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

[Kiranga]

Mover, can be called God or the Supreme Being, if you like. Aquinas never claimed
this was as theatrical as the burning bush that Moses encountered, but it makes
sense.

Mover can or is? Hata huyu anayeandika anajua anasimamia wapi?

Na kwa nini awe God or Supreme Being na si kingine chochote? Hajatuambia, anatulazimisha tu.

Kakuta jani la muembe mlangoni mwake, anasema lazima limeletwa na mtoto. Hatuambii amefikiaje hitimisho hilo, kapata wapi ushahidi wa kusema hilo.

The third proof is called necessity. As important as your boss thinks he is, in real￾ity, the universe would not cease to exist if he ceased to exist—he is not necessary.
But don’t tell him that unless you don’t want that raise you’ve been asking for! No
matter how important, nothing in the world or in the universe is absolutely neces￾sary. Everything is contingent; that means it does not have to exist in order for real￾ity to exist. Only one being is necessary, and that is the Source of being itself, the
Being that keeps everything in existence. Causality and motion merely explain how
something got here, namely, everything is created and has an origin. Necessity and
contingency, on the other hand, show us that something or someone is needed to
keep things going even after they are made. Edison may have invented the light
bulb, but he died, and we still use electric lights well after his death. Electricity is
needed, however, to keep any and all light bulbs working. Think of the Necessary
Being, the Being itself, or the Existence itself (you can even call it God or the
Supreme Being), as the electricity which keeps everything in existence. That which
keeps in existence everything there is, is a necessary being. Everything which
depends on that necessary being is contingent. Head hurt yet?

Bado analazimisha. Anasema kuhusu necessity, lakini hatuambii kwa nini ni lazima hii necessity iwe Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, na si kanuni za kihesabu za entropy tu?

Hajatuambia kwa nini necessity ni lazima iwe Mungu huyu mwenye contradictions kibao.

The fourth proof is called gradation. There is a hierarchy of being in the universe.
First, at the most fundamental level, even at the subatomic, there is inanimate
matter and energy. It exists, but it is not alive.Then you move up into the food chain
and we have the second level of being: plant life (vegetative). Basic, simple, uncom￾plicated, plant life carries on three activities: nutrition, growth, and reproduction.
The third level of being, however, is more complicated. While it has the same three
principles, it also has sensation. Animal life is higher than plant life because these
creatures have bodies which transmit information (data) from their senses to their
brains. Though these brains act on instinct, when a sound is heard through their ears
or images are seen by their eyes, animals react as instinct dictates. This fourth level
of being incorporates the first two but goes into a much more sophisticated mech￾anism. Human life not only consists of nutrition, growth, and reproduction (as does
plant life), and has sense knowledge from the physical body (as does animal life),
but it also involves the ability to reason. Human beings have rational intellects and
free will. While animals act out of instinct, only men and women can make free
choices and base them on reason. When was the last time you saw a hungry dog orcat turn away food just because they were on a diet and needed to lose weight?
Pooch or Kitty will eat out of instinct whenever they are hungry. Human beings can
resist hunger and freely choose to diet. The beings above humans are angels. These
are beings which, unlike us, are not body and soul. They are pure spirit. They have
intellect and will, like we do, but they are not limited by physical bodies which can
feel hunger, pain, cold, heat, sickness, and death. Angels cannot die since they are
spiritual beings with no mortal bodies to hinder them. The last and highest level of
being, however, is not angelic but divine. Angels may not die, but they were created.
They are limited and finite, while the fullness of being is God. He is the highest, the
Supreme Being. God has no beginning and no end. God always existed. Since He is
everywhere (omnipresent) and knows everything (omniscient) and can do anything
(omnipotent), He is the pinnacle and zenith of being itself.

Hii gradation ina prove kwamba God does not exist. Ntatumia physics.

1. God is said to be the most perfect state of being.
2. In Physics, perfection is measured by entropy, the more entropy a state has, the more imperfect it is, the less entropy it has, the more perfect it is.
3.The most perfect state of being, by entropy, is nothingness, once you deviate from nothingness, you are no longer perfect.
4. The perfect God is nothingness. Nothing in actual fact.
5. God does not exist.

The fifth and last proof is called governance. This has nothing to do with city hall,
Parliament, Congress, or the White House. Something or someone with intelligence
created a world and a universe which operates on intelligent and rational laws and
principles. Whether you believe in Creationism or subscribe to a form of evolution,
you recognize that there is a systematic plan upon which reality operates. The laws
of physics and chemistry were not created by scientists; they were discovered by
them. Those laws apply equally in any country and on any planet. Governance
merely means an intelligent Being created the intelligent laws and systems that
maintain order and prevent chaos. That Governor can be called God.
Need an aspirin now? No one ever claimed these five proofs would convert an
atheist overnight. They do show, however, that the existence of God can be known
by reason. The pagan Romans and ancient Greeks, for example, among many other
peoples, figured out there was a supreme being even without having that deity
reveal himself. Yet that is the limit of human reason. We can only know that there
is a God. To know God and not just know about Him involves faith. Faith allows you
to believe in the truths revealed by God. Reason helps make some sense of that, but
much of the mystery of religion does not contradict reason; rather, it goes beyond
the limitations of human reason. Then you just have to believe.

If an all loving, all powerful and all knowing God created the universe, why did this God allow evil to exist, while he could have created a world in which evil cannot exist?

I haven't seen the answer to this question.

 

[Kiranga]

Joshua akisimamisha jua" jua linatembea? Au Dunia ndio inazunguka jua?

Ukisoma Biblia kwa kuuliza maswali kama haya, utagundua Biblia imeandikwa na watu tu, si neno la Mungu.

Tena watu ambao kwa akili zao ndogo za enzi yao, hawakujua kwamba dunia inazunguka jua, walifikiri jua linazunguka dunia.

Ingeandikwa hata kwa muongozo wa Mungu tu, tusingeona mapungufu haya ya watu walioiandika kusema jua lisimame.

 

[OMOYOGWANE]

Mkuu Kiranga naomba niiruhusu mihemko kwa sekunde kadhaa nicheke kwanza kwa kujua kiwa ulianza kufuatilia huu mjadala tangu miaka ya 1990s

Turudi ktk fikra huru,
Binafsi nilianza kufuatilia huu mjadala baada ya kusoma Uzi flani ulioanzishwa na mkuu Mshana Jr ktk huo Uzi nilivutiwa kujua ukweli ni upi ?

Mpaka sasa nilichogundua nikwamba biblia na quaran ni vitabu vilivyoandikwa na watu wakijaribu kumuelezea mungu na makusudi yake ktk ulimwengu na viumbe vyake, ndio maana utaona Luna makosa mengi kama unavyobainisha kila siku,

Dhana ya kuwepo au kutokuwepo kwa mungu ktk mjadala huu, hauna uhusiano kabisa na quaran au biblia kwa sababu hivi kama nilivyoeleza hapo juu,

Kwa mantiki hiyo basi unapomuuliza mtu kwanini mungu mwenye ujuzi wote upendo wote na uwezo wote kwanini anaruhusu mabaya yatokee kwa viumbe wake ?
Hapa unakua umeuliza swali kwa msingi wa kibiblia, unakua unamlazimiha mtu atumie maandiko hayo hayo ambayo huyataki kujibu hoja zako, hili swali inabidi uliangalie upya sababu naona kama linamakosa! Nikikuuliza kuwauliona au kusoma wapi kuwa mungu ni mjuzi wa yote na muweza wa yote lazima utasema kuwa umeona ktk biblia,

Wito wangu kwa wana JF wote ni kuwa KUWEPO AU KUTOKUWEPO KWA MUNGU NI SWALA LINALOHITAJI MJADALA, pia ukiamini kwamba mungu yupo kwa sababu umekosa hoja za kukushawishi, hii isikufanye uamini kile kilichomo kwenye biblia au quaran , sababu hivyo ni viyabu vilivyoandikwa na watu wakijaribu kumuelezea mungu, hata ewe unauesoma hapa ukiweza unaweza andika biblia yako au quaran yako.

 

[Kiranga]

Mkuu Kiranga naomba niiruhusu mihemko kwa sekunde kadhaa nicheke kwanza kwa kujua kiwa ulianza kufuatilia huu mjadala tangu miaka ya 1990s

Turudi ktk fikra huru,
Binafsi nilianza kufuatilia huu mjadala baada ya kusoma Uzi flani ulioanzishwa na mkuu Mshana Jr ktk huo Uzi nilivutiwa kujua ukweli ni upi ?

Mpaka sasa nilichogundua nikwamba biblia na quaran ni vitabu vilivyoandikwa na watu wakijaribu kumuelezea mungu na makusudi yake ktk ulimwengu na viumbe vyake, ndio maana utaona Luna makosa mengi kama unavyobainisha kila siku,

Dhana ya kuwepo au kutokuwepo kwa mungu ktk mjadala huu, hauna uhusiano kabisa na quaran au biblia kwa sababu hivi kama nilivyoeleza hapo juu,

Kwa mantiki hiyo basi unapomuuliza mtu kwanini mungu mwenye ujuzi wote upendo wote na uwezo wote kwanini anaruhusu mabaya yatokee kwa viumbe wake ?
Hapa unakua umeuliza swali kwa msingi wa kibiblia, unakua unamlazimiha mtu atumie maandiko hayo hayo ambayo huyataki kujibu hoja zako, hili swali inabidi uliangalie upya sababu naona kama linamakosa! Nikikuuliza kuwauliona au kusoma wapi kuwa mungu ni mjuzi wa yote na muweza wa yote lazima utasema kuwa umeona ktk biblia,

Wito wangu kwa wana JF wote ni kuwa KUWEPO AU KUTOKUWEPO KWA MUNGU NI SWALA LINALOHITAJI MJADALA, pia ukiamini kwamba mungu yupo kwa sababu umekosa hoja za kukushawishi, hii isikufanye uamini kile kilichomo kwenye biblia au quaran , sababu hivyo ni viyabu vilivyoandikwa na watu wakijaribu kumuelezea mungu, hata ewe unauesoma hapa ukiweza unaweza andika biblia yako au quaran yako.

Mkuu,

Kuna mambo niliyachukulia kawaida sana hapo awali, nikifikiri watu wengi wapo na utashi hivyo tangu awali, lakini nikagundua maisha yetu wengi ya kusaka riziki ya kawaida tu hayaturuhusu kuhoji maswali ya msingi kama Mungu yupo au hayupo.

Ukiona nashikilia sana kwenye Quran, Biblia na Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, ni kwa sababu huko ndiko kwenye watu wengi wa kujadiliana nao, kwenye urahisi wa kukanusha hoja na kutakakoeleweka na wengi.

Sitaki kumjadili Mungu ambaye hana definition, kwa sababu mjadala wa Mungu asiye na definition, hauna maana.

Nikija kuanza kumpinga Mungu wa Anunnaki hapa, nitabishana na watu wachache sana, kama nitaweza kueleweka na mtu yeyote.

Pia, katika kwenda ngazi kwa ngazi, ni muhimu kuonesha Mungu huyu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, anayeaminiwa na wengi, mwenye urahisi wa kumkanusha, hayupo kwanza, kabla ya kurukia mengine.

Kwa sababu, huyu kaandikwa sana, kawa defined sana, ana sehemu nyingi za kumjadili.

Katika mjadala ni muhimu kuwa na reference points na definitions. Sasa kati ya Mungu aliyekuwa defined na Mungu ambaye hajawa defined, naona rahisi kumjadili aliyekuwa defined.

Mimi nampinga Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, na zaidi ya Mungu wa Biblia na Quran tu, sasa nikiuliza swali la kumuhoji Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, kwa watu wanaomuamini, nina kosa gani?

Wewe kama una Mungu mwingine, na huyu wa Biblia na Quran humuamini, mlete huyo Mungu unayemuamini hapa tumjadili.

 

[Vumilika]

Leo hii yuko wapi?

Mkuu,

Kuna mambo niliyachukulia kawaida sana hapo awali, nikifikiri watu wengi wapo na utashi hivyo tangu awali, lakini nikagundua maisha yetu wengi ya kusaka riziki ya kawaida tu hayaturuhusu kuhoji maswali ya msingi kama Mungu yupo au hayupo.

Ukiona nashikilia sana kwenye Quran, Biblia na Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, ni kwa sababu huko ndiko kwenye watu wengi wa kujadiliana nao, kwenye urahisi wa kukanusha hoja na kutakakoeleweka na wengi.

Sitaki kumjadili Mungu ambaye hana definition, kwa sababu mjadala wa Mungu asiye na definition, hauna maana.

Nikija kuanza kumpinga Mungu wa Anunnaki hapa, nitabishana na watu wachache sana, kama nitaweza kueleweka na mtu yeyote.

Pia, katika kwenda ngazi kwa ngazi, ni muhimu kuonesha Mungu huyu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, anayeaminiwa na wengi, mwenye urahisi wa kumkanusha, hayupo kwanza, kabla ya kurukia mengine.

Kwa sababu, huyu kaandikwa sana, kawa defined sana, ana sehemu nyingi za kumjadili.

Katika mjadala ni muhimu kuwa na reference points na definitions. Sasa kati ya Mungu aliyekuwa defined na Mungu ambaye hajawa defined, naona rahisi kumjadili aliyekuwa defined.

Mimi nampinga Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, na zaidi ya Mungu wa Biblia na Quran tu, sasa nikiuliza swali la kumuhoji Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, kwa watu wanaomuamini, nina kosa gani?

Wewe kama una Mungu mwingine, na huyu wa Biblia na Quran humuamini, mlete huyo Mungu unayemuamini hapa tumjadili.

Kiranga hebu basi tuambiye Mungu gani usiyempinga? Maana Mungu wa kwenye Quran na Biblia unawapinga, sijui Mungu gani umuaminiye wewe?
Naomba tutajie nasi Mungu wako ili tumjadili basi?
Kama atakuwa na sifa za uungu unaweza kupata wafuasi, tatizo lako unatumia mifano midogo katika jambo kubwa.

 

[Kiranga]

Kiranga hebu basi tuambiye Mungu gani usiyempinga? Maana Mungu wa kwenye Quran na Biblia unawapinga, sijui Mungu gani umuaminiye wewe?
Naomba tutajie nasi Mungu wako ili tumjadili basi?
Kama atakuwa na sifa za uungu unaweza kupata wafuasi, tatizo lako unatumia mifano midogo katika jambo kubwa.

1. Kwa nini una assume kuna Mungu nisiyempinga?

2. Unapoandika "Mungu" unamaanisha nini?

3. Nikikwambia Mungu nisiyempinga ni yule ambaye hayupo kiuhalisia, yupo katika mawazo ya watu tu, utasemaje?

 

[Avriel]

Mkuu,

Kuna mambo niliyachukulia kawaida sana hapo awali, nikifikiri watu wengi wapo na utashi hivyo tangu awali, lakini nikagundua maisha yetu wengi ya kusaka riziki ya kawaida tu hayaturuhusu kuhoji maswali ya msingi kama Mungu yupo au hayupo.

Ukiona nashikilia sana kwenye Quran, Biblia na Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, ni kwa sababu huko ndiko kwenye watu wengi wa kujadiliana nao, kwenye urahisi wa kukanusha hoja na kutakakoeleweka na wengi.

Sitaki kumjadili Mungu ambaye hana definition, kwa sababu mjadala wa Mungu asiye na definition, hauna maana.

Nikija kuanza kumpinga Mungu wa Anunnaki hapa, nitabishana na watu wachache sana, kama nitaweza kueleweka na mtu yeyote.

Pia, katika kwenda ngazi kwa ngazi, ni muhimu kuonesha Mungu huyu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, anayeaminiwa na wengi, mwenye urahisi wa kumkanusha, hayupo kwanza, kabla ya kurukia mengine.

Kwa sababu, huyu kaandikwa sana, kawa defined sana, ana sehemu nyingi za kumjadili.

Katika mjadala ni muhimu kuwa na reference points na definitions. Sasa kati ya Mungu aliyekuwa defined na Mungu ambaye hajawa defined, naona rahisi kumjadili aliyekuwa defined.

Mimi nampinga Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, na zaidi ya Mungu wa Biblia na Quran tu, sasa nikiuliza swali la kumuhoji Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, kwa watu wanaomuamini, nina kosa gani?

Wewe kama una Mungu mwingine, na huyu wa Biblia na Quran humuamini, mlete huyo Mungu unayemuamini hapa tumjadili.

Mungu yupi hupingani nae?

 

[Avriel]

1. Kwakuwa umesema Mungu unaempinga ni yule Wa kwenye Biblia na Quran maana yake yupo mwingine asieonekana au kutajwa kwenye hivyo vitabu ...

2... Mungu ni Mungu nomino kuu...

3.

1. Kwa nini una assume kuna Mungu nisiyempinga?

2. Unapoandika "Mungu" unamaanisha nini?

3. Nikikwambia Mungu nisiyempinga ni yule ambaye hayupo kiuhalisia, yupo katika mawazo ya watu tu, utasemaje?

 

[Kiranga]

Mungu yupi hupingani nae?

Soma post namba 1312 hapo juu kidogo.

 

[Avriel]

1. Kwa nini una assume kuna Mungu nisiyempinga?

2. Unapoandika "Mungu" unamaanisha nini?

3. Nikikwambia Mungu nisiyempinga ni yule ambaye hayupo kiuhalisia, yupo katika mawazo ya watu tu, utasemaje?

Ni yupi huyo asiekuwepo kiuhalisia bali yupo mawazoni mwa watu tu?

 

[Kiranga]

1. Kwakuwa umesema Mungu unaempinga ni yule Wa kwenye Biblia na Quran maana yake yupo mwingine asieonekana au kutajwa kwenye hivyo vitabu ...

2... Mungu ni Mungu nomino kuu...

3.

Kwanza kabla ya kujadili sana kuhusu Mungu, unaweza ku define Mungu maana yake ni nini na ili kuita "huyu Mungu" inabidi awe na sifa gani?

 

[OMOYOGWANE]

Mkuu,

Kuna mambo niliyachukulia kawaida sana hapo awali, nikifikiri watu wengi wapo na utashi hivyo tangu awali, lakini nikagundua maisha yetu wengi ya kusaka riziki ya kawaida tu hayaturuhusu kuhoji maswali ya msingi kama Mungu yupo au hayupo.

Ukiona nashikilia sana kwenye Quran, Biblia na Mungu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, ni kwa sababu huko ndiko kwenye watu wengi wa kujadiliana nao, kwenye urahisi wa kukanusha hoja na kutakakoeleweka na wengi.

Sitaki kumjadili Mungu ambaye hana definition, kwa sababu mjadala wa Mungu asiye na definition, hauna maana.

Nikija kuanza kumpinga Mungu wa Anunnaki hapa, nitabishana na watu wachache sana, kama nitaweza kueleweka na mtu yeyote.

Pia, katika kwenda ngazi kwa ngazi, ni muhimu kuonesha Mungu huyu mjuzi wa yote, mwenye uwezo wote na upendo wote, anayeaminiwa na wengi, mwenye urahisi wa kumkanusha, hayupo kwanza, kabla ya kurukia mengine.

Kwa sababu, huyu kaandikwa sana, kawa defined sana, ana sehemu nyingi za kumjadili.

Katika mjadala ni muhimu kuwa na reference points na definitions. Sasa kati ya Mungu aliyekuwa defined na Mungu ambaye hajawa defined, naona rahisi kumjadili aliyekuwa defined.

Mimi nampinga Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, na zaidi ya Mungu wa Biblia na Quran tu, sasa nikiuliza swali la kumuhoji Mungu wa Biblia na Quran, kwa watu wanaomuamini, nina kosa gani?

Wewe kama una Mungu mwingine, na huyu wa Biblia na Quran humuamini, mlete huyo Mungu unayemuamini hapa tumjadili.

Nikisema kwamba Nina mungu basi nitakua nimemchonga ktk fikra zangu, nikisema kwamba sina mungu maana yake nimejitoa ktk mjadala, Mimi sio shabiki Bali nipo hapa kupima mjadala ktk fikra zisizo fungamana na upande wowote,

Ndio maana nikakuletea hoja za St Thomas Aquinas tuzijadili, pia naona dizani kama tunaenda sawa kama vile nimepiga hatua flani ktk kuujua ukweli, unaposema tumjadili mungu asiye na uungu maana yake ni kuwa siko kwenye biblia wala Quran,

Lakini pia nimeona kama vile umetishika kumjadili mungu ambaye hayupo kwenye biblia wala Quran namaanisha mungu asiye na uungu why ?

Hebu toa summary kidogo tuone hoja zako kwa mungu asiye na uungu

 

[Vumilika]

1. Kwa nini una assume kuna Mungu nisiyempinga?

2. Unapoandika "Mungu" unamaanisha nini?

3. Nikikwambia Mungu nisiyempinga ni yule ambaye hayupo kiuhalisia, yupo katika mawazo ya watu tu, utasemaje?

1- My assumption based on your kukanusha Mungu aliyeandikwa katika Quran na Biblia doesn't exist, ina maana yupo Mungu unayemuamini.
2- Mungu ninamaanisha tunaemkusudia katika ibada zetu ni mmoja, wa milele hakuzaa wala hakuzaliwa na hafanani na kitu chochote.
3-Ikiwa utasema Mungu usiyempinga hayupo kiuhalisia ila yupo katika mawazo ya watu tu, nitakubaliana na wewe kwa kuwa hafanani na kitu chochote vipi utaujua uhalisia wake?

 

[Avriel]

Done...

Soma post namba 1312 hapo juu kidogo.

 

[Avriel]

Kwanza kabla ya kujadili sana kuhusu Mungu, unaweza ku define Mungu maana yake ni nini na ili kuita "huyu Mungu" inabidi awe na sifa gani?

Nijibu tu usiniulize maswali Mimi Nina frustration zangu sitaki usumbufu Wa maswali......uligwa?

 

[Kiranga]

Ni yupi huyo asiekuwepo kiuhalisia bali yupo mawazoni mwa watu tu?

Allah, Yehova, Ahura Mazda, Krishna, Zeus, Shiva, Athena, Apollo, Horus, na wengine wengi kama hao.

Kama unasema Mungu yupo, thibitisha.

Na kabla ya kuthibitisha, define Mungu ni nini kwako ili tunapojadiliana tuwe pamoja.

 

[Kiranga]

Nikisema kwamba Nina mungu basi nitakua nimemchonga ktk fikra zangu, nikisema kwamba sina mungu maana yake nimejitoa ktk mjadala, Mimi sio shabiki Bali nipo hapa kupima mjadala ktk fikra zisizo fungamana na upande wowote,

Ndio maana nikakuletea hoja za St Thomas Aquinas tuzijadili, pia naona dizani kama tunaenda sawa kama vile nimepiga hatua flani ktk kuujua ukweli, unaposema tumjadili mungu asiye na uungu maana yake ni kuwa siko kwenye biblia wala Quran,

Lakini pia nimeona kama vile umetishika kumjadili mungu ambaye hayupo kwenye biblia wala Quran namaanisha mungu asiye na uungu why ?

Hebu toa summary kidogo tuone hoja zako kwa mungu asiye na uungu

Kwa nini unaona nimetishika na una ushahidi gani wa kuthibitisha hilo kwa kina kiasi cha kukuridhisha kwamba nimetishika na si mawazo yako tu yanayoona nimetishika?

"Mungu asiye na uungu" is an oxymoron.

 

[Kiranga]

Nijibu tu usiniulize maswali Mimi Nina frustration zangu sitaki usumbufu Wa maswali......uligwa?

Kama huwezi kufafanua ulichouliza kwa kujibu maswali yangu, hujauliza swali, umeshindwa kuuliza swali.

Sasa nitajibu vipi swali ambalo umeshindwa kuuliza?

Gashi ole nchilochilo gete ango?

 

[Kiranga]

Done...

Mungu ni nini/ nani? Ili kusema "huyu ni Mungu" inabidi awe na sifa gani?

 

[Avriel]

Allah, Yehova, Ahura Mazda, Krishna, Zeus, Shiva, Athena, Apollo, Horus, na wengine wengi kama hao.

Kama unasema Mungu yupo, thibitisha.

Na kabla ya kuthibitisha, define Mungu ni nini kwako ili tunapijadiliana tuwe pamoja.

Mungu yupo kimawazo fully stop..
Hakamatiki, hashikiki, haonekani kwa macho Bali anajengwa mawazoni, hasemi japo kuna watu husema wanaongea nae au kimaandiko...
Kumjua yupo au hayupo imekuwa ni personal issue ni maandiko kitabuni...