Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
African traditional religion(s) and philosophy in a new world
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Ngong wrote:How is this possible if afrikan members say the bolded [red] about their past? Ama sielewi hii kimambo? Africans are using words (symbols) that have a bias for Western values. But what would happen if these values were put to question? We'd have alternative answers, and if we were to begin such a task we'd need appropriate objectives like globalization, clean environments, global harmony and the like. It's about us accepting our symbols and giving them new meaning.
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
tycho wrote: True. Shared values aren't independent of difference.
What we need to clarify what we mean by saying that shared values do not, and cannot override differences. This is because my argument rests on the premise that values are forces and those who experience them balance the forces politically.
So I'm not excluding difference. Am looking at political decisions and their effects.
It's like when you're talking about 'Wazuan parlance'. There are differences in language and even understanding. For example, I don't see how something can be 'ABK'! But I don't dispute it's part of 'Wazuan parlance'.
I just love bringing out these concessions. Makes my day brighter. You could have said you are looking at political decisions and their effects at the beginning. So what 'political decisions and their effects' do the 'traditional African 'systems' have in the making of a peaceful and prosperous world, universal brotherhood and freedom'? Even then, wont 'moral decisions and their effects' have influence, mitigation, negation, augmentation? When I said you have chosen a simplistic way, I meant it. Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
i_am_saved wrote:tycho wrote: True. Shared values aren't independent of difference.
What we need to clarify what we mean by saying that shared values do not, and cannot override differences. This is because my argument rests on the premise that values are forces and those who experience them balance the forces politically.
So I'm not excluding difference. Am looking at political decisions and their effects.
It's like when you're talking about 'Wazuan parlance'. There are differences in language and even understanding. For example, I don't see how something can be 'ABK'! But I don't dispute it's part of 'Wazuan parlance'.
I just love bringing out these concessions. Makes my day brighter. You could have said you are looking at political decisions and their effects at the beginning. So what 'political decisions and their effects' do the 'traditional African 'systems' have in the making of a peaceful and prosperous world, universal brotherhood and freedom'? Even then, wont 'moral decisions and their effects' have influence, mitigation, negation, augmentation? When I said you have chosen a simplistic way, I meant it. Hahaha! You raise many vital, and interesting ideas, and I'd be sad if your days were dark. And I'm always happy to find light in you. You begin by saying that I should have said that we were talking about politics from the first. And you further ask, whether the moral, the spiritual is not to be involved in these political decisions. While I am certain to reasonable degree that such words as 'prosperity', 'peace', 'freedom', 'universal brotherhood', 'continent', 'heritage', are all political words, I am not so surprised to find that you believe that the moral and spiritual are, or can be seperated from the political. Otherwise you'd probably not ask how African systems contribute to Political decisions. But I count it as one idea of the West. The Jacobins seperated 'Church' from 'State', and Spirituality and morality were restricted to the private sphere. Just the other day the U.S. Supreme court upheld the same idea. My 'Christian goggles', and 'God', became apparent when 'African Church' came up. Was this 'syncretism', what happened in Africa when the missionaries came? How political was that? How moral and spiritual was it? Every spiritual event, is equally, and significantly political. Even Moses was a politician. The garden of Eden is a body politic. The Jacobins had to pay homage to the Sun God. African traditions have not only recognized the spirituality of politics, but that demons come from family members for the family is also a political body. Divination is an attempt at understanding ones' immediate political situation and the repressed, sublimated, . . ., ideas, attitudes, fears, 'demons', that bind, and prevent ease, peace, prosperity, freedom. Even the international system, has its demons, and these demons are cast in the same way as in individuals.
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
In your concessions stop putting words in my mouth. I have asked "wont 'moral decisions and their effects' have influence, mitigation, negation, augmentation?" I have not asked what you are putting across as I have asked. The question is to show the intricate interaction, not whether there should be interaction. Your 'certainity to a reasonable degree' is not conclusive and authoritative. Probability. May or may not. Maybe. Perhaps. Could be. I-dont-know. You-could-be-right. I-could-be-wrong. Is what you are in effect saying. That is why you have jumped to draw that I believe the moral and spiritual are or can be separated from the political. Until and when I say that, you cannot say it for me. What do you know of the church and state issue? Especially when you are only 'certain to a reasonable degree' of prosperity, peace, freedom, universal brotherhood ad nauseum which I have already dismissed. Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
i_am_saved wrote:In your concessions stop putting words in my mouth.
I have asked "wont 'moral decisions and their effects' have influence, mitigation, negation, augmentation?" I have not asked what you are putting across as I have asked. The question is to show the intricate interaction, not whether there should be interaction.
Your 'certainity to a reasonable degree' is not conclusive and authoritative. Probability. May or may not. Maybe. Perhaps. Could be. I-dont-know. You-could-be-right. I-could-be-wrong. Is what you are in effect saying.
That is why you have jumped to draw that I believe the moral and spiritual are or can be separated from the political. Until and when I say that, you cannot say it for me.
What do you know of the church and state issue?
Especially when you are only 'certain to a reasonable degree' of prosperity, peace, freedom, universal brotherhood ad nauseum which I have already dismissed.
I used 'reasonable probability' because I'm aware of my limits, and nature, and context of this 'conversation'. I also realize that you have noted my concessions, and though I have put words in your mouth, we have some agreement, and you now want me to show the intricate relationship between politics and spirituality. And you ask what I know about the Church - State relationship. I'll begin by telling you what I know about Church and State by using a historical example that will end by looking at our conversation. Perhaps, we should begin with a word or two about Martin Luther, and the Spirit of his time. He was a monk in the Catholic Church at a time when the Pope was a powerful figure who intervened in the running of Kingdoms and other bodies politic. Luther, by virtue of his zeal for God, and being enlightened by the Spirit of his age, sought to reform the Church and keep it on her scriptural path. But he ran into political difficulty. For example, how could the Church not sell indulgences and maintain her political power? Luther had to be expelled. German princes saw an opportunity for loosening the Pope's grip on them and sheltered Luther who could gather the masses and provide the German rulers with legitimacy in their break from tradition. Luther refused to support the German peasant war, and consequently thousands of peasants died. Why? To save his own skin, and consequently prop the rulership of the day. In England, the spirit of enlightenment, and chants of 'Sola scriptura', the Anglican church met some zealous dissenters who gathered behind Arthur Cromwell and demanded 'no bishop, no King'. When the Cromwell revolution was crushed these 'dissenters' ran to America and proceeded with their zealous search of the Scripture. And in order to maintain this freedom they even fought the English King for independence. They encouraged the Jacobins. These pious dissenters burnt witches, encouraged the decimation of the red Indian population, and even owned African slaves. One day, a zealous and Scholarly man by the name of William Miller made some calculations and came with some dates on when Christ would return. His friends had just discovered that the heavily Kingdom would be on earth, and he was not to be left behind. He must have been a very respectable zealot, for he managed to gather a following. This was an elite unit of believers who'd rule with Christ. Because the zealots around Miller were serious scholars, they demanded certainty which not even Miller could give. A great disappointment followed and some modified their zeal and went to modest political units who'd safeguard the Constitution. Other Millerite zealots couldn't surrender and lose face, so they gathered and came up with other Scriptural, reasonable, and certain reasons for the great disappointment. And to keep the matter sealed diversion came with missionary activity, and using state protected wealth they descended upon the primitives among who was your grandfather. Within a few years your father's head was filled with unpalatable stuff, he tried to rebel, but the brainwashing was too tight. You were already zealously stirring your 'Soya' and telling your friends that the Pope is the 666, and an active pathfinder. The church fits your personality. It shaped it. And you've performed well, so you've been rewarded with some respectable positions. Armed with such ideas and props do you come to Wazua to reinforce your beliefs!
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
So you, like a ruminant, regurgitate, nay, you plagiarize my autobiography and want to pass it off as your original thought? You want to appear like your 'reasonable probability' is 'fairly' accurate? If I was your professor, I would fail you thoroughly. And give you manual work to do. For being a disgrace to intelligence. To professors. Because you have confirmed that your 'reasonable probability' is actually of the 'I-dont-know' type let alone the 'maybe' type. That you have to wait till I put it for all to read then you pen a lengthy article in apparent 'well thought out postulation' all to just appear like you can make highly intelligent 'reasonable probability'. I hope 'William' will pen an article in the Sunday Nation, as he always does, correcting the ills in English of plagiarism. Regurgitation. Copying. Cheating. Ignorance. Donge? And thank you for conceding once more. Though tactfully. Straight or convoluted I accept all concessions. Simple. Basic. Elementary. Ignorant. I-dont-know-until-you-tell. William. Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
Dont respond yet. I want to add something. Still reading up. Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
i_am_saved wrote:So you, like a ruminant, regurgitate, nay, you plagiarize my autobiography and want to pass it off as your original thought?
You want to appear like your 'reasonable probability' is 'fairly' accurate?
If I was your professor, I would fail you thoroughly. And give you manual work to do. For being a disgrace to intelligence. To professors.
Because you have confirmed that your 'reasonable probability' is actually of the 'I-dont-know' type let alone the 'maybe' type.
That you have to wait till I put it for all to read then you pen a lengthy article in apparent 'well thought out postulation' all to just appear like you can make highly intelligent 'reasonable probability'.
I hope 'William' will pen an article in the Sunday Nation, as he always does, correcting the ills in English of plagiarism. Regurgitation. Copying. Cheating. Ignorance.
Donge?
And thank you for conceding once more. Though tactfully.
Straight or convoluted I accept all concessions.
Simple. Basic. Elementary. Ignorant. I-dont-know-until-you-tell.
William. Hahaha!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:i_am_saved wrote:So you, like a ruminant, regurgitate, nay, you plagiarize my autobiography and want to pass it off as your original thought?
You want to appear like your 'reasonable probability' is 'fairly' accurate?
If I was your professor, I would fail you thoroughly. And give you manual work to do. For being a disgrace to intelligence. To professors.
Because you have confirmed that your 'reasonable probability' is actually of the 'I-dont-know' type let alone the 'maybe' type.
That you have to wait till I put it for all to read then you pen a lengthy article in apparent 'well thought out postulation' all to just appear like you can make highly intelligent 'reasonable probability'.
I hope 'William' will pen an article in the Sunday Nation, as he always does, correcting the ills in English of plagiarism. Regurgitation. Copying. Cheating. Ignorance.
Donge?
And thank you for conceding once more. Though tactfully.
Straight or convoluted I accept all concessions.
Simple. Basic. Elementary. Ignorant. I-dont-know-until-you-tell.
William. Hahaha! So. What do you mean by, 'concession'?
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
I could be a Lutheran I could be a Presbyterian I could be a Baptist I could be a Methodist I could be a Lollard I could be a Seventh-day Adventist I could simply be a 'protestant'. And for a thread meant to discuss 'African traditional religions and philosophy in a new world' surely discussing these 'Western philosophies' is a huge step in the right direction and will lead to greater illumination, enlightenment, grasp, understanding on the 'African traditional religions and philosophy' in a new world. Surely this must be an unmistakable concession that 'Traditional' 'African Systems' are but vague terminologies, words, concepts, ideas, imaginations that has so far eluded definition, delineation, quantification, discussion, enlightenment, illumination. Even Tycho. Donge? You cant define them, so you cant discuss them. This thread is still ABK!!!!! Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
i_am_saved wrote:I could be a Lutheran
I could be a Presbyterian
I could be a Baptist
I could be a Methodist
I could be a Lollard
I could be a Seventh-day Adventist
I could simply be a 'protestant'.
And for a thread meant to discuss 'African traditional religions and philosophy in a new world' surely discussing these 'Western philosophies' is a huge step in the right direction and will lead to greater illumination, enlightenment, grasp, understanding on the 'African traditional religions and philosophy' in a new world.
Surely this must be an unmistakable concession that 'Traditional' 'African Systems' are but vague terminologies, words, concepts, ideas that has so far eluded definition, delineation, quantification, discussion, enlightenment, illumination. Even Tycho.
Donge?
You cant define them, so you cant discuss them.
This thread is still ABK!!!!! I didn't ask, what concession(s) I had made. The question is what you mean when you say, 'concede'.
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 6/12/2013 Posts: 69
|
Wacha otani bwana. William. Philip. Whoever. Reader. Tycho. Can you give, show, illustrate situations, events, hypotheses with 'certainty to a reasonable degree' of the role, part of 'African traditional religions and philosophies in a new world'. That is why you started this thread, donge? Just for Mukiri.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
i_am_saved wrote:Wacha otani bwana.
William. Philip. Whoever. Reader. Tycho.
Can you give, show, illustrate situations, events, hypotheses with 'certainty to a reasonable degree' of the role, part of 'African traditional religions and philosophies in a new world'.
That is why you started this thread, donge?
I know why I started the thread. And that's not the question. You asked me to define some words, and I did. To reasonable certainty. Now I ask you to define 'Concede' for the third time. Will you?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
symbols wrote:AlphDoti wrote:symbols wrote:AlphDoti wrote:symbols wrote:I'm very curious to see how you will approach Egyptian religions and traditions. There is something that orginated from their religion.This is about commemorating the birth of sun god. The primitive man in Meditarenian region..neighbours to the Egyptians. He could see the sun burning back and forth in the southern hemisphere, receding from them. And day by day, it started getting colder and colder, 20th of Dec, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 24th it is getting colder and colder And on 25th the devil trying to swallow the sun (in the mind of the primitive man). Actually, these are happening astronomically..but the primitive man following the sun and could feel the change in temperature and they say now the sins of darkness, the devil has been overcome by the sun. The sun is rebornit is born again, the sun coming back on its own on 25th, 26th, 27th etc getting warmer and warmer. So 25th of Dec was the turn of the tide, in the heaven (i.e. skies). So the sun is being born, The Sun, not the "son of God". So this is how the early church adopted an holiday.... What about the ten commandments and the egyptian book of the dead? There is nothing I have seen so absurd as what peolpe have done to change the Ten Commandments! ...Since both Islam and Christianity share a common foundation in Judaism,I brought up the matter of the ten commandments and its alleged origin from the book of the dead.If Christianity was influenced,who says Judaism was spared and consequently Islam? Did you know that some Church has their own version of the Ten Commandments?And not only did they changed the fourth Commandment, which is why most Churches now worship on Sunday. But they also deleted second Commandment that talks about idolatry. You know why they deleted this, right?To allow remove any conflict when they start idoltery later! Brilliant! I'm would not be surprised to see in the near future, how a man abolishing all the Ten Commandments. And then they would not need salvation anymore. Despite this, many of "them"do not feel shame to tell us that their Church has authority to change law of God. And they felt nothing when they changed Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. They feel nothing about being blasphemous. The literally make God obsolete by the following: Quote:"The Pope is of great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws. The Pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts as vicegerent of God upon earth...” — Lucius Ferraris, in “ Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica”, Volume V, article on “ Papa, Article II”, titled “ Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility”, #30, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition. If it were possiblethe Church will have no problem in changing any of the Ten Commandments to whatever they want. And whenever they want and just insisting that they had the authority. You know how they feeland get upset and defend themselves saying that there's no idolatry in Church.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
African traditional religion(s) and philosophy in a new world
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|