₦airaland Forum

Dtruthspeaker:
It is you who seeks to wrongfully narrow it.

No matter what, no one in the world can reasonably and validly talk about evil, without talking about The Good nor about Rights and Wrong, nor about Law Full and Unlawfull.

They are an Inseparable Whole!

Again, you don't understand what this topic is about. Let me see whether I can help to even help you understand what this topic is about.

Example; a so called wrongdoing in your bible, such as the SIN of fornication, is not a wrongdoing from LEGAL point of view, and therefore, is not a sin from the perspective of the law. Read that again.

musicwriter:
Again, you don't understand what this topic is about. Let me see whether I can help to even help you understand what this topic is about.

Example; a so called wrongdoing in your bible, such as the SIN of fornication, is not a wrongdoing from LEGAL point of view, and therefore, is not a sin from the perspective of the law. Read that again.

Nicely put my good sir. So many of them fail to understand this, as they tend to judge people who don't believe in what they believe in from that point of view.

You can see how hard it is for the moniker you're debating with to comprehend what you've been saying.

musicwriter:
Example; a so called wrongdoing in your bible, such as the SIN of fornication, is not a wrongdoing from LEGAL point of view, and therefore, is not a sin from the perspective of the law. Read that again.

Now you are talking about Lawful vs Unlawful Did I not tell you it is inseperable?

The question then is, "WHO MADE LAW? Certainly not your father nor mine nor our fathers or there fathers there before.

It is God, The Owner of this House (world) Who Made The Laws Controlling all the inhabitants of this house.

That is where The Law, The True Law which men call The Law, The First and Original, Comes from.

And it is that Law which makes you unhappy and pained when you discovered that the woman you love has fornicated with other men.

That is The Law in Force, which everyman is bent under and not the unlawful evil and lying laws which men made for themselves, which will never be there for you when you need them the most.

That is what Christian Lawyers like me now know!

Dtruthspeaker:
This is where you learn the Grades of Things which are Not Good from the lowest to highest order

"Neither good nor not good" to "Not good" to "Bad" to "Very Bad" to "Very Very Bad" to Badness Infinitum (Evil)

Thus, what is evil?

Answer: That thing which is very very very bad such that you gave up measuring it's badness.

lol,... I got you

ShaqFu:
Nicely put my good sir. So many of them fail to understand this, as they tend to judge people who don't believe in whaet they believe in from that point of view.

You can see how hard it is for the moniker you're debating with to comprehend what you've been saying.

Happy to disappoint you lady, No matter what, all relevant judgements in the world are based upon Good vs Evil; Rights vs Wrong; Law Full vs Unlawfull.

maiquel:
lol,... I got you

Thank you sir!

Dtruthspeaker:
Now you are talking about Lawful vs Unlawful Did I not tell you it is inseperable?

The question then is, "WHO MADE LAW? Certainly not your father nor mine nor our fathers or there fathers there before.

It is God, The Owner of this House (world) Who Made The Laws Controlling all the inhabitants of this house.

That is where The Law, The True Law which men call The Law, The First and Original, Comes from.

And it is that Law which makes you unhappy and pained when you discovered that the woman you love has fornicated with other men.

That is The Law in Force, which everyman is bent under and not the unlawful evil and lying laws which men made for themselves, which will never be there for you when you need them the most.

That is what Christian Lawyers like me now know!

Indeed, I've shown that it's separable i.e in RELIGIOUS versus LEGAL perspective. So, how dare you ask that question when you're arguing it's inseparable?

Regarding the rest of your post, I have no time to dwell on your religious views cause religion is madness. I was a Christian for 36 years of my life till I figured out it's damaging effect and any enlightenment person can see the damaging effect of religion in your responses. Your religious argument begins and ends in your bible, so don't assume it's binding on others. You can't even begin to talk about God as an African christian because you have no relationship with God. Unless you understand there can't be a middle man between you and God, you can never know God.

musicwriter:
Indeed, I've shown that it's separable i.e in RELIGIOUS versus LEGAL perspective. So, how dare you ask that question when you're arguing it's inseparable?

You did not know before, as your previous statement proved and you thought I was wrong to have applied Legal Reasoning to it, so I am happy to prove it to you that you were wrong.

musicwriter:
Regarding the rest of your post, I have no time to dwell on your religious views cause religion is madness..

As is your Right sir, as you already have power to do and lo, I did not call on you to take up what you wish to call my religious view.

So I am well in my law full place as you are, so no problem.

Dtruthspeaker:
You did not know before, as your previous statement proved and you thought I was wrong to have applied Legal Reasoning to it, so I am happy to prove it to you that you were wrong.

As is your Right sir, as you already have power to do and lo, I did not call on you to take up what you wish to call my religious view.

So I am well in my law full place as you are, so no problem.

"Nothing is good or bad. Good or bad depends on your point of view. It's your motive that creates the illusion of good or bad. Something could be bad to me but good to you.....and vice versa."

Above is the second paragraph of my first post on this thread but of which you replied saying "wrong." So explain to me how you knew but said I am wrong.

musicwriter:
"Nothing is good or bad. Good or bad depends on your point of view.

Not totally correct.

Some things are not good nor bad (but can be directed for either good purposes or bad purposes eg eating, chairs, gisting, sex.

Some things are apparently Good in themselves having no bad quality eg harming no one, giving good care to others (not any care), fairness, justice.

And there are many things which are bad/evil ab initio eg Stealing, plottings to harm your fellow man, desiring unjust gain and profit, breaking of good faith agreements

So you see, everything in this world have their proper places which ranges from "Neither good nor bad/evil to either good or either bad/evil."

musicwriter:
It's your motive that creates the illusion of good or bad. Something could be bad to me but good to you.....and vice versa."

Above is the second paragraph of my first post on this thread but of which you replied saying "wrong." So explain to me how you knew but said I am wrong.

The question you are supposed to ask is what is the place of Motive in every case?

Answer: So that the ''Just is" can be Served. Motive is only necessary for the purpose of calculating the amount of guiltiness an Accused has so as to determine the amount of punishment to be brought upon him.

These are what makes your presentation flawed.

Dtruthspeaker:
Not totally correct.

Some things are not good nor bad (but can be directed for either good purposes or bad purposes eg eating, chairs, gisting, sex.

Some things are apparently Good in themselves having no bad quality eg harming no one, giving good care to others (not any care), fairness, justice.

And there are many things which are bad/evil ab initio eg Stealing, plottings to harm your fellow man, desiring unjust gain and profit, breaking of good faith agreements

So you see, everything in this world have their proper places which ranges from "Neither good nor bad/evil to either good or either bad/evil."

The question you are supposed to ask is what is the place of Motive in every case?

Answer: So that the ''Just is" can be Served. Motive is only necessary for the purpose of calculating the amount of guiltiness an Accused has so as to determine the amount of punishment to be brought upon him.

These are what makes your presentation flawed.

It's clear you've started contradicting yourself and indeed accepting that good or bad depends on perspective. That's a welcome development.

Read my first post on this thread again cause I already explained everything that you're just coming to terms with now. But the problem is that your religious perspectives have your psyche confined and stuck, otherwise you'll have read where I even said that the nuances to judge bad or good are so many that sometimes it could be difficult determining good or bad depending on the circumstance. I even used words as "good, "better", "best", "extra good" just to be able to explain it. I even went as far as comparing it to weighing something on scale to find a perfect balance!!

Dtruthspeaker:


Wrong the intentions are judged also.

Also, you do not know this, when a person any wicked act, he immediately loses many of his rights, which is why no one would ask him "what is your view?" But rather "Did you do so so and so?" "Why?" (his intention is now under judgement)

You judge what you feel and think the intentions are not the intention. And the bolded is affirming my point. What can be judged not is the observable actions not the why but the DID

Awoo88:
You judge what you feel and think the intentions are not the intention. And the bolded is affirming my point. What can be judged not is the observable actions not the why but the DID

It is procedural, the "did" comes before the "why".

musicwriter:
It's clear you've started contradicting yourself and indeed accepting that good or bad depends on perspective. That's a welcome development.

Wrong! It is you who fails to appreciate that Sight and Seeing which is what causes perspective, is an integral part of our natural living, for we see to live, thus it is taken for granted

So the question in issue is "what do we see?" Which is what I addressed and not "how does a person sees, what we all see and have seen, that he sees?" Wrong question.

musicwriter:
Read my first post on this thread again cause I already explained everything that you're just coming to terms with now. But the problem is that your religious perspectives have your psyche confined and stuck, otherwise you'll have read where I even said that the nuances to judge bad or good are so many that sometimes it could be difficult determining good or bad depending on the circumstance. I even used words as "good, "better", "best", "extra good" just to be able to explain it. I even went as far as comparing it to weighing something on scale to find a perfect balance!!

The foundation of your post was already bad as you yourself have seen by my query of the relevant portion of it.

If the foundation is already bad, there is no way that your post would be valid, therefore, I did not read your attempt at balancing the issues, exactly as administering medications to a horse whose heart and brain is dead is totally a nullity. Forgive my sharp speech.

And twice have you attacked me based on the fact that I live on God and the Bible thereby FALLING IN THE FALL AKA FALLACY OF AD HOMINEM BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN GOD rather than simply present your reasonable rebuttal if you had any, which as you truly see, you do not have.

You are rather pleading that I should have seen the fact that you attempted to do justice to the matter, which I am answering you that "As long as the foundation is bad, you have a bad house under construction" which has now collapsed as the ikoyi storey building.

"Anything placed on Nothing, shall never stand. It must always fall".

Dtruthspeaker:
Wrong! It is you who fails to appreciate that Sight and Seeing which is what causes perspective, is an integral part of our natural living, for we see to live, thus it is taken for granted

So the question in issue is "what do we see?" Which is what I addressed and not "how does a person sees, what we all see and have seen, that he sees?" Wrong question.



The foundation of your post was already bad as you yourself have seen by my query of the relevant portion of it.

If the foundation is already bad, there is no way that your post would be valid, therefore, I did not read your attempt at balancing the issues, exactly as administering medications to a horse whose heart and brain is dead is totally a nullity. Forgive my sharp speech.

And twice have you attacked me based on the fact that I live on God and the Bible thereby FALLING IN THE FALL AKA FALLACY OF AD HOMINEM BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN GOD rather than simply present your reasonable rebuttal if you had any, which as you truly see, you do not have.

You are rather pleading that I should have seen the fact that you attempted to do justice to the matter, which I am answering you that "As long as the foundation is bad, you have a bad house under construction" which has now collapsed as the ikoyi storey building.

"Anything placed on Nothing, shall never stand. It must always fall".

Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying and the reason is because you're conflicted between reality and your religious belief. Sorry, when I talk about your religion it's not to put you down but because I know where your perspective is coming from. A religious person can NEVER understand this thread.

Let me tell you something.......

The issue raised by the OP of this thread predate your god Jehovah Yahweh or Allah, whichever the case...... by thousands of years. The information was well documented in Africa long time before your bible or Koran were written. The ORIGINAL scripts had been in Africa for thousands of years, making the same argument that I am making here. However, what the bible and Koran authors did was burn down the ancient African literatures, plagiarized and re-wrote the ancient African texts and claimed that "their god said" in all the so called holy books, therefore, automatically posing themselves as the custodians of god's word; example; that fornication is sin, etc but which is falsehood. This was done for the purpose of controlling the masses in the name of god. Unless you free yourself from the falsehoods in your bible that has defined good or bad in the name of a god, you'll forever not be clear as far as this topic concerned.

Once you discover the falsehood of religion, you'll understand that good or bad depends on motive/perspective not your god. Sorry, the problem is the falsehood of religion that got you blind and conflicted, that's why I talk about your religion. It's important to first remove the blinders before you can even understand this thread.

Finally, your god has nothing to do with good or bad. It's we humans that create, know, and justify good or bad and it's we humans that said "god said" in the holy books for the purpose of control.

Dtruthspeaker:
It is procedural, the "did" comes before the "why".

Na the same thing we dey talk. You judge the did. You only validate your judgement with the why. No body judge the why with hard fact, only sentiment and subjectivity

Awoo88:
Na the same thing we dey talk. You judge the did. You only validate your judgement with the why. No body judge the why with hard fact, only sentiment and subjectivity

No sir, they are not the same thing because the "Did" can scatter the case eg "Jagga, did you sleep with Rasta's babe? He answers= "me wey no dey around!" Case Dismissed/ Case Closed.

While in "Why", you are guilty already eg "Ogo, why you sleep with Rasta babe"?" Or exactly as thieves are asked when caught, "why you thief dis brainbox, mirror and chrome?" As he is chopping beating for his guilt of stealing.

musicwriter:
Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying and the reason is because you're conflicted between reality and your religious belief. Sorry, when I talk about your religion it's not to put you down but because I know where your perspective is coming from. A religious person can NEVER understand this thread.

Let me tell you something.......

The issue raised by the OP of this thread predate your god Jehovah Yahweh or Allah, whichever the case...... by thousands of years. The information was well documented in Africa long time before your bible or Koran were written. The ORIGINAL scripts had been in Africa for thousands of years, making the same argument that I am making here. However, what the bible and Koran authors did was burn down the ancient African literatures, plagiarized and re-wrote the ancient African texts and claimed that "their god said" in all the so called holy books, therefore, automatically posing themselves as the custodians of god's word; example; that fornication is sin, etc but which is falsehood. This was done for the purpose of controlling the masses in the name of god. Unless you free yourself from the falsehoods in your bible that has defined good or bad in the name of a god, you'll forever not be clear as far as this topic concerned.

Once you discover the falsehood of religion, you'll understand that good or bad depends on motive/perspective not your god. Sorry, the problem is the falsehood of religion that got you blind and conflicted, that's why I talk about your religion. It's important to first remove the blinders before you can even understand this thread.

Finally, your god has nothing to do with good or bad. It's we humans that create, know, and justify good or bad and it's we humans that said "god said" in the holy books for the purpose of control.

See, as I said, ungrounded attack in the believe of God and NOT GIVING ANY VALID REBUTTAL. (Fall Of Ad Hominem Because I Believe In God)

"Anything placed on Nothing, shall never stand. It must always fall".

Dtruthspeaker:
See, as I said, ungrounded attack in the believe of God and NOT GIVING ANY VALID REBUTTAL. (Fall Of Ad Hominem Because I Believe In God)

"Anything placed on Nothing, shall never stand. It must always fall".

Of course, rebuttal has been given. Fornication is a wrongdoing or SIN according to your religious perspective versus SIN as non wrongdoing in the perspective of the law. Can you refute that?

When you give up the idea that a primitive stone age god defined good or bad, you'll understand it's man/woman that set the context for good or bad according to our motives/perspective. Only then shall you understand what this topic is about.

musicwriter:
Of course, rebuttal has been given. Fornication is a wrongdoing or SIN according to your religious perspective versus SIN as non wrongdoing in the perspective of the law. Can you refute that?

I refuted it and you could not reply! I asked,

"WHO MADE LAW? Certainly not your father nor mine nor our fathers or there fathers there before."

For all men where under The Law before they were born.

So Who Owns That Law which all men in the world are born into?

Dtruthspeaker:
I refuted it and you could not reply! I asked,

"WHO MADE LAW? Certainly not your father nor mine nor our fathers or there fathers there before."

For all men where under The Law before they were born.

So Who Owns That Law which all men in the world are born into?

Of course, men/women created all laws, except physical laws that are there by default.

musicwriter:
Of course, men/women created all laws, except physical laws that are there by default.

You are still dodging the question posed.

When those men/women where born, was The Law not already on ground before them waiting for them to come?

Dtruthspeaker:
You are still dodging the question posed.

When those men/women where born, was The Law not already on ground before them waiting for them to come?

ALL laws were made by man/woman from as long as we've been on earth. All laws guiding humanity PREDATE your god but sometime in the past, some overzealous power-seeking priests put those human laws in a holy book claiming that "god said." But a god never said anything.

You see, this is why you must first drop your religion to be able to stop conflicting yourself. Your God didn't make any law. Man/woman made the FIRST law.

Dtruthspeaker:
No sir, they are not the same thing because the "Did" can scatter the case eg [b]"Jagga, did you sleep with Rasta's babe? He answers= "me wey no dey around!" [/b]Case Dismissed/ Case Closed.

While in "Why", you are guilty already eg "Ogo, why you sleep with Rasta babe"?" Or exactly as thieves are asked when caught, "why you thief dis brainbox, mirror and chrome?" As he is chopping beating for his guilt of stealing.

dey house
The bolded is Jagga's did!! His action!!! Which is under trial. Him no dey house. Maybe u should ask Jagga why he did not sleep with Rasta' babe. I am sure his answer will not be "me wen no dey house" Jagga is under query, He quilt or otherwise will be established by his action during the period under question.
Ogo is qulty already. Those asking ogo why he stole brainbox are trying to justify the judgment he was facing.
gerrit?

Awoo88:
dey house
The bolded is Jagga's did!! His action!!!

Life and Living is Action Parked, therefore what is in view is which type of Action brings about a Trial?

By 98% only one type of Action. An action which has injured or harmed another person. Simple.

Awoo88:
Which is under trial. Him no dey house. Maybe u should ask Jagga why he did not sleep with Rasta' babe. I am sure his answer will not be "me wen no dey house" Jagga is under query, He quilt or otherwise will be established by his action during the period under question.
Ogo is qulty already.
Those asking ogo why he stole brainbox are trying to justify the judgment he was facing.
gerrit?

Hence you agree with me that "Did" can Make or Scatter a Case but "Why" means, he is Already Guilty, as you said in the case of Ogo!

musicwriter:
ALL laws were made by man/woman from as long as we've been on earth.

Still Dodging the question.

When those men/women where born, was The Law not already on ground before them waiting for them to come and controlling them when they were babies and children?

Dtruthspeaker:
Still Dodging the question.

When those men/women where born, was The Law not already on ground before them waiting for them to come and controlling them when they were babies?

Again, the first humans on earth created the first laws. All subsequent humans are obeying those laws from generation to generation.

Hmmmm....what's your definition of evil in self defence? Are you talking about shooting a armed robber who is about to arm you or your loved ones? Or throwing a suide bomber into the ocean? Or beating a phone snatcher to pop? Or swapping your poisoned drink with the prisoner's drink? When you defend yourself from a factual attack ( not some I saw it in my dream or suspect him/her o), it is nolonger an evil on your own part.

musicwriter:
Again, the first humans on earth created the first laws. All subsequent humans are obeying those laws from generation to generation.

NOW YOU HAVE CHANGED YOUR FORMER ANSWER.

Are they the ones who made The Law on Sex which gave them the right to have sex with each other and not with animals, plants, children and stuff?

Or Right to own land and property and animals and trees which does not belong to them?

Or Right to life and death, right to fair hearing, Freedom of Speech and Movement? etc.

Or Right to eat everything in sight including sand, stones, iron etc.

Are they the ones who made The Law that they shall not fly as a bird or live in the sea as a fish?

Are they the ones who made These Laws which already Rule them, Whom they obeyed when they came?

Dtruthspeaker:
NOW YOU HAVE CHANGED YOUR FORMER ANSWER.

Are they the ones who made The Law on Sex which gave them the right to have sex with each other and not with animals, plants, children and stuff?

Or Right to own land and property and animals and trees which does not belong to them?

Or Right to life and death, right to fair hearing, Freedom of Speech and Movement? etc.

Or Right to eat everything in sight including sand, stones, iron etc.

Are they the ones who made The Law that they shall not fly as a bird or live in the sea as a fish?

Are they the ones who made These Laws which already Rule them, Whom they obeyed when they came?

I don't think I can continue this discussion because you've reduced it to children's Sunday school topic. I don't engage in such childish discussion. Do you have to be told by a god not to eat stone before you know it's inedible? Did your god also give laws to elephants and fishes not to eat stone? Wow!

Goodbye.

musicwriter:
I don't think I can continue this discussion because you've reduced it to children's Sunday school topic. I don't engage in such childish discussion. Do you have to be told by a god not to eat stone before you know it's inedible?

Do you think your mannequin and artificial robot will not join you to eat rice and chicken if you Law'd it?

musicwriter:
Did your god also give laws to elephants and fishes not to eat stone? Wow!
Goodbye.

As I said up, if you wanted it, you would law it that your phone will drink fuel, your mannequin will eat grass and your car now eats electricity.

Creations always act and operate based on the Laws their Creators have Set for them, exactly as in the absence of fault, your car will move when it has eaten it's food called fuel.