React kwenye comment za Allen Kilewella tu huoni kama ndugu yetu kadhidiwa π€£π€£π€£
React kwenye comment za Allen Kilewella tu huoni kama ndugu yetu kadhidiwa π€£π€£π€£Nazitaka π
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 πReact kwenye comment za Allen Kilewella tu huoni kama ndugu yetu kadhidiwa π€£π€£π€£
Negative Proofs: π
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 β Effectiviology
Mjadala mrefu sana labda Mungu mwenyewe aoneshe ishara zake watu wajue na ni kitu ambacho uwezekano wake ni asilimia chacheHuu 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 π
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.
Of course, Mimi nimezaliwa kwenye familia ya ukristo. Nimebatizwa, nikapata komunio ya Ekaristi, nikapata kipaimara.Huyo Infropreneur ni mtoto wa YESU KRISTO na mda huu yupo kanisani anasoma masomo
Kwahiyo subiri kwanza atoke ndo atakuja ajibu
Sasa thibitisha Mungu yupo.βUmeshindwa kuthibitisha? Hii haimaanishi Mungu hayupo.
Hata huyo Mungu anahitaji chanzo, kama yupo.Kila kitu kilicho hai kinahitaji chanzo.
Hata huyo Mungu, Haiwezekani awepo tu mwenyewe bila chanzo.Dunia haiwezi kuundwa yenyewe.
Huu ulazima unatoka wapi?Allah ndiye kitu cha lazima (necessary being), kisicho na chanzo, kinachosimamia yote.
Allah hayupo.Ukimkataa Allah kwa sababu hamna βproofβ hapo itakuwa unashindwa kuelewa msingi wa logic na uhai.β
Mkuu umemtaja Rita wa kashia nimekumbuka novena ya uchaguzi --- haya mambo magumu sanaOf 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...π
Your argument fails because you do not understand the difference between a contingent being and a necessary being.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 β 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.
Rita wa Kashia, Mtakatifu wa mambo yaliyo shindikana..πMkuu umemtaja Rita wa kashia nimekumbuka novena ya uchaguzi --- haya mambo magumu sana
MTU ANAYE KUAMBIA HAKUNA MUNGU , UJUE HUYO SAYANSI NA MATHEMATICS ZIMEMPIGA CHENGANawaandikia 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.
Ni kweli nakubaliana na wewe kwa asilimia zote kuwa kukosa ushahidi wa kitu si uthibitisho wa kitu hicho kutokuwepo.Kukosa ushahidi wa kitu si ushahidi wa kutokuwepo kwake.
Kusema βMungu hayupo kwa sababu hujathibitishwaβ 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 βulijitokeza tuβ 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 βimani pofuβ, bali unatoa hoja za kiakili na kimantiki.
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)
Kukosa uthibitisho si ushahidi wa kutokuwepo. Mungu ni kiumbe cha lazima, kisicho na chanzo; huwezi kuthibitisha au kukataa kwa masharti ya physical proof.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?
Also your argument fails because you don't understand logical fallacies, also you don't understand the burden of proof philosophy.Your argument fails because you do not understand the difference between a contingent being and a necessary being.
Kama kila kitu kilichopo lazima kiwe na chanzo chake, Hata huyo Mungu lazima awe na chanzo chake.Everything that exists has a cause, but not every cause itself needs to be created.
Divine fallacy.Allah is a Necessary Being β He exists by the essence of His own being, uncreated and without a cause.
Sasa hiyo Islamic philosophy yako, sio Universal.This is neither a divine fallacy nor special pleading; it is the foundation of Islamic philosophy and logic.
Ignoring logical fallacies to force the existence of God, shows lack of understanding, reasoning and critical thinking.Rejecting Allah because you cannot grasp βphysical proofβ ignores the very basis of logic and existence.β
kwamba uongozi wa shule haukutaka hata kuthamini maombi ya jamaa πRita wa Kashia, Mtakatifu wa mambo yaliyo shindikana..π
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.
Negative Proofs: It is generally unreasonable to demand proof of a negative, particularly if there is no evidence to support the positive claim.MTU ANAYE KUAMBIA HAKUNA MUNGU , UJUE HUYO SAYANSI NA MATHEMATICS ZIMEMPIGA CHENGA
Na imani ya spiritual realm ingekuwa ni njia ya kweli basi tungekuwa na imani moja yenye kuamini Mungu mmoja.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)
Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.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 β faith, reason, na reflection ndizo zana za kumfahamu