₦airaland Forum

The same reason God didn't help the Apostles when they faced their own trials.

Stephen was stoned in Acts 7

In 1 Kings 18 and 19, Elijah had to save himself from Jezebel.

And according to tradition all the Apostles died to infidels.

James the Less was beheaded in Acts 12.

According to Tradition Paul was beheaded, Peter was Crucified upside down and John died in exile.

I think prosperity preachers have given people the impression that Christianity is a religion of milk, where everything will go well for you, just cuz.

okigbojihad:
oga those are ipob boys charms were found on there waist.

No be only IPOB de use charm

NgeneUkwenu:
ESN have been carrying out extra Judicial killing of Security agencies in the South East, and you have been celebrating them, calling them unknown Gunmen!

The die is now cast ..

Confirmation of that.

Sibrah:
If he didn't install some people over others then why did he say some people should feed his sheep's? Maybe you will say Jesus was a Fulani herdsman.

Jesus didn't give the sort of structure we have now, neither did his apostles both both did give increasingly complicated structures.

Jesus' structure was far more unofficial but among his hundred or so disciples, the 12 apostles definately did stand out and above as Jesus' "right hand men" and Peter the head.

The the Apostles later put up more positions like deacons but the Bishops and the more complex system will only come up later and the church meetings of that everyone present as an active participant. A model that the Anarchist Church model is trying to revive.

Logic007:
I am.

Christianity held back science. Held back women. Held back gay rights.

Women and gays are human beings that still contribute to the economy.

Did Christianity not persecute scientists back in the early ages?

No it didn't, if anything Christianity allowed science to progress faster. Basically from the period of Rome's ascendence onwards, Greece science and philosophy had ground to a halt, almost everything from then on was scale up of what already existed. Like can you even name one great philosopher of natural philosophy of the period of Rome's rise?

And Christianity wasn't a Global phenomena, so why, oh why is that if christianity held back science it wasn't out paced by non-christian and non-institutional religion areas like China or India (among many others).

It didn't hold back women's rights, like do you want to compare women's rights in Rome, Athens influneced Greece or the Islamic world to Europe? Like the Christian world have several Women Emperors and Kings, whether Isabella of Spain, Irene of the Eastern Roman Empire or Æthelflad of Mercia. Can you mention any equivalent from the Classical or Ancient Era from the same regions that Christianity became ascendant in?

Fine Christians did and still do hold back Gay rights, but the acceptance of Gays and other LGBT+ is oft exaggerated and they were either not tolerated or integrated into society in ways that would be considered "homophobic" today.

Human beings exist for more than just being fuel to the economy, thank you.

I mean, yes but not really for being scientists. Heretics came from all walks of life and while I am not defending the practice, again, Heretics came from all works of life. You could write that "Christians persecuted Farmers in the middle ages" and you would be right.

Like Copernicus the guy that popularized heliocentrism worked for the church, Galileo was something of a braggard that also challenged the priesthood on theologically touchy subjects.

And hey maybe near enlightenment era Christian advancements isn't what you were referring to, then what of during the dark ages, when under the Orthodox Christian Eastern Roman Empire, John the Grammarian, a church man who discovered works on impetus, a break through in physics that would later become a basis for Galileo's works. Or the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas grounding the basic assumption of modern science that the world is fundamentally rational.

And if scientific advancement isn't enough for you, what about the various technological advancements like the wheel and axel, horse shoes, heavy plows, water wheels, arch and glass supported cartedrals, etc.

And if European advancement isn't enough for you, what about the works of Zara Yakob, a Christian philosopher whose Christian philosophy is considered the beginning of Sub-Saharan African philosophy?.

So, no Christianity didn't cause a dint in the rate of scientific and technological progress.

Paul's argument against the law is stepped in the practices of the Christians at the time which from Acts, Peter had already started converting Gentiles and arguing against some things considered unclean (in this case food and gentiles).

And by the time of Galatians, many of the Gentile converts weren't even circumcized but still mostly accepted in the Christian community.

Galatians is Paul laying the argument that Gentiles don't have to become Jews to be Christians.

He makes the argument that since the Law is revelation and was mediated through Angels, it lacks the Full Agency of God, thus Jesus who is considered Fully Man and God has that Full Agency and that Jesus statement that the Law is summarized in Loving God and loving man is the true agency of God.

The way the law was given in the Old Testament is either just before or just after the Jews break a Law so in Galatians 3:19 he argues that the law was revealed to mitigate against these transgressions. Thus the Law was given to serve the good of the Jews but at the place (Canaan) and Time (judges, prophets and kings era) and serves a purpose in the final fulfilment of God's promise to Abraham. Thus he argues it is temporary and serves an intermediate purpose.

Christ is this fulfilment of the law (Matthew 5:17) and the fulfilment of God's plan.

But at the same time the law is still considered good (it was still given by God, even if not the finality) and considered more of a guide now than exacts. Tho Paul never resolves how exactly the law is supposed to function as subservient to Christ in the lives of Christians.

So this is basically Paul's argument on how the Old Testament can be inspired by God but not the eternal law for all time.

But the Traditional churches (Catholic, Orthodox and Eastern), consider this to be the duty of the Church to decide how exactly the Old Testament law intersects with the New Testament.

The Protestants however seem to be divided into 3 rough camps of just follow the love commandment (Quakers and most Liberal Theology people are here).

Follow every law except those explicitly ended by the New Testament (Lutherans) and trusted revelations (Charismatics)

Follow the laws that the New Testament repeats (most non-denominationals)

Some support for this. For one Jeremiah talks about God interfering with the hearts of the Isrelites so that following the law becomes their new nature and not just following a rule book.

Jesus argues against the Pharisee about the divorce law, saying that the law given to the Isrealites was a compromise as their ancestors would never even hope to follow the perfect law and were given a sort of reduced law moulded to their nature. Matthew 19:3-12.

Also the ripping of the veil of the holy of holies at their death of Christ, removing the symbolic distinction between the holiest and most mundane spaces.

Jesus calls himself the Fulfilment of the Law.

The support from the revelations to Peter in Acts 10, where he is commanded to eat of ritually unclean animals, and his actions soon after to convert ritually unclean people (uncircumcised Gentiles) and in Galatians 1&2, to associate, eat with and promote within the church of uncircumcised Gentiles.

There is a certain theme among these Laws that Peter has been commanded to disregard and that is the ritual nature of all of these laws, laws whose purpose had been to remove and/or protect from uncleanliness.

Following from the ripping of the distinguishing veil, the fact that Cyrus who could not have followed these ritual laws was still considered righteous by the later prophets like Nahum, the idea that it is laws specifically dealing with uncleanliness and not sin that are specifically abrogated is present in many Christian sects, Traditional and Protestant.

So this is a condensation of Paul's message concerning the Law in Galatians as well as how the different denominations deal with the ambiguities.

Logic007:
Religion hindered them..that is why they are less religious now

Asia was probably less religious in the past (or at least just as) given the nature of Dharmic religions of confucianism and if religion hindered the West, then why did the arguably more fanatically religious Western Christians rise to dominion and the even more fanatically religious sub-section of that (USA) rise to the world stage.

Atheism is the ideology of a civilization at the end of its rise, whether Qin China or Late Antiquity Greece. Only this time around it is more wide spread than just among the elites

Logic007:
They dumped it for Africans, Latinos and Asians

Latinos are Basic part of the West and Asia is rapidly rising to eclipse the West

Logic007:
What percentage of Europeans are christian or muslim?

Europe remains the least religious continent and the most developed continent.

But during the period that it rose to world dominance it was highly religious. Religion only really started to wane quickly post WWI and WWII as Europe declined and the intellectual atheism of a plurality of the intellectual upper class sunk down in form of the ideology we now call humanism.

uzozieudo:
heck no, if we become like yugoslavia or ethiopia we will all suffer in the end, let the west degenerate, nigeria must reform and grow more powerful or else we will end up as slaves to who knows what

Yugoslavia and Ethiopia aren't accelerationist. It seems you have unknowingly grafted an argument against ethnic federalism into an argument against accelerationism.

And even then it fails. Yugoslavia and Ethiopia are examples of Failures but Canada, India and Russia are examples of successes that followed a similar ethnic Federalism model.

Even Yugoslavia and Ethiopia aren't even really good examples against ethnic Federalism given Yugoslavia wasn't ethnically federal it just Ignored it's ethnic issues until they came back to destroy it and Ethiopia has been more stable since going the ethnically Federal route.

And Nigeria is already on the decline, it has been since Independence best we hurry through our decline period

valentineuwakwe:
i just wish the igbo had a king or empire........

We don't want Empire and we don't need kings

cocolacec:
The Eboes were slaves to the Bini Empire in pre colonial times.The whites saved them from their bini lords and masters.

Lol the same Bini Empire that couldn't beat supposedly primitive Anioma bois.

Look at any reliable Map of Bini Empire, they never reached River Nigeria and that was because they lost consistently to Anioma and Onitsha

SuperBold:
Pyramid or giant shit from gods that is angry with you

But doesn't that prove the reality of Igbo gods unlike your invisible men in the sky?

trutharena:
Ogini?

Land of what free? The land with OSU caste system where people are discriminated about is the land of the free?

The land her inhabitants were escaping from daily in Chukudi Bus is the land of the free?

The erosion ravaged region that discriminated against her blood based on religion is the land of the free?

The baby factory capital of the world? Drug trafficking headquarters of the world is the land of the free?

Accept your status and the shame of your ancestors in not being able to live with the times to build a consolidated platform and wield power.

The only one of these that holds up is Osu caste.

Everything else is post-colonial in origin so doesn't really count. Alaigbo remains the land of the free

thebosstrevor1:
People who are unorganized dont have empires.

All the most powerful civilization of the world had an empire. They fought wars and won battles that made their people proud.

All the greediest and most hated peoples in history had Empires, Aka The Brits, Turks, Spanish, Chinese etc

SuperBold:
Igbos have no empire, let us rest

Onitsha are from Benin
Igala are the chief priest of Enugu (they fulanized the igbos)
All other region in igbos is just villages and housedom

And upon all of that una go de fear "Igbo domination" lol, scared of supposed non-entities shows how pathetic your people are

SuperBold:
All they know is to steal culture and call it their own.
E.g Benin bead dress, very soon they will say it is their culture..... Imagine dragging it with Benin already

The entire Greater Niger-Delta region is part of a single cultural are and Igbos are internally diverse. Igbos and Yorubas have Afa and Ifa both of which were adopted by Edo, Ijo adopted Ikenga and some deities from Igbo and vice versa. Igbos themselves adopted Nsibidi from Ekoi and so on.

And Igbos are again internally diverse. Anioma groups have red coral beads as their traditional dress

SuperBold:
Ancient igbos are like their brothers in Cameroon and Congo. You are not even West Africa if not for Lord Luggard drunkenness. You should be thanking the British not cursing them

Stop listening to debunked Hamtic theories.

Igbos are most closely related to YEAI, which means Yoruba Edo Atyap and Ijo. Then to Ghanian groups like Akan before Cameroon and then Bantu groups.

SuperBold:
1. There was nothing fulani will gain in contacting igboland as there were not developed, advanced and still centuries behind from their colleagues as around 1800.

2. The igbo tribes were not known to most powerful empire during the 19 century, they hid themselves in the forest in tiny group of people

3. If Fulani had contact igbos before British, they will defeat you in just three days, they are more advanced than you with sticks and clubs. Many of you will bearing Abdullah Emeka now.

3. Is impossible. Fulani couldn't conquer Bornu, Borgu or Yoruba even while the later was in civil war and Anioma clans were busy defeating the Benin empire, stopping their expansions East while Aro inflicted several battle defeats on the British.

But the main reason is simply that Tse-Tse flies would kill the Fulani calvary, their most important wing of their military. Even with their calvary they couldn't defeat closer and peoples who were even broken into small states in the case of the Yoruba, what chance would they have without their most important weapons, in unfavourable terrain and against people with better guns.

thebosstrevor1:
They keep shouting igbos are Republicans in nature but we know it is an outright lie.

They claim, igbos were democratic in nature..another outright lie.

The igbo system is based on seniority not on any election.

The red cap aka warrant chiefs were all put in place by the British.

That shows there was no organization.

The igbos are not the first to practise so called decentralize system, in every traditional system in Nigeria, their is a similar system in place

Bros if you don't know Igbo history don't complain.

Nobody practices the pure and extreme version of any ideology, even the most authoritarian state will have democratic elements.

Igbo society was and is democratic enough to be classified as a democracy. Age and accomplishment increased status and made it more likely for one to be selected for something.

The red cap existed before the Brits mainly among the Ozo title societies. The warrant chief system was the Brits given "big men" and chief priests dictatorial power over their villages not randoms being given office, the power of their office was instead unnaturally expanded.

Every tradition is decentralized at least compared to the modern state for simple logistical reasons which until modern day we didn't have the tech to overcome but Igbo society was certainly more decentralized while still remaining organized.

I am Igbo and I agree.

I am tired of all these Jewbrews trying to make us Jews to feel special. Igbos are already special as it is, our origin communities are aboriginal to Nigeria and we share DNA with the ancestral Khoi-San peoples, same with Ijo and our brethren to the East.

We are not Semites, there is no evidence for that, as the OT has shown, no DNA evidence, no language evidence (Hebrew doesn't have Igbo words, Igbo doesn't have Hebrew words the tribes btw Canaan and Alaigbo don't have Igbo words, only our neighbors down south have Igbo words).

And what about our culture fits into semi-desert culture more than forest?.

Igbos are not Hebrews, Igbo bu Igbo

I say some form of Capitalism is better

Then why is Yoruba more Similar to Igala than Urhobo?

Abeg, revisionists, go back to the hole where una de crawl from

So do we need the same for Nigeria?

PoliteActivist:
Jefferson did not hate blacks. You are confusing being intellectually honest about your observations with hatred

He didn't exactly hate Blacks yes, but he still did see them as different, less intelligent and incapable to integrating into White society.

Like you don't hate a Rabbit but you don't consider it your equal either

Martian:
This should be pithy enough for you:

Chad and Algeria both have the Sahara in their territories so what makes the former a “sub-Saharan” African country and the latter a “North” African country?

Because the rest of their territories that are not in the Sahara are South of it

PoliteActivist:
But Ethiopia is not sub-saharan Africa, neither is Somalia

I am pretty sure that Ethiopia and Somalia are referred to as Sub-Saharan African.

Martian:
There is no big barrier separating the continent. The Sahara is a geographical feature of the continent just like the Kalahari. The countries of Chad, Niger, Mali, and Mauritania have the Sahara desert in the territory, so how are they sub Saharan?

You say it’s to delineate cultures between Arabs in North Africa from the rest of the continent as if there is no variation of cultures between the other people on the continent. No one is saying your example is racist because it’s not. Even if there are cultural differences, why is one part referred to using a cardinal point? If they need to highlight difference they might as well use the other three directions because I’m sure Ghana/Nigeria/Mali in the West have more in common compared to Eswatini in the East.
What I’m saying is that you didn’t use the prefix “sub” to describe any of those other places or to bundle them together.

The Sahara is a geographical barrier. The same argument of it not really being a barrier can be laid on the Mediterranean and that is na argument that has been used since ancient times but nobody here will make the argument that Africa and Europe are the same continent. Also, the territory of the Mediterranean too is divided between countries (like the Sahara) it makes things easier when you know who is responsible for which land.

The main reason for the special distinction btw North Africa and te rest of the continent is quite simply that North Africa has been part of the Eurasian world system for far longer than any were else.

"Sub" just means below.

Whytelyon:
-20

Tribal clash end ke? When a civil war is fast looming? I'm not sure you seen the trending video where Fulani is proving supremacy, saying government arms them and cows dont shit_ guns. You think what these people are doing is child's play not so?

Security meetings were hosted, Chief of staff was not present, DSS CG Was not present, police IG was not present at all. And they called for a security meeting and you say this one.
Better you start to think how to relocate your family o. This English you day speak no suppose be wetin you suppose day do now.
Go and read about government backed terrorism and genocide, maybe you go understand clearly what Fulani is up to.

Link to the video

fombi:
More like a fake news. Show us proof.

Yes Ooo literally everything thing in the article is just alleged from the mouth of the guy, no solid proof. Even the police report he claims they have is not referenced