₦airaland Forum

LikeAking:
Are u not an adult?

Code na..

What code is spiritual power?

Templee333:
it's much more better to drop religion and deities in their whatever form, that will give you more freedom. If you could do good to every living thing that comes your way and never intentionaly hurt another person, you will simply come to realize that we are all gods and need no external deities. Also, LikeAking it's good to know that our traditional deities can no longer help us like in the past because we've abandoned our traditions and live a very selfish,dishonest lives. Just my opinion.

There are people who experience REAL spiritual attacks. They KNOW they are no gods. Either they yield or an opposing higher Spirit frees them - those are the only solutions, NOT psychology or psychiatry or mind games.
Here's the thing, we're all in this world but we all actually live in different worlds. What's not possible in your world may be an everyday occurrence in another person's world.
Speaking of we are gods, what kind of god can't make his own hair or nails stop growing, nor has any control over the workings of his own internal organs?!

LikeAking:
If you want real spiritual power, then you have to learn the craft...

What craft is that?

Kobojunkie:
1. So what you are saying is none of what is presented in scripture can be trusted as the true word of God rather we need sources like Google to tell us instead what we are to believe? I guess I would ask if this is what God said --- that interpretations from third parties are needed--- bit since you don't trust any of what is written of Him, I guess that would be futile.

2. So regardless of the fact that it is indicted in Scripture that what we see today is the world awash with the lies of the antichrist, you rather interpret it as direct proof that somehow that decreed by God and confirmed by Jesus Christ in text does not hold any true meaning? I guess it is futile attempting to argue with someone who does not consider the contents of Scripture to be of any real worth.

My friend when direct experience over centuries have overly confirmed something, stop arguing it or you come accross as a real slowpoke. Lord Jesus is an active Spirit that works in people's lives, not words in a book.
He's been working in Gentiles' lives and communities for centuries on end.
Find something better to do with your time. Stop making a fool of yourself arguing nonsense.
Bye bye.

Kobojunkie:
1. Wait a second... why do you keep insisting that I am the one preaching it abeg? I mean anyone reading your post might think I actually shoved the claims in to the mouth of Jesus Christ or something. Again, carefully process what He said to you.

He said, I was sent by the Father ONLY to the Lost sheep of Israel

There is only one possible meaning to the statement above, no matter the attempts to read different meanings into it. So, I guess my question at this point is why you keep searching online for posts to explain away a simply statement Jesus Christ spoke to lay people during His time?

2. As for the text you copied from Google to explain away the words of Jesus Christ in Matthew 7 vs 6, since your teacher of choice is Google and not Jesus Christ Himself, does this mean you also reject Jesus Christ's insistence that He alone is only Teacher to those who belong to Him?

How do you know Lord Jesus' exact words? Were you there writing them down or did you do the various translations? Words have to be interpreted. Google does not do interpretations, it only refers you to ones done by authoritative bodies.
We can see from DIRECT EXPERIENCE over centuries that Lord Jesus is indeed also for Gentiles, and here you are, still arguing an extremely dead point!

Kobojunkie:
1. Jesus Christ is God's New Covenant and Law in the Kingdom of God, and He was sent only to the Lost sheep of Israel-- the Jews and the Gentiles all of whom are Israelites.

2. When approached by the woman whom He made clear was a dog, Jesus Christ did not give that which is Holy to her -- God's Law and Gospel.. Rather He allowed her, a Non-Israelite --- have the crumb which fell from the master's table.

3. Rather, Jesus Christ said do not give that which is Holy -- God's Law -- to the dogs aka Non-Israelites. The reference to do He explained in Matthew 15.

Your treasures/pearls- Matthew 13 vs 42 -44-- , He then warned you not to cast to the pigs, most likely a reference to those who have-- you are meant instead to do your giving to the poor. themselves?

Bros, can't you see that this your "Jesus is only for Jews" you've been preaching makes no sense. Different if these things just happened last month. These are things that happened thousands of years ago and Christ has been working wonders in Gentiles' lives and communities throughout the centuries, yet here you are still debating "Christ is only for Jews". You should know when an argument is moot.

TakeNigeriaBack:
History written by who? The WHITE colonizers.

They were the ones being colonized by Christianity, why would they write against themsrlves?

TakeNigeriaBack:
Christianity and Islam are tools of colonialism and slavery. That's the bottom line. You can slice it which ever way you want, if it makes you feel better about your foreign religion.

These people below were not out to colonize anybody

Kobojunkie:
I would like to suggest that rather than these clippings, which are opinions of others, you read the passages for yourself so you can gain invaluable understanding of your own.

What was the woman's request? She asked Jesus Christ to have mercy on her, and then she told Him her child was demon-possessed. The woman asked Him for mercy to which He responded that He was sent to show mercy only to the lost sheep of Israel.
We know Jesus Christ did not reserve healing only for the Israelites, since there are examples of Him healing Non-Israelites, including Gentiles (Israelites) before His encounter with the Canaanite woman — In Matthew 8 vs 5 - 13 we read of Jesus Christ healing the servant of the Centurion who came asking Him to heal His servant — so it is wrong to assume then that Jesus Christ simply didn't want to heal this woman because she was a Canaanite. Clearly, Jesus Christ's response to her was to reveal that the mercy/love of God --- God's Law as the Son of David --' which He had to give was only meant by the Father who sent Him for the lost sheep of Israel, exactly as Jesus Christ stated. And, again, Jesus Christ came to do the Will of the Father who sent Him and not His own will, so the statement is not of the will of Jesus Christ but of God's Truth.

As for healing, Jesus Christ said instead, freely we were given and so freely we are to give to all who desire healing, pretty much what He did as far as the Canaanite woman and all other Non-Israelites who can to be healed.

This same Jesus Christ is recorded to have also stated the following in Matthew 7 during the sermon on the mount.
Clearly, that which is Holy is not meant for the dogs aka the Non-Israelites.

So, you have a decision to make here for yourself. Do you accept God's Truth or do you reject it thereby insisting that Jesus Christ much have prevaricated in that situation among several others?

I think you may have succeeded in confusing yourself. He healed the woman's child, didn't He?
In his talk about casting pearls to dogs, he was clearly NOT referring to Gentiles but to those who would not listen.. and I suspect you fully well know it!

Rostikol:
The biggest LIE ever told about Nigerian or African culture is that physical discipline of children or anyone at all, is ''part of our culture''.

IT IS NOT.

It was a practice that was introduced by British colonialists.

The saying ''spare the rod and spoil the child'' is an ENGLISH bible proverb with NO African equivalent.

If you know one, I DARE YOU to tell us.

In pre-colonial Nigeria and Africa, children were seen as SACRED.

As the ANCESTORS RETURNED.

How could a sane person be beating up the ancestors?

It was unheard of.

Children were pampered.

They were 'disciplined' through communication.

TALK. Story telling. Preaching. Proverbs. Begging. (You'll be shocked at how well begging a child to behave well actually WORKS if you tried it.)

BUT THEY WERE NOT BEATEN.

It was the European colonialists who introduced corporal punishment (again, no African equivalent of the term) in their missionary schools - flogging and caning was what they did to 'discipline' African children.

THE SAME REASON YOUR PARENTS USED THE SAME CANE AND FLOGGING AGAINST YOU.

It's no coincidence.

It was the ENGLISH that taught them that.

Because the ENGLISH were racist sadists hellbent on creating a society built on hierarchy, fear and intimidation, for their own selfish ends.

THEY HAVE GONE NOW, SO UNLEARN WHAT THEY TAUGHT YOU, AND STOP BEATING YOUR CHILDREN AND HOUSE HELPS.

It is UNAFRICAN.

Meanwhile the British who taught you to beat your kids do not beat their own kids in Britain.

A kid born there can stand up and say what he feels anywhere anytime without fear.

That is how we were before they invaded.

It was THEM who taught us to replace reason and proverbs with fear, beating, and intimidation.

Quite the opposite. Children and women were punished by canning in our tradition.
The West has since outlawed flogging of children. Not Africa, nooo, we love flogging our women and children.
See below

Kobojunkie:
1. You keep saying that but you don't answer the questions I ask in order that I better understand your assertion.

2. But God's promise is realized by God through Israel, His only inheritance in the Land of men. This is detailed in the Old Law of Moses. God's plan has, from the beginning, been to curse and scatter Israel throughout all of the Nations of the earth — to every tribe, every tongue, and every nation — after which He would then — by way of His Special Nation of Priests - Exodus 19 vs 6 — gather them all based on the blood of Jacob back to Himself, and His Holy city Jerusalem. All of those who will be gathered back by Jesus Christ will be of the blood of Jacob even though many of them will also be of foreign birth, like Timothy, Paul's friend. So, clearly, it isn't that I am missing anything here nor is it that I have half knowledge as you continue to claim but instead that in order to hold the stance you do, you reject many of the proclamations of God in order to do so.

3. Sure, the whole and I suggest you take this advice of yours to heart since you seem to be under some impression that Paul went rogue — against God and Jesus Christ — and somehow created for the dogs — Non-Israelites— an entirely different Kingdom from that which is God's special Nation of Priests, the Kingdom of God, which Jesus Christ made clear was only available to those who are of the blood of Israel.

By the way, Jews are Israelites of the Nation of Judah and are majorly from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. The other tribes of Israel were cast out by God — cursed and scattered for their unrighteousness—during the time of King Nebuchadnezzar hence the reason for the reproach expressed by their Jewish brethren towards them. Clearly, the other tribes are non-Jewish people but they are all of them Israelites however.

In reading the below try to also read the Bible quotations

Kobojunkie:
Jesus Christ said He was sent only to the Lost sheep of Israel aka the Gentiles — Israelites who were cursed and scattered by God beginning almost 2500 years ago with the scattering of the Nation of Israel during the time of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, and then concluding almost 2000 years ago with the scattering of those of the Nation of Judah --the Jewish nation--- during their occupation by the Romans. He is the good shepherd sent to gather the Lost sheep back to God in Jerusalem by way of God's Special Nation of Priests which He, God, made clear, He would build of His Israel. But it seems to me that you believe that Paul created a belief system that was contrary to that declared by God through His prophets and confirmed by Jesus Christ in His Gospels. You seem to be arguing that Paul set up a different kingdom run by himself to which he then called out, not Israelites, but those whom Jesus Christ considered dogs — non-Israelites from Matthew 15 vs 24 - 26 & Matthew 7 vs 6 — is this the case here?

Like I said, you seem to have half knowledge, and like the saying goes, "half knowledge is a dangerous thing".
Did you read the various quotations in that article? God promised the world (the world!) would be saved through the seed of Abraham, not only Jews. "For God so loved the world...". NOT "For God so loved Jews...". Lord Jesus Himself gave a parable where the feast was thrown open to all after those invited did not come. In that ONE place where Lord Jesus somewhat jokingly compared Gentiles to the children's dog, he then went ahead to minister fully to the woman...
Take the bible as a whole stop citing outlier verses that can always be found in the Bible, then build your theology on them!

Eruia:
[/b][/color]

ALSO GET A VERIFIED USA BANK ACCOUNT THAT ALLOW YOU TO WITHDRAW FUNDS TO NIGERIAN BANK ACCOUNT.

How does that work? US account that withdraws in Naira?

Kobojunkie:
I am afraid I don't quite follow at all. Research about what exactly? Why? This discussion isn't about a minor squabble between Paul and peter which Paul himself claimed to have tasked Peter with, but instead about the divisions that led to the forming of the religion of Christianity almost 250 years later.

As an aside, Paul and Peter understood clearly that Jesus Christ was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, but it seemed Peter was confused as to whether those called had to at least been circumcized under the Old Law of Moses before they could be admitted into Jesus Christ, the New Law. It still was not a Roman issue or an issue for Rome to concern itself with.

See below

Kobojunkie:
1. Yes, the rogue Bishops whom I kept mentioning.

2. I am sorry, but what does this supposed squabble between Peter and Paul, both of them Israelites, and both well aware that Jesus Christ was sent only to the children of Israel —the Lost sheep of Israel to whom Jesus Christ was sent to — to do with Rome? Did Peter and Paul also bicker about whether Jesus Christ was God in the Kingdom of God or not? Again, the division was created by rogue bishops, all individually hungry for power and control over the movement hence the various different doctrines eventually led up to Nicea.

3. Many theological issues, many of them created by the rogue bishops, led up to Nicea, yes or no?

4. Nicea's resolve to bring all those theological issues under one official banner led to the proliferation of the religion starting under the banner that is Rome, yes or no?

I see you don't know enough about this topic. You are arguing it by the seat of your pants. Why not take time and research it a bit so you'll be talking with some authority. Start with reading the below.
Take good care

Kobojunkie:
1. Did he need to do all of that before he could employ his power in establishing a religion?

2. Considering the many theological issues that came out of Nicea, I would say they had many many major disagreements, none of which the apostles who were sent out by Jesus Christ, in the beginning, had by the way, because they had their foundation in the Truth of God — the Gospel and Law of the Kingdom of God — as opposed to doctrines and traditions of men — sinking sand— upon which the religion of Christianity is founded upon.

3. Sure, and he used his power to unite a divided bunch of rogue bishops under one flag thereby giving the antiChrist more leverage beginning in Rome.

4. Jesus Christ never commanded nor asked an easter of HIs followers.

5. Constantine was a politician who wanted to be ahead of the religion. He was to stand as a backer so that the power could be behind him and his Rome, and he got exactly what he wanted, and then some. While Rome was eventually toppled by the religion it helped make official, to this day, Rome remains the seat of power as far as religion is concerned.

You obviously don't know much about early Christians. They bickering seriously and had different sects following different teachers. Saints Peter and Paul were at odds about circumcision of gentiles.
Many theological issues did not come out of Nicea.
See the Nicene creed below.
Only ONE issue was resoved.

Kobojunkie:
1. It was Constantine who established the religion in Rome though, a religion which eventually brought down Rome. So, it can be said that Constantine by his action helped the spread of the religion since he united the various factions under one official flag. May I suggest you read Daniel 2 paying attention to the explanation Daniel gave regarding the 4th Kingdom in Nebucchadnezzars dream and how it was all destroyed by the forever Kingdom?

Kobojunkie:
1. Constantine was never a believer in Jesus Christ, rather He was a politician who sought to save his empire from a movement that seemed to be driving it to its end, right?

2. Yes, he supposedly ended the persecutions but at that point in time, much of the persecuting was between Christian factions though as rogue bishops were already warring against each other by their many different theologies and doctrines which they used to incite the people against each other with. Constantine stepped in, in an effort to normalize the already rogue movement, while sitting himself at the head of it all. Yes, the religion of Christianity was spreading like wildfire but in a direction that then allowed a power like Constantine to step in and make it the official religion it is today, false doctrines, and all. Had the message spreading at that time been of the foundation set by Jesus Christ Himself and preached by His first disciples, Constantine wouldn't have been able to reign it in or bring anyone to the conference in the manner than He was able to convene the already rogue bishops of his time.

Constantine did not establish anything. He did not understand Christianity and was not baptized till his deathbed.
The bishops had only ONE major disagreement - wether Christ was God or not. Constantine did not care either way, not being a Christian. His only concern was that they stop bickering about it. Nicene was called to resolve that and to establish a date for Easter. He was resolved to enforce whatever they decide. Constantine did NOT establish the church doctrine, the pope and the bishops did!

taylor88:
Nothing surprises me again about Nigeria & Nigerians


If Tinubu who’s wanted by USA for drug trafficking can have supporters then Hilda should have a crazy supporters too


At least Hilda’s award was transparent and ghost figures wasn’t added to her by INEC by 2am midnight

Hilda’s fans has a bragging rights at least they know Hilda’s classmates, age, state of Origin, parents & siblings, her source of income, her certifications etc

Moreover she stood up for days without peeing on her body and sniffing cocaine

I no call Tinubu name oo

I like the way you did not call Tinubu's name, like all these people insulting him

Gemma11:
She was trying to get her name into the Guiness World record books which is an internationally recognised factbook which lists high achievements.

Being a Guinness World Record holder does not have any monetary benefits, but it may have some other benefits such as: Recognition: The Guinness World Record certificate is accepted globally and the holders of this certificate are known all around the world

Hilda has since been featured on CNN, BBC and in other foreign press. It is all about leveraging this new found fame to game more sponsorships, high profile jobs etc.

If I were her manager I would be pitching a shows like Nigerian Masterchef, Nigeria's Best Baker, Nigeria Kitchen Nightmares, The Great Nigerian Bake off, Iron Chef Nigeria (All soin-offs from already internationally recognised shows) with her as a Presenter.

Now everyone knows her name she could even start a ready meals company distributed globally...like if I see Hilda Baci Suya rice or Okra Soup in my local Sainsburys in London, I no go buy? of course!

Anyway, the world is her oyster and the possibilities are numerous. She just needs to pay her cards right and leverage her new found fame with sense.

All that is great. Good FOR HER!! Doesn’t mean we lose sight of what she actually did - she did not sleep for a long. We instinctively KNOW she's not best in Lagos (talkless of the world) when it comes to staying awake for long

donmik:
I don't still get the whole reason for cooking for long.

Maybe I don't understand. U mean she didn't sleep for 100 hours?

If so, the award she deserved is that of not sleeping, not cooking.

But if u prove that her food tasted most delicious of all times, then thank God for her.

If not, pls u guys should sopl posting this useless trend for now pls.

EXACTLY! You put it perfectly - THE AWARD SHOULD BE FOR NOT SLEEPING

Kobojunkie:
Get on the train or get ahead of the train and use it to his glory and benefit?

Point is he had no choice, the fire would have eventually engulfed him and he knew it. So we agree it wasn't he that spread Christianity

Kobojunkie:
Disclaimer: This is in no way an attempt to hold brief for any other poster

How did you come to ascertain that his supposed spiritual encounter was real? Let me guess, you compare it to Paul's supposed encounter with Jesus Christ in scripture, all while conveniently ignoring everything else contained in scripture regarding how God communicates with His own?

2, He convened what was a politically motivated conference to grant Himself power and control over the movement that was the followership of Jesus Christ during which had has other equally power and control-hungry men such as himself compile doctrines upon which his system would be established, yet somehow you see that as confirmation that his so-called encounter was real?

3. Technically, Nicea is at the root of the religion that is Christianity today. Rather than destruction, Rome saw the original movement as a movement they had control over and so sort to take hold of it and mold it in their own image. And this is how the religion of Christianity came to be "officially" birthed.

You are making my point - which is that, even if he infact saw a vision, he did not then become a Christian. He was grateful the god of the Christians helped him which he repaid by ending their persecution. But he did not spread Christianity as you kept saying, Christianity was spreading like wild fire when he jumped aboard

IkeIgboNiile:
You have missed my point. My point was politics and religion are tools of colonialism. It only makes sense that an Emperor will adopt a religion which can only help him politically.

So how were the early Christians colonizing Rome with Christianity?? You miss the point that Christianity was a raging fire, a moving train. All efforts to stem it had failed; Constantine had no choice but get on the train, whether he saw that vision or not!

chizidgreat:
It will happen
God has remembered Nigeria

More like God has forsaken Nigeria due to her unending atrocities. Tinubu is proof - a country gets the kind of politicians they deserve!

IkeIgboNiile:
Weather his actions were understood or not is not important. What i have been saying is that his conversion brought the wide spread of Christianity throughout the vast roman empire.
All you have succeeded in saying is that he was the first pope before popes stole the title.
His actions and the subsequent actions of his successors made Christianity or rather roman version of Christianity a state religion which continued from centuries.

Why not go read up on Constantine b4 continuing the discussion. Apart from his spiritual encounter, which I believe is real, though some doubt it, all his subsequent actions about Christianity were purely political. Example his convening the Nicene conference (which the pope refused to attend) was purely so bickering among the bishops would not tear the empire apart, make it more governable.

But here's the real elephant in the room:
WHY WOULD ROME BE TRYING TO WIPE OUT A RELIGION THEY INVENTED??!!
AND WHY DID THEY INVENT THE RELIGION??!!

IkeIgboNiile:
Christianity was an outlawed religion who was practicing in hiding until Constantine I saw a vision/dream when he was on campaign to become a Christian (a cross a known Christian symbol) was shown to him with the words "With this symbol you shall be victorious"
He was the one that organised the Nicene conference where the bible and other important reforms were made. Christianity grew and spread during his reign and his successor continued after him.

My friend Constantine never even quite understood Christianity. His mother was a devout Christian. His wife, generals were Christians. He saw a sign that reminded him of a cross. He prayed to the the god (as he saw it) of the Christians. After he won he abolished persecution of Christians through edict of Milan, though he anever made Christianity state religion. His actions after he supposedly became a Christian prove he never understood - he executed his son and wife on trumped up charges among other things! See below

chizidgreat:
God bless Peter Obi, the incoming President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

There are not enough honest judges/people in Nigeria to make this happen

IkeIgboNiile:
No you're been economical with the truth because It was Constantine 1 that made romans Christians and led the spread of Christianity all over the roman empire.
Christianity and islam (religion in general) has been a tool for colonialism throughout history.
Getting the locals to practice a religion brought by colonial masters will them easier to control and subdued.
How were the fulanis able to subdue the hausa till date even though the hausa are more in population but all Northern governors/important officer holders are fulanis.
Why did the Americans go to extreme means to strip their enslaved Africans of their African names and religion?

Rostikol:
WHAT NONSENSE.

Christianity was a ROMAN INVENTION.

THEY INVENTED the 'jesus' character using a mishmash of earlier godmen such as Mithra, and the ancient Egyptian son of God, Horus (who became 'jesus'), whose mother was Isis Meri, who became oyinbo 'Mary'.

The whole white Mary cradling white Jesus stuff was a Roman ripoff of the goddess Isis cradling Horus:

THE words, 'orisha', olisa, 'alusi', 'lisa', and other pantheons are actually derived from the ancient African worship of HORUS-AT, to use his full name.

THAT was the original which the Romans stole and invented their white Jesus stories around.

In fact Horus-At was said to have been called ''the lamb'', performed miracles, rose from the dead, raised the dead etc. Virtually the same story as 'Jesus', 2,500 years later.

The Romans just stole the story - YOUR STORY - and repackaged it as oyinbo history, so now you're worshiping THEM as your saviours BY worshiping their fake white jesus.

They did a real number on you guys.

TakeNigeriaBack:
Christianity and Islam are tools of colonialism and slavery. That's the bottom line. You can slice it which ever way you want, if it makes you feel better about your foreign religion.

Rostikol:
There's nothing to know about him because no evidence shows he existed.

So Rome invented Lord Jesus, did Rome also invent Roman persecution of Christians? Which genius in Rome came up with the inspired divine words of Jesus?? Why then is Rome the greatest villain in the history of Jesus? And WHY did Rome invent Jesus? Is it so He will supplant their gods that have worked for them for centuries? The gods that helped them conquer the world? They actually have grounds to be yearning for their old gods - unlike Africans whose gods never helped them conqure the world.
You know nothing about Constantine. He was never really a Christian - he adopted Christianity mainly because his mother, wife, and top generals and many of his most important subjects were rapidly becoming Christians, despite all efforts to wipe out Christianity. Look in your history books - all Roman emperors went to extreme in trying to wipe out Christianity. If there was no strong SPIRITUAL backing they'd have succeeded long, long before Constantine!
Again, there has to be a WHY to things.
WHY did Rome have to invent Jesus (according to you)??!!

And by the way Lord Jesus was never white. There was intentionally no depiction of Him to avoid worshiping an image. As Christianity conquered Europe they filled that void by starting to depict Lord Jesus as European. Infact some of His earlier depictions were images of a Roman god!

Rostikol:
I'm just tired of these imported religions.

My ancestors did not worship any white man as their god or ''saviour''?

SO WHY THE HELL should I be doing it JUST BECAUSE some people overpowered my ancestors with guns and bombs to seize their land, and then forced their foreign gods on us?

TakeNigeriaBack:
Good for you. Islam and Christianity have FAILED us!

What tribe are you? Its best to stick to the gods that originate from your ancestors.

You are being economical with the truth or you are intentionally doing revisionist history. If it were by power or might Rome would have stamped out Christianity, instead they became Christians themselves.
We Africans also resisted the best we can but also ended up becoming Christians. No one ever forced us to become Christians. We gave them our feared forests to build their churches, expecting our gods would destroy them, instead they kept expanding and gave our gods to their children to play with, eventually took our gods to Europe for display in museums!

Runnerzz:
Shut it .. this is what u said. Be a man and defend it and stop hiding like a virgin bitccch

Exactly what he did - put Nigerian businessmen and Yahoo boys side by side, like they are synonymous!

obawaya:
You shouldn’t have asked Cotonou of all places
It’s non of your business.
I’m only seeking on how to get to ghana from Cotonou

Many things are non of my business but I still ask about them out of curiosity because I honestly want to know.
It's now up to you to patiently explain to me, IF YOU WISH!

b4ball:
Just to correct this assumption; 90% of phones and accessories businesses are owned by Nigerians(mostly ibos) in Ghana, 60% of private mega stores are also owned by Nigerians(mostly ibos and yorubas), 45% of the auto spare parts sector owned by Nigerians, in the local markets, yorubas and ibos make up at least 15% of groceries.

There is a Nigerian community of legit business men in every region in Ghana, so how did you come about your assumptions?

I only quoted exactly what he wrote. See it below