budaatum: Would you never get it? Owala has a spirit, lol!
MuttleyLaff: "12So the demons begged Jesus, “Send us to the pigs, so that we may enter them.” 13He gave them permission, and the unclean spirits came out and went into the pigs, and the herd of about two thousand rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the water. 14Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened 15and when they came to Jesus, they saw the man who used to have the mob of demons in him. He was sitting there, clothed and in his right mind; and they were all afraid."" - Mark 5:12-15
You do realise budaatum, that no one except for you, has yet advanced that demons cause infertility or breast cancer. Nobody has emphatically said that demons cause infertility or breast cancer. This is you just drawing conclusions and reading more than necessary, into what interlocutors are typing.
Now, let's get a much better grip and a bit on "biological or psychological causes." Directly or indirectly "biological or psychological causes" no doubt, are caused by certain influences.
Food, environment, choice life style, ignorance, wickedness, DNA inherited traits or heredity and genetics, etcetera are examples of direct influences behind some "biological or psychological causes" while there also are, principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places etcetera, that indirectly are the influences behind some other set of "biological or psychological causes"
Ah, you slowly are now beginnning to get it, lol. Yeah there is a spirit, principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places etcetera behind the cause of infertility
budaatum: buda does not believe, and in fact knows that the Owala River hasn't got a spirit even though others believe it does and sacrifice a ram to it you dumb fuq! buda just likes eating juicy ram, and trust me when I say they wouldn't give me any if I knock their belief! You'd know this if you weren't selective in my posts you dig up!
The following might enlighten you but I doubt it.
budaatum: You make "belief" sound like its a thing only had by people of a particular religion as if "revered spirits of the ancestors, wise and just, ancient warriors with brave deeds to their names", is not a belief in itself.
Mine is the worship of Owala, the river from which I got schistosomiasis that paralysed me from the waist down. We worship it by eating a goat. I received a message from her that anybody who poos or pisses in Owala will render their sexual bits useless and will die. I am promoting it as a belief amongst my people while I educate those who can learn.
I am then, vindicated in calling you a cheat and a hypocrite
budaatum: I'd give you another. I don't knock your God, muttley, even though I know your God is a figment of your imagination you read about in a book. I will mock your ignorance though, especially when you don't keep it to yourself and there's no ram involved!
And just so your dumbness don't stop you understanding, ram, in this instance is metaphor for, 'reducing your ignorance', though there's not a likely chance of that ever occuring!
"2In fact, budaatum people who think they know so much don't know anything at all. 3But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him." - 1 Corinthians 8:2-3
"budaatum he is conceited and understands nothing. Instead, budaatum he has an unhealthy interest in controversies and semantics, out of which come envy, strife, abusive talk, evil suspicions," - 1 1 Timothy 6:4
budaatum, you dont know my God. I am proud of Abba, my God. Why should I keep such pride to myself, hmm? I gladly will shout from the rooftops about His Faithfulness, Goodness, Lovingkindness, about being my Provider, Defender, Healer, Savior, Redeemer, Confidant etcetera
budaatum: As if whatever ignorant opinion a silly dumb mutt like you cooks up inside your stupid head and choose to believe matters one tiny bit to buda!
I do know your god mutt. You are an image of it!
budaatum: ... My maternal great grandparents were Ifa Priests in the Orolu Kingdom. And because of it we are steeped in the Ifa awo. My paternal grandfather, the Basorun, was an Obatala Priest. Obatala is the Supreme God in Orolu Land. You might from this understand that I have pedigree.
Whenever I arrive in the Orolu Kingdom, I do a walk around the town as part of my os[h]a (I've added the h so it reads well), and I must start after 2am, for that is when the Spirits that ensure Orolu prospers roam around the Kingdom. The walk takes me past Saint John's - the first church in town, past the first mosque and past the Palace in front of which stands the Ibo Osa (Osa Shrine), and takes approximately 1.5 - 2 hours. And on it, I will meet nightwatchmen, who are Ogun worshippers, as nightwatchmen usually are in Yoruba land.
They will shout out, "Iwo wo lo nlo ni ibe yen?" (Who is it that goes there?). And I will respond, "Emi" (Me). They would ask, "Ta ni iwo?" (Who is 'me'?) and I will respond, "Emi Basorun". (Me, Basorun). You see, I'm not the Basorun, my uncle is, but we Basoruns have this thing that every Omo Basorun (Child of Basorun) refers to themselves as Basorun so when you see one, you have seen us all. They will then respond, "Te le jeje o, S'Orun" ('Thread on the ground softly, you the Heavenly Doer'), plus some other things. I will respond with the appropriate response, and go on my way.
Now, if you know anything about Yoruba land, you would know that my walk has a meaning to those who are in the know. What amazes them is that Omo Baba Ilu Oyinbo, ("The Child of the Old Man from London" - the old man, having spent years abroad and who appears to have practically lost all knowledge of the local culture), first, knows the role of his forefathers (walking around town in the middle of the night conversing with the Spirits and ensuring they keep on making the Kingdom prosper).
Second, that Omo Baba Ilu Oyinbo is brave enough to take on this role (The middle of the night in the Orolu Kingdom is when the Gods send the Spirits to place a mark on those who will depart from earth that day so, if you don't want to die, stay indoors!). And third, that Omo Baba Ilu Oyinbo knows the right things to say when the Spirits accost him on his walk (not knowing the right words is like not knowing the password, and if you get it wrong the Spirits will just make you depart from earth that very moment!). You might understand why, part of our response in the dialogue is the phrase "Ilu a toro o" (There will be peace and prosperity in the land o).
As Omo Basorun, it is my duty to go up into the heavens and bring light to my people. And the only way I can personally defy the Gods of the land is by me not performing the duty assigned to me by the Gods. And if I do not perform my duty, which is not just walking around town in the middle of the night but also going up into the heavens and bringing Light to my Kingdom, I, buda will die. But I like performing my duty, so buda, lives!
I hope from what I've said above that you would understand me when I say, in the old days, the Gods will tell the likes of myself to take those who defy them to the bottom of the river and bash their heads in and use their skulls to drink sekete. But like human sacrifices, which we did because our Gods required it, we do no more because we are not so stupid anymore. And since we, the doers of the errands of our Gods no more do that which we claimed our Gods told us to do, they, our Gods, have lost their potency to punish those who defy them. Now, they have learnt to forgive many times and make different demands of us.
But besides that, Omo Basorun (It means "Son of the King of the Heavens", in case you do not know), is not able to defy his father, 'The King of the Heavens'. And if anyone is bold enough to falsely accuse him of such a crime, the Son of the King of the Heavens will go up into the Heavens, get permission from his Father The King of the Heavens, to blot out the light and the Kingdom will be in darkness!
Trying to muzzle this dog and its barking out of its rear end arse, smh.
Someone please help me throw it a doggy bone. Shoo, go away with your wahala
The irony is when you dont even recognise yourself of being a dog, lol. You badly needed muzzled before your incessant barks turn into accidental rabies infecting bites.
Dumbo, that thread was in its infancy, there barely were up to 6-7 posts in it and no interlocutors has yet said nor stated anything in detail that demons were the cause of infertlity before you jumped to a twisted conclusion by asking shadeyinka the following: "Are you just calling hormonal imbalance or blockage of fallopian tubes and normal biological reasons for barenness, spiritual, even if it has nothing at all to do with spirits? As in, it runs in the family? Like breast cancer runs in families?
LordReed2nd, it rained cats and dogs last night is a metaphor and not absolute truth. How do you know, when it rained cats and dogs last night, where the myth ends and truth begins and also that it is not one myth nested in another, hmm?
Parables, just like I said about myths, are used to tell a story or talk about a certain event or relevant person in the form of a metaphor. It also is like telling a joke, when cracking a joke, it doesnt necessarily mean, the joke is devoid of some element of truth and reality in it. Well, so is the case and same with parables and/or myths. If you know, you know. Who no know, no go know.
Your analogy is of a metaphor told in contemporary reality while the inquiry is about a parable told in story about a man which was written down not by his contemporaries but several decades later, all of this taking place 1900+ years ago. Your analogy doesn't even come close to answering the question.
Dumbo, that thread was in its infancy, there barely were up to 6-7 posts in it and no interlocutors has yet said nor stated anything in detail that demons were the cause of infertlity
This is post 7 in said thread, a post buda was specifically ccd in.
I guess in your dumb world infertility and bareness mean different things or you think you can hide your usual ignorance in your word diarrhea!
Think again, I would have said, but I'd be wasting my breath.
Not even in my wildest dreams, will I ever think infertility and bareness mean different things but it is you dumb foxtrot uniform charlie kilo, that's as thick as a two plank 2 by 2, it hasnt registered to, that no one on that thread from post zero to post seven, except your honorable and pitiful self budaatum, has said, stated or made any reference to demons/spirits, as being the origin of hormonal imbalance or blockage of fallopian tubes.
Even when shadeyinka flatly and frankly refuted your allegation, saying he never said anything like that, you still viciously attacked and clamped down on shadeyinka, as if like a pit bull, with a death grip locked jaw bite and never letting go.
LordReed2nd: Your analogy is of a metaphor told in contemporary reality
The 17th century is not contemporary times nah, as that is the period where from that phrase originated, in the 1651 collection of poems or Olor Iscanus to be precise.
LordReed2nd: while the inquiry is about a parable told in story about a man which was written down not by his contemporaries but several decades later, all of this taking place 1900+ years ago.
The parable(s) told in story about a man were not only as a matter of fact written down by Jesus' contemporaries. The first gospel as a matter of fact was written 40 years after Jesus' death and not several decades later, as you tried to suggest. The gospels were written on the strength of firsthand eyeswitnesses and before publishing, investigated corroborating eye witness report.
LordReed2nd: Your analogy doesn't even come close to answering the question.
The analogy made a succint comparison and served the purpose of explaining how do you know, when it is said, it rained cats and dogs last night, where the myth ends and truth begins and also that it is not one myth nested in another,
MuttleyLaff: The 17th century is not contemporary times nah, as that is the period where from that phrase originated, in the 1651 collection of poems or Olor Iscanus to be precise.
The parable(s) told in story about a man were not only as a matter of fact written down by Jesus' contemporaries. The first gospel as a matter of fact was written 40 years after Jesus' death and not several decades later, as you tried to suggest. The gospels were written on the strength of firsthand eyeswitnesses and before publishing, investigated corroborating eye witness report.
The analogy made a succint comparison and served the purpose of explaining how do you know, when it is said, it rained cats and dogs last night, where the myth ends and truth begins and also that it is not one myth nested in another,
It doesn't matter what time period the phrase originated from, it clearly isn't the case that it rains cats and dogs now or at any time in the past.
Muttley you make me laugh. 40 years is in fact 4 decades and that qualifies it as several so thanks for making my point for me. Before it was written down these tales were spread of Jesus by oral tradition. Then they were written by authors we have no way of proving their identity but are generally considered anonymous. This is not a stage upon which to accept as pure fact these tales, hence the question how do we know this is not myth nestled in myth, try to answer this question.
The analogy doesn't because you are telling me now and we understand it is a metaphor. How do we know those who told those tales were not simply being metaphorically?
LordReed2nd: It doesn't matter what time period the phrase originated from, it clearly isn't the case that it rains cats and dogs now or at any time in the past.
Its actually at Victorian times, funnily enough that it appeared, as if it really did rain cats and dogs, lol. Anyways, its the penultimate truth and it is true that it rained cats and dogs when understood metaphorically.
I am glad to be of service to make you laugh milord, besides, its in the moniker ID, it comes with MuttleyLaff.
LordReed2nd: 40 years is in fact 4 decades and that qualifies it as several so thanks for making my point for me.
I wasnt making any point for you, rather I was making my own point that 4 decades after, which in fact is a generation, isnt really late in penning things down 2000 years ago.
LordReed2nd: Before it was written down these tales were spread of Jesus by oral tradition. Then they were written by authors we have no way of proving their identity but are generally considered anonymous. This is not a stage upon which to accept as pure fact these tales, hence the question how do we know this is not myth nestled in myth, try to answer this question.
I've taken on board your skepticism, so one word, just one to give you the answer. Conviction
LordReed2nd: The analogy doesn't because you are telling me now and we understand it is a metaphor. How do we know those who told those tales were not simply being metaphorically?
"1Many people have set out to write accounts about the events that have been fulfilled among us. 2They used the eyewitness reports circulating among us from the early disciples. 3Having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I also have decided to write an accurate account for you, most honorable Theophilus, 4so you can be certain of the truth of everything you were taught." - Luke 1:1-4
Dr Luke who is been quoted in Luke 1:1-4 above, would have informed if he was telling tales metaphorically. Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, in the book Antiquities of the Jews, made at least two references to Jesus of Nazareth
LordReed2nd, our Lord and Savior of the world, Jesus Christ regularly used metaphors to describe Himself and hardly explicitly say He is using metaphors, nonetheless, the disciples crystal clearly understood what was said with the metaphors, such as John 6:35's: "Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty."
budaatum: [s]Here we go again. He will not read before he starts with his word diarrhea![/s] I don't suppose you've ever heard of Porgy and Bess by George Gershwin (September 26, 1898 – July 11, 1937). It isn't exactly mainstream. Good morning muttley.
MuttleyLaff: Didnt by the way, perceive you as an opera going individual. Anyway, Sportin' Life, is right about things you are likely to read in the Bible, arent necessarily what you believe them to be because Bible passages arent, as some would like to believe, necessarily monosemous
MuttleyLaff: Do not forget, you can use a spear as a walking stick, but that will not change its true nature. budaatum, I can already predict your next idiotic response so just save it. I've heard all your yada yada nonsense before. Spare some space on the Nairaland servers' hard disk by not talking
I dont accept "Good morning" Greek trojan horses. I wouldnt trust your "Good morning" greeting, as far away as I possibly can throw it, so save it for some gullible other person or better still, shove it up yours
Yes, duh, there are stories of resurrection in the bible. I repeat budaatum, what's your beef, what's wrong with "it is written in a book"
budaatum: Seems you missed the sarcasm and condescension and abject contempt. Forgive me for not spelling it out to dumb you. Sarcastically and condescendingly and with all the contempt possible, good morning mutt.
Now stop assuming buda is answerable to a dumb mutt like you and shove your beef where you like until you've learnt to use your brain!
There is one thing you can do, that I can't and that's to kiss my arse. budaatum, I'll appreaciate you get on your fours, to kiss my arse and lick with your tongue my anus clean, more than your sarcastically and condescendingly and with all the contempt possible, worthless Greek Trojan horse good morning greeting, lol.
Predictable dumb foxtrot uniform charlie kilo, lol
I repeat, what's wrong with "it is written in a book"
MuttleyLaff: It actually at Victorian times, funnily enough appeared, as if it really did rain cats and dogs, lol. Anyways, its the penultimate truth and it is true that it rained cats and dogs when understood metaphorically.
I am glad to be of service to make you laugh milord, besides, its in the moniker ID, it comes with MuttleyLaff.
I wasnt making any point for you, rather I was making my own point that 4 decades after, which in fact is a generation, isnt really late in penning things down 2000 years ago.
I've taken on board your skepticism, so one word, just one to give you the answer. Conviction
"1Many people have set out to write accounts about the events that have been fulfilled among us. 2They used the eyewitness reports circulating among us from the early disciples. 3Having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I also have decided to write an accurate account for you, most honorable Theophilus, 4so you can be certain of the truth of everything you were taught." - Luke 1:1-4
Dr Luke who is been quoted in Luke 1:1-4 above, would have informed if he was telling tales metaphorically. Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, in the book Antiquities of the Jews, made at least two references to Jesus of Nazareth
LordReed2nd, our Lord and Savior of the world, Jesus Christ regularly used metaphors to describe Himself and hardly explicitly say He is using metaphors, nonetheless, the disciples crystal clearly understood what was said with the metaphors, such as John 6:35's: "Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty."
“Cats and dogs” may come from the Greek expression cata doxa, which means “contrary to experience or belief.” If it is raining cats and dogs, it is raining unusually or unbelievably hard. https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/item/what-is-the-origin-of-the-phrase-its-raining-cats-and-dogs/ It is clearly metaphorically and has no reality in it. When don't know this for the Jesus stories. Josephus mentioning Jesus does not validate the story as a real historical event because he mentions Jesus as someone people believed in. Also it is suspect some of what was written was snuck in by believers in Jesus because it does not follow Josephus' style of writing about people.
You also can't use the book to prove the book. What you need to do is show how we can be sure what was written was an accurate account of the events that took place in the life of the man we call Jesus, if such a person actually lived and performed all the acts attributed to him.
4 decades is a lot of time to wait to write from oral traditions. Do you not know that oral traditions have a way of distorting information through the retellings that each new teller gives modified by his own speech patterns, vocabulary and quirks? 4 decades of orally passing along stories does not inspire confidence at all that this actual.
Yeah I guess the pun was unintended but it still works so I'll take it.
budaatum: You may appreciate all you like mutt but kiss your own arse! I don't fuq dimwits like you even if you paid.
Count yourself lucky you've got arse as a chance to kiss you self-aggrandizing jerk. Dumbo, read before you type gramps. I told you I cant kiss my arse, and by the way, I dont need your fuq, not now, not in this life and even not in another life
MuttleyLaff: It actually at Victorian times, funnily enough appeared, as if it really did rain cats and dogs, lol. Anyways, its the penultimate truth and it is true that it rained cats and dogs when understood metaphorically.
I am glad to be of service to make you laugh milord, besides, its in the moniker ID, it comes with MuttleyLaff.
I wasnt making any point for you, rather I was making my own point that 4 decades after, which in fact is a generation, isnt really late in penning things down 2000 years ago.
I've taken on board your skepticism, so one word, just one to give you the answer. Conviction
"1Many people have set out to write accounts about the events that have been fulfilled among us. 2They used the eyewitness reports circulating among us from the early disciples. 3Having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I also have decided to write an accurate account for you, most honorable Theophilus, 4so you can be certain of the truth of everything you were taught." - Luke 1:1-4 Dr Luke who is been quoted in Luke 1:1-4 above, would have informed if he was telling tales metaphorically. Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, in the book Antiquities of the Jews, made at least two references to Jesus of Nazareth
LordReed2nd, our Lord and Savior of the world, Jesus Christ regularly used metaphors to describe Himself and hardly explicitly say He is using metaphors, nonetheless, the disciples crystal clearly understood what was said with the metaphors, such as John 6:35's: "Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty."
Metaphors are figurative language, are hyperboles, similes and/or antithesis, used to provide clarity or exaggerated to emphasis and make a point, like in that case how heavy it rained last night. The reality in it, is that the rained and run up "cats and dogs" are the result of them getting drowned due to the Victoria times poor drainage problems
LordReed2nd: When don't know this for the Jesus stories. Josephus mentioning Jesus does not validate the story as a real historical event because he mentions Jesus as someone people believed in. Also it is suspect some of what was written was snuck in by believers in Jesus because it does not follow Josephus' style of writing about people.
LordReed2nd: You also can use the book to prove the book.
Thank you for your Freudian slip, lol. You're really at heart, kind and generous, lol.
LordReed2nd: What you need to do is show how we can be sure what was written was an accurate account of the events that took place in the life of the man we call Jesus, if such a person actually lived and performed all the acts attributed to him.
Conviction is the barest minimum required to show how we can be sure what was written was an accurate account of the events that took place in the life of the man we call Jesus, if such a person actually lived and performed all the acts attributed to him. If you have it, you have it. If not, well c'est la vie.
LordReed2nd: Yeah I guess the pun was unintended but it still works so I'll take it.
I am glad you take that I am influenced by conviction that all arent myth nestled in myth. Remember I earlier had said something about telling a joke hmm? When cracking a joke, it doesnt necessarily mean, the joke is devoid of some element of truth and reality in it, so it is with all this here we are discussing LordReed2nd.
Metaphors are figurative language, are hyperboles, similes and/or antithesis, used to provide clarity or exaggerated to emphasis and make a point, like in that case how heavy it rained last night. The reality in it, is that the rained and run up "cats and dogs" are the result of them getting drowned due to the Victoria times poor drainage problems
Thank you for your Freudian slip, lol. You're really at heart, kind and generous, lol.
Conviction is the barst minimum required to show how we can be sure what was written was an accurate account of the events that took place in the life of the man we call Jesus, if such a person actually lived and performed all the acts attributed to him. If you have it, you have it. If not, well c'est la vie.
I am glad you take that I am influenced by conviction that all arent myth nestled in myth. Remember I earlier had said something about telling a joke hmm? When cracking a joke, it doesnt necessarily mean, the joke is devoid of some element of truth and reality in it, so it is with all this here we are discussing LordReed2nd.
I have edited my slip so no I am not being generous to you. The book is true because it says so is worthless. Conviction also weighs very little in ascertaining truth. You may be convinced of all manner of things that are neither true or real therefore you still need a method by which to confirm if your convictions bear out. If conviction is all you have then I am sure you understand why some of us remain unconvinced.
LordReed2nd: I have edited my slip so no I am not being generous to you
Editing your unintentional error wont rub out or remove your already revealed subconscious mind/feelings.
LordReed2nd: The book is true because it says so is worthless.
One man's toxic waste, is another man's potpourri., is the least I can say to this comment.
LordReed2nd: Conviction also weighs very little in ascertaining truth. You may be convinced of all manner of things that are neither true or real therefore you still need a method by which to confirm if your convictions bear out. If conviction is all you have then I am sure you understand why some of us remain unconvinced.
MuttleyLaff: Conviction is the barest minimum required to show how we can be sure what was written was an accurate account of the events that took place in the life of the man we call Jesus, if such a person actually lived and performed all the acts attributed to him. If you have it, you have it. If not, well c'est la vie.
I need no method to prove anything. I don't want to prove anything, because I am yet to be let down by my conviction(s). I am glad you see me, as I am and I am sure you'll be the first in queue, to say, I have that right to be as I am, just the same way, you have the right, to be who you are or haven't we, LordReed2nd, hmm?
MuttleyLaff: Editing your unintentional error wont rub out or remove your already revealed subconscious mind/feelings.
One man's toxic waste, is another man's potpourri., is the least I can say to this comment.
I need no method to prove anything. I don't want to prove anything, because I am yet to be let down by my conviction(s). I am glad you see me, as I am and I am sure you'll be the first in queue, to say, I have that right to be as I am, just the same way, you have the right, to be who you are or haven't we, LordReed2nd, hmm?
Bwahahahahaha! My subconscious did not reveal anything but that I am occasionally negligent in my compositions. I make mistakes is not a cause for you to claim some sort of revelation.
What a lovely sentiment I am sure all them Yahoo boys and 419ers would appreciate such reliance on conviction without external checks.
Sure you have the right to depend on stories that you cannot verify, I am not denying you your right at all.
LordReed2nd: Bwahahahahaha! My subconscious did not reveal anything but that I am occasionally negligent in my compositions. I make mistakes is not a cause for you to claim some sort of revelation.
What a lovely sentiment I am sure all them Yahoo boys and 419ers would appreciate such reliance on conviction without external checks.
Sure you have the right to depend on stories that you cannot verify, I am not denying you your right at all.
Ladylite: Because I believe that there are unexplainable things my mind is open to any proof of the existence of such things... Proofs exist in books and experiences or encounters.
Everyone has their own encounters with the unexplained phenomenon, some experience these encounters just before death and others like me have had Near Death Experiences which became proof to us of the afterlife and we know for a fact that there is life after death and the curiosity of such experience kept out minds open to who or what controls the afterlife and we began to understand many things that are hidden from some of you that are locked up in this physical realm.
Yet there are others who without the NDE encounters have had their share of the supernatural in the constant occurrences of dejavu or premonitions.... Which science is yet to explain... Where you can dream or see someone dying or some occurrence happening and few days later it happens in the exact same way.... Kindly explain that.
But to shut your mind and think there is no God is the biggest ignorance of all.
For the universe, and all in it could NEVER have intelligently existence by itself.
I hope you know that there are people in this world that have not met you and to them you do not exist.... Consider that o
Finally I would rather live my life for Godthan live hoping with empty conviction that He doesn't exist.
I wonder why people like you are so bend of making others join you in your unbelief... Maybe you once believed and it didn't work for you because you went about it so superstitiously.... Well I have proof and I have a good relationship with God. I know there is heaven and hell. I am also aware that God is not responsible for the mishaps in this world... The devil is not either... Human beings are.
The devil exists but can not do anything without a human being.... Yes, we are more powerful than evil.
Why would I want to improve on this or attempt to re-invent the wheel, erhn?
budaatum: I wonder which is the lie. One of them certainly is, though I'm certain to be told how less than 2 years ago is "long light years ago" in your deciphering of the "the original Aramaic and Greek texts".
I don't have Jung's publications on any shelves. I put my shelves away a long light years ago. I am a minimalist, I don't have shelves of books anymore
MuttleyLaff post=72878321: I have Civilization in Transition, Volume 10 of the Collected Works of C.G.Jung
OLAADEGBU: See how Lord\Reed and budaatum just got exposed!
Image123: Don't mind them. Ungodly creatures. Dem no dey see fine boy leave am. Rubbish people intruding the poor brother's dream and almost messing him up. Lordubus and Budabus oshi.
MuttleyLaff: I have Civilization in Transition, Volume 10 of the Collected Works of C.G.Jung
MuttleyLaff: I don't have Jung's publications on any shelves. I put my shelves away a long light years ago. I am a minimalist, I don't have shelves of books anymore
budaatum: I wonder which is the lie. One of them certainly is, though I'm certain to be told how less than 2 years ago is "long light years ago" in your deciphering of the "the original Aramaic and Greek texts".
It is only a lazy brain, that's incapable of working out, that e-libraries comprises of soft copies publications/books
What is considered long-term, is usually any period of time above 3 years. I have stopped having shelves, well longer than 3 years ago, but saw dust for brains, doesn't want to appreciate this and/or comprehend that.
It is only a lazy brain, that's incapable of working out, that e-libraries comprises of soft copies publications/books
What is considered long-term, is usually any period of time above 3 years. I have stopped having shelves, well longer than 3 years ago, but saw dust for brains, doesn't want to appreciate this and/or comprehend that.
Anyone who has read the Dhammapada can easily tell that you obviously haven't.
MuttleyLaff: The real mumu is you and those other two, that liked your ignorant comment
That is a picture of the statue of Siddhartha Gautama, known as The Buddha, who happened to be a spiritual teacher in the northern region of India.
The three of you, are the only ones who dont know that Buddhists are atheists. They don't believe in God and gods, don't worship a God or god.
MuttleyLaff: Somebody it seems, is having a rough day and busy doing some serious strawman mining.
That is not an idol. It is a statue of Siddhartha Gautama, known as The Buddha and who happened to be a spiritual teacher in the northern region of India
MuttleyLaff: Baba, the poor history student/teacher, fyi, China was introduced to the teachings of Buddhism as early as the 2nd century BCE, during China's Han Dynasty, becoming more established during the 2nd century CE, and the earliest representations of Buddha, did not start as sculptures of the human form, but rather an empty seat, footprint, tree or stupa, an architectural form eventually inspiring the creation of pagodas in China, just as I earlier had explained above. As normal, sculptural pieces will be representations of Siddhartha Gautama, often known as the "Enlightened One" or "Buddha"
You're oblivious to the fact that, what you posted is a Kemet Buddha and that, its the gymnosophist who brought Buddhism to and spread it in the Nile Valley (i.e. Egypt) lmao.
You're the last to know the origin of Buddhism, lmao. Continue with your dishing out poorly studied history, OK, lmao
Someone else, will tell you where Buddhism originated from, lmao.
budaatum: Anyone who has read the Dhammapada can easily tell that you obviously haven't.
Yinmu. Be deceiving yourself there and keep up the good work of enjoying your throbbing hard on
OkCornel: Hahahaha...the wacky races, and stop that pigeon.
Very funny cartoons.
Hannah Barbera cartoons, Animaniacs, Captain Caveman, Johnny Stupid Bravo. Back when cartoons where cartoons clean and decent and honest and Truthful, bad guys were bad guys and good guys were good guys both easily identifiable, Sweet, very sweet!!
Until MTV's Beavis and Butthead came, and my cartoons were destroyed forever!!
