Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
Freemasonry- thoughts?
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/18/2011 Posts: 12,069 Location: Kianjokoma
|
hardwood wrote:
Very true. The british govt first sent missionaries (late 1890s) to study and pacify the nyeuthi to make it easier for colonial administrators to conquer and rule us. The missionaries were effective in carrying out a religious and cultural revolution whereby mwafrika denounced the God of his forefathers that he had worshiped for thousands of years and also abandoned his culture and adopted the mzungu version of God and culture. All humans believe in a supreme being whom they worship in different ways. I believe it is the same God, whether you call him Ngai, Nyasaye, Holy Trinity, Allah etc. Mzungu shouldn't have trashed the way we worshiped the supreme being. He should ave respected us the way he respected the arabs, Indians, chinese, japanese etc in their worship.
Christianity did not make it easier to colonize. Colonization made it easier to spread Christianity! The colonialists first brought us under their control largely by the use of force & trickery. The rails they built, system of govt was used by Christian missionaries to spread the faith. The Christian population was too small even after WWI to be blamed for colonization!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/28/2015 Posts: 9,562 Location: Rodi Kopany, Homa Bay
|
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 12/7/2012 Posts: 11,908
|
Dustbowl ..... now we know  In the business world, everyone is paid in two coins - cash and experience. Take the experience first; the cash will come later - H Geneen
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 10/26/2011 Posts: 181 Location: Nairobi
|
MugundaMan wrote:Apricot wrote:MugundaMan wrote:Apricot wrote:MugundaMan wrote:[quote=tycho]
If the human mind can't know anything meaningful then there can be no communication. No obedience, no existence.
As for the hair on my head, I can only approximate just as I can approximate the number of people in Kenya. Or I can also have no hair on my head in case I've just been shaved 'Njorodan'.
Yes, I can say with certainty that God said 'Let the earth be!'
Now if you cannot do a simple thing like tell us the exact number of hairs on your head. Nor can you add a single cubit to your height. Nor can your religion of science (broadly defined) for all its bombastic pretenses at power and knowledge "find the cure" for something as simple as a common cold! How then can you purport to explain the God of the universe through Science, that is still analysing rats in labs after all these millenia in a bid to understand nature and life! Yet you are prating at full decibel that we should use your miserably flawed prism of the arrogant religion of science to "understand" the world As I said..give us a break! Your assault on science is rhetorical. If I may ask, should diabetics throw away their pills or should cancer patients abandon their chemo because mugundaman considers science unpersuasive? What fails you is reason - really lack of it. You cannot defend a position without resorting to combative rhetoric. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them. And as Thomas Jefferson put it, 'Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions,' You too are trying too hard to sound smart by regurgitating dead Freemasons while saying essentially zero. At least Tycho has flashes of unique brilliance hapa Na pale while defending his positions. As for chemo...did you know that chemo accelerates the death of cancer patients just like ARVs do for Aids patients? I told you, your religion of science has you fooled. That your soul's hope in it remains steadfast is quite amusing to me. About the Chemo and the ARV's, was this revealed to you supernaturally or did you find it in some scientific journal?
As for the device you are using now to write your reply, are the transistors, circuitry and software in it divinely handed to us or we struggled through a series of engineering failures, redesigns, testing and constant improvement.
Stick to migundas my fren. You are still stuck in the "peer-reviewed journals DICTATORSHIP" mental paradigm? https://www.telegraph.co...-cancer-fighting-drugs/
I once took a graduate class and asked a simple question to the very brilliant (by the world's standards) professor and to the class as well. I asked why is there a serious disconnect between "scientific" research and solutions to very basic world problems? That is, despite all the so-called brilliance of Harvard, Oxford and allied researchers, world problems (and diseases) continue to compound each year. As he began to mumble a response I followed with a possible answer. Could it be as a result of the "peer-review dictatorship?" He looked at me stunned and puzzled at the same time, words escaping him as I continued. The peer-review mechanism basically recommends several basic things: --1.) You only quote "us" and no one else. Not even a newspaper that is explaining to you what is going on in the world around you! Even if you are seeing it with your own eyes! --2) Even when you quote "us" you CANNOT introduce any radical ideas different from "ours" if you do, we fail you automatically! Just introduce slight variants of what we have said and say it in a way to please "us" --3) You must think like we think. Reason like we reason, or else! Questioning fundamental dogmas of the Science we worship is a complete no no. ESPECIALLY any inquiries on the (hopelessly flawed) dogmas of empiricism and its peculiar methods! --4) Anything you publish must and will be reviewed by us so BEWARE. Follow 1, 2 and 3 above OR ELSE! Is it any wonder then that so-called "research" that comes from such a dictatorship of minds is so far removed from reality and never truly "solves" major world problems even when "applied"? This is how you end up with bizarre dogmas being crammed down people's throats in the halls of academe by nutcases like Freud who said Apricot subconsciously wants to screw his or her mother (or father)(Oedipus/Electra complex) and that this directs your every waking move! And you wholeheartedly swallowed it hook, line and sinker like a rat going down a cat's throat because it came in the verbiage of peer reviewed journals! . Yet even a simpleton with half a brain can see that this is unfiltered nonsense. Give us a break! You are funny! I am glad you trust an article written by a science writer. In other postings you have written that you trust water treated by NWSC; at least you trust the chemistry of the treatment chemicals. If your faith was so strong, would you be willing to drink water from a well or borehole dug in the informal settlements of Nairobi like Kibera? You never addressed the issue of the device you are using, whether it is “engineered’ or divinely gifted. I am also puzzled as whether the house(s) you have in the dustbowls are built using engineering principles! You ought to be acutely aware that a lot of physics and math - both branches or science - are involved right? I like your anecdote on peer review. I was hoping however to hear that you submitted a paper for peer review that was rejected, and the reasons for the rejection. We’ll never know if the professor was puzzled by what he thought was a dumb freak in his class or whether he thought yours was a brilliant question. You don't provide enough clue except to give yourself a pat on the back for your "brilliant" question. I am used to your taking things out of context to suit your narrative, but I would rather use the the UC Berkeley approach https://undsci.berkeley....icle/howscienceworks_16 of peer review. Waiting for the next shot from the hip. First time in history we can save the human race by laying in front of the TV and doing nothing. Let's not screw it up
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 1/8/2018 Posts: 2,211 Location: DC (Dustbowl County)
|
Apricot wrote:MugundaMan wrote:Apricot wrote:MugundaMan wrote:Apricot wrote:MugundaMan wrote:[quote=tycho]
If the human mind can't know anything meaningful then there can be no communication. No obedience, no existence.
As for the hair on my head, I can only approximate just as I can approximate the number of people in Kenya. Or I can also have no hair on my head in case I've just been shaved 'Njorodan'.
Yes, I can say with certainty that God said 'Let the earth be!'
Now if you cannot do a simple thing like tell us the exact number of hairs on your head. Nor can you add a single cubit to your height. Nor can your religion of science (broadly defined) for all its bombastic pretenses at power and knowledge "find the cure" for something as simple as a common cold! How then can you purport to explain the God of the universe through Science, that is still analysing rats in labs after all these millenia in a bid to understand nature and life! Yet you are prating at full decibel that we should use your miserably flawed prism of the arrogant religion of science to "understand" the world As I said..give us a break! Your assault on science is rhetorical. If I may ask, should diabetics throw away their pills or should cancer patients abandon their chemo because mugundaman considers science unpersuasive? What fails you is reason - really lack of it. You cannot defend a position without resorting to combative rhetoric. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them. And as Thomas Jefferson put it, 'Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions,' You too are trying too hard to sound smart by regurgitating dead Freemasons while saying essentially zero. At least Tycho has flashes of unique brilliance hapa Na pale while defending his positions. As for chemo...did you know that chemo accelerates the death of cancer patients just like ARVs do for Aids patients? I told you, your religion of science has you fooled. That your soul's hope in it remains steadfast is quite amusing to me. About the Chemo and the ARV's, was this revealed to you supernaturally or did you find it in some scientific journal?
As for the device you are using now to write your reply, are the transistors, circuitry and software in it divinely handed to us or we struggled through a series of engineering failures, redesigns, testing and constant improvement.
Stick to migundas my fren. You are still stuck in the "peer-reviewed journals DICTATORSHIP" mental paradigm? https://www.telegraph.co...-cancer-fighting-drugs/
I once took a graduate class and asked a simple question to the very brilliant (by the world's standards) professor and to the class as well. I asked why is there a serious disconnect between "scientific" research and solutions to very basic world problems? That is, despite all the so-called brilliance of Harvard, Oxford and allied researchers, world problems (and diseases) continue to compound each year. As he began to mumble a response I followed with a possible answer. Could it be as a result of the "peer-review dictatorship?" He looked at me stunned and puzzled at the same time, words escaping him as I continued. The peer-review mechanism basically recommends several basic things: --1.) You only quote "us" and no one else. Not even a newspaper that is explaining to you what is going on in the world around you! Even if you are seeing it with your own eyes! --2) Even when you quote "us" you CANNOT introduce any radical ideas different from "ours" if you do, we fail you automatically! Just introduce slight variants of what we have said and say it in a way to please "us" --3) You must think like we think. Reason like we reason, or else! Questioning fundamental dogmas of the Science we worship is a complete no no. ESPECIALLY any inquiries on the (hopelessly flawed) dogmas of empiricism and its peculiar methods! --4) Anything you publish must and will be reviewed by us so BEWARE. Follow 1, 2 and 3 above OR ELSE! Is it any wonder then that so-called "research" that comes from such a dictatorship of minds is so far removed from reality and never truly "solves" major world problems even when "applied"? This is how you end up with bizarre dogmas being crammed down people's throats in the halls of academe by nutcases like Freud who said Apricot subconsciously wants to screw his or her mother (or father)(Oedipus/Electra complex) and that this directs your every waking move! And you wholeheartedly swallowed it hook, line and sinker like a rat going down a cat's throat because it came in the verbiage of peer reviewed journals! . Yet even a simpleton with half a brain can see that this is unfiltered nonsense. Give us a break! You are funny! I am glad you trust an article written by a science writer. In other postings you have written that you trust water treated by NWSC; at least you trust the chemistry of the treatment chemicals. If your faith was so strong, would you be willing to drink water from a well or borehole dug in the informal settlements of Nairobi like Kibera? You never addressed the issue of the device you are using, whether it is “engineered’ or divinely gifted. I am also puzzled as whether the house(s) you have in the dustbowls are built using engineering principles! You ought to be acutely aware that a lot of physics and math - both branches or science - are involved right? I like your anecdote on peer review. I was hoping however to hear that you submitted a paper for peer review that was rejected, and the reasons for the rejection. We’ll never know if the professor was puzzled by what he thought was a dumb freak in his class or whether he thought yours was a brilliant question. You don't provide enough clue except to give yourself a pat on the back for your "brilliant" question. I am used to your taking things out of context to suit your narrative, but I would rather use the the UC Berkeley approach https://undsci.berkeley....icle/howscienceworks_16 of peer review. Waiting for the next shot from the hip. You are being a typical reductionist. Who said we throw the baby out with the bathwater? I have never said I reject science in toto. God in fact is the Master Scientist who created everything made that was made. I reject THE RELIGION aspect of Science that you subscribe to with gusto! Especially it's dogmatic pillars and bizarre man-made rules that turn even the PhD from Harvard into a spineless, malreasoning zombie who doesn't question self-evident (peer-reviewed?) bald-faced lies! The notion that the hopelessly flawed prism of empricism is the ONLY way to arrive at truth smacks of a remarkably flawed arrogance! Pray tell, where is the "evidence" of the big bang? The lunatic scientists who came up with it admit it is just a THEORY (from a diseased brain?) yet, shockingly, the Apricot's of this world religiously swallow it as GOSPEL TRUTH in their rebellion against the Living God! Uh-mazing!
|
|
|
Rank: User Joined: 8/15/2013 Posts: 13,237 Location: Vacuum
|
Sasa, why can't you people cut short this thread agree to disagree and tell us what each and everyone of you concludes along with closing remarks If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 1/8/2018 Posts: 2,211 Location: DC (Dustbowl County)
|
Swenani wrote:Sasa, why can't you people cut short this thread agree to disagree and tell us what each and everyone of you concludes along with closing remarks Perchance because this debate is enjoyable?
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
Freemasonry- thoughts?
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.
|