₦airaland Forum

voltred:
Arghhhhhh. The way they are quoting the money Fayose has been dealing with. My God my God can you just help us sell this country to the higest bidder and investors. .. so much looters in this Nigeria.

How much would we get for you, Nigerian? And what please would one do with you once bought? Make you a slave, perhaps?

TheOdd1sOut:
NASS are stalling the bill intentionally. I still can't figure out why.
EFCC should provide enough evidence to drive the fayose case straight home

It's good that they are. People would just call them Buhari Courts and accuse him of politics.
Let the regular courts reform and handle this.

Doc, we agree that everyone can believe what suits them, be it true or not, so it's ok for you to believe whatever view of me that best suits you. I wouldn't be the first to be accused of having demons in one nor would you be the first or last to make such a claim just because one has views that differ to your's.

buda is satisfied that buda stands in good company. The irony though, eludes me not.

LordReed:
As long as people are told that only the religious can develop love, compassion and empathy then the situation will persist. Add to that the issue were different religions exhort their followers to give priority to helping their own and to view unbelievers as the enemy, we continue to have an artificial divide that exacerbates the problems.

We need to educate people that love, compassion and empathy are all learnable human traits that transcend all artificial divides.

They are uneducatable, would be my position. "The poor would always be amongst us", is how Christ put it. They are inducted with particular assumptions which they are incapable of questioning so different ways of looking at things is considered a "red hearing" and its presentation "out of context". There is hope yet however. The evidence strongly being on our side.

There was a time it was taught that Jerusalem was in heaven. Ma was amazed when on her way to UK in the 60s her plane stopped over in Egypt and they went sightseeing in Jerusalem. The same is happening with the Bible being the word of God, with many now understanding God does not have a printing press and that it was written by human beings with agendas here on earth. In more knowledgeable nations such thoughts are ridiculed out of existence. It is the reason why those who wish to maintain the ignorant status quo would first bastardize the education system. The less they know, the more controllable they remain, but with the democratising of information, their grasp is loosening. One just need see the many who are freeing themselves by the minute. In past times we would have been burnt as heretics.

I do believe new 'religions' would replace the old however. Not many are capable of individual thought and so would have to unquestionably accept what they are told. And religious institutions would always exist to capture the feeble minded and tell them what to believe.

I am certain you do not "abandon the pursuit of "certain" justification" in your day to day life. Or do you cross a busy road without it?

vaxx:
..... even popper falsifability theory was put into test and could not hold water.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma

Your single track mind must see in black and white. Shades of grey elude you.

The failure of proving exactly any truth as expressed by the Münchhausen trilemma does not have to lead to dismissal of objectivity, as with relativism. One example of an alternative is the fallibilism of Karl Popper and Hans Albert, accepting that certainty is impossible, but that it is best to get as close as possible to truth, while remembering our uncertainty.

In Albert's view, the impossibility to prove any certain truth is not in itself a certain truth. After all, one needs to assume some basic rules of logical inference to derive his result, and in doing so must either abandon the pursuit of "certain" justification, as above, or attempt to justify these rules, etc. He suggests that it has to be taken as true as long as nobody has come forward with a truth which is scrupulously justified as a certain truth. Several philosophers defied Albert's challenge; his responses to such criticisms can be found in his long addendum to his Treatise on Critical Reason and later articles.

DoctorAlien:
You can accept it as confirmation that yours beliefs, and probably my beliefs too, are irrelevant to you. But it is not a confirmation that my beliefs are irrelevant to me.

Of course your beliefs are relevant to you. Moreso if you have sought to verify those beliefs. There are after all reasons why praying to a stone or a rat would give some the results they desire. Or how else would one explain those who continue to pray to stones or rats?

If one believes enough it becomes true to the individual but that in no way makes a thing true. I can cook up whatever I wish in my head and believe it, and I can provide tons of evidence (texts, for instance) to validate my beliefs. It is after all one's head and one can think up in it whatever suits one with references to justify it too, especially if one is limited in ones abilities, or selective of sources, or simply biased. But objectively? There might be issues there.

An example is "eternal life". There is no evidence for it whatsoever yet many appear to believe in it. One might as well read Alice in Wonderland and believe Alice truly fell down a hole or humpty dumpty is a real entity outside fiction. I'm afraid my attitude to such things is incredulity, and it applies to some things written in the Bible. Besides, the Bible itself warns me not to worry about such things. I can neither add an hour to my living and there's enough to worry about in this life, so why waste time on an afterlife of eternal existence that I have no evidence for?

Take "for God so loved the world" for instance. You would note in Bibles that use red to depict direct utterances of Jesus that John 3:16 et al is not depicted in red. Critical analyses would also make one consider Christ would never say such a thing. To start with, it is sheer hubris. Another is that it is just so unjesusy. If it all boiled down to believing in him as you claim, he wouldn't have bothered with so many other lessons about love, compassion and empathy which he taught. And even your own personal experience would show that Jesus is way more than mere belief. Yet here we are trumping belief over actual understanding. No wonder some claim Christianity has not yet been tried and tested; some are indeed in the infancy of mere believing and are yet to abandon childish ways.

My position, which I hope you get, is that, beliefs matter much less to me than the human being before me. One can Love the Lord one's God with all one's heart and with all one's soul and with all one's mind, but if I buda do not love you, my neighbor, whom I see before me, I worship my lord and god whom I see not, in vain, and dwell in the hottest part of hell. It is the portion alloted to buda. Or, shall I say, the belief cooked up in buda head. And there is no reason why the chef who does buda's cooking must be doing yours. Especially if you desire a menu different to buda's. For buda, there is no greater menu than this. So I ensure my chef is competent at cooking it.

I presented falsifiability as an alternative to your "we should be ready to verify whatever we're told". I shall not belabour the point except to state that one should equally be ready to falsify whatever one is told. I am certain even you don't just go looking for evidence to justify everything you are told. If you did, you'd have easily accepted everything I have written now, wouldn't you, after all, I have peppered it with numerous references from a text you find acceptable. Yet, as you say, they are my 'beliefs'. Mere seeds which I cast knowing some grow and some wither and die. And not necessarily because of a fault in where they may land, but even also because some of my seeds may be faulty.

I appreciate your time and consideration. We shared words and created! Do sleep well.

vaxx:
However, for us to do science at all we are forced to assume uniformity, which is just that an assumption. So far it has paid off. Most likely tomorrow it will pay off, but tomorrow has not yet come. Then we say it is faith based .

Read everything you can on The Problem of Induction, especially ""David Hume"" it very impressive .

It is amusing how you can claim "science is faith based" and mention the "problem of induction" in the same post. I guess if you're still stuck way back with Hume, it's understandable, though, being it's you, you probable don't understand Hume at all.

Try Popper's falsifiability for an update.

DoctorAlien:
The only thing about growing up is that we should be ready to verify whatever we're told. That's all.

P.s. There is also a school of thought that operates from the falsification of what one is taught. It helps one to resist the bias to confirm which seems inherent in humans.

You might want to learn about it here.

DoctorAlien:
Again, this is what you believe. So...

I shall accept the above as confirmation that beliefs are irrelevant, be they mine or yours. So, let's deal with that we know, shall we.

DoctorAlien:
The only thing about growing up is that we should be ready to verify whatever we're told. That's all. And I can say that, for me, the Bible keeps standing up to scrutiny every blessed day.

I have verified that the the world would be a great place if we all learnt to love, be compassionate and have empathy for one another. I'd go as far as claiming that in such a world, the lion and the lamb would dwell side by side without either eating the other. If the world were Nairaland and we all accepted to love one another, be compassionate and empathetic, Nairaland would be heaven. But unfortunately, many think what people make up and believe in their heads matters more than the human being before them as if an almighty god would sincerely give a damn about what people believe. And this despite the Parable of the Samaritan.

Are you aware the Samaritans worshipped other gods? Yet, in response to the question "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Christ said, "Go and do likewise." Surely, if "belief", as opposed to what one actually does, were more important, Jesus would have just said, "believe in me"! But to reiterate his point, he taught about the teeth gnashers who claim "lord, lord" but act in ways that belie their 'beliefs'. Or does "lord, lord" not imply 'believers' to you?

Do be aware that I have not so much disputed the Bible or the need for religion in all I've said on this thread. My position is in fact that without the Bible (and books of other faiths) and religion (which is how the contents of those books are usually taught), the majority of humans would not have evolved past animals and many would just eat one another. A time would come however, when we would become adults and abandon our childish and selfish beliefs about one's own existence in a supposed afterlife. When people accept Jesus in to their lifes as opposed to just 'lord lordism', the childish and selfish concern about their existence in an afterlife, which is merely believe, would be replaced with concern for those whom we see before us here and now and heaven would be created right here on earth for everyone.

It is my belief that this is salt worthy of any god. We would surely be in a much better position to go forth and prosper and be fruitful and increase in number if we sought to understand, instead of simply believing. It is after all what is meant when it is written that one should "seek first the Kingdom of God". The wise hear and add to their learning.

DoctorAlien:
We only believe what we want to believe.

True. Especially when we are children, and the tooth fairy and Santa Claus are cases in point. But when we grow up we should abandon our childish ways, be a bit more sceptical about our beliefs and develop critical minds.

I am incapable of believing, Doctor. I was brought up to be sceptical so believing is not a thing I do. I especially don't believe where gods are concerned since I know they are human creations. I love the way Christ is said to have put it, "In as much as I do for those here whom I see before me", the gods whom I see not should be pleased. As Lordreed said, some don't need gods or religion to learn the lessons of love, compassion and empathy, which I hope you agree as MuttleyLaff claimed, are the lessons of Christ.

Asking me to believe in gods is like giving stones to the hungry. It might take care of the so called after life, but my concern is more for the living here on earth who I see before me. I'm more concerned with mine and my neighbours three score and ten than an alledged eternity afterwards. The dead can concern themselves with their death. I am a "birds and the bees" who need not worry about tomorrow.

DoctorAlien:
Christ Himself asserted His deity. He said "before Abraham I AM". He claimed to have power to forgive sins, something which only GOD can do. He received worship in the Bible.

Jesu of Oyingbo said just about the same thing. Some treat his claim with the same ridicule they treated Jesus' claim. They both at least broke the command not to create other gods or bow down and worship them because "I am a jealous God".

DoctorAlien:
Wrong! Christ rose from the dead. His disciples were eyewitnesses of His resurrection. He is in Heaven now, preparing a place for His people.

I've heard it said that he rose from the dead and is in heaven, but I don't really trust such evidences myself. And I'm as likely to believe in heaven as apple pie in the sky. "Someone said" is hardly evidence. And the records you have for it is spurious at best.

DoctorAlien:
Surely you very much need forgiveness, because you know not what you do.

My sort must not be forgiven. I so know exactly what I do know that not knowing could not be accepted as an excuse from me. I'd have you kindly bear that in mind if you would. Some people have to go to hell if just to confirm that such a place exists.

LordReed:
Thankfully we don't need religion to get them, it is available to every human being who recognises that his fellow humans bleed and feel pain just like him.

But, so many years later, the majority still haven't got any closer to having them!

We got a new religion in UK called Mindfulness. It's the new in-thing, taught in schools, hospitals, church, and just about everywhere. It's old as fuq, but you'd think we'd only just discovered the holy grail.

MuttleyLaff:
You have unwittingly identified the components of true religion and/or religion that's pure and that's approved of.

It is that same true religion that made a Samaritian transcend, rise to the occasion and attend to one
when the priest (i.e. bishop/pastor/GO) and levite (i.e. church worker/usher/chorister) passed by on the other side.

See, Lordreed. Christ taught love compassion and empathy, but humans deified him, created a religion out of his simple teachings and worship him.

He would turn in his grave, but even he knew they should be forgiven since they know not what they do. It seems they can't help themselves, and would always be amongst us.

LordReed:
Man can transcend without religion. All we need is love, compassion and empathy.

I agree. Most countries in Europe testify to this fact, though they may just be neoreligious, as in, in the next phase of their religion. I'm however suggesting we'd eventually make religions of whatever transcends us, while using the word "religion" very very loosely when I say "cultural systems of designated behaviors and practices, world views, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organizations". And I am taking into consideration the education levels of people in a society (key words taken loosely too). The less educated would accept things on faith, while the more educated would reason.

I was reading just today how Americans can't get their heads around the fact Brits don't venerate their flags like they do for instance. One person's retort was, Brits don't deify their flag and worship it like Americans do. It made me think of the religion of the Americans. Trump sure qualifies as an anointed prophet who shall not be touched, for some.

Babacele:
he he he. OK. please I need more ebooks o . especially Herbalism Through the Ages and Glands : our invisible Guides.

[url=https://f5db1a33c5d48483c689-1033844f9683e62055e615f7d9cc8875.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/Herbalism%20Through%20the%20Ages%20-%20Ralph%20Whiteside%20Kerr.pdf]Herbalism Through The Ages[/url]
by Ralph Whiteside Kerr

vaxx:
lol......pusyy....when

Decorum, right?! Smh!

Babacele:
well it is your choice. To an alchemist such phenomena are normal but rationally it may not be.

Stop using big words with him please. He might look up the definition and start arguing that you can't make noble gold from basic lead!

vaxx:
when I observe a sense of decorum in your manner, I will engage you.

I beg you please! I will die if you don't engage me, I swear to god.

As if by your posts you know what "decorum" even means!

vaxx:
How is this a reasonable response for Christ sake.

I actually play with your feeble mind. At least you display it emotionally here . Even if you reject it. It is obvious.

Don't cry, vaxx. If you had done well, we would gladly include you amongst the sensible and intelligent who can read past the cover of a book.

vaxx:
It's simply logical that if you want to form an objective opinion about someone, the best place to start, is one resource you definitely cannot ignore is the book he or she claims is about himself.

Really? Despite the following at the back of your mind?!

vaxx:
history is nethier objective nor completely subjective. Historians have their unique way of enticing readers.

1.History is seldom black and white, it is mostly shades of grey..

2 .There is no such thing as an “unbiased” version of history. Every historian is biased which is inherent

there is nothing called an unbiased version or neutral version of history.

By the way, Christ never claimed any book was about himself!

vaxx:
The lack of manner in your speech is simply the reason I expose your intellectual nerds.


I am not here to hurt your feelings .

Look at yourself talking about manners! I wonder if you ever go back and read what you've written? One can only shake one's head at your blatant show of ignorance.

This is you about a book that gives 4 subjective views in the gospels about Christ.

vaxx:
So I say there is no book or any other work be it that of Spencer or what that will be able to give you an objective view of "Jesus's" life.

You can't touch my feelings vaxx. Just reading your incoherent posts should show you that.

garetz:
After some critical analysis, I want to be bold and make my predictions now.

Garetz Predicts: GOP to keep their majority in both the senate and house of reps

It's looking possible. Even though I've paid to have some Gop voters head's reprogrammed so they vote for the Dems, I'm not optimistic I'd get enough of them to change their minds. So I'm considering poisoning the water so they can't go out to vote. My source in Russia says the poison will only affect diehard Gop voters but she can't guarantee some won't just go down the swamp or vote from the afterlife.

I have till Nov6 to decide, so drink lots of water Gops. It's good for you.

Mental Alchemy by Ralph M. Lewis

We can transmute our problems to workable solutions through mental alchemy. While this process is neither easy nor instantaneously effective, eventually the serious person will be rewarded. Certain aspects of our lives can be altered to make them more compatible with our goals. Use this book to alter the direction of your life through proper thought and an understanding of practical mystical philosophy.

This one is for you vaxx. It would help heal your miscomprehension illness, or at least help you understand yourself.

[url=https://f5db1a33c5d48483c689-1033844f9683e62055e615f7d9cc8875.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/Mental%20Alchemy.pdf]Download copy[/url]

LoJ:
@ranchodass & Budaatum

I believe you guys are getting irritated over simple things. I shall bring my discussion on this subject to an end here.

Greetings.

The author himself said "if you like, read am. If you no like, leave am", but you make it sound like I was selling the book! I know you are smarter than this LoJ!

Any way, here's a link to Spencer's [url=https://f5db1a33c5d48483c689-1033844f9683e62055e615f7d9cc8875.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/The%20Secret%20Doctrines%20of%20Jesus%20-%20H.%20Spencer%20Lewis.pdf]The Secret Doctrines of Jesus[/url]. Please, whatever you do, do not read it with the intention of believing! Spencer does not write with that intention.

DonroxyII:
As far as me I'm concerned , we are between 100m and 150m people .... we are far from 190m ....

During National Census exercise , most of the states, local governments and villages usually inflate their numbers because population is also amongst yardstick for sharing allocation .

There are more people at Urban Centres that 100villages combined !!

Inflated population !!

In preparation for the 2016 Census, my people were fighting Kabiyesi in my town because he refused to give them 200k to inflate numbers "like Ede did".

franciskaine:
we don't av leaders at all. Both APC and PDP are useless. To say a nation far outgrowing its means of sustainance is not making any plans on checkmating this population boom is sickening. What is wrong with us as a people? Is it not beta to av 1m healthy and peaceful living citizens Dan av 100m hungry people. Africa is cursed.

I've always said there should be meter on people's toto, and get license to use it but would anyone listen? We should do uberchina. Anyone with more that 1½ children must donate one. We can burn it to generate electricity while charging double tax on net worth of anyone who flouts the law. Alternatively, we can sell some of you to India to increase our foreign reserves. India don't mind big numbers, and I don't think anyone else would want you. Soon time, population will drop to 1 million and they would all be Chinese!

saaron:
EFCC suddenly became blind, deaf and dump because buhari's closest (CORRUPT) political associate is involved. One can only imagine what will happen if Fayose was the one involved in "Babanriga Bullion van Video."
Bloody corrupt ridden govt.

Why do people not learn? Could EFCC touch Fayose while he was in office? Did the constitution not protect him?

When this guy comot office and EFCC no carry am na me go personally burn their office and my Sai Bubu sef!

vaxx:
stop being silly.

You already disengaged this thread with your unsound mind ........but.....

I'm sure you're not being emotional, you poor sod.

vaxx:
vaxx is simply catching fun.....

I will bear this in mind the next time you disengage your brain and open your mouth.

Ranchhoddas:
How preposterous!!

I just had to let him be.

If one doesn't let him be, he'd drag one through post after post of pointlessness that would make one wonder why one bothered. A "waste of space" - on the days he disengages his brain which lately is often - insults space.

I just haven't yet worked out when and how I hurt his tiny ego.

Ranchhoddas:
Lol!

A screenshot is evidence you read it vsxx? lol!

Thing is, even if he read it, he'd still misunderstand it. Simple "sun is in the sky" sounds to him like "the sky itself is the sun or the sun itself is the sky".