Budaatum's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Budaatum's Profile › Budaatum's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 (of 1631 pages)
kolawoleibukun: He was alive, amen He was alive. Jesus was alive Then kolawoleibukun murdered him And now he's dead Sadly |
kolawoleibukun:Some say Jesus never went away and is alive somewhere today. Which is it, I wonder. |
Primesky:It's a good one. The ice will melt and return to water while the vapour will evaporate and disappear into thin air. Can't say they are all the one and same water though, unless the processes are performed on the exact same particular water. I however wonder more what would happen to my gin if I added the vapour (steam) state water to my gin instead of the ice? Laugh! I'm not being serious. |
John 9 “Are you saying we’re blind?” This week is Passover, when Jews celebrate their freedom from Egypt, and Easter weekend, when Christians celebrate the Crucifixion of Christ. The gulf between the Jews and Christ is shown again in this chapter. I've said it before, that the Jews would have found it rather difficult to accept that Jesus was the healer, sent by God. “God should get the glory for this", they claimed, but it was obvious who had healed, as the text specially states that the man was made blind "so the power of God could be seen in him". And on the Sabbath, at that! I can't help see the similarities between Jesus and the Pharisees, and the believers and unbelievers on Nairaland, with both insisting the other must believes as they say they should. It must have been impossible for the Pharisees to believe God sent Jesus. They knew God spoke to Moses, "but we don’t even know where this man comes from.” “God should get the glory for this, because we know this man Jesus is a sinner.” “Are you saying we’re blind?” The atheist would ask. “If you were blind, you wouldn’t be guilty. But you remain guilty because you claim you can see." The believers would claim, essentially meaning, "you are spiritually blind". You might understand the gulf that exists between the two! Happy Easter. |
vaxx:Wọn fi ọwọ osi ju we ile baba wọn. |
PAGAN9JA: |
CoolUsername:Like, an atheist who know ws¿¡ |
GoodMuyis:Your questions are odd, "questioning atheism", " What are your feedback loop?"! The question asked is actually, "do gods exist or not" , and atheism is the word used to describe someone who does not accept that they do exist. My personal journey began with the stories of Zeus, Odin, Osiris, fairies and elves with no one asking me to believe they were actually existing entities, so when I came across God Yahweh believers at 7 years old, you might understand how odd it seemed to me when asked to believe it was an existing entity. The questions I asked were, "what is God?" "Where is God?" "What do you mean by 'believe'" and "why?" And I went to church because that's where they pointed me to to get answers. By 9, I began reading the Bible to answer those questions for myself since those I asked gave me nothing better than, "Just believe!" And by 12, when I got to the last page, I had no problems believing "Though shalt not steal", for instance or, " love thy neighbour" and the likes, but I was also being asked to believe the impossible, like a person was immaculately, or some God created the heaven and the earth? Well, which god exactly, since I'd already been introduced to many creator gods who were immaculately born and created the same earth! It was no different to being asked to believe the stories about Hercules or Odyssey were things that actually did happen. And it did not help that those asking one to believe also believed Oyinbo rats spoke, and "no, it wasn't Sikiru Ayinde wearing that egungun costume but some spirit from the otherworld"! And they were mere hypocrites who didn't seem to believe themselves. They sure didn't behave like the book said they should. Still, I wasn't satisfied that I understood what was meant by "gods" or "God", so I spent many years seeking to understand from various perspectives including, historical, archaeological, philosophical, socialogical, psychological, empirical (as in what is God historically? Why are gods historically worshipped? Etc), and I have found, some 40 odd years later, that in all instances, humans create their gods in their own image to explain the things and phenomena that they do not understand yet and that gods do not exist outside the imagination of those who create them. They are no different to big bangs, which is just another god thing to explain the, as of yet incomprehensible, how the earth came about. My studies (questioning, research), continues today even though some questions have been conclusively answered. One question I get answered on here for instance is what does God mean to people, and how does it motivate one to live and behave towards others. |
I don’t use religion as a punch bag for anything. In fact, I have nothing against religion as it does help teach quite a lot. It was instrumental in teaching us in Nigeria for instance what it means to be educated and how to acquire an education, or do you not know that the earliest schools were created by missionaries – Islamic first and then Christianity? That said, religion too is what we practised before the arrival of the missionaries and which made us take little babies to the bottom of the rivers and bashed their heads in. My angst is against the bad that people do in the name of their religion and their gods. Now, let’s do the questioning. When Satan asked Jesus to turn stones into bread, and jump from the mountain, and bow down and worship him, did Jesus just believe and do those things? What was his problem? Was Satan not quoting from Scripture? Or when the Pharisees accused him of not washing his hands before eating, and not holding the Sabbath Holy, were they wrong? Did he not question them and thereby, and by implication, was he not questioning the Scripture in which it was written and from which the Pharisees were quoting, “Wash your hands!” “Work not on the Sabbath!” God said? I shall even go further and ask that, by questioning those who were quoting Scripture was he not in effect questioning the Lord God his father who art in Heaven and whom some believe wrote those Scriptures? Who the fuq does he think he is questioning the Lord his God Almighty! How dare he! He too must have a demon in him as you seem to think I have in me for questioning as that unbelieving atheistic Jesus Christ seems to have done! Or, in your opinion, would the Pharisees not have at least seen things the way you say is proper, that one should just believe? I tell you, not very long ago, people like me would have been burned at the stake by believers like you. Take us back 2000 odd years and maybe you would have just dragged me before the Roman judges and had me strung up on a cross between two thieves for not believing as I am told to believe and claiming there are no gods! By my understanding, Christ asked those who would follow him not to believe anything those Pharisees say even though they quote it from Scripture. Or is it not true that they wash the outside but touch not the inside, and discard the spirit of the law and give stones when asked for bread? In fact, Christians do help me, are there not specific verses in the Bible that ask that one seek for the truth and not just believe anything that one is told? There is great merit in questioning. And no, it is not a case of incessantly questioning, for really if you think of it, one would need to stop when one gets a conclusive answer to ones question. That is in fact the point that some become atheists or theists depending on how they conclude - both have conclusive answers that convince them that there are gods or no gods. As to the questions you posed below, your assumptions that we incessantly question needed to be dealt with first, and I hope I have done so. As to what it is that one sees and comes to conclude that there are no gods, you would have to go through threads on here (try the ones with atheist in the title) and read the arguments posed for that fact and its counter. For the purpose, and solution, in Yoruba land, we have a proverb that goes thus, “E je ki a se bi a ti n’se, ki o le ri bi o ti n’ri”. Translation: “Let us do as we have always done so we can continue to get the results we have always gotten”. Buda would add, “Bi o ti n’ri ko da o, sugbon ka ma se be ni so, abi?” Translation: “The result we have always gotten has been no good, but we should continue to do as we have always done, right?” Questioning provides a feedback loop that allows us to adjust what we have been doing to get the results we desire. Sticking to what one believes directly opposes this and is like sticking ones head in the sand and ignoring the obvious. One need just look at us as a nation to see how far we have gotten with “our same old same ol”, whilst some nations have taken what was good about us, stripped out the bad and gone way beyond where we only dream of getting to. While we build numerous god prayer worship houses which our people spend their time and money in while they wait for the afterlife, others are building factories and farms and providing employment for their people and building hospitals and extending their life and its quality in the here life. Do tell, which do you think is better, o godly, in fact!? Enjoy today. And I’m sorry it’s long. GoodMuyis: |
GoodMuyis:Questioning everything is not a mental illness, least not in my opinion, after all, you would logically stop questioning once you get an answer. Still, there is no problem even questioning the answer you get, as you'll get another one that either confirms or refutes the initial answer. Eventually, one would stop and claim to know for certain. The extreme opposite is to believe everything without questioning at all, which would result in the acceptance of any odd fact given to one. Imagine if you had been lied to, never checked, and believed the lie. Can you perhaps see how such a person can be said to be incapable of learning, and hence, stupid? Questioning things is the act of a person who wishes to advance in knowledge. Believing everything is the act of a person whose desire is to remain stupid, in my opinion. |
Butterflyleo:You must think buda is like you who would blatantly tell lies to prove her point!? You shameless person! Please note, I do not assume I am speaking to you alone on here as others get to read it to. DSM-IV is available online. Anyone can check through it. You don't even have to read its over 800 pages, just search for the words/phrase you want and present your evidence here! |
sonofthunder:You ask a rather odd question if you think of it to be honest. Is it not like asking "does one question one's Christianity", for instance. (p.s. I pose that rhetorically, you need not answer). That said, an atheist, those born into a religion at least, do go through periods of doubting their atheist stance as their theistic indoctrination tends to run very deep. I often come across atheists with strongly held religious ideology that they were born into, and it's not unusual to hear them say, "Oh my god". Personally, I was not indoctrinated into religion and could be classified as a tabula rasa in a sense. I never quite knew religion till I was 7, and by then, you might as well have tried to convince me that fairys and elves were real. I did wonder what gods were when I got older and encountered believing people, but they also believed oyinbo rats talked, so you might grasp how incredible they must have seemed. It all the same provoked me to study religion and belief as a human aspect, and along the way, "what is god", and "do gods exist" came up. It is the conclusions to these questions which people ponder that makes them either atheists or a theists. So, in a sense, one does (has) question[ed] whether gods exist or not, and that questioning could begin from either the stance that gods exist or don't. Personally, I don't anymore as it's a question I have already answered. Please, this may not be clear. I will gladly respond to relevant clarifying questions. |
spartan117:This is from the link you posted: One of the main goals of the Christopher Columbus expedition financed by Queen Isabella of Spain was to spread Christianity. During the Age of Discovery, Spain and Portugal established many missions in their American and Asian colonies. The most active orders were the Jesuits, Augustinians, Franciscans and Dominicans. The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are some of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression, others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism. In both Portugal and Spain, religion was an integral part of the state and evangelization was seen as having both secular and spiritual benefits. Wherever these powers attempted to expand their territories or influence, missionaries would soon follow. By the Treaty of Tordesillas, the two powers divided the world between them into exclusive spheres of influence, trade and colonization. The proselytization of Asia became linked to Portuguese colonial policy. Wiki |
awesomeJ:To be honest, if you don't mind me butting in, the mission of the Portuguese and the British, was, along with commerce, to spread religion too. They were much reliant on their God and the Church as it had much influence by providing the scribes, though, that is not to claim that their God told them to do what they did in the process. It is very well known that there were many ignorant individuals amongst them, and were wont to twist scripture for their own benefit and did so often. Any good book on colonialism states this point. Christianity is targeted by critics of colonialism because the tenets of the religion were used to justify the actions of the colonists. For example, Toyin Falola asserts that there were some missionaries who believed that "the agenda of colonialism in Africa was similar to that of Christianity". Falola cites Jan H. Boer of the Sudan United Mission as saying, "Colonialism is a form of imperialism based on a divine mandate and designed to bring liberation - spiritual, cultural, economic and political - by sharing the blessings of the Christ-inspired civilization of the West with a people suffering under satanic oppression, ignorance and disease, effected by a combination of political, economic and religious forces that cooperate under a regime seeking the benefit of both ruler and ruled." Wiki Nigerian soldiers are not as religious as they were in the Holy Roman Empire of the Portuguese days so they cannot be compared exactly. They operated at a different time and place when religion was not as influential as it was in those days, for starts, and they never left Nigeria with a religious mandate while many of the colonisers did. Do note that the Muslims were no better. They took slaves too in the name of Allah. |
Thanks for for VBCampaign. The Jews were very adept at studying the Torah in this way, and in my opinion, it is the form of studying (believers might say, 'worship'), that has made them the formidable group of people that they are. I myself studied the Gospel according to Luke in this same manner - "discussions, debates and questions on the text", with "everyone at liberty to speak" - and while it did not make me a believer, I learnt quite a lot from the study such that I felt like I went with a fishhead and came away with a whole fish and a loaf of bread. I went on a study of the Quran and have been in a book reading club that ran on the same format and both have been of immense benefit. There's is no better way to demonstrate that the Kingdom of God is within everyone, as opposed to it only being in the one telling everyone what to believe. It is incidentally a common format used for learning at uni too incidentally. |
dalaman:It's in their nature to twist the scripture to mean what they claim it means as suits them. It some form of humpty dumptyism which I doubt they can help. |
GoodMuyis:We are atheist. We question everything. And with some, it is rather wise that we do so. For some will say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ but they lie! |
For those interested in decreasing their ignorance further, The “V code” will be a bane to Christian psychologists if it nurtures the tendency to assume that tenets of non-traditional faiths are believable only to the mentally ill or hyper-suggestible. I well remember one case where a psychiatrist against The Ramptha movement, whose leader J. Z. Knight speaks with the voices of ancient seers while in trance, said, “Any fool knows that is not true.” Christian psychologists may be convinced that psychiatrist was correct, but they should be cautious about expressing such an opinion lest someone apply the same judgment to statements made about faith in Jesus Christ. While the day of apologetics is not over, postmodern society will no longer allow using modal culture to assert proof for religious ideas. Boon and Bane for Christian Psychologists The category was called "Psychoreligious or psychospiritual problem" and was approved by the Task Force on DSM-IV in 1993, after changing its name to Religious or spiritual problem. |
Butterflyleo:I checked DSM-IV myself, since you refuse to provide any evidence to support your claim, and neither atheist nor atheism occur once in the entire 886 (915) pages of the document. Nor does freethinking, or unbelieving! The DSM-IV does include V62.89 Religious & Spiritual Problems and is listed as a category that can be used when the focus of clinical attention is a religious or spiritual problem. Examples include distressing experiences that involve loss or questioning of faith, problems associated with conversion to a new faith, or questioning of spiritual values that may not necessarily be related to an organized church or religious institution. |
Finally! Emmanystone states her purpose! Surely, that wasn't that hard, was it? Emmanystone:So, in effect, you choose to do something for the benefit of others, and in effect, "make the world less bad than if you did nothing" and thereby, in your opinion, your life is not purposeless and meaningless. I guess you missed the following. budaatum:Might your issues be because you are too busy listening to yourself without hearing what others say? Or perhaps you are just wired to hear the word atheist and see demons? Or you just don't take your own advise and "read"? Or maybe you just are too busy that you cannot see any value in those who don't worship your god? Or do you just plain have issues with people choosing goals for themselves? Or.....? Do tell, when Omo Basoorun goes all the way up to the heavens to bring light to the people in the Orolu Kingdom on earth as described here, is it because she does not so much like the heavenly existence and so bothers to return to earth so others can have light and see too? Or do you think it is because she can't buy a candle and light it to see for herself? Is a person who brings light to others "meaningless" "purposeless" and "useless", as you've repeatedly insisted, Emmanystone? Or, are you just a [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+13%3A+22-30&version=RSV]teeth gnashers[/url] who sees nothing wrong in thanking your very own god that you are not like the "[url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+18%3A9-14&version=RSV]tax collector[/url]" over there? |
I am not quite clear here, despite your shouting! What is your purpose that you depend on God to help you fulfil? Is it to be "his family", and "serve him"? Emmanystone: |
You all must have not heard of Mary Toft who gave birth to rabbits! In September, 1726 Mary Toft began to give birth to rabbits. The local surgeon, John Howard, responded to her family's summons and hurried to Mary's house where, to his amazement, he helped her deliver nine of the animals. They were all born dead, and they were actually rabbit parts rather than whole rabbits. Nevertheless, this didn't lessen the amazing fact that she was giving birth to them. John Howard excitedly wrote to other men of science around the country, urging them to help him investigate this bizarre phenomenon. Soon two prominent men, sent by the King himself, arrived to investigate: Nathanael St. Andre, surgeon-anatomist to the King, and Samuel Molyneux, secretary to the Prince of Wales. Mary explained to these men that she had recently miscarried, but that during the pregnancy she had intensely craved rabbit meat. After unsuccessfully attempting to chase down several rabbits, she had dreamt that there were rabbits in her lap. The next thing she knew, she was giving birth to rabbits. In the presence of the doctors, Mary continued to give birth to even more rabbits. The men performed tests to verify the reality of the phenomenon. For instance, they placed a piece of the lung of one of the rabbits in water and noted that it floated. This meant that the rabbit must have breathed air before its death, which could not have happened inside a womb. Amazingly, the doctors ignored this evidence and decided that there was no deception involved—that Mary really was giving birth to the rabbits. The Rabbit Babies of Mary Toft They teach about her in UK schools. I have always said that the level of reasoning of some is stuck way back in the past! |
dalaman:How else can one interact with the figments of one's imagination? Just convince oneself (or allow oneself to be convinced), it is a spirit with no manifestation outside of the imagination and lie through ones teeth to validate it, basically. The Queen summed the process up prettily: "I can't believe that!" said Alice. "Can't you?" the Queen said in a pitying tone. "Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes." Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There (1871) Try it Dalaman, and you too will go to heaven when you die. Make sure you try it with heaven too though, and redefine death to mean, 'everlasting death', or 'life' rather, for half-an-hour a day. |
Emmanystone:Listen to yourself! So even God considers you meaningless and pointless, according to you. So what exactly is your point? Why do you live, again? |
Emmanystone:Agree what, exactly, that one chooses a purpose for living, perhaps, or that ones choice is meaningless? And do tell while you are at it, what are you here for again that differs to what you listed - "eat to just live", "medicate yourself", "rest", "strive to achieve a lot in life", "studying", "look for a better job and spend money aquering (sic) more degrees to be better placed", "marry", "enjoy set (sic) and have children" and "worry", and which you described as meaningless? In you opinion, is all the above meaningless? Or is there something you actually do apart from the above that makes your more meaningful than others? |
Emmanystone:Do you want me to tell you my story all over again, or is it not a worthy purpose as far as you are concerned? Lets call it, my mission. The, what I do with my time, the reason I keep myself alive, my self appointed purpose. Emmanystone: budaatum: |
CuteMadridista:It's intentional. If I can convince you that a person was 'immaculately' born, that that person died and now sits on the right hand of some god interceeding on your behalf, what more can't I convince you of? You'd be amazed at the scams done by pastors who peddle those stories. Wisely, they teach not to touch their anointed. |
CuteMadridista:They are so fond of doing the above that its no more amusing. I guess people who easily believe things expect others to simply believe as they do and they must be perplexed when asked to provide evidence for their claims. What's easier than providing a section of the DSM-IV to prove a claim that it classified atheism as an illness? If it's true afteral, it would be hard for the atheist to argue against it. But what do we get? Reddit! Good thing is a lot of people will follow those links and read what is said there and conclude for themselves one way or the other. Only a few would not bother and believe as they are told. |
Emmanystone:So, according to you, a person who does all the purposeful things to live that you listed above is, "meaningless and useless"? Please tell, what more than the above do you do? |
Thanks for the link, but that's not to the document but to a report about the document, and the same link as in the original post! zaapost: |
Emmanystone:Seems so, according to you at least Sigh. |
"Buda must not be a human being! Buda must not be buda. Buda is an atheist. And that's all that buda is!?" You are trying really hard to input your own meanings to what I wrote (or perhaps my writing is so bad!). Did you read buda's response on reddit? I responded to what I felt the need to. Too much words seemed to evoke miscomprehension. "Because, buda is an atheist!"? Buda is a human being, and like everyone else, I don't eat to grow fat. I eat to sustain my life. I do not succumb to death because I live to live. I am not depressed. And I love my life, and plan to ensure it continues till I die. I may be nonsense to you, but hey, that's your opinion. I'm big enough to know that "a thing is not just what someone says it is". I don't fill children's heads with stuff they must believe (that includes gods, big bangs, evolution etc). I in fact teach not to believe stuff, but to know by checking if things are true or false. To understand, is more important than believing the facts, I say and teach that, "a thing is not just what someone says it is". And I do so because it improves their quality of life in my opinion. To me, it's about teaching to be scientific, and not just believing things with no supporting evidence, or just because it is written in one book. Do not live by the writings in one book, I say, "but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of god" You would call it atheism. I call it building on solid foundations, where the rains and the storms will not blow or wash them away. There's a book that talks about talking donkeys and bushes too and all sorts of incredible things along with eternal life. But I wouldn't claim I have evidence that any of them are true. Nor would I go about deceitfully telling anyone they are true. That said, I don't believe Alice fell through a looking glass either, but you'd find me quoting Lewis Carroll often. Emmanystone: |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 (of 1631 pages)