Thibitisha kwamba HAKUNA MUNGU

[Harmful]

Nazitaka 😁

React kwenye comment za Allen Kilewella tu huoni kama ndugu yetu kadhidiwa 🤣🤣🤣

 

[dosho12]

React kwenye comment za Allen Kilewella tu huoni kama ndugu yetu kadhidiwa 🤣🤣🤣

Huu mjadala hautakuja kuisha, na kina min me ni kama wana point hatutaweza kuthibitisha, ni imani tu kwamba yupo ndio maana tuna ahidiwa zawadi kama tuki komaa na imani zetu 😀

 

[Jagina]

Negative Proofs: 👇

It is generally unreasonable to demand proof of a negative, particularly if there is no evidence to support the positive claim.

Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Hii ni Divine fallacy
(Argument from incredulity)

Umeshindwa kuthibitisha uwepo wa huyo Mungu, yeye kama yeye, bila kumhusisha na chochote.

Unahusisha vitu vilivyomo ulimwenguni kufosi kwamba viliumbwa na huyo Mungu.

Hii ni logical fallacy inaitwa Divine fallacy. Argument from incredulity.

Divine fallacy, also known as the argument from incredulity, is a logical fallacy asserting that because a phenomenon is amazing, complex, or difficult to understand, it must be caused by divine intervention or a supernatural force.

It assumes personal lack of understanding equals a divine explanation.

Kama kila kilichopo kitahitaji kuwa na MUANZILISHI wake. Hata muanzilishi wa kila kitu atahitaji kuwa na muanzilishi wake mwingine.

Pasiwepo kitu chochote kile kilicho exist chenyewe tu bila chanzo.

Hivyo kutakuwa na msururu mrefu usio na mwisho wa vyanzo vingi visivyokuwa na mwisho.

Kusema kwamba lazima Dunia iwe chanzo lakini Mungu hana chanzo ni kufanya logical fallacy inaitwa special pleading fallacy.

The special pleading fallacy is an informal fallacy where someone applies a double standard, invoking a universal principle while arbitrarily claiming an exception for themselves or a specific, preferred case without justification. It is a form of rationalization used to avoid admitting a claim is false or to exempt oneself from rules.

The burden of proof in religion generally rests on the person making a positive assertion (theist claiming God exists), requiring them to provide evidence to support their claim. It follows the principle onus probandi, where the party asserting a position must substantiate it, rather than the party denying it.

Source: Effectiviology The Divine Fallacy: When People Assume that God Must Be the Explanation – Effectiviology

From an Islamic perspective​

Burden of Proof in Islam​

In Islam, belief in God (Allah) is considered the natural state of human fitrah (innate disposition).

However, the Qur’an often invites reflection and reasoning rather than blind assertion.

Example:
“Do they not look at the sky above them – how We have built it and adorned it, and there are no flaws in it?” (Qur’an 50:6)
Here, the argument is cosmological and teleological, but it does not rely on a “God of the gaps” argument. Islam encourages observation, reasoning, and reflection.

Key insight: Islam does not claim “everything complex must have Allah” simply because humans cannot explain it. It invites reasoned belief based on observation and signs (āyāt) in the universe.

Islam rejects the notion that belief in Allah is based on human inability to understand phenomena.
Belief is grounded in:

Signs in creation (Qur’an 3:190–191): observing order, balance, and design.
Scriptural guidance (Qur’an) and prophetic wisdom.

The Qur’an repeatedly appeals to reason, not just amazement:

“Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of night and day are signs for those of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:190)

So Islam avoids the logical error of the “divine fallacy” because it bases belief on evidence and reasoning, not mere incredulity.

The concept of Allah as uncaused (lā sābiq li’l-wujūdihi sabab – “nothing precedes His existence”) is central in Islamic theology.​

Allah is necessary existence (wājib al-wujūd), unlike created beings. This is not special pleading but a classical philosophical distinction:

Everything that begins to exist has a cause - universe began - requires a cause.
Allah is uncreated, eternal, and self-sufficient - no cause needed.

Philosophers like Al-Ghazali and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) argued: if everything required a cause, there must exist at least one necessary being that exists by its own essence, which stops infinite regress.

Key insight: In Islamic theology, this is logically consistent — Allah is necessary, everything else is contingent. It’s not arbitrary, unlike the atheist critique of “special pleading.”

Islam emphasizes rational reflection on the world, not just blind faith:​

Signs (āyāt): natural phenomena, human existence, moral order.

Scripture and Prophethood: guidance confirming reasoning and historical testimony.

So, Islam provides positive reasons to believe rather than relying solely on incredulity or fear of the unknown.

---

---

 

[Harmful]

Huu mjadala hautakuja kuisha, na kina min me ni kama wana point hatutaweza kuthibitisha, ni imani tu kwamba yupo ndio maana tuna ahidiwa zawadi kama tuki komaa na imani zetu 😀

Mjadala mrefu sana labda Mungu mwenyewe aoneshe ishara zake watu wajue na ni kitu ambacho uwezekano wake ni asilimia chache

Ila muhimu kila mtu aendelee kuamin anachoamini

 

[Jagina]

Sasa wewe Umeshindwa kuthibitisha dai la kwamba "Mungu yupo" halafu bado unakataa kwamba Mungu hayupo.

Where do you stand?

Kama unadai Mungu yupo, Thibitisha yupo. Madai ni yako, yathibitishe.

Ukishindwa kuthibitisha madai yako, ina maana madai yako ni ya UONGO. Na huyo Mungu unayedai yupo, Hayupo.

Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

“Umeshindwa kuthibitisha? Hii haimaanishi Mungu hayupo.

Kila kitu kilicho hai kinahitaji chanzo.

Dunia haiwezi kuundwa yenyewe.

Allah ndiye kitu cha lazima (necessary being), kisicho na chanzo, kinachosimamia yote.

Ukimkataa Allah kwa sababu hamna ‘proof’ hapo itakuwa unashindwa kuelewa msingi wa logic na uhai.”

 

[Infropreneur]

Huyo Infropreneur ni mtoto wa YESU KRISTO na mda huu yupo kanisani anasoma masomo

Kwahiyo subiri kwanza atoke ndo atakuja ajibu

Of course, Mimi nimezaliwa kwenye familia ya ukristo. Nimebatizwa, nikapata komunio ya Ekaristi, nikapata kipaimara.

Pia nimesoma Seminari Moshi. Nimesali misa za kilatini, kiitaliano, kiingereza na kiswahili.

Kwa hiyo habari za Yesu, Maria na Yosefu nazifahamu vyema kabisa.

Hadi habari za watakatifu, kina Rita wa Kashia, Padri Pio, Mashahidi wa Uganda na watakatifu wengine nimezisoma sana.

Habari za Bikira Maria na watoto wa Fatima. Nimezisoma.

Nimesali rozari ya huruma ya Mungu. Rozari kwa mama Maria. Nimefunga sana.

In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti...🙏

 

[Infropreneur]

“Umeshindwa kuthibitisha? Hii haimaanishi Mungu hayupo.

Sasa thibitisha Mungu yupo.

Kila kitu kilicho hai kinahitaji chanzo.

Hata huyo Mungu anahitaji chanzo, kama yupo.

Dunia haiwezi kuundwa yenyewe.

Hata huyo Mungu, Haiwezekani awepo tu mwenyewe bila chanzo.

Allah ndiye kitu cha lazima (necessary being), kisicho na chanzo, kinachosimamia yote.

Huu ulazima unatoka wapi?

Huo ulazima ni logical fallacy inaitwa Divine fallacy . Unafosi Dunia iwe na chanzo halafu una mu exempt huyo Mungu kwenye ulazima huu.

Source: Effectiviology The Divine Fallacy: When People Assume that God Must Be the Explanation – Effectiviology

Divine fallacy, also known as the argument from incredulity, is a logical fallacy asserting that because a phenomenon is amazing, complex, or difficult to understand, it must be caused by divine intervention or a supernatural force.

It assumes personal lack of understanding equals a divine explanation.

Ukimkataa Allah kwa sababu hamna ‘proof’ hapo itakuwa unashindwa kuelewa msingi wa logic na uhai.”

Allah hayupo.

Yesu hayupo.

Mungu hayupo.

Shetani hayupo.

 

[Lax]

Of course, Mimi nimezaliwa kwenye familia ya ukristo. Nimebatizwa, nikapata komunio ya Ekaristi, nikapata kipaimara.

Pia nimesoma Seminari Moshi. Nimesali misa za kilatini, kiitaliano, kiingereza na kiswahili.

Kwa hiyo habari za Yesu, Maria na Yosefu nazifahamu vyema kabisa.

Hadi habari za watakatifu, kina Rita wa Kashia, Padri Pio, Mashahidi wa Uganda, nimezisoma sana.

Habari za Bikira Maria na watoto wa Fatima. Nimezisoma.

Nimesali rozari ya huruma ya Mungu. Rozari kwa mama Maria. Nimefunga sana.

In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti...🙏

Mkuu umemtaja Rita wa kashia nimekumbuka novena ya uchaguzi --- haya mambo magumu sana

 

[Jagina]

Sasa thibitisha Mungu yupo.

Hata huyo Mungu anahitaji chanzo, kama yupo.

Hata huyo Mungu, Haiwezekani awepo tu mwenyewe bila chanzo.

Huu ulazima unatoka wapi?

Huo ulazima ni logical fallacy inaitwa Divine fallacy . Unafosi Dunia iwe na chanzo halafu una mu exempt huyo Mungu kwenye ulazima huu.

Source: Effectiviology The Divine Fallacy: When People Assume that God Must Be the Explanation – Effectiviology

Divine fallacy, also known as the argument from incredulity, is a logical fallacy asserting that because a phenomenon is amazing, complex, or difficult to understand, it must be caused by divine intervention or a supernatural force.

It assumes personal lack of understanding equals a divine explanation.

Allah hayupo.

Yesu hayupo.

Mungu hayupo.

Shetani hayupo.

Your argument fails because you do not understand the difference between a contingent being and a necessary being.

Everything that exists has a cause, but not every cause itself needs to be created. Allah is a Necessary Being – He exists by the essence of His own being, uncreated and without a cause.

This is neither a divine fallacy nor special pleading; it is the foundation of Islamic philosophy and logic.

Rejecting Allah because you cannot grasp ‘physical proof’ ignores the very basis of logic and existence.”

 

[Infropreneur]

Mkuu umemtaja Rita wa kashia nimekumbuka novena ya uchaguzi --- haya mambo magumu sana

Rita wa Kashia, Mtakatifu wa mambo yaliyo shindikana..😄

Wakati tupo kidato cha pili, kuna jamaa alikuwa hasomi. Yeye muda mwingi ni kusali tu hii novena ya Mt.Rita na kushinda church. Akiamini miujiza itafanyika kwenye mitihani ya Terminal exams.

Pepa lilivyokuja jamaa alifeli, alikuwa below school average, akafukuzwa Seminari.

 

[Seth saint]

Hivi vitu huwa mnajipa stress bure.Umeambiwa kabisa God ni spiritual concept.Sasa hapa proof utapata wapi.Religious concepts zote zinabase kwenye faith na sio kuprove.

Anyway hakuna mwenye uwezo wa kuprove kwamba Mungu yupo au hayupo kwa maana discipline iliyoleta terminology God haina sehemu ya kuprove.

Hakuna cha atheist au believer kwenye mada za kukataa au kukubali kuwa Mungu yupo.Hoja nyingi huwa ziko against na misingi ya theology.Science ina mambo yake ambayo dini haiwezi kuprove,philosophy ina mambo yake ambayo science haiwezi kuprove(kiufupi kila discipline inakuwa na miongozo yake)

 

[Lwiva]

Nawaandikia Infropreneur na Kiranga makuhani wakuu wa Atheists wa JF, salaam.

Kwenye mada hii nataka mtuthibitishie kuwa hakuna Mungu.

Kwenye kuthibitisha kwenu, msiishie tu kusema hayupo kwa kuwa hayupo, tupeni hoja zenye mantiki ni kwa nini hayupo.

Na msikwepe hoja kwa kusema hayupo kwa kuwa wanaosema yupo wanashindwa kuthibitisha kuwa yupo. Nyie ndiyo mnatakiwa mseme kwa nini hakuna Mungu.

Hoja zenu zijitegemee bila ya kuegemea kukosoa wanaosema kuwa Mungu yupo.

MTU ANAYE KUAMBIA HAKUNA MUNGU , UJUE HUYO SAYANSI NA MATHEMATICS ZIMEMPIGA CHENGA

 

[Scars]

Kukosa ushahidi wa kitu si ushahidi wa kutokuwepo kwake.

Kusema “Mungu hayupo kwa sababu hujathibitishwa” ni kosa la mantiki.

Uislamu haumwelezi Mungu kama kitu cha kimaabara kinachopimwa. Kumtaka Mungu athibitishwe kwa vifaa vya kisayansi ni kosa la kategoria. Tunathibitisha athari kwa sababu, si kiini kwa macho.


Kila kilichoanza kuwepo kina sababu
Ulimwengu ulianza kuwepo

Hivyo una sababu isiyoanza kuwepo (Muumbaji)

Kusema ulimwengu “ulijitokeza tu” bila sababu kunakiuka kanuni ile ile ya burden of proof.

Kwa hiyo, atheism si msimamo wa neutral, bali ni dai jingine la kimetafizikia linalohitaji hoja.

Uislamu hautaki “imani pofu”, bali unatoa hoja za kiakili na kimantiki.

Ni kweli nakubaliana na wewe kwa asilimia zote kuwa kukosa ushahidi wa kitu si uthibitisho wa kitu hicho kutokuwepo.

Lakini tutajuaje kwamba hiki hakipo kwasababu ni kweli hakipo au kipo ila umekosekana tu uthibitisho wa ku prove kipo?

 

[Jagina]

Hivi vitu huwa mnajipa stress bure.Umeambiwa kabisa God ni spiritual concept.Sasa hapa proof utapata wapi.Religious concepts zote zinabase kwenye faith na sio kuprove.

Anyway hakuna mwenye uwezo wa kuprove kwamba Mungu yupo au hayupo kwa maana discipline iliyoleta terminology God haina sehemu ya kuprove.

Hakuna cha atheist au believer kwenye mada za kukataa au kukubali kuwa Mungu yupo.Hoja nyingi huwa ziko against na misingi ya theology.Science ina mambo yake ambayo dini haiwezi kuprove,philosophy ina mambo yake ambayo science haiwezi kuprove(kiufupi kila discipline inakuwa na miongozo yake)

God is a metaphysical reality; faith, reason, and revelation are the tools to understand Him.

Expecting physical proof is a category error – science and theology operate in different domains.

 

[Jagina]

Ni kweli nakubaliana na wewe kwa asilimia zote kuwa kukosa ushahidi wa kitu si uthibitisho wa kitu hicho kutokuwepo.

Lakini tutajuaje kwamba hiki hakipo kwasababu ni kweli hakipo au kipo ila umekosekana tu uthibitisho wa ku prove kipo?

Kukosa uthibitisho si ushahidi wa kutokuwepo. Mungu ni kiumbe cha lazima, kisicho na chanzo; huwezi kuthibitisha au kukataa kwa masharti ya physical proof.

Kuhitaji proof ya aina hiyo ni makosa ya logic – faith, reason, na reflection ndizo zana za kumfahamu

 

[Infropreneur]

Your argument fails because you do not understand the difference between a contingent being and a necessary being.

Also your argument fails because you don't understand logical fallacies, also you don't understand the burden of proof philosophy.

You don't understand Divine fallacy.

You don't understand Special Pleading Fallacy.

You don't understand the philosophy of Burden of proof.

Everything that exists has a cause, but not every cause itself needs to be created.

Kama kila kitu kilichopo lazima kiwe na chanzo chake, Hata huyo Mungu lazima awe na chanzo chake.

Na kama si lazima kwamba, kila kilichopo kina chanzo, Hata Dunia na vyote vilivyomo except man-made things, Havihitaji na havina chanzo.

The universe is self-existing. The universe doesn't need a cause.

The universe doesn't need a creator.

The universe doesn't need to be created.

Allah is a Necessary Being – He exists by the essence of His own being, uncreated and without a cause.

Divine fallacy.

This is neither a divine fallacy nor special pleading; it is the foundation of Islamic philosophy and logic.

Sasa hiyo Islamic philosophy yako, sio Universal.

Usiifosi iwe Universal.

Hiyo philosophy ni ya kwenu tu, kwenye dini yenu ya uislamu.

Kwa sababu si kila mtu anamwamini huyo Allah.

Rejecting Allah because you cannot grasp ‘physical proof’ ignores the very basis of logic and existence.”

Ignoring logical fallacies to force the existence of God, shows lack of understanding, reasoning and critical thinking.

Facts don't cease to exist just because they are ignored.

Wewe unataka kupindisha pindisha kufosi uwepo wa huyo Allah.

 

[Lax]

Rita wa Kashia, Mtakatifu wa mambo yaliyo shindikana..😄

Wakati tupo kidato cha pili, kuna jamaa alikuwa hasomi. Yeye muda mwingi ni kusali tu hii novena ya Mt.Rita na kushinda church. Akiamini miujiza itafanyika kwenye mitihani ya Terminal exams.

Pepa lilivyokuja jamaa alifeli, alikuwa below school average, akafukuzwa Seminari.

kwamba uongozi wa shule haukutaka hata kuthamini maombi ya jamaa 😁

 

[Infropreneur]

MTU ANAYE KUAMBIA HAKUNA MUNGU , UJUE HUYO SAYANSI NA MATHEMATICS ZIMEMPIGA CHENGA

Negative Proofs: It is generally unreasonable to demand proof of a negative, particularly if there is no evidence to support the positive claim.

Chochote kinachodaiwa bila ushahidi kinaweza kutupiliwa mbali bila ushahidi.

Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Huyo Mungu tunaweza kumtupilia mbali, kwa sababu ninyi mnaodai "Mungu yupo" hamna uthibitisho wa uwepo wake.

 

[Scars]

Hivi vitu huwa mnajipa stress bure.Umeambiwa kabisa God ni spiritual concept.Sasa hapa proof utapata wapi.Religious concepts zote zinabase kwenye faith na sio kuprove.

Anyway hakuna mwenye uwezo wa kuprove kwamba Mungu yupo au hayupo kwa maana discipline iliyoleta terminology God haina sehemu ya kuprove.

Hakuna cha atheist au believer kwenye mada za kukataa au kukubali kuwa Mungu yupo.Hoja nyingi huwa ziko against na misingi ya theology.Science ina mambo yake ambayo dini haiwezi kuprove,philosophy ina mambo yake ambayo science haiwezi kuprove(kiufupi kila discipline inakuwa na miongozo yake)

Na imani ya spiritual realm ingekuwa ni njia ya kweli basi tungekuwa na imani moja yenye kuamini Mungu mmoja.

Since kumekuwa na imani nyingi tena zenye kupingana, inakuwa ngumu kukubaliana na hoja ya kwamba swala la Mungu ni jambo la imani kwasababu tunaona hata ndani ya imani bado kuna mgawanyiko.

Mkristo hakubaliana na Allah sio kwasababu ya scientific proofs.

 

[Infropreneur]

Kukosa uthibitisho si ushahidi wa kutokuwepo. Mungu ni kiumbe cha lazima, kisicho na chanzo; huwezi kuthibitisha au kukataa kwa masharti ya physical proof.

Kuhitaji proof ya aina hiyo ni makosa ya logic – faith, reason, na reflection ndizo zana za kumfahamu

Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Chochote kinachodaiwa bila ushahidi kinaweza kutupiliwa mbali bila ushahidi.

Negative Proofs: 👇

It is generally unreasonable to demand proof of a negative, particularly if there is no evidence to support the positive claim.