Sunday, June 24, 2012

DOING GREATER WORKS THAN JESUS

Some Christians have done far greater works than Jesus.

Jesus says: “He who believes in me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to my Father.” (John 14:12).  This statement has confounded many Christians.  Very few are bold enough even to imagine doing greater works than Jesus.  And yet, Jesus’ words cannot be broken.  Some believers have done far greater works than Jesus.  But we do not even realize it because we do not know what it means to do the works of God.

Signs and wonders

It is generally assumed doing the works of God entails the working of miracles.  But this is not true.  Demons also perform miracles.  In Revelation, John saw evil spirits coming out of the mouth of the false prophet among others.  He observes that: “They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world.” (Revelation 16:14).
Pharaoh’s magicians duplicated some of Moses’ miracles.  When Moses and Aaron caused frogs to appear out of nowhere: “The magicians did the same things by their secret arts; they also made frogs come up on the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 8:7).  Indeed, Jesus warns: “False christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.” (Matthew 24:24).  Therefore, miracles should not be misconstrued as essentially or exclusively the works of God.
However, only God and his sons can do God’s definitive works.  Indeed, God’s children are identifiable by our ability to do the works of God.  Thus, Jesus said to the Jews: “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.” (John 8:39).
When the disciples received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, passers-by marveled at how Galileans could suddenly speak foreign-languages.  They said: “We hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” (Acts 2:11).  This provides the clue we need.  By divine inspiration, the disciples spoke the works of God.  The wonderful works of God are God’s spoken words.  At Pentecost, the works of God were manifest in the speech of the disciples who spoke works that only God speaks; the words of eternal life.
The psalmist says: “I believed, therefore I spoke.” (Psalm 116:10).  In order to do the works of God, we have to believe in Jesus and speak his works.  Indeed, it is the works we speak that identify us as sons of God and disciples of Christ.  Jesus says: “You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.” (Matthew 7:16-17).  “A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.” (Luke 6:44-45).

Good works

In God’s dictionary, good works are not merely synonymous with good deeds.  Good deeds can be done by unbelievers.  Good deeds are sheep’s clothing sometimes worn by wolves.  “Good works” actually imply “good words.”  Accordingly, Jesus uses both expressions interchangeably.  He says: “The WORDS that I speak to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does the WORKS.” (John 14:10).  This shows the works are indivisible from the speaking of the words.  Jesus speaks God’s words and the Father does the works.
The works of God are his words.  God works by his words.  He speaks his works.  God created all things by his word.  But the greatest work of God is in speaking the living-dead back to life.  Jesus says: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live.” (John 5:25).

Bread of life
 
John says: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory.” (John 1:14).  Similarly, the word of Jesus must become flesh in us.  Jesus says: “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.” (John 6:56).  This means Jesus’ words must be broken down and digested so it enters into our spirit-man and becomes part of us.  When this happens, we automatically speak Jesus’ works in atonement with him.  We become “at one” with Christ; even as he is “at one” with the Father. (John 17:20-23).
The will of God is that his works should be revealed in his sons. (John 9:3).  Jesus says to us: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16).  Our light is the word of Jesus.  Jesus’ word is “a lamp to our feet and a light to our path.” (Psalm 119:105).  In God’s light, we see light. (Psalm 36:9).  Even so should our words provide illumination to this world of gross darkness.  Our good works are our edifying words.  Our words are “good works” when they glorify the Father.

Greater works

Jesus says we shall do greater works than him BECAUSE he goes to his Father in heaven.  (John 14:12).  This is because Jesus spoke God’s words for only thirty-three years.  However, some of us will live much longer than Jesus.  Therefore, we shall have the opportunity to speak more life-affirming words to others for much longer through various media.  Indeed, God has used the mouth of some Christians to raise more dead people back to life than he did through Jesus.
The Holy Spirit enables us to do God’s works by reminding us of the words of Jesus.  In sending him to us, Jesus says: “The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.” (John 14:26).  The word of God comes to us in our daily walk with God.  It not only empowers us, it keeps us from sin.  David says to the Lord: “By the word of Your lips, I have kept away from the paths of the destroyer.” (Psalm 17:4).
Our words are our works.  However, Paul says we are justified by grace: “Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:24).  Then he says we are justified by faith: “A man is justified by faith apart from works of law.” (Romans 3:28).  And then again he says we are justified by the blood of Jesus: “Having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” (Romans 5:9).  This is classic Pauline mumbo-jumbo.  Are we justified by grace; or by faith; or by the blood?
Such Pauline confusion is avoided when we listen to Jesus; “the faithful and true witness.” (Revelation 3:14).  As usual, Jesus is precise, specific and to the point.  He says: “Every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment.  For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:36-37).

By Femi Aribisala

MEN OF GOD AND THE WILL OF GOD IN NIGERIA

The foremost African American leader of the 20th Century, Martin Luther King Jr., having been arrested for leading a protest against racial segregation, wrote from his prison cell in Birmingham, Alabama. It was a letter he addressed to a group of clergymen that accused him of extremism. In that letter, he tacitly admitted being an extremist. And he argued that on that day at Calvary, three persons were crucified for the same offense; they were all extremists. To the left and to the right were two extremists. They were extremists in crime – theft and murder. In the middle, also, was an extremist. He was an extremist in his love for humanity and in doing the will of God.
Of course, Jesus Christ was an extremist. It must have taken an extremist in mercy and love to pray for the forgiveness of those who were crucifying him. The word Christian translates to Christ-like. Therefore, a true Christian, especially, a man of God, cannot escape being an extremist in the mode of Jesus Christ, that is, in love, selflessness and upholding the will of God.
The pulpit is sanctimonious and sacrosanct. The word of God is the most potent force within man’s grasp. And a true man of God cannot help being a Spirit-filled, fearless and daring warrior. I have always dreamt of when an invigorating mix of these powerful tools of God (fearless pastor, the pulpit and the divine Word) will give rise to the will of God in Nigeria.
In his last speech, Martin Luther King Jr. talked about, “I am not worried about anything. I am not fearing any man. I just want to do the will of God”. Evidently, he was acutely conscious that the will of God in America was not limited to guiding man towards eternal life in the hereafter, but included making America a racially just society where both Whites and Blacks can partake in all America promises all her citizens. He knew that the racial degradation of Blacks in America, and essentially, the degradation of any human being anywhere are against the will of God. So, in his extremism, he labored for an America all God’s children are judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
And today, the fruit of the work he did in concert with other Black American men of God is inconceivably evident. To elect a Black man, Barak Obama, to the presidency of a predominantly White country, he must have been judged by the content of his character and not the color of his skin.  
What is the will of God in Nigeria? The will of God in Nigeria must include that a Nigerian citizen be comfortable, proud and self-confident in his own country, knowing that he is the subject of the concerns and actions of elected and other public officials and all the institutions of government. That he feels protected and at peace in his country because his rights are protected and his immunity from abuse and harassment, from governing officials, government agents,  landlords/landladies and all kinds of “big men” and madams, is guaranteed by the laws of the land. And that he feels secured in the knowledge that his right to partake in the wealth of his country is inviolable.
It is not the will of God that the generality of Nigerians live in insufferable social and economic conditions because a disproportionate percentage of the nation’s wealth is stolen by a privileged few. It is a perversion of the will of God that the Nigerian political class remains contemptuously indifferent to the continually increasing economic plight of the Nigerian masses. It is against the will of God that government agents, especially, the police, ride roughshod over Nigerians and extort money from them and arrest the innocent, consign them to dirty, bug-ridden and dingy cells; and demand “bail” money for their release. And so on and so forth.
In the United States of America, African American men of God driven by the Christian attributes of courage and self-sacrifice rose up against societal evils, especially, racial injustice, that militated against the will of God in America. In South Africa, men of God, motivated by Christ-like qualities of courage and commitment to social justice fought against the distortion of the will of God in South Africa as embodied in that iniquitous racial policy, Apartheid.  
Armed with the power of the word of God and the sanctity of the pulpit, the Nigerian men of God are not confronting the societal vices militating against the will of God in Nigeria. Why are they not speaking out against the forces of greed and wickedness that are subverting the will of God in Nigeria? Why are they not asking our conscienceless rulers to change their evil ways, and stop looting the national wealth? Why are they not urging them to obey the laws of the country and uphold their political and moral responsibilities to the Nigerian people?
This must be because they lack the Christ-like attributes of courage and selflessness, and are invariably, cowardly, selfish and materialistic, and consequently, desperately seeking the friendship and validation of the same power elite that is subverting the will of God in Nigeria.
Is it possible for men of God to be cowardly, selfish and wealth-conscious, and as a result, shamelessly fawning over morally bankrupt power elite? Yes, it is possible, if they are disobedient to the Gospel of Jesus Christ which teaches the equality of all men, and have therefore, taken to worshiping the rich and despising the poor; if they have forsaken the weightier things of the gospel for the vanities of this world; and if they have convoluted the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and instead of preaching righteousness, love, kindness, contentment, they preach prosperity, materialism and greed.
In addition, it is possible, if, instead of demonstrating the Christ like qualities of selflessness, modest lifestyle, kindness and concern for the well-being of others (especially, for the poor, weak and needy), they exemplify greed, self-indulgence, ostentation, selfish ambition, profligacy, and contempt for the poor and needy.

Tochukwu Ezukanma writes from Lagos, Nigeria.  maciln18@yahoo.com

Sunday, June 17, 2012

THE BLESSINGS OF BOKO-HARAM

Jesus says we can identify his disciples by their fruits. (Matthew 7:20). He then says the fruits of a man are his words. (Luke 6:43-45). So here is a sure-fire way of determining the true disciple. Step on his toes and see what he has to say. Give him a slap and listen to what comes out of his mouth. That is the value of Boko Haram attacks for Nigerian Christians.
How we respond separates the wheat from the chaff. Those calling for retaliation are enemies of the cross of Christ. They are the tares the enemy planted at night among the wheat. Those calling for restraints are the true sons of God.
The challenge
God calls Nebuchadnezzar his servant. (Jeremiah 25:9). Similarly, the Boko Haram must be seen as “servants” of God. God is using them to determine those who will enter into the blessings of his kingdom. God’s blessings are not only extraordinary; his means of deter-mining the recipients are peculiar.

Jesus says: “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven.” (Matthew 5:10-12).
Jesus foresaw the Boko Haram attacks and warned Christians about them. He said: “These things I have spoken to you, that you should not be made to stumble. They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. And these things they will do to you be-cause they have not known the Father nor Me.
But these things I have told you, that when the time comes, you may remember that I told you of them.” (John 16:1-4). Therefore, the challenge of Boko Haram is in determining whether Nigerian Christians will be made to stumble, or whether we will remember the words of Jesus and be guided accordingly. (Matthew 13:18-23).
CAN response
We have to decide whether to follow Jesus or follow Christian leaders like Dr. Sunday Mbang, former Prelate of the Methodist Church in Nigeria, and former President of CAN (Christian Association of Nigeria), who said: “If they kill Christians in their own part of the country and we kill them in our side of the country, nobody should blame anybody.” “Buy the truth and sell it not.” (Proverbs 23:23).

The Lord will blame us all.  Reverend Philip Mwel-bish, Head of CAN in Plateau State, also said: “We have a proverb in Nigeria: if you push a goat to the wall, he will bite you. They’ve pushed us to the wall.” Someone needs to tell the Right Reverend he is wrong. Christ’s disciples are not “goats;” they are “sheep.” (Matthew 25:31-46).
We have to decide whether to follow Jesus or follow the leadership of Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, National President of CAN, who called on Nigerian Christians to defend themselves against Boko Haram attacks. That is wrong. Jesus says: “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But who-ever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.” (Matthew 5:38-39).
The kingdom of God is not of this world; therefore Christians must not fight back. The life Jesus gives is spiritual and not temporal. That means it does not need armed protection for it cannot be lost by physical death. Boko Haram bombs and bullets cannot kill. The only thing that kills is sin.
War, even when fought in self-defense, represents the triumph of sin over righteousness in believers. Win or lose, spiritual death is the result. Jesus warns: “Whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it.” (Luke 9:24). He says further-more: “All who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26: 52). Therefore, CAN or no CAN, no true disciple of Jesus should heed any bogus call to arms.
Blind leaders
Nigerian Christians have to decide whether to follow Jesus or follow Pastor Enoch Adeboye of Redeemed Church who, instead of praying for the Boko Haram, declared spiritual warfare on them. Adeboye even prayed that, “before the end of this month, all the problems of Nigeria would be over.” However, we know from Jesus, the Good Pastor, that some problems are tonic for the soul.

Public prayers in street-corners are not going to eradicate Nigeria’s problems overnight, if at all. To live for Christ is to expect and embrace affliction. Jesus says: “In the world you will have tribulation.” (John 16: 33). James adds: “Blessed is the man who per-severes under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.” (James 1:12).
Nigerian Christians also have to decide whether to follow Jesus or follow Bishop David Oyedepo of Winners Chapel who encourages his congregation to curse their enemies. He said: “I decree mysterious death in the camp of the Boko Haram sect in Jesus’ name.” However, it is life, and not death, that is decreed in Jesus’ name.
On the cross, Jesus even prayed for the forgiveness of his murderers. He enjoins us to follow his example: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:43-45).
Kingdom dynamics
In times like these, Christians need to remember that God creates goodness out of evil. He brings life out of death. Therefore, the architects of Boko Haram are going to be con-founded. In the same way the killing of Jesus resulted in his glorious resurrection, so also will Boko Haram attacks on Christians result in blessings for Nigeria.

Indeed, the attacks are already fostering solidarity between Christians and Moslems in the North like never be-fore. Responding to the crisis, the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammadu Sa’ad Abubakar, said: “What is going on is a conflict between evil people and good peo-ple. The good people are more than the evil ones. So the good people must come together to defeat the evil ones and that is the message.”
Boko Haram is not just the enemy of Christians; it is the enemy of every peace-loving Nigerian. For this reason, the attacks on Christians have provoked Moslems in the North to even greater righteousness. For example, the former FCT Minister, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, appealed on Twitter to Moslem youths to: “form rings of protection around all churches in the 19 northern states and FCT, Abuja during Sunday service.”
In Minna, Niger State, Moslem youths formed groups to guard churches during Sun-day services. Their leader, Gimba Kakanda, said: “We are protecting our fellow Christian brothers and sisters to show the world that our leaders cannot use religion to divide us.”
In Kano, Moslems, under the leadership of Salihu Tanko, formed a group called “Concerned Citizens of Kano” to reach out in support of aggrieved Christians. They visit churches, giving speeches of friendship and solidarity. Clearly, this outpouring of love and compassion is not what the Boko Haram intended.
Joseph said to his bro-thers who sold him as a slave to Egypt only to discover he became the country’s Prime Minist-er: “You plotted evil against me, but God turned it into good, in order to preserve the lives of many people.” (Genesis 50:20).

By Femi Aribisala

THERE IS NO SALVATION BY PREDESTINATION

I find it astonishing that anyone who knows God would subscribe to a doctrine of predestination. But this is precisely what Paul does in his epistles. He maintains God predestines some people to salvation and others to condemnation: “God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.” (Rom. 9:18). I beg, most sincerely, to disagree.
God is not capricious or unjust. Abraham asks: “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (Gen. 18:25). Of course, he will. Therefore, predestination must be anathema to him. Indeed, Paul soon contradicts his own thesis.
While insisting God hardens those he wants to harden; he goes on to say in the same epistle: “God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all.” (Rom. 11: 32). But if God would have mercy on all, why then would he harden anybody? If he would have mercy on all, it cannot be said at the same time that he would only have mercy on so-me. This kind of contradiction does not come by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. (II Tim. 3:16).
Esau and Jacob
Paul fabricates scripture in support of his fla-wed theory. He says while Rebecca was still pregnant, God had already chosen Jacob in preference to Esau: “For the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls, it was said to her, ‘The older shall serve the younger.’ As it is written, ‘Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.’” (Rom. 9:11-13).

This is not true. Nowhere in the scriptures is it written that God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were born. In order to give this false impression, Paul combines Moses with Malachi. According to Moses, the Lord said to Rebecca while she was still pregnant: “Two NATIONS are in your womb, two PEOPLES shall be separated from your body; one people shall be stronger than the other, and the older shall serve the younger.” (Gen. 25:23).
There is absolutely nothing here to suggest God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were born. But over 1,000 years later, Malachi looks back and reports God as saying: “Jacob I have loved; but Esau I have hated.” (Mal. 1:2-3). However, it is clear that Malachi’s “Jacob” and “Esau” are not individuals but PEOPLES. “Esau” refers to the descendants of Esau; while “Jacob” refers to the descendants of Jacob. Thus, Malachi calls Esau: “the people against whom the LORD will have indignation forever.” (Mal. 1:4).
Malachi says God has loved the people of Jacob and has hated the people of Esau. The individuals were not loved and hated from the womb as Paul would have us believe. The peoples were loved and hated because God had seen their works for over 1,000 years. Indeed, for a long time, “Esau” was favoured and blessed of the Lord. God even gave Mount Seir to his descendants. (Deut. 2:4-5).
A bankrupt doctrine
Predestination has no place in Jesus’ doctrine. Nowhere does Jesus say God saves by a selection he makes before we are born. Instead, he says salvation is by works: “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.” (Matt. 7:21). Jesus says to Jewish religious leaders: “A man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’ He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went.

Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said to Him, ‘The first.’ Jesus then replied: ‘Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you.’” (Matt. 21:28-31).
This means salvation is contingent upon our freewill action. It has nothing to do with predestination. Tax-collectors and harlots will enter the kingdom of God before the pastors because the former repent of their sins while the latter become sinners. What Jesus gives here is a prophecy, which should not be confused with predestination. The prophecy says: “The last (tax-collectors) will be first and the first (pastors) last.” (Matt. 20:16). Adam and Eve were not predestined to eat the forbidden fruit. They did so of their own free will.
Measure for measure
God is impartial. Jesus says: “He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” (Matt. 5:45). Peter, who learnt at the feet of Jesus, echoes this, affirming that: “God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.” (Acts 10:34-35). As far as salvation is concerned, Jesus maintains we only receive from God what we deserve. He says in the kingdom of God: “With the same measure you use, it will be measured to you.” (Mark 4:24).

Thus, Jesus enjoins us: “Forgive anyone you are holding a grudge against, so that your Father in heaven will forgive you your sins too.”(Mark 11:25). He also says in his beatitudes: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” (Matt. 5:7). The merciful obtain mercy because they are merciful and not because of predestination.
Paul’s fallacy
Paul says some people are created for salvation while others are created for damnation. Anticipating that some would question the injustice here, Paul goes into pre-emptive overdrive. He asks: “Who are you to reply against God?” But Paul is not God. He then asks: “What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory?’” (Rom. 9:22-23).

However, if salvation were by gratuitous predestination, Jesus’ ministry would have been a complete waste of ti-me. Jesus says: “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” (Luke 5:32) But what would be the point if, according to Paul, there are vessels of wrath already prepared beforehand for destruction; and vessels of mercy prepared beforehand for glory? What is the point of preaching the gospel to Jews if, according to Paul, “all Israel will be saved” in any case? (Rom. 11:26).
Jesus’ salvation
Jesus says: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” (John 6: 44). This is often used in support of predestination, forgetting that Jesus then says: “I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to myself.” (John 12:32) Since Christ was lifted up on the cross, this means he draws all men to himself. However, most refuse to be drawn.

Paul says: “Whom (God) predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified.” (Rom. 8:30) But Jesus disagrees. He says: “Many are called but few are chosen.” (Matt. 22:14). Definitely, God would not bother to call those he had predetermined not to choose.
On the contrary, Jesus’ position shows God does not choose anybody beforehand; otherwise he would automatically choose whoever he calls. Judas was called but he was ultimately not chosen. Jesus’ major principle of salvation says: “Whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.” (Matt. 16:25) The conditionality makes it up to us, and not up to God, whether we are heirs of salvation.
In effect, Paul’s predestination doctrine is a fallacy inclined to make Christians fatalistic and complacent. Beware. This can lead to condemnation.

By Femi Aribisala

BATTLE FOR THE ENUGU STATE LION BUILDING. JUDGMENT: THE CHRONICLE OF LEGAL FISTICUFFS

The most striking disparity between Law and other areas of science is that unlike Mathematics and physics that warrants precise predictability once the hypothesis are correct, Law is a different ball game as the Court in arriving at its judgment is always subsumed in the suffocating intricacies of legal jurisprudence that most time baffles even the best brains in the Legal Profession any time a groundbreaking judgment is handed down by the Courts.
It is the dynamic nature of Law that makes two Law Professors to argue on the same subject matter and arrive at a conclusion that is diametrically antipodal. And this goes a long way in highlighting the dilemma our Judges find themselves on daily basis in the herculean task of interpreting the Law.
The subject matter of today’s discus is a peep into the raging legal battle between Chief Alex Obiechina and Governor Sullivan Chime, as we await the judgment of the Court.
Justice Adamu Bello of Federal High Court sitting in Abuja slated April 23rd 2012 for judgment in a suit challenging the nomination of Enugu State Governor, Sullivan Chime as the PDP candidate in the April 2011 General Election. The date was fixed after the parties adopted their consolidated written addresses in the suit, and on the 23rd April, the matter was again adjourned sine-die (indefinitely) 
The plaintiff, a governorship aspirant of the party in Enugu State had instituted the lawsuit through his counsel, Oba Maduabuchi, approached the court to nullify the nomination of Governor Chime as the candidate for the April 16, 2011 governorship election in the state and to declare him as the candidate of the party.
Section 85(1) states that “A Registered political party shall give the commission at least 21 days notice of any convention, congress, conference or meeting convened for the purpose of electing members of its executives committee, other governing bodies or nominating candidates for any of the elective offices under this Act” (italics and emphasis mine)
In view of the above provision of the Act, the plaintiff asked the court to declare that the purported primaries held on January 12 which also purportedly produced the 3rd defendant as the governorship candidate of the 2nd defendant for the governorship elections in Enugu State and which was accepted by the 1st defendant [INEC] did not comply with the Electoral Act 2011 as amended and his purported nomination and acceptance by the 2nd defendant is therefore null, void and of no effect and the only date set for the governorship primaries in Enugu State was January 9, 2011 as per exhibit ACO 9 and whoever won same is the valid candidate for the said election.
Chief Obiechina also prayed the Court to determine whether the PDP had the Powers to organize a special congress for the purpose of nominating its Governorship candidate without recourse to the electoral Act. And also for the Court to go ahead and ascertain whether the two-days notice given to the Enugu State Resident Electoral Commissioner, REC, of the INEC, for the said special congress or primaries, complied with section 85[1] of the Electoral Act.
On the other hand, PDP represented by its National Legal Adviser, Chief Olusola Oke and Governor Chime filed separate preliminary objection against the suit, they challenged the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the matter, adding that the plaintiff was bereft of the Locus-Standi to seek such reliefs. And therefore prayed the Court to strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction or alternatively dismiss same for lacking in merit. 
Governor Chime who was represented by Chief Mrs. Justina Offiah, SAN, equally adopted the prayers of the party, insisting in her address that the action is speculative and academic as it discloses no cause of action against the defendant. (…no cause of action? Time will tell)
The suit since inception witnessed an overbearing dramatic pyrotechnics and legal dithering. The most prominent of the setbacks was that Governor Chime wrote a petition to the National Judicial Council and accused the previous judge that presided over the case Justice Gladys Olotu of bias, and it is on the strength of the petition dated April 28 2011, that Justice Olotu disqualified herself from the matter which heralds the reassignment of the case file to Justice Adamu Bello to preside on the matter de novo (afresh)  and this happened when Justice Olotu was at the verge of delivering judgement on the suit.
The genesis of this cut-throat political bifurcation emanated when Dr. Okwesilieze Nwodo (Ezeanyanwu) assumed office as the National Chairman of PDP. Dr Nwodo made it clear during his inaugural speech that the central plank of his assignment was to deepen internal democracy within the party and also proposed a reform process to return PDP to the dreams of its founders, which will serve as a cardinal index for our political development.   Dr. Okwesilieze’s apotheoses and his avowed stance on deepening internal democracy within the party sent jitters down the spine of PDP over- lords who never believed in playing by the rules. And therein lies the beginning of Dr. Nwodo’s problem as the National Chairman of the party.
PDP under the leadership of Dr. Nwodo fixed and conducted Governorship primary election in Enugu and other States across the Country on 9th January 2011, in strict compliance with the provisions of the electoral Act 2011. After the election in Enugu State, Chief Alexander Obiechina emerged as the winner.
The PDP over-lords ganged up against Dr. Okwesilieze to a point of even carrying his mock coffin around Enugu Metropolis.  Dr. Nwodo was finally pressurized to resign in a smokescreen arrangement of obeying a Court order even before the order takes effect. Dr.Okwesilieze Nwodo’s traducers were so obsessed in ousting him from office thereby losing focus on the primary election believing that there will always be a way to circumvent the situation at the exit of Nwodo, and in their hysterical effort to turn things round, they staged their own (mock) primary election on the 12th day of January 2011 where Governor Chime emerged as the winner, in outright disregard to the provisions of the Electoral Act 2011.
After the successful outcome of the primaries on 9th of January 2011 which produced Chief Alex Obiechina, other aggrieved members of the party petitioned the National Working Committee on 13th January 2011. The N.W.C, inundated with barrage of petitions from across the Country, met on 14th January 2011 to address issues raised in the petitions. After detailed consideration of all the petitions, the National Working Committee ordered for re-run in several states and constituencies across the Nation, and dismissed others for lack of substance and merit. The exclusion of Enugu Sate in the re-run list shows that the primary election that produced Chief. Alexander Obiechina was not only free and fair but also credible.
To lend credence to the above assertion, INEC usually stand by its result and defend it to logical conclusion, but in this suit, INEC in its written brief filed by Elex Ejeseme and the written address prepared by a consortium of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) and adopted by Nnamdi Nwafor made it clear that they would have disqualified the Governor from contesting for the election if it had such powers.
INEC said “With respect to primary elections said to be conducted on January 11 and 12, 2011, it can be said that what was passed as the “Notice’ was plaintiff’s exhibit addresses to the Resident Electoral Commissioner at Enugu, which most certainly is not the same as the 1st defendant who, by the clear terms of section 85 [1] of the Electoral Act, 2010 must be the Commission itself. This apart, the letter is dated January 10, 2011 and apparently was received on January 11, 2011, the very next day, it gave notice of primaries scheduled for the same day, and urged the court to hold that the Governor was not validly nominated.
If that is the case, why did INEC allow the Governor to contest the election in the first place? This question showcased the dictatorial and brazen selfishness of our Law Makers. Members of the National Assembly amended the electoral act 2010 prior to the election and added a proviso to section 31(1) which completely strips INEC of its powers in the matter of qualification of nominees submitted by political parties. The law states that “Every political party shall not later than 60 days before the date appointed for the General Election under the provision of this bill submit to the Commission in the prescribed form, the list of candidates the party proposes to sponsor at the elections, provided that the Commission shall not reject or disqualify candidates for any reason whatsoever” It is this blanket provision of the Act that reduced INEC to mere spectator in a game it ought to be the referee.
As if that was not enough, the Law Makers also added in section 87 (10) that “Nothing in this section shall empower a Court to grant order stopping a wrong complained by anybody in relation to party primaries or election”. The Law Makers abridged the powers of the Court to grant an order thereby allowing a wrongful act to run its full course, believing that it will give them the illusory access to unmerited automatic return ticket. But when the chips are down, about 70 percent of the Law Makers got kicked out because the top echelon Stakeholders mostly changed the names of the nominees maybe in front of INEC office during submission. And that amounts to the hunter being hunted with his own gun.
Food for thought; when the Former Governor of Bayelsa State,  Timipre Sylva approached the Federal High Court to stop PDP from conducting primary election to replace him. The PDP legal team led by the same Chief Olusola Oke in its written address submitted inter alia that “Jurisdiction to do became vested and by the virtue of section 87 (9) of the Electoral Act, 2010, as amended, which provides thus: 'Notwithstanding the provisions of the Act or rules of a political party, an aspirant who complains that any of the provisions of this Act and the guidelines of a political party have not been complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate of a political party for election, may apply to the Federal High Court or High Court of a state or FCT for redress."
The party added in the written response that the relief sought must come after the determination of the suit, adding: "A combined reading of sections 87 (9) and (10) must lead to the conclusion that the redress available to a plaintiff under section 87 (9) must come at the final determination of his suit."
In the instant case, Chief Alex Obiechina is seeking for redress and for the matter to be finally determined on merit, yet PDP led by Oke submitted that Chief Obiechina lacks locus-standi in their preliminary objection and the suit discloses no cause of action. (Legal Double Speak). We are waiting for the judgment anxiously!
Historically, when Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State emerged meritoriously as the PDP candidate in 2007, President Olusegun Obesanjo the emperor General of the party (as he then was) declared during the handover of flags to the party candidates that Gov. Amaechi’s candidacy had “k-leg” and as such his name was substituted by Celestine Omehia. And consequent upon that, EFCC was unleashed against Amaechi which forced him into self imposed exile.
Governor Amaechi later surfaced and approached the court in order to straight the “K-Leg” of his candidature.
Amaechi’s vindication came with the 25th October, 2007 controversial judgment  by the Supreme Court which unanimously declared Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi not only the authentic flag-bearer of PDP but  that he be sworn in to immediately replace Omehia who had previously been sworn in on May 29, 2007 as the Governor of Rivers State.  Thus, he became the first person to occupy the office of governor in the country without technically standing for election. In explaining the judgment, Justice Aloysious Katsina-Alu, stated that it is the party that contests elections and that the PDP won the gubernatorial elections, and that, consequently, Amaechi, being the rightful candidate, should assume power as Governor. (emphasis mine). Today Amaechi is not only the Governor of Rivers State but also the Chairman of the Almighty Governors Forum of Nigeria.
Is the same scenario playing out in Enugu State? Lord Denning (MR) stated in the case of UAC v MCFOY (1962) AC 152 that “you can’t place something on nothing and expect it to stand” Suffices to say that, a purloined primary election cannot sustain an outright victory in the General Election. So can we reasonably say that Gov. Sullivan won the election with the face of Chief Obiechina? (The court will decide). It is obvious that  the Courts have the plenipotentiary powers to overrule itself, therefore, irrespective of where the judicial pendulum eventually tilts in this case, the judgment no doubt will be more than groundbreaking.
Equally of note is that some pro Chime supporters especially those whom their knowledge of the law can fully be accommodated on a pin danced around the city when the Supreme Court sealed the fate of former Bayelsa State Governor Timipre Sylva when it held that " issues of nomination of candidates were essentially the business of political parties and as such the Court had no hand in deciding for them" the main question is "did the Supreme Court said that a political party can freely violate the electoral Act with such compelling  impunity? (The Court will decide).
However, in the case of Hon Aidoko Ali Usman Atai & others Versus Ocheja Emmanuel Dangana & others CA/A/EPT/582/2011, the Court of Appeal ruled among other things that it was wrong for INEC not to have participated in the primaries and voided the primaries. In this case, INEC is not even aware of the primary election that produced Gov Chime and as such never participated. (The Court will still decide)
I really smell a rat with the pace of delay in delivering judgement in this suit but i have the confidence that irrespective of the snail speed of the sun while rising, it must surely set.
Finally, nobody can stop the constant power of change, whether you have the dictatorial instincts of late Gadaffi or rely on sheer luck and happenstance like Mr. Jonathan, there will always be a change sooner or later as those who may pose for Presidential recognition today may as well hide in the prison (Ibori) when the time comes.
I appreciate the developmental activities of Enugu State Government under Gov. Chime, but calling a spade by its true name no matter whose ox is gored will always be a noble course for those that traces’ their origin to God.

JESUS IS A MAN

Everything about Jesus identifies him as our kinsman-redeemer. 
John warns Christians: “Many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 7).  This allegation is applicable to Paul in the bible.
By his own admission, Paul was a sinner who could not walk righteously before God.  He confesses: “What I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do.” (Romans 7:15).  Therefore, Paul creates a self-serving Christology to excuse his sinfulness.  He says: “There is none righteous, no, not one.” (Romans 3:10).  He maintains furthermore that, in the flesh, man is totally depraved: “I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells.”(Romans 7:18).  He then asks: “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (Romans 7:24).  The answer can only be a Jesus who is not in the flesh.

Mystical Jesus

Paul says the flesh is too weak to obey God’s law.  Therefore, God sent Jesus to our rescue: “What the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. (Romans 8:3). This means Jesus came in what seemed like flesh but which could not have been flesh.  According to Paul, a man who never saw Jesus, Jesus came: “in the likeness of men;” and was found: “in appearance as a man.” (Philippians 2:7-8). But he was not a man but “a life-giving spirit.” (1 Corinthians 15:45).
This mystical Jesus washes sinners in his blood and abracadabra, they become new creatures. (2 Corinthians 5:17). In Paul’s jaundiced theology: “God imputes righteousness apart from works.” (Romans 4:6).  Jesus zaps Christians with his righteousness and they automatically become: “the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Thereby, Paul invalidates the cogent lessons learnt from the life and ministry of Jesus.  He says: “From now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.” (2 Corinthians 5:16).  This is a convenient and expedient position for Paul for the simple reason that he never knew Jesus according to the flesh anyway, although he is economical with the truth here by implying he did with others.

Jesus is human

However, Jesus is a man.  The fact that Paul never knew Jesus when he was on earth does not mean we should stop regarding him as a man.  When convenient, Paul himself grudgingly acknowledges Jesus’ humanity with characteristic double-mindedness.  He says: “(God’s) Son Jesus Christ our Lord, was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” (Romans 1:3).  But John, who unlike Paul knew Jesus personally, says Jesus was fully human.  He says: “the Word (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory.” (John 1:14).
Paul maintains: “those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:8).  But God contradicts this by saying to flesh-and-blood Jesus: “You are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Mark 1:11).  If Jesus is not a man, he cannot be our Saviour.  We know God is able.  What we want to know is whether man is also able.  Jesus answers this question conclusively.  The word was made flesh in order that we may fully identify with the word.  The disciples asked concerning Jesus: “What manner of man is this?” (Matthew 8:27).  Jesus is precisely the manner of man God intended every one of us to be.
Everything about Jesus identifies him as our kinsman-redeemer.  He was born of a woman.  He increased in wisdom and stature. (Luke 2:52).  When he was hungry, he ate. (Matthew 21:18).  When he was tired, he slept. (Matthew 8:24).  When he was overwhelmed, he wept. (John 11:35).  When he was killed, he died. (Matthew 27:50).  Jesus calls himself “the son of man” over ninety times.  He declared his humanity to his Jewish opponents: “You seek to kill me, A MAN who has told you the truth.” (John 8:40).
Therefore, if Jesus was a sacrifice, God is guilty of human sacrifice; making him no better than other pagan idol gods. We diminish the power of Jesus’ message by trying to make him so extraordinary, he becomes irrelevant to us.  Jesus’ message is simple.  Man can resist temptation.  Man can overcome sin.  Man can have the righteousness of God.  This righteousness will not be imputed to us according to the bogus precepts of Paul. (Romans 4:11; 23-24).  It will be learnt.
Isaiah contradicts Paul’s misleading grace dogma.  He says: “When (God’s) judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness. Let grace be shown to the wicked, yet he will not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness he will deal unjustly.” (Isaiah 26:9-10).  God’s righteousness is taught and not imputed.  Isaiah says: “(God) will teach us his ways.” (Isaiah 2:3).  We attain God’s righteousness by the systematic process of hating our life in this world and laying it down. (John 12:25).  Like Jesus, we give our lives as a ransom for others. (Matthew 20:25-28). 

The atonement

Balaam says: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent.” (Numbers 23:19). Well, I have news for Balaam.  God became a man.  Paul says: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.”(1 Corinthians 15:50).  I say bully for him.  Job says: “After my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God.” (Job 19:26).  Jesus resurrected bodily as a man of flesh and blood.  He said to his disciples: “Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” (Luke 24:39).  This means there is now a man in the midst of the throne of God. (Revelation 7:17).  That man is our brother.  He is looking out for us.  He understands our pains and troubles because: “in all (our) affliction He was afflicted.” (Isaiah 63:9).
We can be like Jesus.  Jesus says: “If you have faith as a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.” (Matthew 17:20).  If Jesus can carry his cross and lay down his life; then so can we; and so should we.  We can walk on water. (Matthew 14:29).  We can raise the dead back to life. (Matthew 10:8).  We can even be righteous and sinless.  Jesus says; “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48).
The psalmist asks God: “What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You visit him?  You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet. (Psalm 8:4/6). Jesus is the confirmation of man’s ordained distinction.  He says: “Anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.” (John 14:12-14).
(Next week: “Doing Greater Works Than Jesus.”)

 By  Femi Aribisala

Sunday, June 10, 2012

GOD IS NOT A TRINITY

The word “Trinity” can be found nowhere in the Bible. It is completely incongruous with scriptural understanding of God. God is not three persons. There is only one God and it is the Father. Jesus says: “salvation is of the Jews.” (John 4:22). Salvation is neither of the Romans nor of the Italians. The Trinity is an unscriptural concept, smuggled into Christendom under Roman Constantine by cloak-and-dagger means.
Precepts of men
Jesus says to God: “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17). But the doctrine of the Trinity is a lie.  Here is the lie: “There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.” (I John 5:7).
This so-called scripture is counterfeit. It is non-existent in the original versions of the Bible. It was smuggled into the Bible by Trinitarians. Today, you will only find it in the King James editions. The very fact that Trinitarians found it necessary to smuggle I John 5:7 into the Bible in order to validate the doctrine of the Trinity shows conclusively that the doctrine is fake.
The cardinal principle of God is simple and straightforward. Here it is in a nutshell: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.” (Deuteronomy 6:4). This is validated by Jesus himself. (Mark 12:29).  Therefore, hear O Christians, the Lord our God is not a Trinity. The Lord our God is one. Jesus berated the Pharisees for teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. (Matt-hew 15:9). Many churches have fallen into the same error with the Trinity fallacy.
Family of God
John says: “No man has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18). But men have seen Jesus. Therefore, the expression “God” refers exclusively to God the Father. Jesus never refers to himself as God; he reserves that terminology solely for the Father. When someone called him “Good Teacher,” Jesus replied: “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.” (Matthew 19: 17).
Jesus never says God is a Trinity. Instead, he reveals God is a family. The head of this family is the Father. God’s household include Jesus; God’s sons and servants; and angels. That is more than a trinity. The man-made concept of the Trinity makes God an exclusive triumvirate, limited to “the Godhead. ”
However, the Christ-revealed portrait of God makes God an inclusive and growing family, open to all believers. Jesus said to God: “I will declare your name to my brothers.” (Psalm 22: 22). Jesus is: “the firstborn among many brothers.” (Romans 8:29). Believers are the brothers of Jesus. But we are not the brothers of God. God is our Father.
Sons of God
Jesus only claims to be “the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:18). Indeed, he drew a distinction between God and himself. He said to God: “This is eternal life, that they may know You, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” (John 17:3). When they accused him of blasphemy saying: “You, being a man, make yourself God,” Jesus replied: “I said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” (John 10:36).
When Peter said to Jesus: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus confirmed this was a God-given revelation. He replied: “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 16:15-17).
This divine affirmation was repeated during Jesus’ baptism (Matthew 3:17); and on the Mount of Transfiguration. (Matthew 17:5). There can be no higher validation than these. John says: “If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.” (I John 5:9). Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Jesus existed “before the foundation of the world.” (John 17:24). Then he became a man. (John 1:14). But God does not change. (Malachi 3:6). Jesus is a man. (John 8:40). But God is not a man (Numbers 23:19). Jesus died. But God cannot die. Jesus died but God raised him from the dead.
Jesus calls himself “the beginning of the creation of God.” (Revelation 3:14). God confirms this, declaring to Jesus: “You are My Son, today I have begotten You.” (Psalm 2:7). But the Father himself is not begotten. He has no beginning but is from everlasting. The psalmist declares: “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.” (Psalm 90:2).
Jesus has a Father. But God has no Father. Jesus has a God. But there is no other God but God. Jesus says to Mary: “I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.” (John 20:17). However, it should be understood that the son of a lion is a lion. Therefore, Jesus, the son of God is a God. God the Father calls Jesus God, confirming his divinity.
He says to Jesus: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions.” (Psalm 45:6-7).
Jesus explained to the Jews that in the scriptures: “(God) called them gods, to whom the word of God came.” (John 10:35). Indeed, God calls his sons gods. He says: “You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. But you shall die like men,” (Psalm 82:6-7).
He also says to his servant, Moses: “I have made thee a god to Pharaoh.” (Exodus 7: 1). Moses himself declares to the Israelites: “The LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords.” (Deuteronomy 10:17). Paul summarizes it thus: “Even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ.” (I Corinthians 8:5-6).
In short, God is not Father, Son and Holy Ghost. There is only one God and it is the Father. There is only one Lord and it is Jesus. As a man cannot be differentiated from his spirit, so God cannot be differentiated from his spirit. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of God.
God has no equals
The word “Christ” is not Jesus’ surname. It means “the Anointed One.” But the anointed must be subordinate to the anointer. Nowhere in the scriptures is it ever said or implied that God is anointed. However, Luke says: “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power.” (Acts 10: 38).
The Jews accused Jesus of making himself equal with God. (John 5:18). But Jesus never makes such claims. Instead he says: “My Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28). Jesus submitted totally to God. At Gethsemane, he said to him: “Not My will, but Yours, be done.” (Luke 22:42).
Atonement with God
Nevertheless, Jesus declares: “I and My Father are one.” (John 10:30). However, the sense in which he makes this declaration is qualified. Jesus only does the will of the Father. (John 6:38). He only speaks the words of the Father. (John 14: 10). The works he does are the works of the Father.
That is the true atonement, ensuring that he who sees Jesus sees the Father. (John 14:9). Jesus prescribes the same atonement for us. He says to God: “I gave them the same glory you gave me, so that they may be one, just as you and I are one: I in them and you in me, so that they may be completely one.” (John 17:22-23).

By Femi Aribisala

ILOGICAL CHRISTIANITY

Paul’s illogicality cannot be the word of “the only wise God.”

There is no one in the bible as illogical as Paul.  He claims he preached the gospel: “not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.” (1 Corinthians 1:17).  Nevertheless, Luke says: “(Paul) reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath.” (Acts 18:4).  Paul’s “reasoning” is often incoherent and contradictory.  To accept some of the things he says, one has to take leave of one’s senses.

Contradictions galore

Paul maintains salvation is not contingent upon our works, but is “by grace through faith” in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:8-9).  Then he puts his foot in his mouth by saying to the Galatians: “You who attempt to be justified by law have fallen from grace.” (Galatians 5:4).  But if grace is unmerited favour, then a man cannot fall from it. If the favour is unmerited, it cannot be lost by demerits.  Paul says we were “bought at a price,” ostensibly by Christ. (1 Corinthians 6:20).  But only slaves are bought; sons are not bought but birthed.  Then he says we are forgiven. (Colossians 2:13).  But if we are forgiven, nobody needs to pay for us; and if we are paid for, then we don’t need to be forgiven.
Paul says: “there is none righteous, no not one.” (Romans 3:10).  He then boxes himself into a corner by saying: “the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9).  But if there is none righteous and only the righteous will inherit, where then will God find the righteous who will inherit his kingdom?  Paul just cannot think straight.  His defective logic about the non-existence of the righteous does not even recognize “Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1).  Compare Paul’s irreverent generalization to Jesus’ recognition of God’s exceptionality.  Jesus says: “No one is good but One, that is, God.” (Matthew 19:17).
In 1 Corinthians 2:14, Paul sets a trap for himself and falls into it.  He says: “The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”  Then he says: “However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.” (1 Cor 15:46).  But if the natural is first, how can the natural then become spiritual when, according to Paul’s ingenuity, the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God?  Thereby, Paul nullifies his own doctrine and shows it to be idiotic.

Convoluted logic

Paul tries to compare the coming of the New Testament with the second marriage of a widow.  But he muddles everything up; casting serious doubts on his alleged Pharisee training.  He says: “The woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. .. Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another- to Him who was raised from the dead.” (Romans 7:2/4).  But a widow does not die because her husband dies.  A dead wife does not remarry.  In actual fact, it is Christ, the “new husband,” who died.  The law, the “old husband,” is still alive.   
Quoting Epidemedes, Paul says: “One of them, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’” Surprisingly, Paul agrees with this, saying: “This testimony is true.” (Titus 1:12-13).  But if Cretans are always liars, this statement by one of them must also be false.  Thereby, Paul trips on his own shoe-laces once again.

Double-mindedness

Paul comes up with this lofty principle: “Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.  For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.” (Galatians 6:7-8).  However, he then nullifies it by insisting those who sow to the spirit should reap in the flesh.  He says: “If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things?” (1 Corinthians 9:11).  This is the hypocritical theology of the money-minded con-man which has so many adherents in the pastors of today.
Paul says: “The doers of the law shall be justified.” (Romans 2:13).  Then he contradicts himself in the same breath: “By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified.” (Romans 3:20).  He says to the Galatians: “Bear one another’s burdens.” (Galatians 6:2).  Then he says: “Each one shall bear his own load.” (Galatians 6:5).  If each man shall bear his own load, how can we then bear one another’s burdens?  Paul says: “All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law.” (Romans 2:12).  Then he contradicts himself by saying: “where there is no law, there is no transgression.” (Romans 4:15).  If, as he says, no law means no sin; how then can he also say no law means sin leading to condemnation?
Listen to Paul in his own self-implicating words.  He says to the Thessalonians: “Our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, NOR IN GUILE.” (1 Thessalonians 2:3).  Then he says to the Corinthians: “I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you WITH GUILE.” (2 Corinthians 12:16).  In short, by his own account, Paul is not deceptive and he also is.  Which of these is the infallible word of Paul?  Certainly, such illogicality cannot be the word of “the only wise God.” (Romans 16:27).

Nonsensical Christology

Lagos drivers are terrible.  We drive with scant regard for traffic laws.  We drive on the pavements and on the wrong sides of the road.  We beat red lights, violate one-way traffic signs, and park in no-parking zones.
But one day, a man called Jesus came to Lagos.  He was a perfect driver and he obeyed scrupulously all the traffic laws.  In recognition for his fastidiousness, the Lagos State Government repealed all traffic laws on the grounds that Jesus had fulfilled them.  Any man who believes in Jesus is then deemed to have also obeyed all the laws.  Nevertheless, the government sent Jesus himself to the firing squad for violating traffic laws, even though in actual fact he had obeyed them all.
This is a parody of Paul’s Christology.  Why should Christians believe such arrant nonsense?
With the repeal of all traffic laws because of Jesus’ perfect obedience, would Lagos drivers automatically become “new creatures” on the roads?  No!  What if Paul maintains: “there is now no condemnation for Lagos drivers?” (Romans 8:1).  Would that improve the situation? Not likely!  What if Paul declares: “There is no good driver, no, not one.” (Romans 3:10).  Would that make the difference?  Certainly not! What if Paul tells Lagos drivers all things are lawful on the roads, but they should avoid things that are not expedient? (1 Corinthians 6:12).  Would they therefore drive with circumspection?  Definitely not!  What if Paul reassures Lagosians the Chief Judge of the state now “justifies ungodly drivers?” (Romans 4:5).  Would that make them good drivers?  Absolutely not!
And yet, that is the foolishness and ludicrousness of Pauline Christianity.

By Femi Aribisala

Sunday, June 3, 2012

GOD DOES NOT KNOW EVERYTHING

Image result for Femi AribisalaIT is generally assumed by Christians that God is all-knowing. We say insistently God is omniscient. Peter said to Jesus: “We understand that you know everything.” (Jn 16:30). However, there are things Jesus did not know. He did not know a fig-tree did not have figs. (Mk 11:13). He did not know the time of his return. (Mk 13:32).
Just as Jesus relinquish-ed provisionally certain attributes of his divinity when he became a man, including the ability to be in two places simultaneously; even so God has relinquished certain divine attributes in order to interact with us. This includes the fore-knowledge of the moral choices of men.
Indeed, God declares “the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done.” (Isa 46:10). Nevertheless, there are things about men that God has decided not to know, except through investigation and research.
Free will
God cannot be all-knowing when some things go against his will. He cannot be held responsible for the evil in the world. Jesus asks us to pray that God’s will be done; precisely because God’s will is not done on earth as a rule.
If God knew everything beforehand, he would be trapped in his fore-knowledge and would have no free will. But we know God has free will because man has free will, and we are created in God’s image and likeness. God’s omniscience permits men the free will to make independent moral choices. He says to us: “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life.” (Deut 30:19). The choice is ours.
In order for an omniscient God to exercise his free will in time as opposed to eternity, he has to stop being completely omniscient. Therefore, the God of the Bible is a “watcher of men.” (Job 7:20). He predicts our actions essentially by “searching” our hearts and minds. (Ps 7:9). He “discovers” our hidden sins. (Ps 44:20-21). He tests us in order to know us.
In order to know David, God had to study him. David confirms this, saying: “O Lord, you have examined my heart and know everything about me.” (Ps 139:1). The Lord himself says: “I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve.” (Jer 17:10).
When the princes of Babylon came to visit Hezekiah: “God withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might know all that was in his heart.” (2 Chron 32:31). The same applies to the children of Israel in the wilderness. Moses says God tested them: “to know what was in (their) heart, whether (they) would keep His commandments or not.” (Deut 8:2).
According to Jesus, the judgment of God is not predetermined. The Father waits to see how we act in order to decide how to judge us. Therefore, Jesus warns: “With what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.” (Mt 7:2).
God’s self-limitations
Job says: “(God) knows the way that I take.” (Job 23:10). But this usually happens after he becomes acquainted with us and sees a pattern in our behaviour. Thus, Jesus knew Peter would betray him through a combination of the foreknowledge of his trial and the observation of Peter’s inclinations. Similarly, Jesus studied Judas even before calling him, just as he did Nathanael. (Jn 1:47-48). Therefore, he knew Judas would betray him once the opportunity arose.
God is not cynical or pessimistic. Therefore, he did not expect men to become evil. When this happened: “The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth.” (Gen 6:6). God did not anticipate that men would plan to build Babel. When we did: “The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.” (Gen 11:5). God did not even have foreknowledge that Abraham would offer up Isaac. Therefore when Abraham did, God said to him: “Now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” (Gen 22:12).
Because God is pure in mind, he did not envisage the evil actions of men before they happened the very first time. He says of Judah: “They built the high places of Baal which are in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I did not command them, nor did it come into My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.’” (Jer 32:35).
As a matter of fact, God does not personally oversee everything done everywhere. He has angels on assignment who give him regular reports. Thus, an angel pointed out other angels to Zechariah and said: “The Lord has sent them to patrol the earth for him.”
(Zech 1:10). At other times, God decides to confirm their reports personally. Thus, he said to Abraham concerning Sodom: “I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to me; and if not, I will know.” (Gen 18:21). When Abraham interceded for the city, God said to him: “If I find in Sodom 50 righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sake.” (Gen 18:26).
Conditional promises
Many of God’s promises are contingent upon our conformity to his will. Samuel says: “(God) is not a man that he should change his mind.” (1 Sam 15:29). But on a number of occasions, God is said to have changed his mind in the scriptures in annoyance at the contravention of his will.
Thus, the promise he made that the house of Eli would minister before him forever was revoked: “I, the LORD God of Israel, promised in the past that your family and your clan would serve me as priests for all time. But now I say that I won’t have it any longer!” (1 Sam 2:30).
This indicates God does not predetermine the will of men. Indeed, he says: “If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.” (Jer 18:7-10).
This explains why the devil could challenge God concerning Job. (Job 1:9-11). If God could predetermine Job’s eventual faithfulness, the challenge would have been pointless. Indeed, if God predetermines everything, prayer would be pointless. But when Moses interceded for Israel: “the LORD relented from the harm which He said He would do to His people.” (Exo 32:14). When Hezekiah prayed, God rescinded his earlier decision to take his life. (II Kg 20:5-6).
Knowledge of God
The holiness of God precludes him from knowing certain people. God does not know sinners because he does not know evil. “The Lord knows the way of the righteous.” (Ps 1:6). He does not know the way of the wicked. “He knows those who trust in Him.” (Nah 1:7). He does not know those who don’t.
Therefore, in the Day of the Lord, many highfalutin Christians will discover the Lord does not know us. Jesus warns: “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’” (Mt 7:22-23).

By Femi Aribisala