My understanding from your viewpoint is that everyone has their own brain and their own God. Saidia Mimi kama siskii volume Yako vizuri
Miracles do happen. I have encountered several in my life
Thanks.
I prefer the one with more reason than faith.
Religion is the opium of the masses…my standard answer when it comes to religiousity…i believe in God but he is my personal God… mostly I feel close to him when I hear Kikuyu prayers and they call him Ngai… I would like my young daughter to be taught in our traditional way knowing Ngai and not this white Jesus while the devil is depicted as a black asshole:cool:
Q: Why do some people belive in God?
A: Because believing it allows them to thinks that they are a product os some supreme being. This makes them feel secure and also gives them a purpose in life (apparently).
Q: Why do most people not believe in God?
A1: They realise that the god notion is bulkshiet.
A2. There are so many gods and thus you can’t tell if any of them is genuine.
Believing that God is omnipresent and omnipotent is toying with the idea of higher dimensional beings, yet a theory of aliens existing is considerd atheistic or scientific beliefs.
What unconfirmed beliefs do atheists have? Atheism is literally the lack of belief in the unseen.
What are the reasons you believe God exists?
[SIZE=7]My brainwashed fren by the name @MachaaWaHadithi , please be specific , which god are you talking about ? Unaongea juu ya nani hapa ndio bonobos wachague ?[/SIZE]
peleka ignorance yako kulee --------------------------------------------------->
[ATTACH=full]440398[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]440399[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=full]440402[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=full]440403[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]440401[/ATTACH]
Not lack of belief…
It’s the conviction that God doesn’t exist.
That’s an unprovable premise.
You are redefining atheism to suit your needs. An atheist lacks belief in the supernatural. So how can an atheist have conviction? A conviction is a strong belief. Additionally an atheist does not need to prove anything since he does not claim anything. It is a theist who claims God exists. It is up to a theist to prove God exists.
Not redefining anything…
You must not know the definitions bruh!
An atheist says there is no God. That’s a position of conviction.
A religious person says there is God. Another position of conviction.
That’s literally what Atheism is… the belief there is no God.
Replace belief with conviction and we are still talking about the same thing.
The conviction is the differentiator between the Atheist and the Agnostic
Nonsense.
If the Religious needs prove there is a God.
Then the Atheist needs to prove there is no possibility of the existence of a God.
That’s exactly the conviction.
Or is the assertion that there is no God not a conviction, but a mere suggestion?
Bro, if I make the claim “I have been to Mombasa.” Is it up to you to research my entire life to disprove whether I have been to Mombasa or it is up to me to produce the evidence that I was indeed in Mombasa?
If I say I have been to Mombasa…
And you say Mombasa doesn’t exist…
You owe your listeners the evidence like I owe mine the evidence.
It’s like a religious person saying they don’t believe in God… they just disbelieve the Atheists position that there is no God.
Very cunning ways of escaping the simple reality that none can conclusively argue their case.
This is the predicament that birthed agnostics
An atheist does not say anything! An atheist rejects what theists say, that God exists. Atheism is not the belief there is no God. Atheism is the disbelief there is a God.
That’s the new lazy Athesitic approach.
Research the definitions. In its bare bones its the conviction that no deity exists.
If I simplified Atheism into this sentence:
There are no gods. Would that be a correct submission?
Where disbelief in one thing so automatically translates to a belief in another… I wonder why the modern Atheist wants to encroach the Agnostic’s terrain so cunningly.
Two positions… either there is a God, or there is none.
For the religious, the belief in God points to disbelief in the idea that there is no God.
For the atheist, the rejection of the premise that there is a God automatically embraces the idea that there can’t be a God.
Can’t have your cake and eat it.
If you don’t believe in the existence of God you believe in his inexistence.
Everything else is just splitting hairs and semantics
Except I haven’t said Mombasa doesn’t exist, I have simply doubted whether you went to Mombasa. It is therefore up to you to produce photos of yourself in Mombasa. It is not up to me tor produce photos of everywhere in Mombasa to prove you were never in Mombasa.
God is with them
And that’s where you don’t understand Atheism and Agnostics.
The position here is Agnostic…
That’s to say you don’t reject the premise, but need more evidence.
The chief difference between Atheism and Agnostics is that Atheism rejects possibility that any deity exists.
Agnostics don’t reject the possibility, but neither embrace it.
Let me illustrate it in 3 statements:
Theist: God/s exist
Atheist: God/s don’t exist
Agnostic: Can’t be certain either way