₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
LoL! Right on the money.

I know that you are a very intelligent person.

HellVictorinho:
Anything that can or/and wants to hurt me has no right to life.

He is going to counter that the cow and chicken did not attempt to hurt you, yet you killed them, so how are you going to rebut?

LordReed:
Actually its a complex issue that has no simple answers. Take for instance the wholesale slaughter of millions of animals for our food or living space. Do you not recognise that that represents a lot of suffering? Do you not think animals have a right to life as well? Do you think we can immediately cease all forms of animal killing?

Aha, this is serious evasion and change of issue, for we were talking about humans and their Rights to Relief from hurts and harms caused by other humans and not animal rights and suffering which we can go into after settling this first issue of man and his Rights to Relief from Hurts and Harms.

If you find this uncomfortable, I would immediately stop.

I just wish to be accurately certain about the ground or grounds on which we stand.

So would you be supplying an answer to the question I asked

"So do you think that the sufferer should and must be given relief from and for all of his suffering?"

or do you wish me to stop?

LordReed:
Where possible, yes.

You have not really answered the question, because I think the possibility of relief is different from a right to relief.

So do you think that the sufferer should be given relief, which is the first part of the settlement before the other parts of the sufficiency and possibility of the relief enters in?

That is, Right to Relief first then Sufficiency of Relief next, hence 2.distinct issues!

LordReed:
Yes indeed.

Thus, do you agree that the complainant sufferer should and must be given relief from and for all of his suffering?

LordReed:
Yeah we agree on that.

Thus, do you noticed that this box of evil contains all those matters which reasonably annoy, offend, deliver pain, suffering and inconvenience and makes a person cry out for soothings, reliefs, restoration and compensation?

LordReed:
Nice

Yes, this is more or less it.

Yep, there's nothing worse than evil

Correct

No, as they say there are fates worse than death. Some conditions humans afflict on themselves are worse than death.

Ok I think I can say now say I understand your position on evil/ harm and it is not really different from my view on save for the advantage of my training as a Lawyer, I am much more acutely aware of the differences between evils which in my own humble opinion is that I would describe the box of "evil" as All those Things Which Range from (the least wicked to the infinite unseen heights/depths of Extreme Wickedness or Evil) "Not Good, bad, wicked, very Wicked, Pure Raw Wickedness/Evil!

What do you think of my opinion on this box?

LordReed:
Yes I did, you?

Ah, Always!

LordReed:
Well it is, thats why those simplifications exist but the problem is acting on those simplifications all the time creates more problems than it solves.

I think what you mean is in those instances where the presumptions were not correct, then the conduct of the parties would play a role in accelerating the conflict that may arise out of the presumption, did I speak your mind here?

LordReed:
No, there are only grades of evil/Yes there are also grades of harm.

When you say "No", do you mean that there is nothing more worse than evil?

Then would I be right to understand that when you say grades of evil you refer to some evil things could be more evil than others, in comparison?

Same also for grades of harm being less harmful in comparison to other types or grades of harm?

I had wanted to be certain when you said "For me evil are those things which egregiously delivers harm to life" this in reference that to you "evil are only those things which bring death to a person, is that correct?

Also, do you strictly confine it to death alone

Morning, hope you had a goodful day?

LordReed:
Well, I'd say it depends on how much interaction we are going to be doing. For instance when I go to pay for my shopping at the supermarket, I may not be able to interview the person at the till to determine their uniqueness so I just understand that even though I am treating them as belonging to the category cashier, I have it at the back of my mind that this person is unique and need to deal with them as such if the need arises, otherwise our interaction won't be more than me handing over my money and they issuing me a receipt. So even though I have categorised them into the box cashier, I retain the awareness that this is a unique individual.

On your whole, I concur, we do the same for we need some prior knowledge before we begin to relate with a person eg when I first got my son to by fuel for the generator, he first stood at the pump and did not say anything, then after the fueling, he had begun to move away with the fuel before I reminded him that he has not given the attendant the money.

And this is the place of modifiable presumptions in that it supplies to us the prior information we require to establish interaction with unknown persons. And this prior information is either confirmed or modified as the interaction increases with the increase of necessary information.

"I have it at the back of my mind that this person is unique

Isn't this burdensome? Isn't it preferable and restful to simply go with the flow of the interaction while waiting for the uniqueness to be presented? Eg it was until I played table tennis with a Senior Lecturer in Ibadan that was when I saw that he was powerful on the tennis board, men, hot serves and bullet strokes, whooped me, men

LordReed:
Yes this is harm but not evil.

Yes, harm but still not evil

Now this is verging on evil because his actions are a disproportionate response to the situation, it's still not what I would actually call evil though.

Okay would I be right to say that for you evil is "worser" than harm?

To you Is evil the highest harm? Is there anything "worser" than evil?

On the end do you have the lowest grade of harm?

LordReed:
As you most likely know, light has a spectrum and when its broken into its component wavelengths like during a rainbow, you can discern the various colours it is composed of. Also, you'll notice that the boundaries between each successive clour shades to the next so that there is no hard boundary between them. This is how I view human beings, we are a spectrum and need to be treated individually with that at the back of the mind.

Interesting view! Does it mean that you would always interview each person you meet never presuming or having any explanations of them, so that you can understand each individual as a separate colour?

Also don't you think that your colour view is still the same as boxes based on colour?

LordReed:
For me evil are those things which egregiously delivers harm to life, either to us as humans or to the biome we live in.

I promise to return to offer my opinion on what is evil and I will like to avoid defining it, if you would permit me.

I have many nterpretations of the word "harm" so I would like to understand your view on the word harm by placing this live scenarios

1) would you consider it harmful if you return from work and you find out that the pawpaw you were waiting to pluck has been plucked?

2) would you consider insults and ridicule harmful?

3) a situation where a person smashes your mirror because you failed to give him money, would all or some of these be considered harmful to you?

LordReed:
Fresh start is good and speaking plainly is good. If these are going to be the basis of future interactions then I welcome it.

Yippee!
I do intend this to be the basis of future relationship

LordReed:
You are free to mention any box you thing I have put you however I do strive not to put people in boxes because I have come to realise that people are complex and so boxes are only useful for generalisations and simplifications which may not apply to an individual and so cannot be the basis for actual individual interaction.

What you said up here is True but my own respectful contribution is that I still find that people are Truly in boxes, no matter the diverse signals and messages they send.

And generally I see that a thing or person is first identified which includes his box eg. A man is in the box of a man therefore, it is reasonable for us to raise up all the information we know and remember about the box man First, then we check to see if those information match the man exactly as we do to a phone. What do you think about this?

LordReed:
Evil should be condemned but what is evil?

I would like to know your opinion here.

LordReed:
Am I evil because I don't believe your particular brand of mythology? Am I to be destroyed because I lack belief in things I don't find convincing?

The obvious answer is that a person is always condemned for the Wrong, Not Good, Bad, Wicked or Evil Thing He DID!

Not for what or how incredible he thinks!

LordReed:
Bwahahahahaha! Thanks for revealing your prejudice. This is why people like you use labels so you can put people in boxes in your mind and make them easy to categorise as enemies,

Come on Reed, you of all people know very well that we all come in boxes, you yourself have accused me and others of being in a type of box.

LordReed:
condemned and worthy to be destroyed.

Only one thing or one type of thing or box is Condemned, which I think should and must be condemned and that is All things "Not good, wrongs, bad, wicked and the super wicked which we call evil.

Or do you think that evil or bad things should not be condemned?

You appear to be in good spirits, so I hereby propose suspension of hostilities and let us speak plainly, truly and naturally as though we have only just met, bias and prejudments suspended, let's start afresh?

Do you consider this a good way to relate with people or what do you propose that would be good in keeping with the spirit of goods, joy and festivities?

johnhood:
Keep on deceiving yourself.

I understand, all your labours entered your mouth, yet your hunger is not full.

Now you can say your Motto!

People do not understand and know that God Loves Parties and Joys and Happiness and Laughter and Eating and Drinking and Dancing and Playing and If He was Allowed to be our President ehn, we would work for only 2 or 3 or
4 days, the remaining days would be about Parties and Rest.

So for me, I just love the fact that Everything Shuts Down and you Plenty Happiness and Goodness is Seen and Experienced All Around.

Christmas Period used to be a Pure Reflection of what God's Kingdom is like, No crying and whipping Only Joy and Happiness and Goodness All around.

But these are the days of Trouble-lations and even this Christmas is Dull Outside but inside my House, is Always Chrismasy!

LordReed:
This is like asking why adults go to an amusement park, is it not for children? They go because it is entertaining and exciting, things that are not limited to children. Similarly, festive celebrations are for sharing joy and goodwill, these are not restricted to the practioners of whatever religion is at root of the celebration.

You are not an Athenian, Atheist, you are a Satanist.

But since you are still some percentage man (mostly man actually) you are allowed and permited to enjoy the Goodness of God Most High, if you can!

Satanson, are saying you like goods and joys and feastings which is also festivities?

johnhood:
Keep on deceiving yourself.

This is very Serious Pain oh. Everything Scattered you and scattered for you, even your wife left, eyaah! Hell is real for you!

I live in heaven and I got everything I wanted this year Through my Love, God Most High!

Sorry things did not work out so well at least you are alive to have an improved fortune next year, if you may!

johnhood:
Keep on deceiving yourself.

Eh yah oh! You are already in hell where there is no goodness for you. Ah, Oti tan ni!

CandyOps:
That was painful to read. no conjunctions in the wrtieup

Writing without conjunctions is also a creative literary device!

budaatum:
You, concern me wherever you are.

Normal, very normal, so have a sit somewhere around, there is an empty chair over across there, you can get it and settle in.

budaatum:
buda sings praises to the Almighty Lord God.

If it's where I am now, it is heaven.

"if?" Fool.atum "if?" You no know where your house dey again?

Anyway, I understand, I understand, so far you don rish house!

budaatum:
He is not very bright, is he?

[img]https://s5/images/ezgif-2-bb81ab7ea10d.gif[/img]

Een! Opportunity to enter fight wey no concern you!

LordReed:
.........

[img]https://s5/images/ezgif-2-bb81ab7ea10d.gif[/img]

johnhood:
Keep on deceiving yourself.

I can not and can never deceive myself. And this is more apparent in the fact that if I had some of His powers, and you are my enemy, it won't rain forever in your land and you will never be able to leave that place at all and you shall live with hunger and thirst forever, nothing like dying (that's kindness).

And this is just tossing!

But He allows you some moments of laughter and joy, even if it is not enough for you, but you have them.

That's How Greatly Good He is!

LordReed:
LMFAO! In your mind Satanist is the worst accusation you can throw. Bwahahahaha!

The Most Worst position is still being occupied by your Worser, so until vacancy, you have to make do with present position.

budaatum:
Speak only the truth, dt!

You are not patronizing buda. You are just ignorantly shouting insults at buda. And buda is not fleeing. Which shows how powerless you are.

Fool.atum, you have already been returned to your God-Given place!

LordReed:
Glad you recognise that you are all playing games in your heads. LOL!

You would not be a Satanist if you are not Anti-Bible!.

Kalatium:
I noticed that in the western world where many atheist reside they still celebrate Christmas.

Is Christmas not a christian thing?

That is how Greatly Good God is. His Goodness Falls on both His Enemies and his children like the sun and rain.

LordReed:
I am not interested in hearing your subjectivist bull crap, I want a definition of faith from the Bible.

. Hebrew 11:1 is Paul's subjective definition. Jude has his, John had his, Peter his, but it is nothing to be angry about for you and I both know that whatever anyone says and proves to you will not be acceptable to you, as is your God Given right to accept or Reject a thing.

LordReed:
In other words you just spilled bullshìt and are walking away. Ok. LoL.

In the likeness of what The Lord told the rich man, I say "We have the Scriptures, It speaks for itself. Whosoever has an ear to hear, let him hear"!

LordReed:
The question was HOW. To further break it down I am asking you to explain how the verse is a definition of faith because there is nothing faith related in the verse nor is there anything about "Knowing"-Having True, Sound and Solid Information".

Verse for reference:

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

That, I am not going to do for the value and praise of that verse is in its Dis-Covering and it's Uncovering!

Everyone has to unlock the other parts of themselves to See, for themselves, if they want!

All the helps to aid us in doing that have been given but the remainder of that journey Must be completed by that person.

So respectfully, this is where I must stop and proceed no further.

IfIPerishIPeris:
Bro! Which one is Spirit or idea! These are Grammars. Let's leave Grammar and follow Scriptures.

Rapture is the Catching away of the saints to Meet JESUS in the air.

The Rapture is a Mystery! The Greatest Mystery to Hit Humanity.

The Bible alone is the Guide. That's what I Follow and Believe with all my Heart.

See, are you not going contrary to what God has said in that you are paying too much attention to the physical yet you say "let's leave grammar and follow Scriptures"?

Has Christ not clearly told us Scriptures are "Spirit" in saying "My words are Spirit"?

No wahala, I am not trying to start a fight!

LordReed:
How is this verse the definition of faith?

You Clearly Asked,

LordReed:
Taken from which verse of the bible?

And I have supplied it thus.

The Bible via Paul did also Provide another Explanation of what Faith is. But The Lord in His Usual supply of Understanding via Riddles also has left us Clues to find what "Faith" is, which is what I have presented in the exercise of my freedom to offer an explanation to what the Bible described as "faith".

And I rest