'Who created God' is an Illogical Question!

[UHURU JR]

Kwako wewe, katika dunia ambayo contradiction haina umuhimu, hakuna tofauti kati ya "upo" na "haupo".

Hivi unajua kwanini sie tunataka uthibitisho kwako?

 

[Apollo]

Currently watching "The Story of God" a National Geographic documentary narrated by Morgan Freeman.

Just to gain from a contrary, educated perspective.

Do any of the believers here read and explore beyond their beliefs?

The Story of God with Morgan Freeman

Nimeitazama mara nyingi

Ifuatilie kisha njoo tujadili.

 

[Kiranga]

Hivi unajua kwanini sie tunataka uthibitisho kwako?

Kwa sababu hamuelewi uthibitisho ni nini.

 

[Kiranga]

Nimeitazama mara nyingi

Ifuatilie kisha njoo tujadili.

Nimeiangalia yote.

Uliona wale watoto wadogo wa New Zealand walivyofanyiwa experiment ya Princess?

 

[Apollo]

Nimeiangalia yote.

Uliona wale watoto wadogo wa New Zealand walivyofanyiwa experiment ya Princess?

Yeah. Ni kitu ambacho naona wanahifadhi traditions zao. Lakini kwa interview, wale watoto hawakuonekana kuridhika na hiyo tamaduni. Alishiriki kwa sababu aliambiwa kushiriki.

 

[Apollo]

Nimeiangalia yote.

Uliona wale watoto wadogo wa New Zealand walivyofanyiwa experiment ya Princess?

So tell me. Umejifunza nini ndugu yangu?

 

[Kiranga]

So tell me. Umejifunza nini ndugu yangu?

Mungu hayupo, ila watu wengi hawawezi kufanya mema na kuogopa mabaya mpaka watishiwe kuna Mungu anawaangalia.

Kwa hiyo jamii ikajitungia kwamba Mungu yupo ili kufanya watu waogope kufanya mabaya na wafanye mazuri.

Documentary ni nzuri kwa maana ya kuonesha tamaduni nyingi tofauti, lakini it is a bit of a lightweight kwa mtu aliyesoma vitu kama "The Philosophy of Religion : An Anthology". The questions were a bit lightweight and rushed, there was a lot of room for follow up and deeper questions. It looks almost like Morgan Freeman was afraid to puncture some religious sensibilities.

Nimependa ile experiment na watoto wa New Zealand kwa sababu ina capture the essence of the God idea.

 

[Asili100]

Comments zaidi ya elfu na bado hamjakubaliana?? Kweli MUNGU yupo na ni mkubwa tu... thread hii na zingne zilizopita zinadhihirisha uwepo na ukubwa wake. Wanaobisha uwepo wake hawakatai kuwepo kwake wao wanachobisha ni 'kama yupo yuko wapi'. Wanataka Mungu awe na account hapa JF..... Ridiculous!! Shame on you humans

 

[Apollo]

Mungu hayupo, ila watu wengi hawawezi kufanya mema na kuogopa mabaya mpaka watishiwe kuna Mungu anawaangalia.

Kwa hiyo jamii ikajitungia kwamba Mungu yupo ili kufanya watu waogope kufanya mabaya na wafanye mazuri.

Documentary ni nzuri kwa maana ya kuonesha tamaduni nyingi tofauti, lakini it is a bit of a lightweight kwa mtu aliyesoma vitu kama "The Philosophy of Religion : An Anthology". The questions were a bit lightweight and rushed, there was a lot of room for follow up and deeper questions. It looks almost like Morgan Freeman was afraid to puncture some religious sensibilities.

Nimependa ile experiment na watoto wa New Zealand kwa sababu ina capture the essence of the God idea.

Nakuelewa vyema. Unayosema ni kweli na idea of God its human made, its a result of human mind.

So, there is no God, then what follows?

 

[Kiranga]

Nakuelewa vyema. Unayosema ni kweli na idea of God its human made, its a result of human mind.

So, there is no God, then what follows?

This education should liberate humankind twofold.

1. All shackles impending progress due to the God idea, should be broken. All kings, rulers, high priests, politicians, Popes who control others by using the God idea should be exposed. This will tremendously help humankind progress. A lot of the problems we face today are due to ignorance and belief in a nonexistent God. People should work to find the true root cause of problems rather than resorting to the easy answer if God. For example, if we see changes in the rain pattern, in that we receive less rain, the solution should be to study nature and find the reason in a natural context, not to pray to a non existent God.

2. Humankind can live justly and in harmony by large, as humanly possible, without the need of a God. In fact God oftentimes serves as a reason for religious and political divisions and wars. As we get rid of our ignorance and the need for a God, we will see that it is possible to live a moral and just life without the need of a God and following humane and humanistic principles.

 

[Apollo]

This education should liberate humankind twofold.

1. All shackles impending progress due to the God idea, should be broken. All kings, rulers, high priests, politicians, Popes who control others by using the God idea should be exposed. This will tremendously help humankind progress. A lot of the problems we face today are due to ignorance and belief in a nonexistent God. People should work to find the true root cause of problems rather than resorting to the easy answer if God. For example, if we see changes in the rain pattern, in that we receive less rain, the solution should be to study nature and find the reason in a natural context, not to pray to a non existent God.

2. Humankind can live justly and in harmony by large, as humanly possible, without the need of a God. In fact God oftentimes serves as a reason for religious and political divisions and wars. As we get rid of our ignorance and the need for a God, we will see that it is possible to live a moral and just life without the need of a God and following humane and humanistic principles.

I totally agree with your words. There is no need of "God-idea" to understand the universe and ourselves. We have to search more, to understand mysteries of the universe.

But then, what instrument do we use to understand this world?

 

[Kiranga]

I totally agree with your words. There is no need of "God-idea" to understand the universe and ourselves. We have to search more, to understand mysteries of the universe.

But then, what instrument do we use to understand this world?

We use investigation, we use logic, we use inquiry, we use reflection, we use an ever recalibrated convergence towards ever reviewed truth.

Einstein's theory of relativity is over 100 years old. It has given us the satellite, the GPS and the internet. It is still being reviewed and reconfirmed every year.

It does not need the God idea to stand.

 

[Apollo]

We use investigation, we use logic, we use inquiry, we use reflection, we use an ever recalibrated convergence towards ever reviewed truth.

Einstein's theory of relativity is over 100 years old. It has given us the satellite, the GPS and the internet. It is still being reviewed and reconfirmed every year.

It does not need the God idea to stand.

Yes. There is no need for the God idea to understand. That's totally true and No need to explain.

Where did we get ideas, logics, and everything that we can trust their validity and reliability?

Don't you think they are man-mind made too? Similar to God idea that we have created through our minds.

I am not sure if you get my point!

 

[Kiranga]

Yes. There is no need for the God idea to understand. That's totally true and No need to explain.

Where did we get ideas, logics, and everything that we can trust their validity and reliability?

Don't you think they are man-mind made too? Similar to God idea that we have created through our minds.

I am not sure if you get my point!

I get your point. You are questioning the validity of these ideas that I am upholding, to see if they are any better than the God idea.

That is a very good position. I mention the need of ever calibrating and evaluating our positions to converge towards truth.

It is entirely possible to better our understanding and self correct ourselves this way, if there is anything we are overlooking at all.

First of all, you are asking about "where did we get ideas...?" in relations to how valid ideas are.

I must point out that this correlation (where we get ideas and validity of ideas, basically validity by authority of source) is fallacious. This is the same idea that invented God. Basically "it is written in the bible, the bible is Gods word, therefore it must be right. This is prone to all kinds of falsehoods and abuse. To think that I am rejecting the God idea because it is man made is to misunderstand me. I am not rejecting the God idea because it is man made. I am rejecting it because it is inconsistent, self-contradicting and wrong.

So to me, the fact that an idea is put forward by man is not important at all, what is important is, is that idea true? Does it stand the test of inquiry and investigation? Is it logically consistent? Is it corroborated by the natural world?

The Pope can tell me there is a God. I will examine this God and find this God to be inconsistent and illogical. I will reject this God not because the Pope told me there is a God, but because the God is illogical and inconsistent in a way that such a God should not be.

Einstein told me that time is not absolute. that it is relative to gravity and velocity. Sir Arthur Eddington verified. This has been verified for over 100 years over and over again. GPS, the internet, satellite, cellphones all use this principle and verifies it everyday. I have little to no reason to doubt the validity of Relativity not because Einstein told me so, but because it has stood very well under intense scrutiny.

Moreover, Relativity is open to scrutiny and it is being further scrutinized even as we speak in order to improve our understanding even further.

You cannot equate a self contradicting man made idea to an idea that does not contradict itself, but also is corroborated by nature on investigation. That equation in itself is a contradiction.

The point is not to trust the validity of our tools. The point is to test the validity ever further and recalibrate them for even greater accuracy in convergence towards greater understanding of nature, by natural means.

 

[Apollo]

I get your point. You are questioning the validity of these ideas that I am upholding, to see if they are any better than the God idea.

That is a very good position. I mention the need of ever calibrating and evaluating our positions to converge towards truth.

It is entirely possible to better our understanding.

First of all, you are asking about "where did we get ideas...?" in relations to how valid ideas are.

I must point out that this correlation is fallacious. To think that I am rejecting the God idea because it is man made is to misunderstand me. I am not rejecting the God idea because it is man made. I am rejecting it because it is inconsistent and wrong.

So to me, the fact that an idea is put forward by man is not important at all, what is important is, is that idea true? Does it stand the test of inquiry and investigation? Is it logically consistent?

The Pope can tell me there is a God. I will examine this God and find this God to be inconsistent and illogical. I will reject this God not because the Pope told me there is a God, but because the God is illogical and inconsistent in a way that such a God should not be.

Einstein told me that time is not absolute. that it is relative to gravity and velocity. Sir Arthur Eddington verified. This has been verified for over 100 years over and over again. GPS, the internet, satellite, cellphones all use this principle and verifies it everyday. I have little to no reason to doubt the validity of Relativity not because Einstein told me so, but because it has stood very well under intense scrutiny.

Moreover, Relativity is open to scrutiny and it is being further scrutinized even as we speak in order to improve our understanding even further.

The point is not to trust the validity of our tools. The point is to test the validity ever further and recalibrate them for even greater accuracy in convergence towards greater understanding of nature, by natural means.

Yeah, but not to question if there is better than God idea or we don't own the ability to know. There is no God idea here. I mean in understanding the whole universe and ourselves.

Put aside the god idea. Actually there is no god. Wala usihangaike kurudi upande huo kuwaza au kulinganisha mawazo. Lets look at the world in general bila religious glasses.

So back to my question. What we think its a better way or instrument to explain and search knowledge and understanding; isn't it man made too? From our own minds?

 

[Kiranga]

Yeah, but not to question if there is better than God idea or we don't own the ability to know. There is no God idea here. I mean in understanding the whole universe and ourselves.

Put aside the god idea. Actually there is no god. Wala usihangaike kurudi upande huo kuwaza au kulinganisha mawazo. Lets look at the world in general bila religious glasses.

So back to my question. What we think its a better way or instrument to explain and search knowledge and understanding; isn't it man made too? From our own minds?

If gravity exists in nature, and we did not know it until Newton gave us the equations to understand it, then we understood gravity and how it works because Newton explained it to us, is gravity a man made idea?

A man made idea is something that man makes up that does not exist in nature, a fable.

If something exists in nature and man gains understanding of it and writes equations and books on it, is that something a man made idea?

Moreover, why should something be good or bad based on whether it is man made or not rather than whether it is true and has utility?

I do not reject the God idea because it is man made. Being merely man made is no ground for rejection. I accept a lot of things that are man made and do not have grounding in the natural world.

Money is a man made idea and I do not reject it. There are no natural laws governing money in the way that there are governing gravity. One could cancel the validity of money with the stroke of a pen in a way that one could not equally cancel the validity of gravity.

Government is a man made idea and I do not reject it. I am atheist, not anarchist.

The nation state is a man made idea and I do not reject it. Even as it separates unjustly and unnaturally the Maasai of Tanzania and those of Kenya based on whims of the Berlin Conference by people who had never set foot in Africa.

Democracy is a man made idea and I do not reject it.Even as it is prone to the rule of the lowest common denominator.

I reject the God idea because it is wrong, inconsistent and self contradicting.

 

[Apollo]

If gravity exists in nature, and we did not know it until Newton gave us the equations to understand it, then we understood gravity and how it works because Newton explained it to us, is gravity a man made idea?

A man made idea is something that man makes up that does not exist in nature, a fable.

If something exists in nature and man gains understanding of it and writes equations and books on it, is that something a man made idea?

I agree, thats why there is object/existence and consciousness plus the awareness of that existence of something.

The discovery of gravity is one of the revolutionary idea to human understanding. But it does not mean gravity was not there before it came to be known to human. Probably we knew it, and we were able to work with it. Example we have plumb-bobs and scale. But Newton added something to our understanding. That's a great step.

But we use our minds to understand. Right? Thats what I want to go. To the instrument that we use to understand this world. Do we know it 100%? Do we know ourselves?

We are only scientists only on the world of outside. But we don't investigate this potential instrument that we have. Our minds. If we don't know it well everything else is unnecessary.

Umeelewa ninapotaka kwenda?

 

[Kiranga]

I agree, thats why there is object/existence and consciousness plus the awareness of that existence of something.

The discovery of gravity is one of the revolutionary idea to human understanding. But it does not mean it was not there before it came to be known to human. Probably we knew it, and we were able to work with it. Example we have plumb-bobs and scale. But Newton added something to our understanding. That's a great step.

But we use our minds to understand. Right? Thats what I want to go. To the instrument that we use to understand this world. Do we know it 100%? Do we know ourselves?

We are only scientists only on the world of outside. But we don't investigate this potential instrument that we have. Our minds. If we don't know it well everything else is unnecessary.

Umeelewa ninapotaka kwenda?

The mind is being investigated everyday by science. People write Ph.D papers every day, people conduct fMRI to investigate the mind.

You say that you saw "The Story of God with Morgan Freeman", haven't you seen this in that documentary?

How can you say we don't investigate the mind?

 

[Apollo]

The mind is being investigated everyday by science. People write Ph.D papers every day, people conduct fMRI to investigate the mind.

You say that you saw "The Story of God with Morgan Freeman", haven't you seen this in that documentary?

How can you say we don't investigate the mind?

Take it easy Sir. We are investigating here.

How scientists studies the mind? What's used to understand the mind? Does understanding the mind need academic capabilities? Does it needs instruments made by itself to understand itself?

PS: Its part if the series: Episode on Buddhism views.

 

[Kiranga]

Take it easy Sir. We are investigating here.

How scientists studies the mind? What's used to understand the mind? Does understanding the mind need academic capabilities? Does it needs instruments made by itself to understand itself?

PS: Its part if the series: Episode on Buddhism views.

What is the relevance of these questions?

Do you want to be able to study the mind without using the mind or instruments made by the mind for that study to be valid?