Sunday, May 28, 2006


It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
Euripides (c. 485-406 BCE)


After the first that was to me an Incarnation- to them I had become a God- there came The Second Coming. I didn't come creeping like a thief in the night, no sir! I came in broad daylight, trumpeting like a fallen angel in a seedy Jazz Bar. And Chuchu and Bobo came out to play with me. They were pipers, I was paying; so they played my tune.

They swallowed, by my father that is above they did. Even as I said unto them, verily, "Take this my body and eat it, it symbolises the covenant through which you have sold your souls and labour to me."
Bobo was chocking, Chuchu too, but I wasn't paying them to spill my seed. If they spilled it, it would offend my Celestial Daddy who would smite me in anger reserved for Onan- The Wanker. (As for Terrestrial Daddy, he would be busy doing a Google search on Invitro Fertilisation and patenting it as Immaculate Conception.)

I came. For Christ's fucking sake I did! And then I said to them: "Drink this, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured for the forgiveness of multilateral debts." Then I mumbled the fine print, but the accursed kinsmen of Ham thought I was groaning in ecstacy.

I touched the heads of these vassals with avuncular grace. "Your body is the temple of the God of Lucre," I said to them with magnanimity. "Do not chase out the profiteers, usurers and varied middlemen." (All of them that are in trendy coats made of the finest Northern fleece, I meant!)
They nodded in agreement. Bobo and Chuchu always nod in agreement because they know it earns the, a doggy biscuit. It is always like Pavlov's dogs all over again- only difference is that these dogs have two hands and brachiated thumbs that are perfect for holding begging bowls.

There I stood, my hands spread out; to them in blessing, to me in ecstasy. I was glowing now. My eyes shone and my hair flowed. My eyes that were as blue as the waters I had walked on- across the seas- on my way here, and the hair that was as blonde as Hitler's dream.
"Arise!" I said unto them. "You have become conquerors of your destiny. Behold Canaan...!" But I meant it in jest. I knew they couldn't stand. I had kept them on their knees for too long.

On their knees they stayed. Right where our common ancestor- Noah- had cursed them to live. All that was left for me to do was to put them to work on my Third Coming. If they couldn't swallow it, then they could vomit on my shoes. But they could never stand up to vomit on my coat.
Fot it was written, in the fine print of our covenant -that in their ignorance they couldn't read: "verily, and verily I say unto you, thou shall not vomit on coats made of the finest Northern fleece!"

49 years later, Field Marshal Kimathi Waciuri; Commander, Land and Freedom Army still lies in shackles at The kamiti GK prison... Still Colonised!


Wednesday, May 24, 2006


eA gay Kenyan man was talking about how people use the Bible to condemn homosexuality. Well i always felt that the bible anyone can use the Bible to say anything.
Anyway, I decided to do a quick recap of verses in the Bible that mention homosexuality. I couldn't help throwing in my own editorial comments.

The vengeful Yahweh destroyed Sodom for its lechery. The last straw was when the men of Sodom attempted to rape two angels. The punishment against Sodom was not against homosexuality per se but the immorality of its residents. The story about Sodom does not mention God’s anger, or otherwise, in relation to consensual acts of homosexuality.
What I find interesting about the Lot story- which to me illustrates the double standards people apply to the interpretation of the bible- is towards the end where Lot and his daughters are living in a cave. The daughters conspire to get their father drank and have carnal knowledge of him and huko he is blacked out.

Now that would make Njoki Ndungu gag but Yahweh is easy. The offspring of that liaison (Ammonites and Moabites) are about the only people Yahweh doesn’t instigate a war against. In fact they are considered cousins to Israel.
(Compare that with the purported crime and its subsequent curse in Genesis 9:20-27, which was Christendom's biblical justification for slavery and apartheid.)
In the bible, then, incestuous sexual abuse is tolerated, but if your father gets drank and you happen on him sleeping naked, your ancestors will forever be slaves.

Another time homosexuality is mentioned is in the incidence of the Levite and his concubine. (Judges Ch: 19). This again as verse 22 indicates is a case of homosexual rape:

“[Now] as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, [and] beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.”

If you care to read how that story is resolved in the next two chapters, you will think God writes Hollywood movies and men wrote the bible. (That is one of the worst sex, gore and objectification of women stories you will ever read.) But as I always say, what do you expect when God is a bloodthirsty Patriarch.

The act of sodomy is mentioned in 1 kings 14:24:

“And there were also sodomites in the land: [and] they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.”

(The internet version I am using here uses the word sodomite instead of pervert
In the hard copy I am reading from, which happens to be my mum’s New King James version. In relation to the word ‘perverts’ it gives a footnote to this effect: “That is those practicing sodomy and prostitution in religious rituals.”
In my view then it is not clear whether the crime is in the action or the situation- is it the, what that is wrong or the where?)

The book of Leviticus provides the only outright condemnation of homosexuality in the Old Testament:
Ch. 18:22
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.”
Ch. 20:13
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.”

Now according to the New Concise Bible Dictionary (Ed. Derek Williams), the warnings in Leviticus “are also primarily aimed at idolatry using the word ‘abomination’, which is a religious term often used for idolatrous practices."
(I am taking that dictionary on its own authority since I cannot speak Greek, and as I have once mentioned to the Pink Blogger, Linguistics is not my forte. That word 'abomination', though, is what his Kikuyu Bible translates into: thahu.)


Then came the one whom much had been written about: Jesus Christ. He that came to die that we may live. The lamb of Pentecost. The blood of the New Covenant. Moses’ pension plan or is it Nemesis? He was God- Incarnate- walking amongst men, teaching about the way to the father. He taught about this and that but he never mentioned homosexuality. Yet he spoke of sin- and the forgiveness of sin- and his word was God.

The only outright condemnation of homosexuality in the New Testament comes from the reformed Pharisee, Paul of Tarsus.
1 Cor. 6:9
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,”

1 Tim. 1:9
“For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

(Incidentally, Paul/Saul never met Jesus and had spent his early years persecuting the so called Christians, yet he became the most influential protagonist- in Acts- and author- the Epistles- of the Christian Canon. He is even considered more Orthodox than Peter, who was the Rock upon which Christ was to build his church to a point where he won a doctrinal tiff between them: Gal. 2:14 and Acts Ch. 15)

This is just my reading from the bible,I have used quotations from the Blue Letter Bible.

Maybe now that I am at it, I should attempt what I call: ‘Sermons of the Anglican’….later!

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Yet Another Prologue

In the first instance, I wrote : Potash The Encounter, which did suffice, then, as a prologue to my "Pseudo-intellectual anthology of Kenyan Urban Narratives." In subsequent posts, my intellectual and other failings not withstanding, I set out to chronicle my urban experiences and such other things appertaining. Yet in due time though, I faltered; suddenly this blog went as silent as- to paraphrase Michael Longley's two line Poem, Terezin- a room where hundreds of violins had been hang in unison.

Soon after, this blog was to find itself twice-prologued in the publication of: Interruption of Potash supply. Yet as though being Streetesque and therefore thriving on being opposite, that self-same 'interruption' happened after a couple of other posts.

And now this; yet another prologue? In essence, yes. Do I feel guilty of blog inconstancy? Not necessarily. I see each hiatus, in its being unpredicted/ unforeseen, as a metaphor of Fate's ever turning wheel that allows those of our end of the street no luxury of the future tense. Therefore, though I would like to be here writing my Street Gospel, the vindication of that Gospel is in the not writing- the veracity and eloquence of my narrative, unfortunately, abides in silence. (That's a riddle, now you decide!)

So, have I been writing, lately? Hardly. Neither can I say that I have been reading anything seeing that purchasing relief food- yes- is cheaper and of greater preference than books. But there is, as always when I need mental stimulation, the dog-earred "Complete Shakespeare" - the complete not being descriptive in this case- and the termite streaked bible that has seen worse wear than a Quran in Guantanamo Bay. So my choices are stuck between the soporific Troilus and Cressida on a weary night and a swash-buckling sex and gore story from the Old Testament on a breezy morning.

Now that makes me think:
a) What exactly is civilisation; or, to be civilised?
b) Western civilisation over the last Millenium being premised on the Judaeo-Christian tradition, are its labour pains, vagaries and ill ramifications an indictment of man per se or his religion?

Those questions overshooting my intellectual orbit, I slink back into the ever darkening cocoon of my mundane pursuits.

To think beyond- maize meal and sukumawiki- one's daily bread is to me the epitome of luxury. Oh to think about matters beyond the fulfillment of primal needs. To question: mind, matter. To discourse on war, peace and all things in between. History. Philosophy. Science. Metaphysics.
(The only metaphysics I encounter now rails from behind the gaudy armour of dogmatic faith. But still I prefer the company of the demon I know - who lives in my Napshizzle- than a God, in that there heaven, I do not know, whenever I desire the quality that they have in common; a dulling of the human mind.)

But all this by manner of a prologue. All in the hope that by and by I can afford the luxury of thinking and the skill of writing. Maybe I will soon find a transparent spot on the vast opaqueness of my glass ceiling...
Damn it I am Incoherent, this day!