₦airaland Forum

Crystyano:
You consider it a problem


That's your problem

No it's yours, my ignorance has already been cured.

Crystyano:
Nah


I'm just saying if you say karma is this or that

That's your problem


Karma has nothing to do with the truth to me

Karma is just a name for something that happens whether you like the name or not. Make up your own name for it if you wish, I will call it that for your sake.

My chefs in the house, what is the verdict on outdoor grills, electric or charcoal?

budaatum:
That's why my people invite me to worship Owala. Owala is a huge lake in Osun State that feeds into the Osun River. We kill a white goat and eat, though that does not stop us dying from schistosomiasis if we swim in it at the wrong time of year. I'm invited to the Ogun festival too but can't eat dog because dogs eat shit.

The idea of eating a dog even one that has never tasted shit is so ichy to me.

jamesid29:
And what it does is cast a wider the definition to
include all rejection of religious beliefs if theism is defined as a set of religious beliefs.
Nowhere in that section does it propose that atheism includes a "lack of belief".

Pls read the section in full again to understand it's claim

Also read my read my reply to vic2ree for further expansion of thoughts.

Read this section and digest it.

Crystyano:
Neither is your definition of karma my problem

You started the thread so you obviously have a problem with it.

jamesid29:
This in no way negates anything I wrote. There are many christians who choose to say that Christianity is not a religion (but just a relationship). That doesn't change the fact that Christianity is in fact a religion and if one was to study it, one would study it as a religion.

We live in a world where people choose to define terms on their own for one reason or another, which is fine(as I stated in my piece),but doesn't make their "definition" authoritative.

Pls read what I wrote again in it's entirety. I've pasted the most relevant part IMO below
Point is, you can choose to subscribe with the "lack of belief" definition. That is within your proragative.
What is outside of your prorogative is to say that atheism should not be defined as " the proposition that God(s) do not exist" ; Especially when that is the standard definition within the field that studies it itself.

You can not say I'm wrong with the standard definition the same way I cannot disregard the big bang theory as purely an educated guess because I choose to define theory using it's colloquial understanding of being something that is a "an idea or opinion". That might be true for an everyday conversation but that is not true for the field of science itself or a scientific theory. Of course within science itself, there can be majority and minority views but that's a separate conversation on its own and should be weighed on each views merit.

Not meant to negate what you said but for you to realise that this is the way things work. Meanings can be broadened by virtue of the way people use a word. You will be wrong to say JWs are not Christian because they don't adhere to your particular definition of Christian.

Crystyano:
It's like asking if I have a Nairaland account

Good so your kicking against the concept is simply because it has a "spiritual" name given to it. A sacrificed goat prepared as a meal is still food even though it is carrying the religious appellation.

jamesid29:
Technically (at least from a philosopher's point of view) to withhold or suspend belief for whatever reason does not make one an atheist (at least not under the standard definition).
The problem statement is, Does God exist? Theism give a positive answer of yes.
The "a" in a-theism should be considered as a negation, so if theism is construed as the proposition that God does exist, then atheism is an answer to the question by stating that No, God(s) do not exist.
And if theism is to be broadened to a set of religious beliefs then atheism is more broadly a rejection of all forms of religious beliefs, regardless of their position about the divine ( this was what the extract reed was trying to point out).
The answer "lack of belief" is just a claim about the state of mind of the person, not a claim about existence/inexistence of God. It is not an answer to the question itself.

With that being said,their are many people who don't fall under the standard definition but self identify as atheist or theist and to me that's totally fine. Their are those who are technically irreligious or "nones" who might subscribe to belief in spiritual realities but reject an form of organized religion who self identify as atheist. And their those who are truly atheist but do not self identify as such because they don't want to be identified with the New atheist movement (Neil deGrasse Tyson I believe falls under the category). And their are those who are theist(eg christians) who are practical atheist because even though they say they believe in a deity, they live as if their is no deity.
This view does make having conversations a bit harder cos we all have to define or redefine what we mean but that's just part of the complexity of human interaction (in my opinion).

So do I have a problem with people using "lack of belief" as their definition of atheism? Not really
What is kinda of unsettling is when people choose to make it the universal definition whilst willfully rejecting the standard definition(perhaps because it's unsettling to them and their worldview ); Especially since their definition is almost non existent amongst the people who study the subject matter for a living.

Just like it is unsettling to some Christians that other Christians exist under that label who do not hold beliefs they consider core to being considered Christian yet the definition is broad enough to accommodate those differing beliefs.

jamesid29:
Okay, so let's read through the entire section where you got that extract from

Please what do you think that portion is trying to say again?

It makes it clear that the meaning of atheism has to be broader than merely saying it is a claim that gods do not exist. Certainly some atheists make that claim but not all just like the way JWs are Christian but do not believe that Jesus is the god, you can formulate a definition of Christianity that excludes them from that label.

AntiChristian:
So wetin concern an atheist with theism?

It remains a fascinating proposition even though I no longer hold any religious beliefs.

LilMissFavvy:
An atheist is supposed to be someone who doesn't believe in a deity or God, but I'm yet to encounter such an atheist.

What a dumbass post. The atheists on this board say it quite openly and frequently yet here you are saying you are yet to encounter one. Which school bred such a nitwit for Andromeda's sake. Better go and ask for refund, dem no try for you at all.

Crystyano:
Both the spiritual nonsense and buda's useless definition of karma won't ensure that I fry oxygen

Nothing can ensure you do that so no one is trying.

Crystyano:
It's not only my actions that matter


So, the consequences of my actions should not be taken as the entire story of my life

What I don't have to swallow is what some people consider as karma


It's like Messi versus Ronaldo


That you define Ronaldo as someone that only waits for a chance to tap in doesn't mean I should do the same


Call it the truth and watch me fry water

You didn't answer the question.

jamesid29:
Pls see my responses to vic2ree

Note the highlighted.

Toks2008:
To think that some Pastors preach that until you do a white wedding also known as "Church wedding".. You are not considered married...

I call this foolishness that has no basis in our tradition as Africans or even in the Scriptures.

I will advise any man to focus on the traditional wedding and go ahead to register the wedding if they want but if the lady insists on having a white wedding, let her take care of the entire financial demands except you have enough money to throw away.

May we be emancipated from mental slavery

It is unfortunate that it has almost become a cultural norm to follow this pattern especially the Christian culture in our country. You hear many people say "if I never marry for church then I never marry be that", with that kind of mentality they will always do the double. In my case I did triple (Trad, White, Registry) but of course back then I believed in the whole shtick. If I had to do it again, I'd do registry and that would be it.

Dtruthspeaker:
The bold! See your wicked addition when I never said anything about such?

Not True! My presentation was to confirm reports of the sightings of actions meeting their expected and needful retributions.

So you're saying that this post:

Dtruthspeaker:
The correct word is, you can not bear to accept the Truth of this fact because you know you would suffer serious insecurity.

You find it very difficult to live pondering and wondering about the punishment and blowback you might receive for every action and inaction you do or do not do.

So you find it easier to lie to yourself that goodluck, badluck just happens, chaos etc whereas, THEY ARE ALL LAWED AND SET TO TO HAPPEN WHEN CERTAIN THINGS HAPPEN, EXACTLY AS STEAM WILL ALWAYS FOLLOW THE BOILING WATER ON THE FIRE.

Does not imply you mean it always happens?

triplechoice:
Karma is not punishment you get from offending somebody. That's the general misconception most people have.

The word ,karma, is of Sanskrit origin. It simply means "action" "deeds"or "works" and it is used to explain the "spiritual" cycle of cause and effect. Don't allow the word spiritual put you off from trying to understand it. You can see, I put the word spiritual in quotes to let you know there's nothing really spiritual about it .But since it is a knowledge you don't get from going to school, we regard it that way.


Karma means that in life certain actions results in certain consequences. Most can't see the correlation between the actions they take and the ,consequences. But karmic acts surely do results in that.

For instance, if you're overweight and you dont do anything about it, then it won't be long before you start to experience some health challenges which is karma.

The equivalent for this, (karma) in the sciences, is in Newton's law of motion " for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction"

Even though some religious groups from the Orient have made it part of their teachings, the laws of karma is not in any way tied to them and so you shouldn't be in a hurry to dismiss it as religious nonsense.

Without the laws of karma nothing can be achieved or nothing can work in this world. Even Scientific experiments will not be successful.

The law of karma involves 12 laws. knowing these laws and how they actually work, will help to improve the quality of your life especially when you know how to apply them. Not only that , you also get to understand why some persons seem to get away or actually get away from the "things" they do.

There are no gods doling out Karna neither is it punishment for evil. It is the consequence of your actions good or bad. If you have a lot of bad karma, there a ways to clean it up so you dont experience the consequences. You're the only person that can resolve your karma.

There are certain religious groups who deceptively use an aspect of this law to recruit new members. They tell you that the reason you're having a hard time in live is because of your past misdeeds ,which may be true actually, and then go on to threaten you that unless you join them your karma cannot be resolved meaning you continue to suffer. But it is lie. These are the people I am sure you have been listening to.

There's no one out there who has been given the sole responsibility of resolving your karmic deeds. The emphasis is always on the negative aspect of it. If karma is for both good and bad ,why not place equal emphasis on both?

The link below would help you understand better the 12 laws of karma and how to apply them.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wellandgood.com/12-laws-of-karma/amp/

Didn't see this earlier. Apologies.

hupernikao:
Well, since it's a joke, I am still laughing at him since then.

Good for you, let's laugh together. LoLz

budaatum:
Many think karma is retribution, and in a sense, it is.

If I wake up at 5am and go to on my farm all day, the retribution, as in the punishment that would be inflicted on me, is a full belly on harvest day.

Yeah the colloquial use of karma makes it seem as though it were synonymous with retribution. If it is merely the consequences of our actions then everybody experiences karma. What I guess our dear Crystyano can't quite SWALLOW is the couching in "spiritual" language.

Crystyano:
Swallow that too


It doesn't make it true

So you don't expect your actions to have consequences?

jamesid29:
Yes sir, they would fall under Philosophy.



Even though theology does tackle the same set of problems when it comes to the question of the divine and might use the same set of principles, the theologian comes to the table with a set of presuppositions the philosopher need not come with.
Theology is much more constrained in it's field of study.The word "Theos" is already baked into the theologians field of study.

Ok? And the point is?

budaatum:
Yes, my Lord. Karma is the law of cause and effect. If I sit on my lazy ass all day, the karma is starvation or growing fat and unhealthy. And if I wake up at 5am and go toil in my farm all day, the karma is a full belly on harvest day.

Ah OK, I guess I was still seeing it as retribution then.

hupernikao:
A very smart waiver for him.
A good confirmation of the Lord before the Reed

But let him always add a caveat, that he is a joker and know nothing about what he's saying. That will settle our issue with a smile.

There is nothing to Lord over, this is a semi popular joke so this isn't my first time seeing it.

budaatum:
Karma is not the same thing as retribution, my Lord, as triplechoice pointed out. A murderer may not be caught and punished by the law nor might they be murdered, but they'd still go around with the thought of their act on their mind and the fear of being discovered and punished, which you'd find will psychologically, and in many other ways (they might need to sleep with one eye open and a gun under their pillow), affect their existence. That, my Lord, is karma.

It's like when buda needlessly insults NLers and has karmatic sleepless nights in hell due to buda's hypersensitive conscience.

Are you implying that for example flatulence brought about by eating milk products is karma?

jamesid29:
If I may ask.
What field of study do you reckon the metaphysical or questions concerning the existence/inexistence of the divine fall under?

Theology? May be Philosophy?

hupernikao:
@Lordreed and what's the other one NaijaSatanlst or so...

Is this what atheism has reduced to? To make a claim and not being able to defend it. To speak on what you don't know and then want to turn the argument around?

Look at his OP, he made a claim, I invited him afterwards for discussion on his claim, but he started to tell me to be the one to prove.

Is like he is still a learner or wannabe in atheism. Please help him to know how to put his money where his mouth his.

My understanding of the OP is that it's tongue in cheek humour, not meant to be taken as serious claim.

Dtruthspeaker:
That is the course of your enquiry and that was not my presentation at all.

Your presentation was that acts breed equal consequences all the time. Why did Pilate suffer no murder after murdering Jesus? What did Stephen do that warranted stoning to death? And who did John the Baptist kill to suffer a beheading himself?

triplechoice:
Karma is not retribution. I already explained that

Whatever it is, it is not universal,how then can it be a natural law?

Dtruthspeaker:
No, you did not! You are the one trying to fabricate a non existent CHAIN STYLE RETRIBUTION WHICH I DID NOT SAY HAPPENS.

I Only Affirm Natural Retribution Aka Karma As Proven by the cases we have seen in this world. that's all!

Nothing more, nothing less!

Which chain retribution happened to Pilate or John the Baptist or Stephen?

jamesid29:
The proposition that God(s) do not exist.

Wrong. Once again atheism is the lack of belief in gods, it is not the proposition that gods do not exist. Try again.

triplechoice:
Who has seen?

How can karmabe a natural law if not everyone gets retribution for their misdeeds?