BELIEF IS ANTITHETICAL TO NATURE

The nature of truth is the nature of what one can observe and verify; everything else is a belief in what others claim they bear witness to or observe.

The truth is that, in nature, humans can only reproduce through sex, but a belief system says otherwise - immaculate conception.

In nature, animals don't speak to humans, but a belief system says otherwise - a talking snake.

In nature, men and women come out of the female reproductive organ, but a belief system says otherwise - women came from man's rib.

In nature, nothing is born in sin, but a belief system says otherwise - human is born in sin.

In nature, death is the end of life, but a belief system says otherwise - 72 virgins await men after death.

Clearly, belief is in conflict with nature. The struggle between the observable truth and the unobservable belief is the source of almost all conflicts in the world.

The wise draw conclusions from what they observe in nature, but the followers believe the narratives of the wise. Whenever you're in doubt, observe nature, and there lies your answer. 

Everything you need to know in order to survive is right in front of you, but you're too busy believing the narratives and abstractions of other men.

THE METAPHYSICS OF ORI

Ori (I.e. the immaterial head) is the initial condition that determines the outcome of human events.  Human events/activities are very complicated and random for we exist in a chaos dynamic world. But under the concept of Ori, the outcome of these complicated human activities are totally deterministic and predictable. It is the concept of Ori that makes IFA divination possible; without Ori, IFA would not be able to track randomness and make accurate predictions about the outcome of human activities.

Many religious scholars and moral philosophers argue against the underlying concept of Ori for being too deterministic and for denying "free will." Contrary  to this ignorant argument, Ori does not deny free will, and it is not deterministic in the slightest. It is the outcome of human events that is deterministic for every event starts with an initial condition. And since Ori is the initial condition, then Ori is what determines the outcome of human activities. 

While the outcome of any human event  is totally deterministic; free will, being the controller of human activities, makes every outcome appears random and uncertain. And it's this free will-induced uncertainty (i.e. uncertainty principle) that made classical physicists (Einstein et al) conclude, erroneously, that a deterministic system could not be uncertain (i.e. Einstein determinism and Heisenberg uncertainty). But the concept of Ori teaches us that free will-induced uncertainty in human activities can be totally reconciled with the ever present determinism in a chaos dynamic world like ours. In other words, free will-induced uncertainty does not preclude determinism - it is a necessary nuisance in a deterministic world. Thanks to Quatum physics, the physics world is slowly catching on to the metaphysics of Ori and the fundamental teachings of IFA.

In conclusion, while the initial condition or Ori is fixed, IFA teaches that with iwa pele (i.e. good character), ise (i.e. hard work), sacrifice, and good information, free will-induced randomness and uncertainty can be drastically reduced in human activities.

IS TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY RELIABLE?

It's interesting how we would sit in the history class, unperturbed, while we're being fed with endless narratives about events that happened thousands of years before our own era, and we would not even for once ask the professor the hard question about the accuracy of traditional historical chronology.

The hard question we fail to ask is: if the ancient people did not write their own history and if modern men were not alive in the ancient times, how then do modern men feel comfortable learning and teaching about historical events they neither witnessed nor experienced?

The world history that modern men teach to one another today was formulated based on the historical chronology that was developed by Scaliger and Pentavius around 16th Century AD. This traditional historical chronology is popularly known as the Scaligerian Chronology.

The Scaligerian chronologists, mostly Jesuits, relied solely on the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest for dating historical epochs. Ptolemy Almagest was considered the main source of astronomical knowledge and planetary theory before the time of Corpenicus. And since advanced knowledge of astronomy was required for dating historical epochs, the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest became a highly sought after astronomical manual in the Scaligerian era (15th-17th Century AD). 

However, it turns out that the star catalogue of Almagest, upon which traditional historical chronology was formulated, had been been tampered with and edited by Scaligerian chronologists around 17th Century AD to promote their Jesuit world view and to compress world history into the Biblical timeline.

Conscientious scholars and moral philosophers, around the world,  like: Isaac Newton,  Nikolia Morozov, Wilhelm Kammeyer, Robert Baldauf, Peter Krekshin, Fomenko, and Walter Williams had sharply criticized to no avail Scaligerian chronologists for falsifying traditional historical chronology.  

So, if the traditional historical chronology is known to be false, why is it that world history as we know it today is still being taught based on the same falsified chronology?