₦airaland Forum

jaephoenix:
1. Oh yes, Africa was on bed with homosexuality. Back then it was accepted. Adufuro means anal sex but which sexual orientation started it before heterosexuals? Homosexuals. That's why that word was coined.

The above is a joke. So homosexuals were the first people to have anal sex in Yoruba land and because of that
the word "adofuro" was coined?

Where did you get that from?

Where are the Yorubas on Nairaland to confirm this.

@Folykaze and @Deepsight and @Lordreed ( not sure if you're Yoruba ,Reed, but need to hear from you too.) ,How true is it that homosexuals where the first people to have anal sex in Yoruba land which resulted in the descriptive word ,"adofuro"

@Jaephonix I think you're just imagining things ,and it's proof for me that you're only interested in winning an argument ,and don't care how you achieve that.

Even if it were true that homosexuals were the first to have anal sex, it still doesn't support your any of wild claims. Homosexuality and bisexuality are two different things. It's either you don't know the difference between the two, or you're deliberately trying to blur the lines in order to find support for your false assertions. You cannot confuse me with such deceptive argument. I'm very good at spotting that

The first link you shared below doesn't show how homosexuals were the first to have anal sex nor does it prove Africa was a hotbed of homosexuality. I think you need to check again the meaning of the qualifiers, "hotbed and immersed", you're using. They don't accurately describe what happened back then in Africa.

Nobody is denying the fact that we had effeminate men who could marry and have sex with other men in certain parts of Africa , but the culture wasn't widespread . What was common back then, was bisexuality not homosexuality
The links you shared showed nothing much. Just isolated cases here and there in some remote parts of Africa, and not everywhere.

What of your own community?

Are you not an African?

Get closer to your own people , listen to what they have to say and know the truth first-hand from them. I'm afraid you're being misled by what you read on some gay propoganda website.

Relationships with those effeminate shouldn't be equated with the culture of homosexuality as it's currently practiced in the western world, where it's one man to one man, one woman to one woman alone. The effeminate men if they marry at all, were married to men who were also married to women and that's not same sex relationship, homosexuality as we currently understand it to mean.

In most cases, if not all, such marriages with effeminate men are usually hidden from the public.


If same sex relationship was the norm and widespread back then in Africa, then the consequence of that would easily be seen; a marked decrease in the general population, since those who engage in same sex relationship don't procreate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudoko_dako
2. There's a copious amount of history of effeminate African men getting married to men. You can Google it and blow your mind. In fact lemme help you out with a few examples.
The vocabulary used to describe same-sex relations in traditional languages, predating colonialism, is further proof of the existence of such relations in precolonial Africa. To name but a few, the Shangaan of southern Africa referred to same-sex relations as “inkotshane” (male-wife); Basotho women in present-day Lesotho engage in socially sanctioned erotic relationships called “motsoalle” (special friend) and in the Wolof language, spoken in Senegal, homosexual men are known as “gor-digen” (men-women).

But to be sure, the context and experiences of such relationships did not necessarily mirror homosexual relations as understood in the West, nor were they necessarily consistent with what we now describe as a gay or queer identity.

If such relationships didn't mirror homosexual relationship as it's understood in the west, then why continue to use the inappropriate expression , same sex relationship, to describe it?

Why not describe it as it's? .They way it was understood and practiced back then in Africa.,so we get a clearer picture for comparison with what we see now




If you don't reply to the above question then don't expect me to continue with the conversation.

Same-sex relationships in Africa were far more complex than what the champions of the “un-African” myth would have us believe. Apart from erotic same-sex desire, in precolonial Africa, several other activities were involved in same-sex (or what the colonialists branded “unnatural”) sexuality. For example, the Ndebele and Shona in Zimbabwe, the Azande in Sudan and Congo, the Nupe in Nigeria and the Tutsi in Rwanda and Burundi all engaged in same-sex acts for spiritual rearmament — i.e., as a source of fresh power for their territories. It was also used for ritual purposes. Among various communities in South Africa, sex education among adolescent peers allowed them to experiment through acts such as “thigh sex” (“hlobonga” among the Zulu, “ukumetsha” among the Xhosa and “gangisa” among the Shangaan).

If you had the above information before now, why withholding it?You already misled your readers into believing that those artworks you discussed in your previous reply represents evidence of homosexuality.. You never considered anything else.

3. Im not saying some of the homosexual intimacy wasn't for any other purpose. Of course they were thought to give power. But in the end, its still homo sex, whether for power, initiation or pleasure.

There's nothing like homosexual intimacy or gay sex. Sex is sex Intimacy is intimacy.Anal sex is not only for homosexuals? People who aren't gays are sometimes forced by circumstances to engage in anal sex.; Male students in an only male hostel, some sex starved soldiers with POW, and Sex starved prisoners
with other inmates during their period of incarceration. . Once the situation changes, the above group of persons usually revert back to the usual lifestyle.

What I see, is that you seem hell bent in seeing homosexuality in everything around you. So, I wonder why you're yet to describe as homosexuals ,male footballers who warmly embrace each other, and roll together on the field of play, during a game of football once a goal is scored..

Til now some female cults in nigeria initiate their members with sex orgies. I guess its the White Men that taught them that, right?

Apart from you not providing any evidence for the above, I struggle to see its relevance to the ongoing discussion. The discussion is not centered on who taught anyone anything ,but on the false claim that the culture of homosexuality currently practiced in the western world is the same as we had back then in Africa and that it was also widespread

4. Mwanga 2 had wives to comply with his father's wishes, but it didn't stop him from engaging in homosexuality. There are African sites(not American or European) that labelled him as such. Its well known.

It's your own imagination that Mwaga 11 had wives to "comply with his father's wishes" share your source if you're not lying.

An African male king refusing to get married? You're telling tales by moonlight.

African sites labelling the king homosexual doesn't make it true. What makes something true is when it's supported by facts. There are no evidence from the link you shared below , which I retained in my reply, to confirm the king was openly gay. I have already explained the source of the false story.It was from the false accusation placed on him by the white colonialists. None of his own people confirmed he was gay and we don't have any images to support that he actually displayed that lifestyle openly.

The annoying thing you have done now, is that you shared exactly the same link which I already shared ,without even bothering to read it yourself
You only read the headline and quickly attached it to your post or read it without understanding it.

If you had actually read it , you would have seen that what it contains debunked your claim that the King was openly gay.
Go back to the thread and see where I shared the same thing showing where it was stated clearly that there's no evidence the King was openly gay.

Someone married to sixteen women is not homosexual. It doesn't matter if the person sometimes has sex with other men.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://theafricanroyalfamilies.com/2022/06/04/kabaka-king-mwanga-ii-of-buganda-gay-bisexual-or-queer/&ved=2ahUKEwip1NyZ2O_9AhUGgv0HHdYcDv8QFnoECGgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0H1QrHzWl8LJnGEjzpJWr1

https://face2faceafrica.com/article/king-mwanga-ii-of-buganda-the-19th-century-ugandan-king-who-was-gay[/quote]

Maynman:
I said the “article is nonsense” not “gerald reaction is nonsense”.
And gerald reaction is base on the nonsense article hence “correlation is not causation” even though there was NO correlation.

Gerald, himself, never confirmed the story to be true. I said he reacted ,either assuming it were true ,or he never got to know all of the facts as at the time .

It should not be judged as nonsense if someone were to react reasonable to a question based on a hypothetical situation. We all have done that at different times.

Besides, everyone now knows the story is not true, even Gerald at the moment.

So, I think you should rather focused more on his logical response , and not trying to desperately tie him to something he never started in order to condemn what he said. It's pointless.

One thing is clear from the Op. It was meant to present to the Christian community ,the informed and more reasonable position of respected Christian leader concerning the fake story or anything similar to it, hence the timeless advice, that 'correlation is not causation' in that particular instance.

This is what I see and I believe others who may have read it


Good day.

Maynman:
That’s why i said nonsense article.

How is Gerald's reaction nonsense?

He debunked the claim a god caused the flood assuming it were true

Maynman:
The Author literally copied and pasted the original content creator, that’s why i said “nonsense article”.
And context of the article,the time and location is important if you are making such CLAIMS.

If the facts were right do you think those “gullible christians” will believe the claim in the first place?
Those that believe the article to be true and correlated are as gullible.

I have modified my last reply. My attention is on Gerald's reaction to the story and not the fake content.

Maynman:
The storm/flood didn’t happen in BRAZIL.
The carnival was in 2019, the storm/flood was in 2021.
There’s no CORRELATION!

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/fact-check/brazil-floods-not-due-to-mockery-christ-at-carnival-skit/

Within the context of the article,the time and location is not relevant to the author's argument that correlation is not causation


He is not the person who created the false story. You make it seem he is responsible for it. He has only reacted to it assuming it were true


The original content creator should be blamed for the misinformation


What's relevant here, is that he didn't foolishly believe, like other gullible Christians, that a god or God has punished a county with flood, whether the story is true or not.

Modified. I am focused on the reaction of Gerald in the article and not everything in it. He is not the author of the article as we can see

Maynman:
The article didn’t debunk the claim.
Gerald said “Correlation is not necessarily causation”
But the events, Timing and the flood doesn’t even correlate.

Read it again slowly.

You missed this part below

"Correlation is not causation" used by the author of the article was meant to drive home the point that theirs no connection between the carnival and the flood that happened the next day; The former wasn't the cause of the latter

Maynman:
What nonsense article, must one be a dummy to be a theist?
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/fact-check/brazil-floods-not-due-to-mockery-christ-at-carnival-skit/

I don't think the article is nonsense. It actually debunked the claim that the devastating flood was due to the carnival.

Take your time to read it again.

About king Mwaga 11

jaephoenix:
1. Africa was a hotbed of homosexuality.
The (Yoruba), the word for “homosexual” is adofuro, a colloquialism for someone who has anal sex. It might sound insulting and derogatory, however, the point is there is a word for the behaviour. Moreover, this is not a new word; it is as old as the Yoruba culture itself.

In the northern part of Nigeria, yan daudu is a Hausa term to described effeminate men who are considered to be wives to men. While the Yoruba word might be more about behaviour than identity, this Hausa term is more about identity. You have to look and act like a yan daudu to be called one. It is not an identity you can just carry. These words are neutral; they are not infused with hate or disgust.

Barack Obama tells African states to abandon anti-gay discrimination
In the Buganda Kingdom, part of modern-day Uganda, King Mwanga II was openly gay and faced no hate from his subjects until white men brought the Christian church and its condemnation. Though King Mwanga is the most prominent African recorded as being openly gay, he was not alone.In Boy-Wives and Female Husbands, a book examining homosexuality and feminism in Africa, the researchers found ‘‘explicit” Bushman artwork that depicts men engaging in same-sex sexual activity. There have been other indicators that the transition from boyhood to adulthood within many African ethnic groups involved same-sex sexual activities. Also pre-Pyramid paintings in ancient Egypt depict gay men entwined and kissing

2. Maybe ignorant people hide behind religion to exhibit homophobia

What you copied directly from the article written by the gay rights activist, Bisi Alimi, are gay propoganda; false narratives. None of it supports your wild claims that in the past Africa was a hotbed of homosexuality and that we were also immersed in it.

In the first place, the Yoruba word, adofuro, only describes anal sex and not homosexuality. Homosexuals are not the only ones to engage anal sex. Some men who aren't gays also have anal sex with either a male or female partner. The author of the article has placed the word,homosexual, in quotes because he is not certain if the word , adofuro, actually describes that. He Just gave his own subjective interpretation of it.

Secondly, the fact we had few effeminate men in the northern part of Nigeria who could marry is still not enough for your generalisation. There's no evidence whatsoever of such men living together with any man as "husband and wife" similar to the culture of homosexuality currently practiced in the Western world.The men were open to have sex with anybody, married and unmarried men ,and not cohabiting with anyone.

Furthermore, the claim that king Mwaga 11 was openly gay is one of those false narratives meant to deceive the gullible public. The King never at anytime declared he was gay. There's no evidence he flaunted that lifestyle . None of his subjects confirmed he was having sex with any man.

So, where did the rumor that he was openly gay emanate from?

It came from the false accusation placed on him by white Christian colonialists . He was accused , without any evidence, of sleeping with some young men whom he had actually executed for converting to Christianity. The King put up a strong resistance against colonial rule and Christianity, and for that , they set him up in order to remove him and have their way.

It was a case of giving a dog a bad name in order to hang it. The information being withheld from the public is the fact that the king was married to sixteen different women who produced many children for him. Why then would anyone in their right senses describe such a man as openly gay is something very difficult to understand. Even if it was true he slept with other men, that still doesn't make him homosexual. He was married to women.

https://theafricanroyalfamilies.com/


Finally, artworks depicting men having sex with other men doesn't confirm anything. Artworks are produced for a number of reasons which are usually not known except by the person who actually produced them. If we don't know the actual reason for which an artwork was created, we can't just speculate using our personal experiences or from our own view point, and then try to force what we arrived at on others as evidence of something.

In certain parts of Africa, especially in sub Saharan Africa, it's believed that male members of some secret cults engaged in anal sex with other men either for acquiring mystical powers or as part of initiatory rites into such societies. So, it's possible those art depictions represents such beliefs or something else we don't even know.

I'm not against homosexuals. Why should I? I don't subscribe to any religious text that instruct its readers to condemn them. What I'm against are the misinformation , half truths and outright lies being dished out concerning the issue.

It's insulting to our collective intelligence as Africans to sit down and watch, without reacting, while some outsiders, in conjunction with our own people, are trying desperately to rewrite our own history.



King Mwaga 11 was the first prominent African to come out as gay? Oh!

Exactly the same tactics being used by some individuals and Christian groups; Jesus was a black man, he was from Africa, infact the Bible was written by the Yorubas, there's a word for the devil in Yoruba and blah blah blah.


Not everyone is fooled.

Below is where you directly copied from.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/09/being-gay-african-history-homosexuality-christianity

tctrills:
I have no issue with someone being homosexual but you raised more questions than you answered. What is bad science? There really is nothing like bad science. Science can be applied for good or bad but science in itself is not bad.
Again, how do we determine a bad culture. What makes the Gay culture bad and the straight culture good?

I believe the Op actually meant pseudoscience and not bad science.

jaephoenix:
1. When you say theists aren't against homosexuality, you are such a big liar. Just taking a peek on the nairaland religion topics would show you how christians and Muslims feel about it.You even christians assaulted or killing gays. Same for Muslims. Why do you think homosexuality isn't accepted in Nigeria? How many Nigerian are atheists? Even in religious books they forbid homosexuality and recommend death for gays. So I wonder how you arrived at your conclusion.
2. I'm sure you didn't research on China and homosexuality. That country has accepted homosexuality since early 2000s. And its largely atheistic.
3. Russia is quite religious. It would interest you to know Putin is a Russian Orthodox Christian. In fact, only a small percentage is atheistic, ie 10% or so. The rest is theistic with Orthodox Church taking a huge bite. Thus its no wonder their anti-gay stance. Most relatively large atheistic counters are pro-gay(unsurprisingly). From Eastern Europe to UK.
4. Africa was immersed in homosexuality before the White man came and told us its bad. Now they are telling us is good.
5. Atheists are pro-gay. Why? Because we believe in equal rights for everyone. Blacks, Yoruba, Igbo, gay, Muslims, Christians, blind etc. We are humanists. Of course there may be individuals who hate it, but they don't represent the majority, not up to 1%

I never said theist are not homophobic. Please take your time to read what I posted once again and understand it very well before replying.

What you highlighted, in case you don't understand it, simply means religion is not the main reason why most people are homophobic.

My argument is that. ignorant and intolerant people hide behind it to express hatred for others.

Modified. When I mentioned China and Russia,, I was focused mainly on both government's attitude towards the LGBT community and not those of their citizens. Please try to know the difference

Also, there's no evidence that Africa was, according to you, "immersed"in homosexuality before the coming of the whites. There may have been few instances of individuals involved in that,. but not enough to conclude it was common.

The large population we have everywhere in Africa does not support what you declared. Homosexuals don't procreate. I hope you know what that means?

Finally, please provide the source for the stats that only 1% of atheists are not pro gay. I'm much interested in that.one.

You must realise that atheists. are not the only ones who. are pro gay. Some religious people are even pro gay too.

So, there's nothing special or unique about it. Anyone can get involve

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl.org/amp/russia-parliament-law-banning-lgbt-propaganda-adults/32146774.html

HUMANIIST:
A child is born, and upon hitting puberty, discovers that he or
she is attracted to the same gender.
Confused at first, they wondered why they had no romantic
attraction to the opposite gender.
They feel differently, and without a support system they end
up isolating themselves, trying to figure out the hows and
whys.
They never created themselves, nor do they have control over
this attraction.
But homophobia, propagated by religion, leads them to hate
themselves, to the extent of suffering from internalised
homophobia.
This is when a homosexual fight and bullies other
homosexuals to avoid suspicion.
And they can be very convincing.
In nature, we have counted over 1500 species that engage in
homosexuality.
Unfortunately, homophobia exists in one, humans.
The beauty of life lies in our differences. You can't hate
someone because of his race, beliefs or sexuality.
Live and let live.

AndroidAI

I believe you brought this here because you assume religion is the real reason most people are homophobic. But that's not true

The Russian and especially the Chinese government strongly reject the LGBT community, and we know it's not because of religious beliefs.

The truth of the matter is that most humans are hardwired to reject anything that's against the norm and would react negatively without thinking when faced with what they don't expect to see ,or something they cannot make sense of.

Ignorant and intolerant people are found amomgs all groups. We have the irreligious who are bitterly homophobic. Some atheist are also included and guilty of the same

So, Instead of blaming religion for the current discrimination against gay people, you and others on the same path of promoting the same thing, which I'm not against and at the same time not in support of, should focus more on enlightening the general public on why we have homosexuals in our midst and the reason we should tolerate them .

The public need to know the whole truth and not half truths and propoganda to make them change their minds.



But remember not everyone would listen to you or want to change their attitude. It's not easy to change human behaviour especially those of an adult.

Attacking a particular group or any other group can only make things worse for those in the LGBT community as it would cause these other groups to take it as fight or competition which they must win.

Unfortunately, gay people are a minority group that's not expected to win this battle.


Most gay people, if you ask them, Just want to live their lifes quietly without the unnecessary attention being placed on them.

Putting them in the spotlight may have increased the pyschological pressure coming from others around them and also from within themselves. This can affect their mental health in ways they may not be fully conscious of.

Most people are more comfortable and relax to live their lives without much stress when others are not focused on them.

Traditional African societies of the past were very good at managing this kind of situation better than those in the western world are currently doing.

Our forefathers never made much of an issue out of the situation . They maintained a silence that came from sincere concern and understanding which gave those with gay tendencies the mental freedom and physical space to live their lifes quietly and happily without any harrassment.


My advice is that you sheathe the sword and use other methods that can achieve better results.

If you insist religion is the problem then, what do you have to say about atheist who are homophobic?

Flamemignon1:
Well "normal" is subjective and depends on the society,it was normal for twins to be killed at birth in some cultures in the past but look at today,it was normal to drink the sperm of your elders before one can become a man in some cultures but look at today. Normal moves on a pendulum whose moral compass may be questionable making it more subjective.

As for it being "natural",you are right, nature has it quirks but that doesn't those quirks unnatural, it's not something set in stone as every rule has an exception.

You didn't answer my question.
I wanted you to provide the scientific evidence you said you have for homosexuality being normal.


Your final statement up there as nothing do with me.

I never mentioned that quirks of nature are unnatural, but a deviation from the norm.

Flamemignon1:
The same science that proved it a natural and normal sexual orientation as heterosexuality

What's the logic behind religion?

I'm not going to contest the naturalness of homosexual behaviour, but only want you to educate me on why you have asserted it's a normal sexual orientation.


For me,I think it's an abnormal sexual orientation, but which I personally don't judge as a product of insanity . I see it as a quirk of nature, a deviation from the norm which is not enough reason to discriminate against those who engage in it ,as most of them cannot help to be that way.

As you reply me, please ensure that the scientific support you would provide is peer reviewed. If it's not, then don't just bother.

jaephoenix:
Grammatical errors is correct while grammar errors aint. You're welcome

And I never boasted I speak perfect grammar. In fact I even told you myself, I do have irregularities but you were already bawling like a baby while reading the post. Apologies for making you cry, bro. Not intended.

Correcting people isn't being proud. Its being meticulous. Nigerians are notoriously poor in grammar and knowledge. Now if everyone assumes your mindset of 'Your grammar or knowledge is poor, so don't correct me' then we become a nation of poor quality(which is already happening)

And I don't re-read comments after hitting submit. Call it laziness. Call it pride. Dunno.

I'm not here to argue about my profession. I'm not interested in impressing you or anyone, for that matter. Only reason you know my vocation is because I want my audience to know my perspective. This is Nairaland, lots of impostors here. Maybe I am one. Maybe I aint. So take your tear filled exposition and give it to anyone that cares

Clown. See who's talking. "Nigerians are notoriously poor in grammar". After saying so, the next thing is to confirm for everyone through what comes out from you that you're part of those Nigerians.

Another headache causing reply from you again. Chai. I don see something for Nairaland.Pot calling kettle black

Go and employ a private English language teacher. You don't know the grammar rules behind what you're correcting.

I have friends who are medical doctors and Nairalanders too. Unlike you, they don't always have the time to be on Nairaland 24/7 due to the nature of their job.

But you're always here probably because you're either not whom you claim to be or not very good in what you do.

Besides you're not too familiar with the regular medical jargons doctors use in describing some of the things they do. How do you expect people to believe your claim then?

"Legit" prescriptions. Mofo Like a lawyer calling his clients, customers. You have betrayed who you're already. Stop acting!

Go and help yourself with those "legit" medications you prescribe for your patients. .

jaephoenix:
Grammatical errors is correct while grammar errors aint. You're welcome

And I never boasted I speak perfect grammar. In fact I even told you myself, I do have irregularities but you were already bawling like a baby while reading the post. Apologies for making you cry, bro. Not intended.

Correcting people isn't being proud. Its being meticulous. Nigerians are notoriously poor in grammar and knowledge. Now if everyone assumes your mindset of 'Your grammar or knowledge is poor, so don't correct me' then we become a nation of poor quality(which is already happening)

And I don't re-read comments after hitting submit. Call it laziness. Call it pride. Dunno.

I'm not here to argue about my profession. I'm not interested in impressing you or anyone, for that matter. Only reason you know my vocation is because I want my audience to know my perspective. This is Nairaland, lots of impostors here. Maybe I am one. Maybe I aint. So take your tear filled exposition and give it to anyone that cares

Go and take your "legit" prescriptions.

How often do you find other nairalanders correcting the spelling mistakes of others or drawing attention to it.

You have failed woefully

jaephoenix:
Its grammatical inadequacies not grammar inadequacies

So that you should stop embarrassing yourself and not so you should stop embarrassing yourself

posts here are filled with grammatical errors and not post here is filled with grammar errors

Yes, I can use crack in that context of abstracts like atheism. Crack can mean a deficiency or inadequacy.

You don't know what's is is wrong. You don't know what's is correct. The is is redundant. (Hope you know what it is)

The possessive pronoun ish is intentional. It's an autocorrect that's stuck with my keyboard app which, in time, I learnt to ignore. Thanks for pointing it out. I have to actively 'impinge' on that app.

Continue to reply again with your very bad English is wrong. Continue to reply again with your very bad grammar is correct.

See, its not that hard to learn English. But you were smoking weed when all the learning were going on. Your parents need to take their refund from that hinterland secondary school. Hope you attended a higher institution to improve yourself, bro.

Clown.
Grammar inadequacies is correct . I don't expect you to know anyway. You don't know the difference between grammar and grammatical . I guess you were never taught attributive nouns in the mushroom school you attended .


You have used the word ,crack, like an illiterate who wants to impress others and now defending it foolishly.

I never boasted at anytime that I speak perfect English. Correcting me is meaningless and wayward You started this whole nonsense which has exposed you . Everything you're doing now is just to save face.

I can correct myself if I spot the errors on time, but in your case you cannot. That's the difference between you and me

You thought you found something in my reply which you could use to mock me .But it has unfortunately worked against you.

Your major preoccupation on Nairaland is to mock others whom you assume you're more intelligent than, whereas nothing in your head.

You can continue with the denial and self deception. That's your business.

Just look at how you're now using the excuse of auto-correct for your inability to differentiate between its and it's.

Even if that were true, why have you not been correcting them after you hit the submit button?
You don't because you don't know the correct one to use. That's the truth.

And you reply again is filled with errors, Mr English teacher who also claims to be a medical doctor that corrects his patients grammar in his consulting room.

A medical doctor using the word, legit, to qualify prescriptions he gives to his patients.

You put "your medications on the spot" to see if they were "legit" and "They all checked out" lol

Impostor! You can deceive others not me.

Go and take "your medications" they are actually "legit".

Modified. I'm not sitting for an English language exam. If I were, I would make sure I edit very well what I have written before submitting my answer script.

Your pettiness is what has led to your disgrace. You want to correct another person when you cannot even correct yourself.
You started this nonsense.What I have done is to show the world that you're worse.

Even your conclusion in your latest reply is terrible, poor expression everywhere.

SMH.

jaephoenix:
I love this. Thanks for the correction. Appreciate. That one was actually an error, not a auto-correct like you claim, to hide your grammatical inadequacies.
Actually, I put atheism to the test several times. The only crack was Pascal's Wager

Look at this clown still talking.

A spelling mistake committed just once and accidentally, which I would have corrected myself if I had seen it earlier, is now evidence of grammar inadequacies?

Go and check for the meaning of grammar inadequacies so you stop embarrassing yourself.

Most of what you post here is filled with grammar errors. Even this latest reply of yours contains blunders everywhere and you still want to brag.
What's the meaning of "The only crack" . Do you take crack cocaine?

The mushroom secondary school you attended has done you great damage. I really pity you. You don't know what's is correct grammar and what's not.

Since you started posting on Nairaland you have been using the possessive pronoun ,its instead of , it's ,Mr "Grammar inadequacies" .



You should worry first about improving your own inadequacies and not wasting your time about others.

You put someone on the spot and not something on the spot. I highlighted that in that your gibberish post but you were blind to see the blunders .

How do you put something on the spot? A dunce who doesn't know the correct way to use an idiom.
Go and employ a private English language because everyone of your post is very painful to read.

Don't hide behind it's "paining me" and think I would be moved by that.

And who bothers about spelling mistakes here on Nairaland when a serious conversation is going on. If not that you started the nonsense, who cares?

Maybe that's the only way you think you could force you points.

Continue to reply again with your very bad English. You're ignored.

jaephoenix:
How is one supposed to prove his Christianity? Is there a Christian-o-meter? We just believe they said so, same way we believe you are. Though we can't say for sure, since there are no meters.
About the belief in god, there is no verifiable evidence of his existence.
Do you see the difference between the 2 notions?

Mr English teacher,

"How is one supposed to prove his Christianity"? Haba! .which kind "egrish be dis na. My head dey turn me o!


No consistency in expression.

How is one supposed to prove one's Christianity?

"Do you see the difference between the 2 "notions" (statements)?

Let me free you. I'm done with you. Next time behave well and stop being petty.

jaephoenix:
Yeah, atheism makes you take everything around you with skepticism, even your existence. I put all of my attributes into test. I put them on the spot and critically examined them bereft of bias. I put my paternity(whether my father was my biological father), my profession(whether my prescriptions were actually legit and made patients better ie if medical science was true or just trash being paraded via conspiracies) etc. They all checked out. I didn't take any of them as a given.
I put my religion on the spot and it failed time after time. At first i was sad, but one has to be mentally strong to handle disappointment

With the above, it's about time you employed a private English language teacher.

Today is Saturday,my day of rest.

I shall be following your comments bumper to bumper in any thread on this board to highlight your poor grammar.
I will put "all of your attributes to test" even "your existence"
I hope you don't "take any of them as given"

Your atheistic position would be put " on the spot" to see if you're "mentally strong to handle disappoinment"

Techobeys:
What I’m saying is if destiny was ever taken then it wont be with you, but you always have your destiny so it’s never taken. It’s always with you, you’re the one who refuse to walk in it. The enemy only distracts you from walking in your destiny but he can’t take it.

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

I don't think you understand me. Nobody can take your destiny. It's why I placed "taken" in quotes in my reply

Go back and read my initial reply here to understand me better.

jaephoenix:
Lol bro. Nigerians think a lot themselves. Many of my patients call it kneel, and I correct them all the time. And I bet this particular one isn't a typo but you can't bring yourself to agree. I also bet you are amongst those that point to the bone in your back and call it spinal cord. Please take your L in peace

It's not about thinking too much of one's self, but that you're slow , petty and childish.

If I had made that same mistake in the past then you have a case. I have used that same expression before. This is not the first time.

Because you lack common sense ,you want to use one instance to compare me to your patients who obviously speak directly to you and not typing from a phone that has auto correct which can lead to this kind of thing .

I usually notice the same in the comments of others here and don't see it as anything. As long I understand the person,no problem.
I always try to edit my comments before and after posting. If not that I was immediately taken by another activity I would have noticed that and corrected it because I certainly know the difference between the noun ,knee and the verb ,kneel.

But what about you? A very dark pot.

Here below are some of your comments replete with grammatical blunders and spelling mistakes.

1. Poor grammar. Difficult to read you as you struggle most times to get your thoughts out.
2. Punctuation. Poor
3. Use of the wrong tense in the subjunctive mood.
4.. You don't know the difference between ,its and it's .
5. Using a transitive verb without a direct object.
And others too. Chai! Na this olodo wan correct person? I don see sometin for Nairaland.

jaephoenix:
Lol. You drop some gibberish and expect something magical to pop out from there. Or when your opponent cannot make head or tail of the gibberish, you declare yourself winner and run off.
Its a regular antic of yours we are used to.
If you think that post makes sense, rephrase… it

Its instead of it's.

Spelling mistake.
Poor expression.

jaephoenix:
Does that thing you wrote mean anything to you? If it means something to you, then rephrase

Another error in the above. I bet you cannot spot it yourself.

jaephoenix:
Oh Unintelligent One, destiny is predetermined . Its not changed

And again, using its Instead of it's. This cannot be typing mistake. You don't know the difference.

jaephoenix:
Good.

And this is the dictionary meaning


destiny
/ˈdɛstɪni/
Learn to pronounce
noun
the events that will necessarily happen to a particular person or thing in the future

That means no matter what you do, its still your destiny. If my destiny is to die this morning, even if I like let me hide inside a room locked up, I'll still die. Earthquake fit happen come kill me.
So if someone marries a bad wife, or wastes his time in a church(like depicted), its still his destiny, nobody took anything.
If my destiny is to be very poor, then I can't help it.
And one more thing, not everyone is destined to be rich, like your psycho pastors tell you. They even say rich men harvest 'destinies' from poor folks. Some of them even call it 'star'. I mean, how? How can Ned Nwoko steal the destiny of Portable?
Are you guys mentally unstable?

Finally, ladies and gentlemen, Nairaland English language teacher using its Instead of it's everywhere in the above. How many can you spot.

If you make a mistake once ,you could be forgiven. But when you keep repeating it, then something is wrong. And you want to correct others? Take your medications first

Other errors too. Who can spot those?

I don't want to be caught doing this kind of thing, but to put you where you belong, I just have to.

I hope you rest now and know you're among the nonentities in Nigeria whenever you scream, "what is wrong with the water in Nigeria"
You don't know but you think you know. People like you are a problem in any society.

An atheist who doesn't know the difference between superstitious belief and fact.

Predetermined by flying spaghetti monster.

jaephoenix:
1. It's knee jerk, not kneel jerk
2. So what if every action was first an idea. How is it of importance to personal destinies?

It's very important because your predominant thoughts which are embedded strongly in your unconscious mind (subconscious) creates your personal reality which then greatly influences the things you say and do.

Unfortunately, most people are only concern with external actions and not fully conscious of how behaviour is controlled from the inside . It's for this reason, they erroneously believe their destiny is set by external circumstances beyond their control.

There's a more detailed explanation in modern cognitive science of how the human brain stores information to control behaviour. Everything is not known yet but at least, the knowledge they have provided at this time, is invaluable for anyone to make use of .

I expected someone like you who claim to be a medical doctor, and a self acclaimed expert scientist who know everything, to have this kind information, but it's obvious you don't. You're not current at all.

And the worst part, is that, without realising it, you have been arguing blindly like a religious fanatic and superstitious person each time you insist destiny is predetermined and cannot change. Just like an ignorant theist who thinks scientific theory means belief or speculation not backed by fact because that's how a dictionary has made him understand it.

If you say destiny is predetermined and cannot change, then the question you should ask yourself is, who, what has set the events that must play out in the future?

Is it your personal god or a flying spaghetti monster?


Are you really thinking of the things you type before you hit the submit button?

Do you even understand the actual reality behind the words you have been using all along to discuss the op?


You don't really understand what destiny means because you don't know how dictionaries compilers do their work and think that every dictionary entry of a word has a description that's enough to make you fully understand it all.

It's very obvious from your comments here that your understanding of destiny is still influenced by what you were taught in Christianity before you became an atheist.

An atheist who believes in predestination? I never seen this before. You're confused.


You need to wean yourself of your past Christian indoctrination before discussing this any further.

If you like focus on finding spellings mistakes in my reply and not the meat of the matter.

I will come back shortly to fully address your pettiness and craziness concerning the mountain you want to make out of a mistake which has happened to everyone here and most especially you. You very much guilty of the same thing . Yours is even worse.

I thought I was engaged in a conversation with an adult .
SHM.

You think you can throw snaky comments and veiled insults at me and get away with it?

I will tell you why you need more of the medications you give to the mad people you claim consult you all the time as it appears they have infected you with their insanity.

jaephoenix:
1. It's knee jerk, not kneel jerk
2. So what if every action was first an idea. How is it of importance to personal destinies?

It's typo ,Mr English teacher. You don't expect me not to know how to spell the word, knee.
I have something to do now. I would respond to your number 2 later.

jaephoenix:
Wtf?
So if I dream and think like Elon Musk, I end up like him?
Is there something wrong with the water in Nigeria?

Lol. A kneel jerk reaction from you.

Everything that has been achieved or created by anyone in this world first began as an idea, thought, in the head of an individual before steps were taken to bring it to fruition.
Hope you understand me better now

Thoughts precedes actions

jaephoenix:
What is destiny

One's destiny is the result from the thoughts and beliefs one hold on strongly to.

Techobeys:
Don’t you think abandoning destiny isn’t the same as destiny being taken? If something is taken then it’s not with you, but if you have it right there with you and refuse to perform it then you’ve only abandoned what’s with you. If that’s the case, don’t you think destiny cannot be taken?

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

I have placed taken in quotes

Someone who takes something must have taken it from somewhere else or from another person
So, I don't understand what you mean by if something is taken then it's not with you.

Yes, it can be taken, but not in the way it's believed in these parts.

When you're "tricked" into abandoning the plans you have for your own life by others around you, who don't really care about your own well being, then your destiny has been "taken"


For instance, if you spend nearly all of your time and money, in your local church or mosque without you benefiting much in return to take care of your own personal needs, then your destiny has been" taken"

A church or mosque is not the only place this could happen. It happens nearly all the time in any kinds of personal relationships or other situations ;friendships or marriages, where you work, football fanatics who spend most of their time supporting their favourite team ,and of course those addicted to Nairaland.

And one thing that's common with the different categories of people listed above , and which makes them easy victims, is that they're always in the habit of putting first the needs of others before theirs .

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you should not first consider others in anything you do. But don't overdo it.


Common sense is needed all the time if not you stand the risk of having your destiny "taken"

A reckless and very annoying write up, filled with lies, written by Femi Adesina to promote the CBN's cashless policy of 20k Maximum withdrawal limit which he doesn't even understand very well.

So he wants us to believe if he had transferred 8k into his driver's account ,the driver wouldn't have been able to buy fuel using an ATM card in Abuja of all places?

Ok, 20k is the only money Femi had as at that time. Nothing in his numerous bank account to the extent he has accept a loan from his poor driver. Lies upon lies

It's obvious this man, like a lot of Nigerians right now barely understand the real reason behind the CBN'S cashless policy , hence the unnecessary complain and resistance .

Nobody has said that you can't or should not spend the thousands or millions in your bank account,(adopt shoestring budget) but do so through ATM card transfers, POS and bank apps.

If most of us agree to change to this, (some people, like drug addicts, are still stubbornly insisting on spending and receiving physical cash in large sums) the current scarcity of both the old and new notes wouldn't be felt.

The new naira notes should mostly be made available for rural dwellers without bank accounts, those not having immediate access to any banking institution and those engaged in petty trading and buying.

If you're living in the cities or major towns,any transaction more than 1k ,use your ATM or do.
bank transfer. If the person you're dealing with refuses transfers ,then go elsewhere if possible. Some petty traders due to drop in sales from the current cash scarcity have started to accept bank transfers.

POS agents are starting to reduce their excess charges. It's just a matter of time things return the normal.

Let's play our part to support the government to make things work in this country. We want change but resist it when it comes.

The 20k physical cash Femi had in his possession maybe too much. He should be leading by example by writing something on how people can spend their money by using alternative channels, and not this lying "shoestring budget$ write up.

AntiChristian:
They are not the same. Jesus in the Bible is not the same as us. He should know that Mustard seed is not the smallest seed!
It's not about them happening! It's about them containing lies unbefitting for someone of Godly status!

The audience for any parable don't see it as lies. They understand from the word go that the story within it is not true ,and know they are not being deceived.

You can only lie to someone who's not in a position to know the truth. The audience for that parable have seen a mustard plant before and know it can grow into that size described in the story.

So where's the lie?

How's it possible to lie to somebody, who you're aware, already knows the truth of what you're telling them?

Your problem is that you're struggling to understand what a parable is or just clutching at straws to defend your already failed op

The mustard seed in that parable is symbolic .It represents something and not a real seed. This is what you still don't understand.

As long as parables are not deliberate falsehood anyone , no matter their status, divine or not, can use it to teach.

The disciples of Jesus, in the Christian Bible, understood very well what he was doing using a parable , and accused him of not speaking directly to the audience ,who they felt, may struggle to understand the symbolic meaning it contains.

He wasn't accused of lying .

You're not different from Christians who create threads to criticize your religion, Islam, with the limited knowledge they have

Read below where the disciples questioned him about using a parable and show me where he was accused of lies

AntiChristian:
The entry that birds nest on a Mustard tree is a mistake! The assertion that a mustard seed is the smallest seed is also false. Mustard seed is one of the smallest seeds.
Can you quote another parable of Jesus that contains mistakes like this one?

How many times do you want me answer the same question. Shouting won't help you in this case. You're already doing so in frustration..

I already explained that within the context of the parable it's not a mistake to give those description of the mustard plant. Outside of it, it's

What's difficult to understand in that?


A parable is an imaginative story meant to illustrate a particular principle. The story in a parable must not agree with what's obtainable in the real world. It's very silly to use the story in parable to determine what's true or not true

The narrator has the licence to say anything, whether true or not, to help illustrate the moral truth or lesson behind it.

The message is the most important thing in a parable ,and if you understand the message in the parable in contention then, you can easily see why the mustard plant was described as that which can grow into a tree when it shouldn't.

Why is it difficult for you to understand this simple explanation that even a child in primary school would easily grasp?

I think it's becoming obvious now that the idea of using parables to illustrate something is completely lost on you. You certainly don't understand it at all


For the other parables of Jesus in the Bible , it's also known that they were fictional stories meant to illustrate a moral truth.

So don't understand why you're asking for other examples, or do you expect them to
also contain a mustard seed description?

Fiction is fiction. It doesn't matter how it's told or what it contains

I think I am done with you. Everything has been explained by me. Nothing more.