₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
Science is in itself a proof of the Universe existence, because science is about unravelling the hidden knowledge of the Universe in order to replicate it or use it to provide solutions regarding the world.

Therefore without the Universe, science itself wouldn't exist, because without the Universe there wouldn't be any world for science to explore or learn from.

Therefore science itself is actually a pointer to the Universe, hence why the biggest brains or the greatest scientists in history do not just believe in the existence of the Universe but actually believe in the Universe, because of how fascinating the world is, which they find themselves privileged to explore and learn a lot from.

Universe bless.

But dont you think somethings display WAAAAYYYYYYYYYY too much order and fitness for purpose to be the result of a mindless process only?
Such as the cell, the brain, the eye?

The brain is orders of magnitude more advanced than any computer and no one would ever think that anything resembling a computer could come about without intelligence behind it.

TV01:
And after umpteen posts you refuse to see or acknowledge what has been repeatedly pointed out - it was covenant based, not culture.

Such a covenant is racist.

Indeed up till today they dont marry non Jews and this is racism.

And, he granted the woman her desire despite the fact she was not party to the covenants of promise. That was the reverse of racism. The Lord granted her something she had no right to. What was the harm done? Racism that brought a blessing. Your faulty lens will always mislead you.

The woman's reaction was just like a high minded person reacting to gutter talk.
I dont really believe the story by the way, many myths are written about the figure called Jesus and its a figure I have great respect and admiration for.

I dont think the same Jesus that said so much to the contrary would talk like that.

Human rights as we know them are an outworking of His work. Argue with your child-sacrifice demanding tribal deity.


TV

I see I have to school you a little.

Ancient Codes & Spiritual Traditions
c. 2350 BCE – 539 BCE
Early legal codes (such as the Code of Hammurabi) regulated social order rather than individual rights. A major shift occurred with the Cyrus Cylinder (539 BCE), issued by Cyrus the Great of Persia after conquering Babylon. It declared freedom of religion, abolished forced labor, and allowed displaced peoples to return home, earning a reputation as one of the earliest declarations of human rights.

Natural Law Philosophies
c. 500 BCE – 300 CE
Greek Stoicism and Roman jurisprudence introduced the concept of Natural Law (lex naturalis). Thinkers like Cicero argued that a universal moral order exists above state-made law, applicable to all human beings by virtue of reason.

Medieval Charters & Constitutional Limits
1215 – 1689
The English Magna Carta (1215) established that the sovereign's power was not absolute, introducing early protections against arbitrary detention and due process (Clause 39). This constitutional thread continued through the English Bill of Rights (1689), which restricted royal prerogative and protected freedom of speech within Parliament.

The Enlightenment & Social Contract Theory
17th – 18th Century
Philosophers like John Locke redefined rights as innate ("natural rights" to life, liberty, and property) rather than granted by monarchs. This intellectual shift fueled revolutionary documents that explicitly linked state legitimacy to individual liberty:

US Declaration of Independence (1776): Asserted unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789): Declared all men born free and equal in rights.

Post-WWII Codification
1945 – 1948
The atrocities of World War II and the Holocaust demonstrated that domestic legal systems were insufficient to guarantee human dignity. The United Nations Charter (1945) established human rights as a core pillar of international order, culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on December 10, 1948, chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt.
-------------
The above is a brief extract on the history of concepts on Human Rights and they well predate Christ.

Didi2d:
Person wey don get plenty name like that na 419

I swear!

LegendHero:
If I am Wike, I will bulldoze Amechi house.

No be una dey celebrate some thugs destroying Tinubu banner few days ago? All is fair in politics my friend.

Make Wike bulldoze Amaechi village house, heaven will not fall!

Is this your mentality, seriously? Well, noted.

AMINDA:
. . . .. . and will disappear like the fart of a leprous witch come January next year.

seunmsg:
I was told the same thing by the locals when I went to Omoku and Obrikom about two weeks ago. Most of the people I interacted with laughed at me when I mentioned Amaechi. They told me he can't even win Ubima not to talk of Rivers State. Apart from Port. Harcourt where Obi will still do well, APC will clear all the other local governments in Rivers State.

By rigging.

AMINDA:
He tried to do so in his backyard in Osun with the fullest machinery they can ever muster. We all know how it went. 19 governors, 60 billion, accounts freezing, 15 thousand security personnel, LG funds seizure, etc. All proved not to be enough. He will be spread thin in 2027 and Nigerians will also be prepared.

I dont think he went full throttle in Osun. The Adeleke's are his friends.

LegendHero:
Hurt as how? What hurt exactly

He took on and escalated the PMB model of nepotism by handing every critical thing to his tribe and his Lagos clique, the North feel betrayed and they will show it.

LegendHero:
From APC northern leaders who stay true to the creed. People like Ganduje, Yari, and etc.

Yes but every state in the 36 where he lost, the margin of victory the winner won him with is so minute and he came second in any state he lost.

You are a baby politician. How does Obi winning Lagos by 20k votes or Atiku winning Sokoto by just 3k votes mean Asiwaju was handicapped by votes?

Tinubu never won much states in the core North but yet he got more votes on count than Atiku from the NW.

When we say Buhari boys, we mean those controlling the federal government.

You too beware, in 2023 the North didnt feel hurt by BAT, now they do.

AMINDA:
So where did his 5.6m Northern votes come from? Did he not win only 4 Yoruba states out of 17 Southern states? Was Sanwo-olu, Umahi and Uzodinma part of the Buhari boys that betrayed Tinubu, because they also couldn't deliver their states to Tinubu.

Beware, that was when he was not president. BAT no be gentle man weakling like GEJ oh, he will take what he wants by force and now he has the yam and he has the knife.

Only God can stop him.

PigTormentor:
Ikemefuna Okeke also known as Van Batten is scam artist.
Some Nigerians are so shallow and gullible that they will believe anything as long as it's against Tinubu. Easily programmable.

Men just checked this out.

Yes. Karl Von Batten—the Managing Partner at the Washington, D.C.-based government affairs firm Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C.—uses full birth and corporate filings recorded under the name Karl-Marx Edward Ikemefuna William George Okeke-Von Batten (or simply Ikemefuna Okeke). Background & ContextIdentity & Background: Born in Nigeria, Okeke appended "Von Batten" to his name later in life. In professional contexts and U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) filings, he operates primarily as Karl Von Batten or Dr. Karl Von Batten. Lobbying Work:

He serves as a foreign agent and policy consultant for various international clients and governments. Recent Public Scrutiny: He has been the subject of extensive political news coverage—particularly regarding a $1.2 million lobbying contract between his firm and Nigerian politician Atiku Abubakar, as well as foreign political advocacy involving the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Somalia. Investigative reports and critics have frequently scrutinised his shifting legal names, academic credentials, and official titles.

LordReed:
Here

Aha.
Understood.

Perhaps that is exactly when many different views will all ring true at once!

LordReed:
But none of these would be relevant if you could occupy all perspectives.

Maybe i didnt follow the thread.
Why does occupying all perspectives come up?

LordReed:
How would when you can occupy all perspectives?

Let me attempt an answer -

So I will approach it from morality. Objective, subjective and relative.

Objective - What remains true regardless of personal opinion or circumstances.

Subjective - What is dependent on personal opinion or view point.

Relative - What is dependent on circumstances.

So talking about relative truth, we are talking about circumstances.

An example will be -

Q: Is it true that it is acceptable for a parent to abandon his or her infant child?

Objective answer - It is wrong.

Example of Subjective Answer - Baby was result of rape and so parent does not feel responsible.

Example of Relative Answer - Parent left child in a moment of flux during a shootout in the middle of a war so it is understandable.

However something like this still makes me feel you will say this is morals and not a matter of truth. So let's do another example.

Does the Earth revolve around the sun?

Objective Answer - Yes.

Subjective Answer - I am blind, I don't know. Infact I have never felt the Earth moving.

Relative Answer - It's a simulation so nothing is revolving around anything.

SIRTee15:
So let me ask u a question?

Jesus called Israelites sheep in that passage. Why don't u have a problem with it?
In some culture today, calling someone a sheep means naive and dumb. Will those cultures take offense in Jesus calling Israelites sheep.

In the book of Revelation, Jesus called some people dogs; and Paul also said beware of dogs, what does he mean?
What is the theological meaning of dog in the scripture.

I repeat, u have no clue what u talking about. U are simply extrapolating today's understanding of the word into ancient language.

See here ---->>>

DeepSight:
In answer to your question, believing that one race or tribe deserves pre eminent or preferential treatment to another on account of it's very race/ ancestry.

This is exactly what bros Jay said there.

TV01:
It wasn't really much of a question was it? It was an attempt to smear!

And, in as much as it was, I answered. I showed you a broad-lens view of the work and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. His ministry, what his acolytes taught & preached, and, most pertinently, the generational and national outworking in peoples and amongst nations that follow His teaching.

I even showed you that the progressive human rights which you predicate your poser on originated from the peoples and nations followed Him. No other peoples or nations gave rise to them or at best copied them.

I also pointed out that the cultural and civil milieu you hail from, does not have these kind of progressive human rights natively - if\where they exist, they are borrowed. And you can see they are, as they haven't really embedded, have they? Oyo, Sokoto, Alu and so on and so forth.

Now, answer the question - What is the unique trait or behaviour that defines a racist?. Waiting patiently to blow some wind .



TV

In answer to your question, believing that one race or tribe deserves pre eminent or preferential treatment to another on account of it's very race/ ancestry.

This is exactly what bros Jay said there.

By the way, the Jesus figure is one I have utmost respect for.

And no, he was not the author of human rights.

BigYash:
Nothing like that. Na manipulations

Six and half a dozen.

Talking without thinking all for clicks.

LordReed:
I think there are ontological truths and it is our limited perceptions that produce this relativity. If we could perceive the entirety of the universe there be no relativity.

There would still be. From perspective.
I am just struggling to find an excellent example of what I mean to you, for thou art a rigorous taskmaster, friend.

GloriousGbola:
Fk off with that woke nonsense!
This is the new world order where might makes right, war is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength!

Now go and get your testerone shot and lets go steal some regimes resources!!

Aye, m'lord drunken Hegseth.

belikewater:
A win for Africa at least bringing this to the forefront. I’m sure Argentina would have voted against it…very racist country overseen by demons. Tufiakwa!

Only the US voted against it.

How many have noticed tha the USA now consistently votes against global justice, fairness, equity, human rights etc?

TV01:
Complain away. How about you start with decapitations in Oyo, or public lynchings in Sokoto? Instead you raise a contrived allegation against the One from whom the very notion of human rights emanated.

You can question Christ, trash the West, smear white people, hate the juice - all to avoid taking a good hard look at your own culture and people. Bobo reflect small na. Truly what ails you?


TV

Good grief. Can you not even just address the question of what Jesus said. And for heavens sake the notion of human rights did not originate with him.

SIRTee15:
animal imagery is deeply rooted in Ancient jewish tradition language. They called God The Lion of Judah, Jesus called Israelites sheep in the same passage she referred to the gentile woman as dog.

Dog is a term is used for gentiles by ancient Israelites, it's not derogatory in anyway rather it stems from gentiles close relationship and fondness with dogs. for example dogs are allowed inside homes of gentiles while such practice is prohibited in jewish homes.

most gentiles in Jesus' era would not even care if u call them dogs, they will just look at u and shrug. It's like mocking an hausa by calling him aboki or mocking a south african by calling him bantu.
aboki means friend in hausa and bantu means people in zulu. they are in no way derogatory in their proper usage.
Just like benue people mock Yoruba people by calling them ajegbin- snail eaters. I'm sure a Yoruba man would care less so long as he has a steady plate filled with garnished snail meat to consume.

anyone seeing racism in that passage is just extrapolating today's understanding of the word 'dog' into ancient language. and that's simply ignorance.

Cheap and desperate excuses. The word dog is telling enough on its own but we can ignore it. What is important is that he says the children of the house should be attended to first.

TV01:
You would say that wouldn't you?
But at once fail to respond to any of the points or answer the question.

The milieu you hail from does not natally have any notion of rights, freedoms or liberties. Not the sort that would conceptualise racism as commonly used. It's borrowed language. And, borrowed from nations that developed those very notions on the basis of the teaching and work of Jesus Christ - the very person you ironically have the nads to allege racism against! You can't make this up. Take off the race-tinted lens and cape of victimhood.

What is the unique trait or behaviour that defines a racist?


TV

You are all over the place. You are saying something like human rights are a borrowed concept so we in Africa must never complain of breach of human rights. If you have anything to say, address what Jesus said and thats all.

This man singularly wrecked everything

O

LordReed:
Give me an example.

Let me think on it a little.

LordReed:
Lemme illustrate. It is true that gravity holds down everything on the planet to its surface but it is also true that aircraft and birds can fly off the surface and sustain their flight longer than merely throwing an object into the air could. In a sense the truths are relative because there is a change of reference which allows both to be true without contradiction.

But when some people say truth is relative, they mean they can hold mutually contradictory positions or they can hold positions that have no basis in fact or reality. For example a woman claiming she is a born again virgin. There is nothing that can erase the fact that she has already had PIV sex so her claim that it is her truth that she's a virgin again holds no water.

What is relative to me is a sort of corollary of what is circumstantial or subjective and not necessarily how you have described it.

chieveboy:
I wish to assure you that having interfaced with you on here on Nairaland, these kinds of discussion are usually not for you.

Forcing yourself into it is why you easily get upset and insult people all around the place calling them names and whatnots.

I suggest you open a thread describing the different ways Akpu can be made and consumed. I assure you likely are more easily to agree or disagree with people without getting worked up each time.

Profound wisdom.
Truer words have never been spoken.

TV01: Have you ever considered what ails you? If you did, you wouldn’t dream of raising that poser.

You hail from desolate nation, do you not? Would you gainsay that? I’ll grant you, there are some who could live comfortably – without major adaptations to their characters – in more civilised climes, or even climes that we would consider more civilised than any currently extant. But, in your country, and amongst your people, lawlessness prevails.

How? you might ask. Let’s take the Christian student murdered in broad daylight. Not just in cold blood, but in a blood-letting frenzy. Recorded in all its grainy horror on video. A bare-faced confession – whole-chested boast?? – captured live.

Yet, nothing happened, justice was not only not served, it was utterly traduced, disdained, not even allowed to take a seat.
And, not only that, but members of the NBA offered to represent the perpetrators – who were not actually charges, let alone arraigned before a court of law - pro bono.

The NBA of which you, deepsight,are a member. Yet you kept mute, mum, nary a word. The NBA did not break, or split. Nothing, nada, zilch.

And the above is just one of literally innumerable instances of primitive behaviour in your environs. Yet you dared ask that question.
deepsight, you boasted of having a CEO sacked for racism. But you are the product of backwardness, possibly a coward, from a regressiveic nation, where did you learn, how do you understand the notion of racism?

You clothe yourself with the term “learned friend”, but that garb is borrowed. Purloined from a nation that is civilised. You hail from a nation where discrimination and bigotry are not only rife, they are celebrated, genetically codified almost, spiritually embedded. Environs where sectarianism and tribalism, caste-systems and personal self-aggrandisement unrelentingly underpin your social charter Yet you dare deploy the word racist, accuse anyone of racism. Have you no sense of irony?? no ability to self reflect??

Let me ask you a question, “what is the unique trait or behaviour that makes one a racist? deepsight, notions of inclusion, equity, diversity, equal opoortunity and the like did not emanate from the milieu of which you are a part. They arose from communities that accepted Jesus as Lord. From countries that embeddied the teachings of the Christian scriptures into their laws and constitutions. That live and embed Christs teaching, such as the sermon on the mount” into their day-to-ay interactions and national characters.

deepsight, deepsight, Deepight, you, from a primordial nation, are asking if the person responsible for bringing light to a darkened world freeing the enslaved and benighted, responsible for incepting notions of enlightened human rights, civil liberties and personal freedoms as they exist in civilised countries is a racisthuh Next you’ll be alleging that He endorses slavery grin.

Oga, come to Christ and now the love of God – join us who are way beyond civilised, we are godly.

Did you miss me you wet lettuce cool. Oya, answer the question in bold, let me add more stripes kiss


TV

All this is puerile self-hating ad hominem without addressing an inch of the issue raised.
Self hating because you spend your time insulting Nigeria as though I, singularly am Nigeria alone, and you are not Nigerian.
At all events, it does nothing to address the issue.

TV01: Have you ever considered what ails you? If you did, you wouldn’t dream of raising that poser.

You hail from desolate nation, do you not? Would you gainsay that? I’ll grant you, there are some who could live comfortably – without major adaptations to their characters – in more civilised climes, or even climes that we would consider more civilised than any currently extant. But, in your country, and amongst your people, lawlessness prevails.

How? you might ask. Let’s take the Christian student murdered in broad daylight. Not just in cold blood, but in a blood-letting frenzy. Recorded in all its grainy horror on video. A bare-faced confession – whole-chested boast?? – captured live.

Yet, nothing happened, justice was not only not served, it was utterly traduced, disdained, not even allowed to take a seat.
And, not only that, but members of the NBA offered to represent the perpetrators – who were not actually charges, let alone arraigned before a court of law - pro bono.

The NBA of which you, deepsight,are a member. Yet you kept mute, mum, nary a word. The NBA did not break, or split. Nothing, nada, zilch.

And the above is just one of literally innumerable instances of primitive behaviour in your environs. Yet you dared ask that question.
deepsight, you boasted of having a CEO sacked for racism. But you are the product of backwardness, possibly a coward, from a regressiveic nation, where did you learn, how do you understand the notion of racism?

You clothe yourself with the term “learned friend”, but that garb is borrowed. Purloined from a nation that is civilised. You hail from a nation where discrimination and bigotry are not only rife, they are celebrated, genetically codified almost, spiritually embedded. Environs where sectarianism and tribalism, caste-systems and personal self-aggrandisement unrelentingly underpin your social charter Yet you dare deploy the word racist, accuse anyone of racism. Have you no sense of irony?? no ability to self reflect??

Let me ask you a question, “what is the unique trait or behaviour that makes one a racist? deepsight, notions of inclusion, equity, diversity, equal opoortunity and the like did not emanate from the milieu of which you are a part. They arose from communities that accepted Jesus as Lord. From countries that embeddied the teachings of the Christian scriptures into their laws and constitutions. That live and embed Christs teaching, such as the sermon on the mount” into their day-to-ay interactions and national characters.

deepsight, deepsight, Deepight, you, from a primordial nation, are asking if the person responsible for bringing light to a darkened world freeing the enslaved and benighted, responsible for incepting notions of enlightened human rights, civil liberties and personal freedoms as they exist in civilised countries is a racisthuh Next you’ll be alleging that He endorses slavery grin.

Oga, come to Christ and now the love of God – join us who are way beyond civilised, we are godly.

Did you miss me you wet lettuce cool. Oya, answer the question in bold, let me add more stripes kiss


TV

Bless my nimble fingers, I snapped this up before the bot could act.

TV01:
Fourth time of posting what I believe is an excellent piece. NL' loss !


TV

Remove the insults, it should sail through.