MuttleyLaff:
I can bet my bottom dollar you're arent familiar with Professor Sophie 'Bosede Oluwole also known as Mamalawo
I also doubt you're conversant with her works
or have read any of her books, especially the one titled "Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà: Two Patron Saint of Classical Philosophy"

It's good to doubt. You owe me your bottom dollar, MuttleyLaff.

budaatum:

Socrates and Orunmila… Putting Premium On Africa’s Indigenous Philosophy


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nrrpo4mxFkI

budaatum:
It's good to doubt. You owe me your bottom dollar, MuttleyLaff

I didnt even scroll past the that comment, I mean the one I saw and responded to.
If I did scroll up, I would have since you had posted one out of Mama's numerous YouTube videos

I just read the comment made by vaxx, and thought to myself,
if vaxx is familiar with Mama's works on Orunmila, he wouldnt be saying that Orunmila isnt a philosopher

MuttleyLaff:
I didnt even go beyond.
Just read his comment, and thought to myself,
if this guy is familiar with Mamalawo's work on Orunmila, he wouldnt be saying that Orunmila isnt a philosopher

Well, next time you wanna start telling me vaxx is a "pussy", you might wanna read some first!

budaatum:
Well, next time you wanna start telling me vaxx is a "pussy", you might wanna read some first!

Is it vaxx, now, who is a "pussy"

MuttleyLaff:
Is it vaxx, now, who is a "pussy"

You don't have to open your mouth all the time. Sometimes, just shut up.

And yes, I am kicking your butt!

vaxx:
That is not the goal initially.

Really? What was the "goal initially"?

vaxx:
The Bible expressed itself already. ( love your neighbour as yourself) i think this verse interprets itself without any form of ambiguity.

First, the Bible did not express itself. Some people expressed themselves in the Bible, and it is left to us to understand it, hopefully, in the sense they could have meant it to be understood - though many don't, dare I say - and even, in a context that makes it relevant to us in our own subjective time.

As to "love thy neighbour" being "without any form of ambiguity", and interpreting itself as you claim. I think you are being unserious, or did you not insult me in your very own thread about weapons?! Weapons of love, were they?

vaxx:


""The true philological spirit, or critical spirit, or scholarly spirit, in biblical interpretation has as its goal to discover the original meaning and intention of the text. Its goal is exegesis --to lead the meaning out of the text and shuns eisogesis --bringing a meaning to the text."" Anonymous .

Exegesis focus is to arrive at objectivity and any form of personal interpretation is highly discarded.

Have you read the exegesis meaning of that verse?


This are simply my own opinion.

budaatum, this is the first place i first borrowed the word exegesis while giving explanation.


And it seems you just want to argue. Nothing here I have said differ my other comment.

And if you can' stil feel the urge to continue quarry me on this simple explanation, then it is not due to lack of explanation again but unneccasry urge to argue.

budaatum:

Really? What was the "goal initially"?

I have stated the reason on my first explanation on exegesis in this thread. Do you avoid to understand it or perhaps you don't see the reason to belive it .

First, the Bible did not express itself. Some people expressed themselves in the Bible, and it is left to us to understand it, hopefully, in the sense they could have meant it to be understood - though many don't, dare I say - and even, in a context that makes it relevant to us in our own subjective time. :

This is not simple as it is.many part of the bible are just simple to grasp. Jehovah witness have adopt to use or quote bible literally and this is evidence that it expresses itself. May doubt it if that suit your desire.

As to "love thy neighbour" being "without any form of ambiguity", and interpreting itself as you claim. I think you are being unserious, or did you not insult me in your very own thread about weapons?! Weapons of love, were they?

This is not my thread , this is happy pagan thread. Telling you bible express itself does not mean I agree with the bible. It just way to pass some explanation regarding the importance of exegesis to you.

budaatum:

Well, next time you wanna start telling me vaxx is a "pussy", you might wanna read some first!

I already withdraw my initial apology , so do expect me to jab you with vaxx words again

MuttleyLaff:
Is it vaxx, now, who is a "pussy"

vaxx will rather crash the ball of a pussy than falling to be like one. Vaxx remain vaxx.

budaatum:
You don't have to open your mouth all the time.
Sometimes, just shut up.
And yes, I am kicking your butt!

I fully give you the right to,
just dont leave bruise marks

MuttleyLaff:
ican bet my bottom dollar you're arent familiar with Professor Sophie 'Bosede Oluwole also known as Mamalawo
I also doubt you're conversant with her works
or have read any of her books, especially the one titled "Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà: Two Patron Saint of Classical Philosophy"

You own the liberty to your own opinion or assertion. It is too unimportant for me say anything regarding that. Well, if I we say anything here, madam Sophie is consider one of those people I own in a high esteem in Nigeria. I noted ORUNMILA is consider a sage and might not be consider a philosopher in the modern sense of the word. I am sure you avoid that in my writing. This is my veiw, philosopher are those who are wise enough and this trait has distinguished them for wisdom and their sound judgement while a sage is a wise induvidial whose trait has distinguished them for their wisdom and from experience. This is what orunmila represent in ifa. And if pro Sophie in her book find it a reason to claim that ORUNMILA is a philosopher by comparing him with Socrates . Then I must welcome it too. She is an authority on the subject. Maybe i need to cheap in something. There had been there Greek thinkers before Socrates who deserved the name philosopher (such as Heraclitus or Anaxagoras or Parmenides), but Socrates’ dialectical method of inquiry —seeking the truth through focused questioning of others—made it possible to place him in such position.""philosopher"" but ORUNMILA already come with a solution rather than making enquiry. ORUNMILA was given solution not just simply giving enquiry. This is my own take.and this is trait that made him more advance than a philosopher

vaxx, you're innocently unaware of the reason of and/or for Jesus

Another opinion here ok...

Jesus, is God, on a mission
To have anything to say on epistemology, meta-ethics or whatnot isnt the objective

This is fuel by desire. And I wish it is true.Anyway that is reason why it will make no absolute sense to compare such a figure as a philosopher. He does not have the perequsite in entire gospel.

Maybe you don't or didn't know, that some Greeks, came to worship, and thereafter, expressly wanted to see Jesus.
At this, the disciples relayed the request to Jesus,
but check out, how Jesus responded and what He had to say to the Greeks.
People overlook it and you wont find it explained in Sunday Schools and/or other believers' gathering

This is out of the context. The question is- is there any undeniable record or documented evidence Jesus had contact with these men (I.e) socrate, Plato and Aristotle.i await one.

Jesus, true to His special modus operandi, immediately expressed Himself to the Greeks, at their level
and indeed spoke with the Greeks, in a way they could understand and relate to

That is not the veiw I projected. What I say is- there is no record of Jesus having knowing the works of those men. Anyone can talk to the Greek without using those men philosophy.

Ah-ha!
So there you are, if depicted as a learned figure,
then it's suffice to say, He would have been familiar with the rich body of work from earlier Greek philosophers

This is where it become more complex.since there is no record showing direct contact of him with these men works. To say he is familiar with their philosophy will be mere assumption.

Many learned men in China and India during those perioud too had no contact with those three Greeks men works . GREEK philosophy was not the only standard of knowledge

MuttleyLaff:
I fully give you the right to,
just dont leave bruise marks

I'll consider. But first educate vaxx on how complex the Bible is. Start with "love thy neighbour", which he thinks is a "verse [that] interprets itself without any form of ambiguity”. You might want to show the many ways Jesus taught that lesson and why, and then move on to it's modern day implications which it would seem many have not yet learned even though it is taught in just about every religion worth the salt. It might enter his blockhead coming from you.

budaatum:

I'll consider. But first educate vaxx on how complex the Bible is. Start with "love thy neighbour", which he thinks is a "verse [that] interprets itself without any form of ambiguity”. You might want to show the many ways Jesus taught that lesson and why, and then move on to it's modern day implications which it would seem many have not yet learned even though it is taught in just about every religion worth the salt. It might enter his blockhead coming from you.

You are directly telling him to make bible a complex text book. And I am sure he is smart enough to avoid that tricks. muttleylaf is one of the few christain I respect his theology prowess on nairaland. he will not fall into your charm. How can he argue against his own standard of truth.

vaxx:
You are directly telling him to make bible a complex test book. And I am sure he is smart enough to avoid that tricks muttleylaf is one of the few christain I respect his theology prowess on nairaland. he will not fall into your charm. How can he argue against his own standard of truth.

Not every post is for the sake of arguing, vaxx. Not every post is about ones tiny ego. He'll be teaching you. Unlike you, some can discuss in order to increase their own understanding and that of other readers.

budaatum:

Not every post is for the sake of arguing, vaxx. Not every post is about ones tiny ego. He'll be teaching you. Unlike you, some can discuss in order to increase their own understanding and that of other readers.

There is nothing bad in him teaching me or perhaps the word educating me. That is why I am here. so don't be too carried away with such use of words as it does not in anyway passed a reasonable message. But a message of ignorant.

I still repeat it . It will be gullible of him arguing against his own standard of truth.