Amujale:

I agree with the spirit of your post, in a way education can be said to evolve out of religion. I totally get that.

Western eductaion produced manufactured religion.

In actual fact, African spirituality is that which brought about religion.

Religion can aswell be defined as the mimicking of African philosophical concepts.

All manufactured religions are malicious imitations of African spirituality. i.e Abrahamic, Greek, Red Indian, Roman, Summerian e.t.c

Amujale:

Most of the narratives peddled by the above religions incoporate into their text various adaptations of our continental iconic characters and philosophical concepts.

Amujale:
Although the Abrahamic religions are mainly known for these type of West Asian and Eurocentric practises due to the fact that they took their exploitation of intellectual property to a whole new level.

Amujale:
The authors of Abrahamic religious text demonised the source of their copied continental philosophies and bastardise the content.

Amujale:
What most of us dont realise is the fact that most African philosphies are amongst the only verifiable religioussic concepts in living history; and are universally considered as a part of true history.

budaatum:

"Mainly known" by whom....

Amujale:


All the Abrahamic religions are mainly known by genuine historians for those type of West Asian and Eurocentric practises due to the fact that they took their exploitation of intellectual property to a whole new level.

budaatum:

My point is, how adherents see it might not necessary be how it is. And philosophising is what "intellectually robust and unequivocally honest" people do. And since you'd bother to use such words, hopefully, not flippantly, I hoped to hold you to such rigour. After all, its not like you would ask others to be "robust and honest" and you be a lazy hypocrite.

The poor go looking for "gods, spirits, devils", joseph, yet "figurative expressions" is exactly what they are, figurative expressions to denote that which is not exactly comprehended, but which hark back to the very beginning of human attempts to reflect, which is what philosophy is and science even. The wealthy however, are "intellectually robust and unequivocally honest" and end up coming to different understandings through their hard work and effort.

Christianity for instances specifically teaches, do not create figures nor bow down and worship them, and [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A40&version=KJV]do for[/url] those here whom you see and whatever Father might be in heaven will be pleased. So, why should an "intellectually robust and unequivocally honest" Christian be concerned with "the elements therein - gods, spirits, devils", and not an understanding of what those words might mean and or imply? Is it not specifically written "no one has seen God"? And yet here you are asking that God be presented to you on a plate.

I'm going to consider that what you are doing here is looking for the "elements therein" for that which is meant in spirit, so to speak. But know that it is foolish to learn calculus from random people on the street whom you dictionary define but who might not have defined themselves by a dictionary.

budaatum:

You decide whether religion makes you virtuos or not. But imagine what the rest of us would have been like if we had not been religionised at all.

Hint: Education as we know it today evolved from religion

budaatum:

You might me surprised to know how much Africa there is in the Abrahamic religion. Over 400 years worth, according to books ascribed to Moses, unless you think we enslaved the body but left the mind free to think whatever it wanted. If only the Egyptians had shared their gods, says I. Or show me how that "intellectual property" might have gotten to me if they were not exploited to various whole new levels over very many centuries until it got to poor undeserving me. Or would you say I was so worthy and it would or should have gotten to me? And what form would it get to me? Carvings off the walls of the ruined Temple of Amun, perhaps, lol.

joseph1013:


And what does this proof?

Evidently, Isaac Newton's belief about the world ending, some belief in 2060, according to Biblical prophecies is credited to have helped his focus on developing calculus. Should we then accept armageddon as a core doctrine?

I can list many others, including those who claim slavery was important to the development of civilization. Should we accept slavery on account of that?

Should we start asking what the world would have become without slavery?

You don't apply a lot of logic to these discussions?

Amujale:


Apart from historical use, for what other reason does a West African really need to be interested in ancient Egyptian mythology.

Ancient Egyptians are a product of their own downfall.

Ancient Egypt came about as a result of African unism. Various nationalities from all across Africa especially Sudan created the super state known as KM.T, they comprised of researchers and scientists; the best of every nation volunteered to that project.

When Ancient Egypt reached unbelievable heights in the world of science and technology, they betrayed the rest of the continentals even launching numerous failed wars on the continentals, thanks to the brave and battle ready people of Sudan; world renown for their impossible accuracy with the long bow.

budaatum:

A look at other societies that went back to consider their history would answer your question.

The rediscovery of classical Greek philosopher Protagoras (490 BC – c. 420 BC) brought us to the view a thousand years later that "Man is the measure of all things" and the 1400-1700 Renaissance which evolved into the Scientific (or Intellectual) Age we are in today. Same way Newton got his calculus from his understanding of ancient alchemy texts.

One can learn from history how things were done to emulate or decide which works and which doesn't.

joseph1013:


How do you know the first words bolded? Word gymnastics may suffice for you, but if readers in 2050 claim that Buhari's message of sending an envoy to South Africa in response to Xenophobic attacks are figurative expressions, should we accept them? That's why I ask, why do you know they are figurative expressions?

Bible says, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

To your second words in bold, instead of foolishly learning calculus from random people on the street, do you think it makes sense to call out their ignorance?

Amujale:


The only reason for a West African to study ancient Egyptian mythology is so as to learn other aspects of African history. And to despell the falsities being peddle by all the Abrahamic religions and not as to adopt their concepts.

The Nile civilisation represents 5% of African history.

The Dogon philosophy of West Africa represents one of the oldest knowledge of Astrology and Astronomy in the world.

The understanding in Dogon philosophy has taken modern science hundreds of years to realise.

For example the Dogon people of Mali due to their accurate astronomical calculations are the first community to plot the fact that suggests Earth spins on its own axis.

Amujale:
Religion isn’t a problem per se, it’s the Abrahamic ones that are.

budaatum:

I think the Abrahamic ones are not the problem, the misunderstanding of the individual is. But I still delight in our failure, or rather, not having done enough to know and understand and just believe. The future, is Orange.

Just wondering why these books have stood the test of time and what caused them out of all the books to be flung from so far back so I can read them is worthy of my consideration. And just reading up on what some might call inanities sure influences how I understand or see it, shall I say. And its a book. Reading is good!

Below is a short trip how it got to me. You'd find it had been messed up from the start.

The Hebrew Bible, which is also called the Tanakh (/tɑːˈnɑːx/; תָּנָ״ךְ, pronounced [taˈnaχ] or the [təˈnax]; also Tenakh, Tenak, Tanach) or sometimes the Mikra, is the canonical collection of Hebrew scriptures. These texts are almost exclusively in Biblical Hebrew, except for some Biblical Aramaic passages in the books of Daniel and Ezra. The Hebrew Bible is also the textual source for the Christian Old Testament.

The Septuagint (from the Latin: septuāgintā literally "seventy"; often abbreviated as 70 in Roman numerals, i.e., LXX; sometimes called the Greek Old Testament) is the earliest extant Koine Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.

The book of Isaiah was the most popular of all the prophetic books among the earliest Christians—it accounts for more than half the allusions and quotations in the New Testament and over half the quotations attributed to Jesus himself, and the Gospel of Matthew in particular presents Jesus's ministry as largely the fulfillment of prophecies from Isaiah. In the time of Jesus, however, the Jews of Palestine no longer spoke Hebrew, and Isaiah had to be translated into Greek and Aramaic, the two commonly used languages. In the original Hebrew of Isaiah 7:14 the word almah meant a young woman of childbearing age who had not yet given birth; however the Greek translation, the Septuagint, rendered it as parthenos, a word which means virgin. This gave the author of Matthew the opportunity to interpret Jesus as the fulfilment of the Immanuel prophecy: Jesus becomes God is with us (Matthew 1:23), the divine representative on earth, and Matthew further identifies Jesus with the Immanuel born to a parthenos by asserting that Joseph did not have sexual intercourse with Mary before she gave birth (Matthew 1:25).
[url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_7%3A14?wprov=sfla1]Gospel of Matthew[/url]

Amujale:


All the Abrahamic religions are a sham.

All Abrahamic text are false, fake and counterintuitive.

All the real authors of Abrahamic text are liars and fakers.

You are no different to the uncle Tom's that are amongst us, those that know of the falsities the Abrahamic religions peddle and continue to quote and peddle those same known fakery.

All the Abrahamic religious narratives are based on a false premise, those that are ignorant of these facts have a diminished responsibility whilst those that know of these facts and continue to pretend that they are real
are the worst pepertrators.

The Christian bible is a fraudulent compilation of documents.

The Christian bible is not a genuine document, rather its a bibliograpghy, a compilation of religious text from all across the globe, the contents of which have been repackaged, plagerised, copied, sexed-up or simply outrightly made up.

In order words, all Abrahamic religious text are fake and unreliable.

budaatum:

As you may have seen from above, theres nothing like "original text", since it evolved into being over time, and even if it were fiction I'd still give it more credit than you do.

I can only wonder how much of the texts you've read and understood to condemn it so much.

Amujale:


Abrahamic religious text should never be taken seriously.

The authors of Abrahanic text arw guilty of a huge anount of criminality.

During my research into Abrahanic religious text made me have read the The Bible, Torah and Quran from front to back on more than one occasion.

Many of us that have read the Christian bible does so by readimg lightly or casually.

However, one is meant to not only study what we read but compare and contrast the assertions and vicious inssinuations contained in their text with real history.

budaatum:

As you may have seen from above, theres nothing like "original text", since it evolved into being over time, and even if it were fiction I'd still give it more credit than you do.

I can only wonder how much of the texts you've read and understood to condemn it so much.

LordReed:


For me what is more telling is that gods do not write books.

budaatum:

We learn in the Garden of Eden how the Word of God can be good or bad. Study, compare and contrast would make one wonder if God would keep one naked and forbid them knowledge. I just need look to the North of Nigeria to see the consequences of such policies. Then see how long Adam did "not exactly die after being kicked out of Eden", and the intellectually robust and unequivocally honest would be inclined to ask, who lied.

Adjectival lenses. That's what I call those two bolds. Lenses one wears that distorts what is there into what one wants to see. Another view is expressed with "Love God", suggesting a perspective from which to view things, which in Christianity implies, for that which is good and godly and relating to those around one.

I do not have issues with such lenses, but if you put on one with blue glass, everything will seem blue, and when the glass is red it all goes red. The intellectually robust and unequivocally honest should therefore have lots of lenses with various colours with which to view things so as not to be one coloured in their view. Or they should have eyes that work well so their views are not distorted by glass.

Try it. Remove the lens then watch these and tell me what you see.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5RfScpEcZ8


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g40Eck6gW7U


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndAnzWduwP8

Amujale:



Can the authors of any of the Abrahamic religious text really be trusted?

If your answer is no, why?

If your answer is yes, why?

joseph1013:
14 WORDS THAT DESTROY CERTAINTY

Consider proposition (1):

"It is POSSIBLE that the Bible was written entirely by superstitious men imagining God."

Can you deny this proposition? Can you prove it wrong? Feel free to try but I don't think you can.

budaatum:

First, strawman. That's what your proposition is. And I'm saying it first before you can.

"It is POSSIBLE that the Bible was written entirely by superstitious men imagining God", though I very much doubt it since the Bible actually comes from the post era when the 'bibles' were written by "superstitious men imagining God". Or have you no knowledge of the more superstitiously conceived Greek, Roman, Egyptian and Yoruba gods, to mention a few, who were the imaginings of the superstitious?

The Bible is a product of a post era of imaginings of the superstitious and and was in fact the cause of the death of the more superstitious writings about Zeus and co, being more rational thought than the superstitious era that preceeded it - a fact overlooked by many especially those who are ignorant of history or missed it in the Bible where they would have observed the exact same evolution of the wrathful jealous destroying YHWH to the loving compassionate Jesus Christ.

So therefore, consider proposition (buda 1):

"It is POSSIBLE that the Bible was written entirely by rational people to explain gods to superstitious people".

Can you deny this proposition? Can you prove it wrong?

Amujale:


All the Abrahamic religions are a sham.

All Abrahamic text are false, fake and counterintuitive.

All the real authors of Abrahamic text are liars and fakers.

You are no different to the uncle Tom's that are amongst us, those that know of the falsities the Abrahamic religions peddle and continue to quote and peddle those same known fakery.

MuttleyLaff:
In their own respective way of looking/thinking at the Bible, I completely agree with both budaatum and joseph1013

budaatum:

You are asking me to quibble about the props instead of seeing how the lessons taught with and by the props have contributed to, or at least affected, human existence, either negatively or positively.

budaatum:

Sorry, but I refuse to be so lazy and would rather be "uncle Tom".

Amujale:


No, not really, i'm asking you to stop pretending that Abrahamic religious text isnt fake; summon the courage to despell the horrific falsities being drummed into innocent onlookers.

budaatum:


So therefore, consider proposition (buda 1):

"It is POSSIBLE that the Bible was written entirely by rational people to explain gods to superstitious people".

Can you deny this proposition? Can you prove it wrong?