₦airaland Forum

azpeculiar: A. Eveh?

Me sasa. I’m fine.

'Wo sosa' means?

I was asking. . .are you alright? – haha I think I used that in the wrong context though.

P.S. what makes you peculiar?

Kefee - Kokoroko

No wannabees.

Weke!

dislike or dissatisfied?

And where did that percentage materialize from?

From my experience...Zimbabweans are lovely!

[quote author=Ta_Xasa]I am New here so I haven't Observed or got used to the Old look to take effect on me, But it does look more plain Now. [/quote]Well to be fair, the old face wasn’t much of a looker either lol.

Last Came The Rockstars arriving Late the Kushtic People crossing Into africa from all direction From Sinai till Djbouti

Haha nice intro.

So essentially there are 4 major African groups?

Some claim that the san people are the oldest in the world.

[quote author=One_Naira]It should be pretty self-explanatory when someone is making fun of you while trying to be politically correct. The higlighted should have hinted to you, you are being made fun of[/quote]To be honest I thought most people cottoned on to the not-so-subtle sarcasm. The list was quite clearly a mick take.
People actually mistook this for a compliment? Hmmm
Anyhow if another doesn't really appreciate the mainstream Naija accent or if indeed another does, that should not influence our national esteem - our pride or lack of it should not be dependent on the opinion of outsiders. This is not a news to be jubilant or lamenting about depending on how one has actually interpreted it.

buzugee: you know people need to get over this HEAVEN and HELL conspiracy. there is no heaven in the skies, there is no magical thing that happens in heaven. heaven simply means rulership of the earth. THATS ALL IT MEANS. the lord exalts a race of people to be in control of the world. that race of people are in heaven and if they rule accordingly ? then everyone else will be in heaven with them ( proverbs 29 vs 2). but if the exalted race of people rule unrighteously, then every other race of people will be in mourning (hell) while that race that is in rulership is in heaven. (like for example after romans 11 vs 11, the edomites also known as caucasians have been exalted to rule the earth but they are not ruling righteously and because of that, white people are in heaven while everyone else is in hell ). that is all heaven and hell is. rulership and subjugation. NOTHING MORE NOTHING LESS. however the new thing that will happen now is thet christ will return and will with 144,000 righteous black men, rule the world righteously forever and ever. this way everyone on earth will be happy because the righteous are ruling. so in 'heaven' when christ is on earth, its still the same thing that is happening today that will be happening. only difference is their will be righteousness and happiness and plenty on earth so no need for crime or evil. and if you do evil everyone will be judged righteously not according to race as the white man does. like iin the white mans courts a black man will do 3 times more for the same crime than a white man etc etc. so we are in caucasian heaven now while the rest of us are in hell. i have biblical verses for all i have written, let me know if you want it

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

mkmyers45: I myself see all as sham as i don't believe that out of 40,000 or so description of God that only one stands true

I think one can also look at it as 40 000 interpretations of “God” if you like. Even people of the same belief system interpret God differently.

Before England became a protestant nation, they were Roman Catholics. So at the time many people struggled to adapt to this new (protestant) way of worship. The puritans were simple and plain in contrast to the elaborate exhibition of the Catholics who employed a lot of imagery and art etc. (i.e. stained glass windows) in their form of worship. However some of this art assisted the lay people (illiterates) to understand the stories of the bible. If it wasn’t for these art or “graven images” some would have remained ignorant to certain narrations in the bible.

And such reminds me of the different classifications of learning. Some people are audio learners, some visual, some kinesthetic etc however in school we are usually taught in a particular style that may favour a specific group (most often the audio learners who could absorb much echoed information). Now in order for other people with different abilities to capture the lesson being taught they may seek methods that correspond to their capacity to learn.
How then does this differ from the religious contingent who retains and interpret information differently to each other.

There are many representations of “God”. Yet many if not all religion claims sole authenticity.

Some believers fashion raw materials to depict god. These adherents claim such figurine is figurative of their god; the raw materials do not represent god only the content. Other believers accuse such portrayal as idolatry. How can one worship a god they have engraved? some ask.

Some believer’s portrait of god is encapsulated solely in text. These adherents claim such article is the infallible “word of God”. Others claim such portrayal is susceptible to mistranslation. Why didn’t god write his own autobiography? some ask.

If the holy book(s) are said to be “inspired by God” thus could not these physical representations of certain deities also have been god-inspired when engraved?

The Holy books are laid out in text – a means of communication from god to man. Art is also a form of communication hence these graven images are translated via art.

Could not all these different interpretations of god be valid forms of capturing “his” essence?

If some people desire to have a tangible depiction of god then why should another’s representation be deemed as wrong?

Could God not reveal itself or be celebrated in various contextual forms?

[quote author=Ta_Xasa]Haha No My friend I was busy At work lately I would never Abandon This site Unless I am Banned somehow [/quote]Such commitment. However I must admit this site is pretty unattractive (pun intended).

About The afro-asiatic Its Better Known as Erythrean Language Group These days

Erythrean corresponding to Eritrean, right? lol

Ethiopia, well at least that particular geographical region (Eastern Africa) has been often cited as the cradle of life. Do you agree with this claim?

By the way are you a historian or just a researcher?

MyJoe: Hasn't the thread lost it's original focus and arn't you people twisting religious logic out of shape a bit?

Then please help me understand. I'm asking questions for people to clarify certain things which appear confusing.
Yes I’ve deviated somewhat. In fact I wish I just started a new thread altogether addressing this seeming contradiction of sorts but nevertheless here we are.

No mainstream religious text tells you to give up luxury. You are simply not to pursue them at the expense of following God. The logic behind these promises is that even if you miss them in this world you will get them in the next.

I understand that certain things of the world could pose as a distraction and set the believer off course so certain things of this world are forbidden so as not to lead the believer astray. There are requirements that are expected of believers.

If gold streets (corresponding to the biblical description of heaven) and beautiful never-ending virgin female characters (corresponding to the Quaranic description of heaven) are rewards for remaining “righteous” and abstaining from the vices of this world – materialism - then does that not expose some contradiction and imperfection of the sought after utopia?

If one is not to be lured by the worldly pleasures in order to qualify an entry into a habitat that promises so much more of some of that pleasures – how does that separate the supposed “righteous” believer from the “heathen”?

I.e. on earth one must not drink wine because one has been promised if they abstain then they can drink wine for eternity

Why is this abode somewhat materialistic in nature when such vanity is disapproved of on earth?

How can materialism be a reward for spiritualism? The two concepts are mutually exclusive.

The heaven in the bible appears to be of a regal nature whilst the heaven in the Quaran appears to be of a sensual nature

Sawa Sawa Sawale - The Ethiopian Version

Interesting. The guy even try for pidgin.

P.S. Is it just me or does the guy resemble Emmanuel Adebayor small?

To an extent yes. And not solely of the body but of characteristics etc.

She might just be showing someone that she broke her nail

PeeBee: If an ordinary kiss does not count as cheating then I'm faithful

(Off Topic: I love your username. That's the nickname I call my sister )

[quote author=~Killz~][color=#000030]

So much for the most visited website in Nigeria, and the second most visited in Africa and of course, the "new" Nairaland![/color][/quote]Which website is the number one visited in Africa?

er. . .it shows that you've been conditioned even the brief history of your background conveys that.

tbaba1234: Every kid would undergo some kind of preconditioning , if they do not get it from parents/relatives, they get it from society and friends. Id argue that it is better kids are indoctrinated at home than outside of it. Kids do not just develop convictions, they do so based on their environment. There is another study that claims that if kids were left on an island to develop their own civilization.. They would end up worshiping something [i would look up the reference]. The belief in a divine is within us.

The signs of God are subtle: sometimes the signs come to us and we reject it even though it has already being ingrained in us.The Quran uses the word 'kafir' to describe those who disbelieve: Kafir simply means to hide, to bury, to deny the truth already ingrained within yourself. The word normally translated as verse in the quran is called 'ayat' which actually means sign.

The quran states

We have sent down to thee Manifest Signs [ayat]; and none reject them but those who are perverse.(2:99)

And how would ye deny Faith while unto you are rehearsed the Signs of Allah, and among you Lives the Messenger? Whoever holds firmly to Allah will be
shown a way that is straight. (3:101)

If one is sincere, and asks God for guidance. then guidance will come. As long as the signs are not denied.

Tbaba1234 what is the principle of faith?

Is our conviction inborn, inspired or dictated? Should religion be hereditary?

So largely our “faith” is determined by our environment?

If I follow a particular religion due to the orientation of my family then that may not be “faith” if not personally inspired in fact I would call it custom and a child has thus been conditioned into that particular climate. Because of this some people remain complacent or even take such belief for granted and not willing to search for themselves.

Of course parents will nurture their child in what they believe is right and will benefit their child. And if such parents are religious, it’s understandable that their children will likely be brought up or exposed in that faith.

But subjecting a child to a particular belief as opposed to being an example of that particular belief is coercion not conviction.
Faith cannot be forced, and forcing people shows a lack of faith.

Sweetnecta: @Emofine; You should calm down and you dont have to prove your position to me or try to satisfy me. You have conscience and that is your better guide; hopefully our conscience will guide us to all truth.

My intention was neither to "satisfy" you or attack you. I never wrote that heavy response in anger more so mild frustration if anything which must have spilt but I apologise if I’ve misconstrued your intention and reply. I guess certain things have accumulated in my head and manifested itself in that novel I wrote you. Sorry you had to bear the brunt of my accumulated frustration. I appreciate your patience but sometimes I believe you (unintentionally) render my beliefs redundant or non-existent by friendly nudging me towards Islam especially when I express curiosity.
Sweetnecta, I would like for us to finally have a proper talk someday to understand each other and share our beliefs– if you’re so willing.

Sweetnecta: See, emofine when I said you will have to mention "God" by instinct in you at definite critical point/position/situation I was serious and sure about it. It is because its similar to drinking cold water to eliminate thirst, eating to rid hunger. You have no control, just as you have no control of the flow of blood in your body; you wish that it flows freely because it is part of your being alive. The human nature, her instinct in your case recognizes God. Your soul will go to His mentioning without you able to avoid this, since you are human. Every human has a soul which makes the body stand, alive. It is the living soul and when it leaves the body, the body is dead. The soul does not come from the parents; it is created exclusively by God, while human body is brought about by God using parents as the vessels.

Sweetnecta, let me tell you something. If a person is irreligious or does not adhere to the popular faiths such as Islam or Christianity it doesn't mean that such people are not conscious of a creator.

I actually have beliefs but you wouldn’t know that because you fail to ask as other individuals do on this forum. Only one person in my whole time in this entire forum has bothered to inquire about my beliefs and such encounter did not even take place in the religious section.
When a person declares that they are neither for Allah or Jehovah it appears many people here readily assume that such a person is atheist. When a person discusses with another individual or collective of a particular status some people lump the foreigner with the majority. When a person asks questions some people are averse to answer because some assume that such person is a trouble maker or some really care because they think that such a person is lost and looking for directions.

Let me tell you now, I belong to none of those demographics. I am not floating or flirting with different belief systems. I already have my own beliefs if you care to check. However I am very interested in learning more about other people’s beliefs and philosophies. There is nothing more I despise than willful ignorance. I don’t like to adhere to any cast roles awarded to any collective or individual by any biased or bigoted people including the media. When I want to find out more about a particular people I will investigate said people preferably by first hand. So when I read the Quaran it doesn't mean I've made a sub-conscious choice to adopt Allah as my God. When I quote the Bible it doesn't mean that I have faith in the text I reiterate. I converse with you in the language you understand to make our communication more amicable it’s just a shame that that same courtesy often or not is never extended. Just because I’m sensitive to another people’s belief or unbelief doesn't mean I revere it.

Sorry to write that whole epistle but I think it’s about time you know where I stand.

kmcutez: Why bring a child to this world, knowing quite well, that there is a high possibility that he/she will go to hell. Even when most christians "give their life to christ" they still commit grievous offences that will send them to hell, where they will burn forever?

By that same token shouldn’t god be punished for creating humans that “he” had the foreknowledge of that will eventually sin and go to hell?

Is bringing a child to this world not the most selfish of all act? Why bring a child to this world, knowing quite well that there is a high possibility for him/her to be sent to hell, where they will suffer forever? Should God not punish all Mothers and Fathers for this act of selfishness, where they too should be sent to hell if any of their child goes to hell, for the selfish act of bringing them to this world?

Well people have different reasons for having children and not all of those reasons are selfish at all. Actually some may argue that having a child is perhaps one of the most selfless tasks; as for a period that child becomes the parent’s greater responsibility and primary priority. But cases differ from parent to parent.
Why should people be punished for procreating which is even one of the instructions of the biblical god. If men didn’t have babies then there will eventually be no humans at all to acknowledge this god – and I doubt such being would want that.

Besides answer me this. . .if parents are to be punished for each child that ends up in hell. . . what if a couple had two children and one of them made it to heaven whilst the other hell? What should happen to such people then?

sarmy: I think this guy asked a valid question, I propose that people should stop giving birth until God change his mind about this hell of a thing.

Why giving birth if there is no 100% assurance that the child will make it to heaven.

lol I also thought this was a valid question too. Used to privately ponder on this (minus the punish parents part)

Chimezie198: But . . . .

you misplace am abi? e don grow leg waka?

Guy no kill me with suspense o!

Lol for this poster and thread.

Interesting read but I think the title is either sensational or misleading.

If children according to Dr Barret’s research believe that creation was as a result of a supreme architect it doesn’t mean that they therefore adhere to or are in some allegiance with this creator or “God” as the title suggest. (Unless the child has no immediate religious background then their idea of God will most likely eventually conform to the deity governing the religion of their household or even religious society).
Having said that, if this is true it’s very very interesting. Perhaps then a child should be left to develop their own conviction without pressure from relatives/neighbours or preconditioning because surely if one has faith in the being they call God then could not that in which they have put their trust in reveal itself to each child at an appointed time so at the very least every religious individual should be confident in saying that their conviction was not coerced by man but inspired by god.

lefulefu: my password pass any hacking programme wey dey town.omo jus see as my password dey pass even the unpassable firewalls
omo u cant beat da prince at his game ooo

Speaking of games u kno say na b LDN wey for host 2012, ehen prince lefulefu u for enter tatafo Olympics na. You and your mouth wey dey run like tap, shey u neva tire?

Craze pikin I beg carry go lol.

dabrake: the day i carry my mum's official car go school because sey i wan impress babe, julius berger trailer smash am gimme

Lol, sorry ehn but that one no be the fault of naija girl before some of una men come descend on us this hour.

lefulefu: Prince lefulefu never lies and my code on naija babes dey always work .My password dey pass any firewall wey a naija babe wan put take obstruct my advances

Talk true, u no fit even hack sef

Image123: It depends. God looks at the heart. Some do it for show, to show off their gadget, or their high tech ability/disability. Some just have the 'owanbe spirit' and need help. Some do it because they're ashamed to leave home with a Bible in hand, or be seen going to church. Some were not able to get their Bible before going to church, some may have the version the preacher is using on phone not in paper. So many more reasons, so it depends. Some na just follow follow, copy cat.

That is an interesting and thoughtful perspective and you have a very valid point. But I was under the impression that the OP was questioning what device may qualify as a sin not in its employment or the intention of the user but simply as a mere product.

snthesis: is having a phone now a sin

I wonder o.

Ozegbe: now that we cant decipher what is a sin or not with the invention of new and high tech stuff...using the phone to read bible on sunday service, is it a sin?

Don’t some churches even use "high tech stuff" such as screen projectors for the whole congregation to view particular passages being read? or have they sinned because they didn't use a chalk and blackboard

Oh the dreaded left hand!

I believe some West Africans also follow this pattern. I’m not sure as to how this came about or what purpose it serves other than customary behaviour – but like you I’m curious to know.
But I also think this convention may be seen to portray alignment and some sort of structure eliminating waywardness just like driving on either the right or left side of the road. Although personally I still believe there is a story behind this because some senior Africans deem it as almost sacrilege to use the left hand.

However the only gripe I have is when a potential left handed child is forced to use their right hand (like my brother when he was a toddler). I believe that type of tampering alters the sequence of the child.

But I've been so conditioned in this peculiar custom that even when I'm with outsiders I'm always conscious to use my right hand.