwa na makosa. Sasa mbona kanisa lake [mungu] linakosea? Hau mungu hayupo? Maana angekuwepo, basi maelezo yake na sheria zake zingekuwa perfect from day one, sio kubabaisha babaisha kama church inavyo fanya.

Nasidhani hili swala la makosa lipo kwa wakristo tuu!

 

[Kiranga]

1. 'Knowledge is a result of experience'. Process ya kuthibitisha ukweli inafuata - thesis - antithesis - sythesis. Lilichofanya Kanisa ni 'antithesis' na hatimaye kumepatikana synthesis.

Mazee bado unakwenda na 19th Century Hegelian dialectics? You need to check out how Russell, Nietzche, Popper and even Edmund Wilson debunked the above mentioned Hegelian dialectics.

2. 'Papal infallibility' haina maana kuwa papa hawezi kukosea. Ina maana kwamba katika kusimamia mafundisho sahihi ya Kanisa, papa hakosei. Yaani, papa akisimamia kitu ambacho ni kweli - kinachotokana na ufunulio wa Mungu basi papa anakuwa hajakosea/hakukosea/hakosei.

No spin zone, kama ni hivyo basi hiyo "papal infallibility" haina maana yoyote, kwa sababu kama kweli kuna mungu huyu wa Judeo-Christian faith, mtu yeyote atakayesimamia au kufuatisha mafundisho mazuri ya kanisa na kusimamia kitu kilicho kweli hawezi kukosea.Kwa jinsi unavyosema wewe hiyo papal infallibility inakuwa haina distinction kutoka infallibility yangu, ukisema the pope is infallible in that sense ni kama kusema papa ana damu nyekundu, what is so special about that? Binadamu wote wana damu nyekundu.

Hebu msome Plancscale hapo juu kwanza uone the fallibility of papal infallibility and the entire god idea.

3. Siyo sahihi kwamba Kanisa likisimamia maadili linadanganya watu. Sidhani kama wanakanisa wote ni wajinga. Ndani ya Kanisa kuna wataalamu wengi sana - kuna wanasayansi pia. Kwa hiyo, kusema Kanisa linadanganya - ni 'blanket judgement' yenye lengo la kuwashawishi watu wadhani Kanisa likisema kitu ni kwa sababu halina elimu ya kisayansi. Kufanya hivi ndio udanganyifu wenyewe. Mbona hata wanasayansi watofautiana katika kusema kitu fulani?

Hata kama awali Kanisa lilisema dunia ni mviringo, ilikuwa ndio uelewa wa watu kwa wakati huo. Unadhani zamani wanasayansi waliweza kusema mimea inawasiliana na kiini cha mawasiliano kiko kwenye mizizi (wakati wa Galileo)? Lakini leo hii, wanasayansi wanasema mimea inawasiliana (na ina feelings). Mbona haya hayakugunduliwa zamani za kale bali siku hizi? [/QUOTE]

Unachekesha.Kanisa linadanganya kwa sababu linatuambia kwamba lenyewe lina gospel truth, lina neno la mungu. Neno la mungu haliwezi kuwa la uongo. Halafu linakuambia kwamba jua linazunguka dunia, amini, usiulize kwa nini, mungu kasema. Linadanganya watu.

Wanasayansi wanakwambia kwamba kwa mujibu wa ujuzi wetu mpaka leo, mambo yanaenda hivi na vile.Lakini kama wewe unajua vingine karibu utuonyeshe, tunakubali kufundishwa, ukigundua kitu kipya cha muhimu leo utapewa mi Nobel na mizawadi.

Hebu soma hiyo quote ya kwenye signature yangu kutoka kwa Einstein, anakwambia sayansi haijui ukweli, inatafuta ukweli, inaboresha picha tuliyo nayo hatua kwa hatua, ukifika kwenye ma Planckscale huko vitu hata haviwezi kupimika.Ukifika kwenye Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle huko inako apply fully kwenye the quantum realm, hakuna kupima vitu kwa uhakika, ukipima hiki, unapunguza uwezo wa kupima kile, ukipima kile unapunguza uwezo wa kupima hiki.Ni kama unavyokuwa na camera halafu unataka kufocus watu wawili kwa mpigo, mmoja yuko mbali, mwingine yuko karibu, huwezi kufocus kwa wote kwa wakati mmoja, ukifocus kwa wa karibu wa mbali atatokea blurry and vice versa.

Kwa hiyo sayansi halisi haidanganyi, inakwambia kabisa if anything there is nothing sure in this world.

Ila dini ndiyo inayodanganya kwa kukwambia kwamba tuna hakika mungu yuko mbinguni na wenye dhambi watachomwa moto na wenye thawabu wataenda mbinguni na ujinga mwingine kama huo.

Kadiri miaka inavyokwenda na knowledge kuongezeka itabidi waombe misamaha mingi kwa maneno haya yote ya uongo wanayosema.If at all dini itakuwa ina exist.

 

[Magobe T]

Mkuu, nadhani Kiranga anamaanisha kwamba neno la dini halitakiwi kuwa na makosa maana linatoka kwa mungu ambaye ni "PERFECT". Kwahiyo ikiwa kanisa lina kosea kosea na kuomba msamaha, basi inamaana mkubwa wa kanisa (Yaani Mungu) maelezo yake sio yauhakika. Kama god's word ingekuwa kamilifu, basi the church wasinge kuwa wana kosea kosea.

Swali nikwamba je mungu neno lake linatangazwa ipatavyo? Hau binadamu ni wazushi tuu? Maana kwa mujibu wa dini, kazi ya mungu haitakiwi kuwa na makosa. Sasa mbona kanisa lake [mungu] linakosea? Hau mungu hayupo? Maana angekuwepo, basi maelezo yake na sheria zake zingekuwa perfect from day one, sio kubabaisha babaisha kama church inavyo fanya.

Nasidhani hili swala la makosa lipo kwa wakristo tuu!

Nikuulize: watu wanaokosea waliumbwa na nani? Je, Mungu asiyekosea anaweza kuumba watu wanaokosea? Kusema neno la Mungu halikosei haina maana kuwa mtu anayelihubiri naye hakosei. Otherwise, kila kitu kilichoumbwa na Mungu kingekuwa Mungu. Je, wewe hujawahi kukosea na kama ulishawahi uliumbwa na nani?

Pili, je kwa vile ulishawahi kukosea, kwa hiyo huwa unakosea mara zote (hakuna siku/wakati/muda unapoweza kutenda kitu kilicho sahihi)? Ukijibu maswahi haya tutaendelea kuelezea kwa nini Kanisa linaweza kukosea hata kama ujumbe wa Mungu haukosei.

 

[PlanckScale]

Nikuulize: watu wanaokosea waliumbwa na nani? Je, Mungu asiyekosea anaweza kuumba watu wanaokosea? Kusema neno la Mungu halikosei haina maana kuwa mtu anayelihubiri naye hakosei. Otherwise, kila kitu kilichoumbwa na Mungu kingekuwa Mungu. Je, wewe hujawahi kukosea na kama ulishawahi uliumbwa na nani?

Pili, je kwa vile ulishawahi kukosea, kwa hiyo huwa unakosea mara zote (hakuna siku/wakati/muda unapoweza kutenda kitu kilicho sahihi)? Ukijibu maswahi haya tutaendelea kuelezea kwa nini Kanisa linaweza kukosea hata kama ujumbe wa Mungu haukosei.

Nilisikia kwamba hao walio andika misahafu na maneno takatifu walipewa inspiration na mungu. Kwahiyo, wasemalo lapashwa kuwa sahihi kama vile mungu apaswavyo kuwa. Kama kuna utata, basi ya mungu nayo yana utata. Ndio maana wengine husema mungu tumemzua sisi wenyewe - hayupo. Kila mtu anasema kivyake kuhusu huyo mungu...waumini wana kosea kosea. Mimi naona bora tutumie udadisi wa sayansi, maana hapo hamna kudanganyana.

kabla ujanijia juu kuhusu ukweli katika sayansi, hebu soma "the correspondence principle". It is probably one of the most important principle in physics (and science in general) due to its insistence on "logical consistency."

 

[Magobe T]

Nilisikia kwamba hao walio andika misahafu na maneno takatifu walipewa inspiration na mungu. Kwahiyo, wasemalo lapashwa kuwa sahihi kama vile mungu apaswavyo kuwa. Kama kuna utata, basi ya mungu nayo yana utata. Ndio maana wengine husema mungu tumemzua sisi wenyewe - hayupo. Kila mtu anasema kivyake kuhusu huyo mungu...waumini wana kosea kosea. Mimi naona bora tutumie udadisi wa sayansi, maana hapo hamna kudanganyana.

kabla ujanijia juu kuhusu ukweli katika sayansi, hebu soma "the correspondence principle". It is probably one of the most important principle in physics (and science in general) due to its insistence on "logical consistency."

Nianze na 'logical consistency'. Mara zote kumekuwa kukisemwa kwamba sayansi inapingana na imani. Lakini siku hizi, baadhi ya wanasayansi wanasema sayansi na imani vina uhusiano. Je, katika hili hiyo 'logical consistency' ya sayansi iko wapi?

Hebu soma kwanza hii, halafu u'comment' juu ya hiyo 'logical consistency':

DISCOVERING GOD IN SCIENCE​

DID THE UNIVERSE and LIFE HAPPEN IN A​

NATURAL MATERIALISTIC WAY OR WAS​

IT NECESSARY FOR A CREATOR TO START IT ALL?​

READ the NEW BOOK to EXPLORE the NEW SCIENCE DISCOVERIES​

WHICH are SHEDDING NEW LIGHT on this IMPORTANT QUESTION of OUR EXISTENCE!​

WHAT THE READERS
ARE SAYING:

Can there be links in science to a creator? "Discovering God in Science: Science Discoveries That Suggest There Is a Creator" discusses the potential links from science in discussing the possibility of a divine creator. Drawing lines from evolution, the Earth's place in the universe, and the origin of the Universe, there is much to discuss for both Christians and scientists within. Intriguing theories, "Discovering God in Science" is an intriguing read that should not be missed.
Midwest Book Review
Oregon, WI

This is a fabulous book! I feel it will be a great addition to not only my book shelf but to our Library's, schools and book stores. I was pleasantly surprised how I was able to really understand and grasp all the concepts Mr. Steele brings to our attention. This should be taught in our schools to the kids, given equal time as they also teach Evolution. I can't say that I have a favorite chapter because I would think, "wow, this chapter is really eye opening and informative", then I'd like the next chapter for something else. Great book!
Ellen Shubel
Health Care Professional
Canton, MI

Discovering God in Science, proposes excellent theories to prove the existence of God and His hand in creating the Universe and everything in it! I think it should be used as an alternative textbook in classrooms in addition to Darwin's theories. I especially enjoyed the section on expanded dimensions and string theory. I've often thought of God as a being in a higher dimension, being able to both see and walk through four dimensions as we do three! Your book suggests this, but adds scientific proof! It's about time someone wrote a book showing that religion and science do not have to be at odds! Again, congratulations on a masterful book!
Charles Sherry,
Retired Ford Supervisor
Amherst, OH

As a non-scientific person I found what I read to be very easy to follow and understand. I found that the more I read the more I wanted to read. I now understand the Big Bang Theory better, even though it did not change my belief that God created the world. As I read I envisioned a Sunday School class using it for a discussion topic and source. I found the pictures and diagrams to be very well done and fun to study. Mr. Steele has written a book that the average person can read, understand and enjoy.
Dave Cook,
Insurance & Tax Consultant
Morrow, OH

This well researched book helps simplify a very complex topic making the complex understandable. The graphics and clear charts are very helpful. Discovering God in Science covers all the key issues of this controversial subject. While Christians do disagree on the age of the earth, Mr. Steele has put forth an interesting proposal.
Jerry Newcombe
Senior Producer
Coral Ridge Ministries,
FL

I found the book Discovering God in Science it to be informative and insightful. The basic scientific facts & theories surrounding the beginning of our universe are presented in a highly professional yet very understandable way. Most importantly, recent findings are presented which enable the reader to clearly understand previous misconceptions.
The origin of life on this earth, also subject to various theories, is treated with the same consideration. In each case the reader is invited to form his/her own opinion as to what to believe. . . . The human body itself is far to complex to have formed randomly or by chance, thus suggesting Intelligent Design.
His points warning about the forces in our society who seek to steer us away from God are well taken. Along with this I cannot overlook the sometimes humorous and personal way in which the book is written.
Carol Briggs
Teacher
Indianapolis, IN



Most of us learned in school that the Big Bang started the Universe and the Natural Process of Evolution started the First Life on Earth.


New Cosmology Discoveries are now questioning whether the Universe and Life could have happened purely by chance without the need of a Creator to Explain the Complexity we observe in the Universe.

A New Book Discovering God in Science will fascinate you with Cutting Edge Science Discoveries that answer the following questions:


Did the BIG BANG start the Universe or was a Creator God necessary?

Did Life Start by Evolution as Darwin claimed or was a Creator God necessary?

Is the Universe 13.7 Billion Years Old or is it only 6000 Years Old?

What's Causing Global Warming?

Is There Life After Death?

Is There A GOD?


Discovering God in Science is Fun and Interesting to read: Easy to Understand and has the Latest Science Discoveries and Theories for You to Ponder.

Here's A Look at the Chapters:
Part 1: The Clash of Science and Religion
Chapter 1. Two Historic Divisions: There have been two major conflicts between the Church and Science. A short review, explores how science was at odds with the Medieval Catholic Church, and now how the Church is at odds with Darwin's theory of evolution.
NOTE: In 2009 Science Celebrates both of these two Historic Events. Galileo used the telescope to confirm that the Earth was not the center of the Universe 400 years ago. Darwin was born 200 years ago and his book the Origin of the Species, was published 150 years ago.

Part 2: Science Discoveries pointing to a Creator
Chapter 2. Creation's Big Bang:
The Big Bang discovery tells us how the Universe began. Is the Big Bang correct? Does it conflict with the Bible or does the Bible support the Big Bang theory? Read the surprising answer in 'Creation's Big Bang'.
Chapter 3. A Finely Tuned Universe:
The most perplexing discovery of recent time is how perfectly and precisely the Universe was made. This discovery mathematically rules out a random chance Universe and indicates a design process was required.
Chapter 4. String Theory and Other Dimensions:
A new theory of sub atomic particles suggests that they are made of small string loops of energy. This theory also suggests that other dimensions of space and time exist. Other dimensions of space and time have some very important theological clues to the question of a Creator God.
Chapter 5. Einstein's Age of the Universe:
While science says the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old the Bible says God created Heaven, Earth and Life in just six days and rested on the seventh. These two concepts of the age of the Universe are completely at odds, yet Einstein's theory of Relativity gives a surprising solution to this seeming contradiction.
Chapter 6. Earth, a Very Special Place:
Like the Universe, the Earth seems to be created in a very unique and special way in order to support life. Are Earth-like planets common or is the Earth a unique special place? Is Earth a pure chance happening or the act of a Creator?
Chapter 7. The Origin of Life and Evolution:
Darwin's theory of Evolution says that the first life on Earth started by a random accident and all life on Earth evolved from that first living cell. Is Darwin right or did God create Man in his own image? Read what the scientific evidence is now telling us.
Chapter 8. A Case for Intelligent Design:
Read why a growing number of scientists see 'Design' in nature, from the largest to the smallest things in the Universe. These observations are leading scientists to put forth the 'God Hypothesis'.
Part 3: Science: a Weapon in the Culture War
Chapter 9. Science in the Media:
A large proportion of the media leans to the secular left. As a result, what we learn about science through the media is often not the whole truth.
Chapter 10. The Religion of Science:
Science has been to a large part, taken over by a philosophy of Naturalism and Materialism. This has made some science more philosophy than science, and has led to an uneasiness between science and religion.

While most People turn to Religion and the Scriptures to Learn about GOD, this Book Looks to Scientists for Clues About the Supreme Being.

You will Learn from the Greatest Scientists of our Time to Explore the Discoveries Pointing Us to A Divine Creator. While all these Scientist do not profess to believe in God most will admit that Science touches on the origins of creation.

YOUR TEACHERS ARE:

Stephen Hawking: Considered by many to be the most brilliant theoretical physicist since Einstein, who holds the same University of Cambridge chair that Newton once held.
Albert Einstein: Considered to be the most brilliant theoretical physicist of the 20th century, who developed the theory of Relativity which has changed our understanding of space and time.
Edwin Hubble: A University of Chicago astronomer who discovered that the Universe is expanding. The Hubble Space Telescope (NASA HST) is named after him.
Sir Fred Hoyle: A leading English scientist & astronomer who presented many new ideas in science.
Carl Sagan: A popular astronomer who presented the PBS 'Cosmos' series in the 1980's.
George Gamow: A physicist who was involved in the development of the Big Bang theory. His predictions were confirmed by the 1965 discovery of the cosmic microwave background.

Steven Weinberg: Nobel Prize winner who wrote the book 'The First Three Minutes' which describes what the Universe was like just after it was created.
Hugh Ross: a former Cal Tech astronomer and Christian apologist who founded 'Reasons to Believe.'
My name is Charles Steele the author of Discovering God in Science. I wrote this book because this is simply very fascinating stuff, on the Cutting Edge of Science. I have been interested in Astronomy and Science since I was in the 3rd grade. With the new Discoveries of the past few decades, a new focus has been put on the intersection between Science and Religion. It seems the two are connected at the hip even though both sides wish it weren't so. It is time that both sides recognize that for us humans to understand our place in the Cosmos, we need a cohesive fulfilling explanation of the Universe and Life in harmony from both Science and Religion. My book attempts to bring both sides together.

MY STORY:
My parents where Christians and as a child we attended Church on a regular basis. As I entered High School and College I began to learn new concepts in science such as the Big Bang and Evolution. Both of these theories seemed to cast doubt on the Creation Story as taught in Genesis. It seemed that science was telling me that nature can explain our existence and beginnings without a need for a Creator God. As a result after college I stopped attending Church for number of years. As the years went on I continued to read and learn more about both science and religion. As I learned about new discoveries in Cosmology, it became apparent that what I had learned in my youth were not the whole truth, and science was now realizing that there was a need for an Intelligent Designer to account for the precision and complexity of the Universe and Life.

PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND:
The author earned a B.S. in Industrial Design from the University of Cincinnati, OH. He has worked at General Motors Styling contributing to a best selling car. He also worked at major design firms in Chicago and Michigan, where he designed a number of best selling products. His interest in science and technology has contributed to his being awarded 11 U.S. Patents. Mr. Steele has been listed in Whose Who (Midwest Edition) and served in the U.S.A.F. stationed in California and West Germany.

Discovering God in Science, Cosomology, Astrophysics, Astronomy Science and Religion

 

[PlanckScale]

Nianze na 'logical consistency'. Mara zote kumekuwa kukisemwa kwamba sayansi inapingana na imani. Lakini siku hizi, baadhi ya wanasayansi wanasema sayansi na imani vina uhusiano. Je, katika hili hiyo 'logical consistency' ya sayansi iko wapi?

Hebu soma kwanza hii, halafu u'comment' juu ya hiyo 'logical consistency':

DISCOVERING GOD IN SCIENCE
DID THE UNIVERSE and LIFE HAPPEN IN A
NATURAL MATERIALISTIC WAY OR WAS
IT NECESSARY FOR A CREATOR TO START IT ALL?
READ the NEW BOOK to EXPLORE the NEW SCIENCE DISCOVERIES
WHICH are SHEDDING NEW LIGHT on this IMPORTANT QUESTION of OUR EXISTENCE!​

WHAT THE READERS
ARE SAYING:

Can there be links in science to a creator? "Discovering God in Science: Science Discoveries That Suggest There Is a Creator" discusses the potential links from science in discussing the possibility of a divine creator. Drawing lines from evolution, the Earth's place in the universe, and the origin of the Universe, there is much to discuss for both Christians and scientists within. Intriguing theories, "Discovering God in Science" is an intriguing read that should not be missed.
Midwest Book Review
Oregon, WI

This is a fabulous book! I feel it will be a great addition to not only my book shelf but to our Library's, schools and book stores. I was pleasantly surprised how I was able to really understand and grasp all the concepts Mr. Steele brings to our attention. This should be taught in our schools to the kids, given equal time as they also teach Evolution. I can't say that I have a favorite chapter because I would think, "wow, this chapter is really eye opening and informative", then I'd like the next chapter for something else. Great book!
Ellen Shubel
Health Care Professional
Canton, MI

Discovering God in Science, proposes excellent theories to prove the existence of God and His hand in creating the Universe and everything in it! I think it should be used as an alternative textbook in classrooms in addition to Darwin's theories. I especially enjoyed the section on expanded dimensions and string theory. I've often thought of God as a being in a higher dimension, being able to both see and walk through four dimensions as we do three! Your book suggests this, but adds scientific proof! It's about time someone wrote a book showing that religion and science do not have to be at odds! Again, congratulations on a masterful book!
Charles Sherry,
Retired Ford Supervisor
Amherst, OH

As a non-scientific person I found what I read to be very easy to follow and understand. I found that the more I read the more I wanted to read. I now understand the Big Bang Theory better, even though it did not change my belief that God created the world. As I read I envisioned a Sunday School class using it for a discussion topic and source. I found the pictures and diagrams to be very well done and fun to study. Mr. Steele has written a book that the average person can read, understand and enjoy.
Dave Cook,
Insurance & Tax Consultant
Morrow, OH

This well researched book helps simplify a very complex topic making the complex understandable. The graphics and clear charts are very helpful. Discovering God in Science covers all the key issues of this controversial subject. While Christians do disagree on the age of the earth, Mr. Steele has put forth an interesting proposal.
Jerry Newcombe
Senior Producer
Coral Ridge Ministries,
FL

I found the book Discovering God in Science it to be informative and insightful. The basic scientific facts & theories surrounding the beginning of our universe are presented in a highly professional yet very understandable way. Most importantly, recent findings are presented which enable the reader to clearly understand previous misconceptions.
The origin of life on this earth, also subject to various theories, is treated with the same consideration. In each case the reader is invited to form his/her own opinion as to what to believe. . . . The human body itself is far to complex to have formed randomly or by chance, thus suggesting Intelligent Design.
His points warning about the forces in our society who seek to steer us away from God are well taken. Along with this I cannot overlook the sometimes humorous and personal way in which the book is written.
Carol Briggs
Teacher
Indianapolis, IN



Most of us learned in school that the Big Bang started the Universe and the Natural Process of Evolution started the First Life on Earth.


New Cosmology Discoveries are now questioning whether the Universe and Life could have happened purely by chance without the need of a Creator to Explain the Complexity we observe in the Universe.

A New Book Discovering God in Science will fascinate you with Cutting Edge Science Discoveries that answer the following questions:


Did the BIG BANG start the Universe or was a Creator God necessary?

Did Life Start by Evolution as Darwin claimed or was a Creator God necessary?

Is the Universe 13.7 Billion Years Old or is it only 6000 Years Old?

What's Causing Global Warming?

Is There Life After Death?

Is There A GOD?


Discovering God in Science is Fun and Interesting to read: Easy to Understand and has the Latest Science Discoveries and Theories for You to Ponder.

Here's A Look at the Chapters:
Part 1: The Clash of Science and Religion
Chapter 1. Two Historic Divisions: There have been two major conflicts between the Church and Science. A short review, explores how science was at odds with the Medieval Catholic Church, and now how the Church is at odds with Darwin's theory of evolution.
NOTE: In 2009 Science Celebrates both of these two Historic Events. Galileo used the telescope to confirm that the Earth was not the center of the Universe 400 years ago. Darwin was born 200 years ago and his book the Origin of the Species, was published 150 years ago.

Part 2: Science Discoveries pointing to a Creator
Chapter 2. Creation's Big Bang:
The Big Bang discovery tells us how the Universe began. Is the Big Bang correct? Does it conflict with the Bible or does the Bible support the Big Bang theory? Read the surprising answer in 'Creation's Big Bang'.
Chapter 3. A Finely Tuned Universe:
The most perplexing discovery of recent time is how perfectly and precisely the Universe was made. This discovery mathematically rules out a random chance Universe and indicates a design process was required.
Chapter 4. String Theory and Other Dimensions:
A new theory of sub atomic particles suggests that they are made of small string loops of energy. This theory also suggests that other dimensions of space and time exist. Other dimensions of space and time have some very important theological clues to the question of a Creator God.
Chapter 5. Einstein's Age of the Universe:
While science says the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old the Bible says God created Heaven, Earth and Life in just six days and rested on the seventh. These two concepts of the age of the Universe are completely at odds, yet Einstein's theory of Relativity gives a surprising solution to this seeming contradiction.
Chapter 6. Earth, a Very Special Place:
Like the Universe, the Earth seems to be created in a very unique and special way in order to support life. Are Earth-like planets common or is the Earth a unique special place? Is Earth a pure chance happening or the act of a Creator?
Chapter 7. The Origin of Life and Evolution:
Darwin's theory of Evolution says that the first life on Earth started by a random accident and all life on Earth evolved from that first living cell. Is Darwin right or did God create Man in his own image? Read what the scientific evidence is now telling us.
Chapter 8. A Case for Intelligent Design:
Read why a growing number of scientists see 'Design' in nature, from the largest to the smallest things in the Universe. These observations are leading scientists to put forth the 'God Hypothesis'.
Part 3: Science: a Weapon in the Culture War
Chapter 9. Science in the Media:
A large proportion of the media leans to the secular left. As a result, what we learn about science through the media is often not the whole truth.
Chapter 10. The Religion of Science:
Science has been to a large part, taken over by a philosophy of Naturalism and Materialism. This has made some science more philosophy than science, and has led to an uneasiness between science and religion.

While most People turn to Religion and the Scriptures to Learn about GOD, this Book Looks to Scientists for Clues About the Supreme Being.

You will Learn from the Greatest Scientists of our Time to Explore the Discoveries Pointing Us to A Divine Creator. While all these Scientist do not profess to believe in God most will admit that Science touches on the origins of creation.

YOUR TEACHERS ARE:

Stephen Hawking: Considered by many to be the most brilliant theoretical physicist since Einstein, who holds the same University of Cambridge chair that Newton once held.
Albert Einstein: Considered to be the most brilliant theoretical physicist of the 20th century, who developed the theory of Relativity which has changed our understanding of space and time.
Edwin Hubble: A University of Chicago astronomer who discovered that the Universe is expanding. The Hubble Space Telescope (NASA HST) is named after him.
Sir Fred Hoyle: A leading English scientist & astronomer who presented many new ideas in science.
Carl Sagan: A popular astronomer who presented the PBS 'Cosmos' series in the 1980's.
George Gamow: A physicist who was involved in the development of the Big Bang theory. His predictions were confirmed by the 1965 discovery of the cosmic microwave background.

Steven Weinberg: Nobel Prize winner who wrote the book 'The First Three Minutes' which describes what the Universe was like just after it was created.
Hugh Ross: a former Cal Tech astronomer and Christian apologist who founded 'Reasons to Believe.'
My name is Charles Steele the author of Discovering God in Science. I wrote this book because this is simply very fascinating stuff, on the Cutting Edge of Science. I have been interested in Astronomy and Science since I was in the 3rd grade. With the new Discoveries of the past few decades, a new focus has been put on the intersection between Science and Religion. It seems the two are connected at the hip even though both sides wish it weren't so. It is time that both sides recognize that for us humans to understand our place in the Cosmos, we need a cohesive fulfilling explanation of the Universe and Life in harmony from both Science and Religion. My book attempts to bring both sides together.

MY STORY:
My parents where Christians and as a child we attended Church on a regular basis. As I entered High School and College I began to learn new concepts in science such as the Big Bang and Evolution. Both of these theories seemed to cast doubt on the Creation Story as taught in Genesis. It seemed that science was telling me that nature can explain our existence and beginnings without a need for a Creator God. As a result after college I stopped attending Church for number of years. As the years went on I continued to read and learn more about both science and religion. As I learned about new discoveries in Cosmology, it became apparent that what I had learned in my youth were not the whole truth, and science was now realizing that there was a need for an Intelligent Designer to account for the precision and complexity of the Universe and Life.

PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND:
The author earned a B.S. in Industrial Design from the University of Cincinnati, OH. He has worked at General Motors Styling contributing to a best selling car. He also worked at major design firms in Chicago and Michigan, where he designed a number of best selling products. His interest in science and technology has contributed to his being awarded 11 U.S. Patents. Mr. Steele has been listed in Whose Who (Midwest Edition) and served in the U.S.A.F. stationed in California and West Germany.

Discovering God in Science, Cosomology, Astrophysics, Astronomy Science and Religion

Asante kwa hiyo kat and paist, lakini naona hukunielewa nikimaanisha nini with "logical consistency". Naomba uisome kwa makini hiyo "the correspondence principle". Naweza kukutafsiria kama ukipenda.

In brief naona ulicho paste hapo juu nikwamba; The universe is a complex system and therefore it must have been created. Sasa, YOU MUST ALSO AGREE THAT A CREATOR OF A UNIVERSE MUST ALSO BE A HIGHLY COMPLEX "thing", AND THEREFORE, IT/HE/SHE MUST ALSO HAVE BEEN CREATED!

Can you at least see the logic behind this deduction? (Hebu jipe uhuru wa kufikiri kidogo, usiogoe sana kwenda motoni )

 

[PlanckScale]

.... You will Learn from the Greatest Scientists of our Time to Explore the Discoveries Pointing Us to A Divine Creator. While all these Scientist do not profess to believe in God most will admit that Science touches on the origins of creation…..



....[/url]

Yaani the experts have not admit there is god, lakini wewe mtazamani una-conclude kuna mungu ukitumia ugunduzi wa hao hao ma-experts ambao they don't see god in their work ???

 

[Shingo]

God will not be the same after Galileo. Science has gone too far and it is going day and night. Religion (and here I mean all religious thinking) can be seen only as cultural constructs that are not continuous. At one time religions will be the past thing and they will remain only in the dustbin of history.

Dini hazina ukweli kwa sababu zinalazimisha watu kuamini bila kuhoji wala kuuliza. Dini zimejiua zenyewe kutokana na matendo ya viongozi wake ambayo yalifanya watu wahoji uhalali wa dini zenyewe. Dini zilipata umaarufu kutokana na waanzilishi wake kuwa na exceptional traits ambazo waanzilishi hao walikufa nazo. Hayo unaweza kuyaona kwa dini zote; Budhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc .... etc. Baada ya waanzilishi kufa dini zimekuwa zikififia as time goes; kama yalivyo madhehebu kama ya akina Kakobe (siku kakobe akifa, full gospel church is history).

Bahati nzuri Sayansi ni kitu continuous. Akifa newton, Einstein anaanzia pale alipoishia newton. Sayansi ni utafiti na uvumbuzi wa ukweli kupitia majaribio ya kisayansi. Kwa hiyo scientific truths zinasimama, haziwezi kuwa twisted kutokana na wakati wala mazingira. Once kitu kikishakuwa established kama scientific truth then, hakuna siku hiyo scientific truth itakuja badilika kwa sababu yoyote ile. Hivyo kama kuna kitu inatakiwa tukichukulie kama Mungu, basi kitu hicho ni Sayansi.

Kwenye suala la Mungu watu wengi huburuzwa tu na wanaenda kama bendera kufuata upepo. Kwa hiyo, ndiyo na ndo ukweli wenyewe, iko siku kanisa litakuja kukiri kuwa liliwadanganya watu kuhusu mungu. Kwa mfano mbinguni pameshabadilika sana na siku hizi watu huita Peponi ili kukiri ukweli kuwa mahali panapoitwa mbinguni (zamani juu iliaminika kuwa ni mbinguni) si sehemu halisi ambayo tunaweza kuiona. Watu wa dini wanapojaribu hapa na pale kuoanisha mafundisho ya dini na sayansi mara nyingi inazidi kuthibitisha failure ya concept ya Mungu. Sayansi inapogundua mambo ambayo hayapingiki dini hazichelewi kudandia na kusema sayansi inakwenda sambamba na dini.

Tatizo kubwa hasa ni hii central belief ya dini zote kuwa kuna Mungu au Miungu ambayo inatawala kila kitu na iko above anything yet viumbe hao (Mungu au Miungu) wanapewa personal attributes zinazoonesha confusions tu. Mungu anavyoelezwa na kueleweka katika Uislam, Ukristo, Uyuda, Uhindu, Ubudha, n.k. haielekei kuwa huyu mungu ni kitu halisi kilichopo. Ni majaribio ya kutafsiri matukio mbali mbali yanayowazunguka wanadamu wa kila sehemu. Wengine walifanikiwa kuchanyata uongo wao ukakubalika kitambo, lakini kadri binadamu wanavyozidi kufumbuliwa macho na sayansi, uongo unazidi kujitenga.

With science we don't need any GOD to be in control because the universe's destiny is not at all GODLY OR GOD DESIGNED!!

 

[Magobe T]

God will not be the same after Galileo. Science has gone too far and it is going day and night. Religion (and here I mean all religious thinking) can be seen only as cultural constructs that are not continuous. At one time religions will be the past thing and they will remain only in the dustbin of history.

Dini hazina ukweli kwa sababu zinalazimisha watu kuamini bila kuhoji wala kuuliza. Dini zimejiua zenyewe kutokana na matendo ya viongozi wake ambayo yalifanya watu wahoji uhalali wa dini zenyewe. Dini zilipata umaarufu kutokana na waanzilishi wake kuwa na exceptional traits ambazo waanzilishi hao walikufa nazo. Hayo unaweza kuyaona kwa dini zote; Budhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc .... etc. Baada ya waanzilishi kufa dini zimekuwa zikififia as time goes; kama yalivyo madhehebu kama ya akina Kakobe (siku kakobe akifa, full gospel church is history).

Bahati nzuri Sayansi ni kitu continuous. Akifa newton, Einstein anaanzia pale alipoishia newton. Sayansi ni utafiti na uvumbuzi wa ukweli kupitia majaribio ya kisayansi. Kwa hiyo scientific truths zinasimama, haziwezi kuwa twisted kutokana na wakati wala mazingira. Once kitu kikishakuwa established kama scientific truth then, hakuna siku hiyo scientific truth itakuja badilika kwa sababu yoyote ile. Hivyo kama kuna kitu inatakiwa tukichukulie kama Mungu, basi kitu hicho ni Sayansi.

Kwenye suala la Mungu watu wengi huburuzwa tu na wanaenda kama bendera kufuata upepo. Kwa hiyo, ndiyo na ndo ukweli wenyewe, iko siku kanisa litakuja kukiri kuwa liliwadanganya watu kuhusu mungu. Kwa mfano mbinguni pameshabadilika sana na siku hizi watu huita Peponi ili kukiri ukweli kuwa mahali panapoitwa mbinguni (zamani juu iliaminika kuwa ni mbinguni) si sehemu halisi ambayo tunaweza kuiona. Watu wa dini wanapojaribu hapa na pale kuoanisha mafundisho ya dini na sayansi mara nyingi inazidi kuthibitisha failure ya concept ya Mungu. Sayansi inapogundua mambo ambayo hayapingiki dini hazichelewi kudandia na kusema sayansi inakwenda sambamba na dini.

Tatizo kubwa hasa ni hii central belief ya dini zote kuwa kuna Mungu au Miungu ambayo inatawala kila kitu na iko above anything yet viumbe hao (Mungu au Miungu) wanapewa personal attributes zinazoonesha confusions tu. Mungu anavyoelezwa na kueleweka katika Uislam, Ukristo, Uyuda, Uhindu, Ubudha, n.k. haielekei kuwa huyu mungu ni kitu halisi kilichopo. Ni majaribio ya kutafsiri matukio mbali mbali yanayowazunguka wanadamu wa kila sehemu. Wengine walifanikiwa kuchanyata uongo wao ukakubalika kitambo, lakini kadri binadamu wanavyozidi kufumbuliwa macho na sayansi, uongo unazidi kujitenga.

With science we don't need any GOD to be in control because the universe's destiny is not at all GODLY OR GOD DESIGNED!!

Mafundisho ya dini yangu yananielekeza kuwa: faith and reason complement each other, they are not contradictory for one must believe only that, which makes sense to him or her.