BUHARI AND THE BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN

As we draw near to the 2015 General Elections, it is important that all vital questions are answered; especially the ones regarding the candidature of Gen. Muhammadu Buhari. As a Buhari supporter and also a born again Christian, I encounter questions from fellow believers that range from “should a Christian vote for a Muslim, since we are taught in scriptures not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers?” to “how does a Christian vote for a Muslim, seeing that Muslims are one of the goals in our evangelistic efforts?” The answers to these questions are not easy ones but we must provide them or we run the risk of losing a large section of the electorate to the “other side” or to indifference which is making some people decide to stay home rather than vote for either of the two leading candidates.

The born-again Christian community in the Nigerian political space has since become a force to reckon with since the advent of steady democratic process in 1999. In 2011, Gen. Buhari recognized this and adopted Pastor Tunde Bakare of the Latter Rain Assembly, Lagos, as his running mate. In the same period the two of them went and court the blessing of Pastor E.A. Adeboye of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, a leading Pentecostal minister in the country. In like manner, President Goodluck Jonathan attended the Redeemed Church Annual Holy Ghost Convention and that picture of the president kneeling before a towering and praying Adeboye might have single handedly handed over the 2011 elections to Jonathan. Though Adeboye never made his preferred candidate known publicly, most born-again Christians concluded from that picture that Jonathan was “Baba’s” preferred candidate and like they say, the rest is history today. It is no longer news that Buhari has since settled again for another born-again individual, in the person of Prof. Osibanjo, as his running mate for the 2015 elections. Osibanjo happens to also be a Redeemed Pastor. Quite naturally the born-again Christian is not fooled by these political maneuvering. He still has questions in his heart. He still wants to understand whether it is right, in a moral sense, to cast his vote for a Muslim. He want to understand whether he is not being unequally yoked with an unbeliever for choosing to support Buhari.

To answer these questions we as born-again Christians must first understand that voting and being voted for is a civic responsibility that we are enjoined on by scriptures to carry out. Romans 13:1 says “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God…” God is the author of ordered society. And it happens that in our time, the monarchical system of government that was prevalent in bible times has given way to democracy. And democracy consist of the populace voting in its leaders so that the individual that carries the most vote becomes the ruler. Therefore, part of being "subject to higher powers" will be to partake actively in the process in which these powers are elected. It is important to know that Romans 13:1ff did not give some conditions for Christians to be subject to the rulers. It didn't say "be subject only if the rulers are good rulers"; neither did it say "be subject only if the rulers are born again or professing Christians". It simply commanded us to be subject to all authority, as rulers are of God. Submitting to civil authorities and its processes is therefore submission to God. So it is safe to say that the basis of choosing a ruler cannot be based on the individual's religious persuasion but on his competence. For this election, the born again Christian has essentially two people before him: he must choose between them both based on their record of performance in public office and not just their religious profession.

The precedence of Buhari in public office is clear for all to see. The records of his performance in the military, as Chairman of the NNPC, as head of state and as chairman of the petroleum trust fund (PTF) are a testimony to excellent service to ones fatherland. The records of Goodluck Jonathan are also clear to all, especially his six year in office so far. So born again Christian, judge their performance in public office and vote rightly.

The Christian cannot also be said to be unequally yoked with an unbeliever for choosing to support and vote another person from another faith or religion. When scripture speaks of being unequally yoked with unbelievers in 2 Corinthians 6:14, it was talking about not partaking in the evil deeds that non Christians partake of. 2 Corinthians 6 was speaking about the need to walk in holiness as Christians and be separated from evil. It is interesting to note that Buhari, despite being Muslim, is the one out of the two leading candidates that has a public record of incorruptibility and uprightness. While President Jonathan had once being quoted as saying "corruption is not stealing". It makes a lot of sense that the Christian community will vote for a candidate who by his lifestyle and record in public office is known to be upright. This is what the bible will have us to be associated or yoked with! There is a lot of problem with an individual professing to be Christian in one hand and not living up to the tenets of the faith in another hand. This is certainly not one we should be yoked with. Islam and Christianity have diverse point of view on religion but they share some basic rules on morality. There is nothing wrong with associating with a Muslim who lives in a morally upright manner.

Lastly, voting in a Muslim does not compromise our evangelistic duty to Muslims or people of other faiths. Born again Christians must beware of one thing: we must not turn evangelism to a means of conquest. The very nature of our witnessing allows the individuals we witness to the freedom to accept or reject our views. Christian evangelism should not be reduced to the sort of Jihadism that Boko Haram and other extremist groups are championing. Our calling is not a political takeover of a society but a spiritual one. A situation where the Christian is known more for his fruit than just mere talk. The Christian greatest voice of evangelism is his lifestyle. The Christian also accentuates this with his preaching of the gospel where occasion demands it. When he preaches Christ, he is not meant to impose Christ. God by his Holy Spirit then uses the Christian's life and words to brings the Muslim and others to faith. So the manner in which we handle this political situation would go a long way in witnessing to the world. If others are voting on mere religious sentiments, the born again Christian should not be found doing the same.

There is a lie that is being sold that voting in Buhari is voting in someone who will Islamize Nigeria. If Buhari did not Islamize this country as paramount military ruler some thirty years ago when he had all the machinery of government to do it; if he crushed the very first Boko Haram menace, the Maitescine group, in one fell sweep; he will not islamize Nigeria under a democratic rule. Rather he would allow for religious freedom and help crush Boko Haram as he did in 1983/84. No one can Christianize or Islamize Nigeria. This country is a secular state run by a secular constitution. What Christians should fear is a party whose chairman helped implement sharia when he was state governor. And whose presidential candidate has not been able to solve the Boko Haram menace six years since assuming office.

Brother or Sister Born Again Christian, you do not need to fear voting Buhari as President. By doing this, you will be carrying out your civic duty in a manner that will receive the blessing of God and also secure a future for our unborn children.

APC AND PDP: SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

by Deji Yesufu

As we draw close to another general elections in Nigeria, we encounter a large section of the electorate affirming that there is essentially no difference between the ruling part, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), and their biggest opposition, the All Progressive Congress (APC). Their reaction to this quagmire is one of two things:

some have resorted to staying with the devil they know than plunge into the deep blue sea. Others have simply made up their minds not to vote at all. This kind of mindset for a nation's electorate heading for a crucial election that might determine the future existence of that nation is not good at all and I shall be endeavoring to sway such individuals reading this article to take a firm position and that that position should be to vote for the Presidential candidate of the APC, Gen. Buhari and his deputy Prof. Osibanjo. To do this I will try to enumerate major differences between these two leading parties.

The first major difference is the attitude of the two parties to the concept of democracy. Since the advent of democratic rule in this country in 1999, the main complaint that Nigerians have had has been that we have not been able to practice true democracy. From rigged election, to trumped up primaries, coupled with a litany of election cases in couts, Nigerians have become acustomed to a kwashiokor kind of democracy. This remained until the APC organized and cocluded its presidential primaries that produced Gen. Buhari as their presidential candidate. In an

unprecedented manner, we saw votes casted transparently, votes counted and right before the eyes of everyone, the winner declared. In another unprecedented manner, the loosers congratulated the winner right there, accepting the outcome of the elections and pledging their commitment to the overall interest of the party. Contrast this with the PDP "primaries" that had president Goodluck Jonathan as sole candidate. And he was sole candidate because the largest party in Africa printed only one presidential nomination form. No opportunity was given for any other candidate to express interest to run. Jonathan was overwhelmingly selected as the PDP presidential candidate for the February 2015 elections.

Another clear distinction between the APC and the PDP is the manner their

presidential aspirants have sought to fund their various campaign programmes. While Gen. Buhari of the APC has declared that his campaign funds will come from donations made to him by ordinary Nigerians, the PDP on the other hand got business men, government agencies, state Governors and other financial heavy weights to come for Jonathan’s reelection campaign where a whooping sum of N22 Billion was raised. Three state governors that had not paid salaries to their workers in three months donated N1 Billion between them. Buhari and his team, on the other hand, declared they had raised N58 Million so far and were very grateful to all Nigerians who sent in funds. Even in this matter, it has become incredibly difficult for the PDP to publish the names of her fund donors but the APC plans to publish periodical statement on its campaign funds. It is very easy to know which party, from the forgoing, will come to power with a sense of indebtedness to the ordinary people with a commitment to serving them. While it is clear what party will continue the as usual manner of government Nigeria has been plagued with, that seeks to serve a few rich goons in a self enriching manner.

The antecedents of the two leading individuals running for the most exalted public office is another difference that is clear as noon day between them. Buhari led a Government for only eighteen months in 1983/84 and still has many testifying to the national transformation his economic and social programmes brought. Jonathan has been in power for six years and many of his leading supporters find it an herculean task to state his achievements. Buhari has a no tolerance attitude to corruption,while Jonathan has been said to have a body language that encourages corruption. Buhari put out the first Boko Haram menace, the Maitatsine, we had in this nation in a few months of their inception. Jonathan’s government has no answer to Boko Haram except for the no less than 3,000 military and civilian casualities. Buhari had a sound

ecomic policy that laughed at World Bank experimental policies, which Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, presently emir of Kano, once called Buharinomics. An economic policy that thrived despite western powers effort to furstrate it. Jonathan administration, on the othe hand, has enjoyed the highest foreign exchanges on oil, until recently, but has little to show for it except a depleted foreign reserve. Buhari's high moral and discipline mein has not been tainted one bit despite countless number religious mudslinging at him. On the hand the hundred of religious pontiffs that are known to associate with Jonathan both in public and private have not been able to bestow an ounce of sainthood on him.

The allegations that the APC and PDP are one and the same is an intellectually lazy position because it is one that comes from individuals who choose not to make a little effort to study the two parties. If the uneducated or half baked graduates push such position one can understand but it becomes criminal when supposedly enlightened fellows make such conclusions. Any elementary school pupil can play the "spot the difference" game in newspapers. These things were not designed for mere entertainment. They were made to help us in times like these. That two situations can look incredibly similar but a little effort can help bring out the differences between them. I encourage my readers to continue to spot the difference between the APC and PDP and to vote in the coming elections based on their discoveries. I can assure you that there is a world of difference between the APC and the PDP and voting for the APC, especially Muhammadu Buhari, its presidential candidate, will not be a waste.

ELECTING BUHARI IN 2015

A Call to my Constituency, the Church, to Vote Gen. Muhammadu Buhari in the Coming Elections

Introduction

In this article, I will be calling on Christians to vote for the person of General Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) in the forth coming Presidential elections in Nigeria. I am a fellow Christian; a minister of the gospel, who is

however convinced that a person like Buhari is one who has the leadership potentials to lead Nigeria out of the unfortunate situation we have found ourselves as a country. I do not know the General personally and I have not been paid by him or his associates to write this.

Why Buhari? 

The Nigerian political melodrama is shoring up three individuals that are likely to be the leading candidates for the Febuary 14th, 2015 presidential elections. They are the incumbent president of the nation, Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and Gen. Muhammadu Buhari. Atiku and Buhari are likely to square it out at the All Progressive Congress (APC) presidential primaries, and the political permutations give Buhari the advantage because of his popularity with the leaders of the party. Therefore there is the high probability that the 2015 presidential elections shall be a repeat of the 2011 one that was between Jonathan and Buhari. I hereby state ten quick reasons why Buhari will excel as presidentnt of Nigeria.

• Buhari's antecedents as head of state of this country in 1984/85 revealed that he is a highly disciplined individual that commands the respect of his associates, and can replicate the very successful War Against Indiscipline (WAI) of that time to help curb the raging corruption almost crippling this nation today. 
• 
  
• Buhari as a militarycommander in Borno State in the 80's helped conquer an insurgent group that was troubling that region of the country. When he was head of state, he gave the orders that quelled the Maitatsine uprising. The Boko Haram uprsing, an offshoot of Maitatsine, is certain to be curtailed by this experienced military officer if voted into office. 
• 
  
• Buhari's economic prowess as military head of state has been touted the best economic initiative this nation has ever recorded. Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, former Governor of the Central Bank, called it Buharinomics. 
• 
  
• Buhari has a thing for attracting the best of human associates and permits them the liberty to function. Many owe the success of Buhari's regime in 1984 to the ingenuity of the late Brig. Gen. Tunde Idiagbon. Buhari should however be credited for allowing his associates to function; a fit he is likely to repeat with individuals like Raji Fashola (present Gov' of Lagos State), Mallam Nasir El-Rufai (former Minister of the FCT), Dr. Obi Ezekwesili, and a host of other individuals who are at the moment supporting his candidacy and might be working in his government. 
• 
  
• Buhari is not a money bag and will not be buying the loyalty of individuals to support him. Those who do this and then come into political office are the ones that are constrained to steal public money to recoup their "investments". 
• 
  
• Buhari's record as head of Petroleum Trust Fund is untainted and examplary. 
• 
  
• Buhari as an elder stateman is experienced and knowledgeable, and has the ability to translate this to help to solve the nation's myriads of problems. 
• 
  
• Buhari is not an Islamic extremist. Many of his associates and subordinates in his private life are Christians. The statements credited to Buhari, which his detractors use to label him an Islamic fundamentalist, simply tell of an individual who is true to himself and his faith, and who will not compromise his faith for political advantage. 
• 
  
• Buhari is popular among ordinary Nigerians and if he elected will serve these people and not political godfathers. 
• 
  
• Buhari is a man of truth. He is called "mai gaskya" in the north. This country has the opportunity to elect for the first time in her history an individual who will not lie to us and who will carry out the promises he makes to us in the forthcoming manifesto of his political party.

Goodluck Jonathan 

A friend, Bayo Adeyinka, has enumerated ten reasons why President Goodluck Jonathan should be re-elected into office (http://www.bayoadeyinka.com/bayoadeyinka/index.php/entry/goodluck-jonathan-a-balanced-scorecard-by-bayo-adeyinka). These points cannot be disputed and they are commendable indeed. The only trouble with these points is that Nigerians must come to learn that there is a difference between a government's responsibility and its achievements. If government build roads, pay salaries, refurbish the railway, build schools, and permit some stability for the economy, that government has carried out its duties or its responsibilities. It is when that government has done high and above these things enumerated that we can say that government has achieved something upon which it could be considered for re-election. When we consider two things: the speed with which nations are advancing and the amount of resources this country gathers as revenue year in year out, we must of a necessity hold any government in power responsible for not achieving anything. We should not be found praising them for carrying out their responsibilities. 

Unfortunately, two things act as Achilles' for the presidency of Goodluck Jonathan. They are violence and corruption. The Boko Haram insurgency and the inability of the government of Goodluck Jonathan to quell their activities continue to be a major minus for this administration. For the first time since the Civil War in this nation, a section of the country has been annexed and taken over by religious militants with uncountable number of Nigerian citizens being killed every day in the north-eastern part of the country. Jonathan, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, has not been able to rally them to end this continual dissemination of a section of the country. In fact, many political watchers claim that the president is way too weak to handle the situation and the insurgents seem to have discovered this and are taking advantage of it to the full. Since Goodluck Jonathan came into office in 2011, the country has not been able to celebrate it annual Independence ceremony in public for the fear of attack from insurgents. Despite the havoc Boko Haram has wrecked on the North Eastern part of the nation, Jonathan has only visited them once; and even that was a political statement to stop those criticizing him when Governors in the opposition went and walked the streets of Maiduguri. In spite of the call on the president to show sympathy to the people of Chibok, who lost over 200 of their girls to insurgent activites in Borno State, he has not visited them; citing security reasons. The long and short of this all is the truth that Jonathan has failed to make Nigeria safe and should not be permitted another four years in office. 

Sometimes ago the Speaker of the House of Assembly was compelled to say that the body language of Mr. President lent support for corruption in the land. The President will later support this position himself when he declared that "stealing was not corruption." If stealing is not corruption, what else could it be? This government has shown great laxity towards matters of corruption, especially those that involve individuals close to the President. The minister of Petroleum, Diezani Allison-Madueke has continually been fingered in one corruption case or the other, but this government has refused to beam any search light on her activities. The NNPC, were she exercises oversight, is brimming with allegation of corrupt practices. The President himself was recently alleged to be worth $100 million dollars by an online news outfit. 

This allegation had to be dropped after the presidency threatened legal actions against the outfit. Nevertheless many Nigerians argue that anyone could come to any conclusion on how much Jonathan is worth considering the fact that he has refused to declare his assets in public. A question to which our president has responded that he does not give a damn about answering. In this light, Rudolph Okonkwo of the Saharareporters, stated that the President was worth $120 million and he also said that he was ready to be sued for his assertions (http://saharareporters.com/2014/10/14/sue-me-jonathan-youre-worth-120-million-dollars-least-rudolf-ogoo-okonkwo). Since Jonathan came into power, the two apparatus of government that were set up by the administration of Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo to curtail corruption, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), have been rendered useless. The list is endless. A vote for Jonathan is a vote for corruption to continue to disseminate the length and breath of this country. 

The Religious Rivalry 

It is really unfortunate that the Presidential contest again might degenerate to a religious contest between Muslims and Christians like it did in 2011. I am calling on my Christians friends to rise above these religious sentiments in making the decision of whom to vote for in 2015. What is going on between Muslims and Christians is a simple case of rivalry between two prominent

religions in the land. Christians should be blamed for not being political savvy enough to be at the forefront when political candidates for political parties are being selected. We should learn from this and become more politically involved in our nation. For now, we have a sincere, upright, disciplined and visionary individual in the opposition contesting against a supposed Christian; and we should be found making the decision to vote for the Muslim above religious sentiments because we know that he would run our country well. Let us remember that it was a non-Jewish King, the person of Cyrus, that God used to bring Israel out of the political and economic captivity they were in at Babylon. Today, Nigeria is in a similar situation and it might please God to use Buhari, a Muslim, to save the Christian church, resident in Nigeria, from another political and economic captivity. 

Conclusion 

I am again calling on my Christian brethren to vote for Buhari. I use this opportunity to call on Tunde Bakare and the Save Nigeria Group to again rally behind the General, like they did in 2011, to see to it that he is elected into office. The All Progressive Congress (APC), the political party under which the General is running, is not a perfect body that consists of saints. There are indeed individuals there whose records in public office are questionable. But like it has been said so many times in many forums in this country: the problem of Nigeria is a leadership one. If we can endeavor to elect a leader that has integrity, discipline and vision, the team that will work with him will have to follow suit. 

Vote Wisely. Vote Gen. Muhammadu Buhari come Febuary 14th, 2015 as President of this country. And may God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria. 

Amen.

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

A Plea for the Lives of Twelve Nigerian Soldiers on Death Row

In 1942 C. S. Lewis began a series of radio talks that were eventually published under the book title “Mere Christianity”. This period was a time of war; a time when the Second World War was at its peak. Lewis was making a case for Christianity in an increasing godless world, but his counsel also resounded as a message of hope to many British troops who were facing uncertain death, as they were shipped off to face Hitler’s Nazi soldiers in a bloody war. Quoting from Wikipedia’s note on the book, “Lewis spends most of his defense of the Christian faith on an argument from morality, a point which persuaded him from atheism to Christianity. He bases his case on a moral law, a ‘rule about right and wrong’ commonly known to all human beings, citing the example of Nazism; both Christians and atheists believed that Hitler’s actions were morally wrong.” I have drawn our attention to this relatively ancient book to remind the Nigerian people that this nation again is at war. 

Whatever else public commentaries are designed to achieve, they must also be a source of hope and encouragement for the Nigerian troops as they face the deadly Boko Haram forces at war in the North-Eastern part of the country. I also need to remind us of a certain military term called the “rules of engagement” (ROE), which in normal street language will mean the rules that govern the use of force by the military. This paper shall not be doing an academic exercise on the above topic; I would rather wish to narrow down on some incidences that the Boko Haram quagmire has roused up and help the public understand them, while at the same hoping to send a message of hope to myriads of our gallant soldiers fighting that war on behalf of all of us.

A few days ago the media reported the outcome of the military court martial of twelve Nigerian soldiers who had been accused of mutiny, in a case where it was said that these soldiers opened fire on their superior officer in protest of an order he gave that led to the death of many of their colleagues in far away Borno State. The twelve soldiers were sentenced to death. Virtually all the commentaries I have read on this matter have condemned the outcome of the court martial; most of them calling it unfair and ridiculous. I disagree. If we must remind ourselves of the concept of the military’s rules of engagement, and in the light of those rules remember that the army also has rules for right and wrong, one cannot but agree with the outcome of the court martial of those soldiers; in spite of how distasteful it might sound in our ears. The whole military structure is based on the strength of command. The moment the command structure is compromised, military formations are faced with certain defeat before the enemy. Soldiers are trained to “obey before complain” regardless of the outcome of their obedience. The military court martial also recognized the fact that the superior officer gave a poor command and handed him the punishment of a compulsory retirement; a decision I agree was too light in comparison to the consequence of his action. Nonetheless, a situation should never arise where junior officers will open fire on a superior officer within the same military formation. It is a grave sin in the military, similar to a coup, and should be severely dealt with. This is the only way the military can discourage a repetition within its ranks and the most effective way to preserve the hallowed system of command that makes the military very efficient.

Having said that, I must quickly enjoin the public to change its tone of commentary on the outcome of the military court martial of these twelve men from that of “right” to that of “plea”. Though these men are guilty, we should at this point begin to seek an avenue for some kind of pardon to be meted out to them. My premise for pardon is based on the fact that providence was kind on the military officer that was shot at and ensured that he was not killed. Also, no other person was killed in the incidence. And so on this basis, we the Nigerian public wish to plead with the highest military command in the land to forgive these twelve soldiers and possibly reduce the death sentence to outright dismissal from the army. I am using this medium to plead with the President of Nigeria, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, to consider using his veto powers to reduce the sentences of these men. I understand that the message that the court martial was wishing to pass to other men of the uniform has been heard clearly and I do not think anyone in his right senses will repeat the actions of these men again. This pardon is equally needed to encourage our soldiers, who are in the heat of the war against insurgency in the land. If they see that the demeanor of their colleagues has been pardoned as a result of public plea, they will know that the whole nation appreciate their sacrifices and while praying for their successes at the war front, are also doing everything within their powers to encourage them. Again, our request for pardon for these soldiers is not based on “right” but on mercy. We plead that they will be forgiven and their sentence reduced.

In conclusion, I use this medium to praise the efforts of the Nigerian soldiers in curtailing the murderous escapades of the Boko Haram sect. Despite the obvious support that these animals have been receiving from foreign terrorist groups through financial aid, weapon supply and mercenaries, our soldiers have continually disseminated their ranks. We praise your efforts. We also pray that the good Lord will crown all of your efforts with successes. We have confidence that at this rate the Boko Haram insurgency will soon come to an abrupt end. Already the result of the assault that these animals are receiving is showing off in their inability to carry out terrorists attacks on other parts of the country. Nigeria will see the end of this insurgency by grace of God. 

Amen.

RE: OF PASTORS, DIVORCE AND SCANDALS

RE: OF PASTORS, DIVORCE AND SCANDALS

This article should not be taken as a strict rebuttal of the above titled article published through The Woman of Virtue Network. The reason being that that article was written as an admonition to Christian couples about safe guarding their marriages. I agree completely with that aspect of the write up because I am married. Any Christian couple must not gloat over a divorce case; we are also in the flesh and can face similar temptations. My trouble however with the article is it's use of a natural challenge that can befall couples, that is divorce, to seemingly offer a soft landing for Pastor Chris Oyakhilome. I shall be arguing in this piece that Christian Oyakhilome deserves what has befallen him because men must reap what they naturally have sown.

I begin my discuss by saying that scripture recognizes that a christian can sin and offers ample solution for this. In fact this is the reason our Lord and Savior died (1John 1:8-9). Scriptures, however, has no solution for a "Christian" that makes a practice of sin (1John 3:9). In fact this scripture says boldly that Christians do not sin or do not make a practice of sin. When we juxtapose the reason for divorce offered by Anita Oyakhilome, adultery, with the plethora of allegations that have been making the rounds on the internet and the the print media about Pastor Chris not living with his wife; his nocturnal activities with lady pastors in the ministry, married and unmarried; his being caught in compromising positions with women in his matrimonial home while his wife is away in the UK; one is left with no choice than to believe that Christian Oyakhilome is not a saint and has a cupboard full of skeletons. Every married man reading this text must agree that our wives will shield and protect us, no matter the situation. How many women have been beaten to their deaths and still will not utter a word to outsiders in a bid to protect their man. Women are designed by God this way and we men must thank God for this if not... hmm(?)

What will make a woman come out to the public and declare that her husband, who is supposed to be a leading Christian minister, is an adulterer, must be likened to the proverbial driving of a goat to the wall who then turns around to attack when left with no choice. Reports making the rounds on the internet, especially that of the group sponsoring a Facebook campaign asking "Where is Rev Anita Oyakhilome" reveals that this seemingly charming, quiet and committed mother of two of Chris' children had been pastoring the UK branch of the church since 1999 but was suddenly removed from her post sometimes towards the end of last year. No reason was given to her church people for this. Rather, when the cacophony of protest about her whereabout was reaching a peak, Christian Oyakhilome went to the church and read out the riot act to them. In front of everyone and their first daughter, he said unprintable things about his wife. And stated that the church is not a democracy and if anyone is unhappy about what he has done with removing his wife from office, they can get out of the ministry. A few weeks later, Anita served papers of divorce to him on the basis of adultery. The Facebook group had alleged in earlier posts that Chris was having too close a relation with women in the church and that his wife should not be punished for protesting. Anita's action were simply those of a woman who had had enough.

What I have written so far is basically what can be seen and deduced from the dilemma befallen Chris Oyakhilome. But this itself is not the real problem with him, his church or churches like his. The real problem is not what they are doing in these churches; the problem is what they BELIEVE in these churches. The problem is doctrinal not practice. The underlining doctrine of the Christ Embassy Church, like many other Pentecostal churches in Nigeria and around the world is doctrinal. These churches preach a Word of Faith gospel. The result is that the pastors and the people under them believe in prosperity, success, healing, breakthoughs, deliverances, and blessings. These doctrines are the overarching teachings in these churches and the result is what we are seeing around us: first with the Ese Walters and Biodun Fatoyinbo saga and now Christian Oyakhilome adulterous relationships. These churches are convinced that these are the teachings of scripture. We argue otherwise. We tell them that if the true doctrines of scriptures are taught in churches, the result will be righteousness, peace and joy in the Spirit amongst God's people. If however another gospel is taught in the church the result will be scandals, cases of adultery, lies, theft, cheating, divorce and all kinds of demonic activities. Our own Lord and Master Jesus Christ had told us that false prophets will abound in the end times and the way to know them is by observing their fruits: the outcomes of their lives.  

I am not advocating a holiness movement. That unfortunately is what people propose in place of a prosperity gospel. Both of them are on unhealthy extremes. I am advocating the true teaching of a gospel of grace in the body of Christ. Jesus Christ came to earth to die for all men's sins. We must preach this gospel and believe it. We must understand that in the gospel, God had given man not only power for salvation but also for right living. And the litmus test as to whether the gospel we have heard is a true one or a false one is to patiently observe the fruit it is bearing in the lives of it's advocate. I am debating here that the true gospel possesses in itself grace to empower men's lives for holy living (Hebrew 13:9). This holiness is not the result of following church prescribed rules or bodily discipline; rather it is the effect of God's Holy Spirit in the heart of each believer, instructing us on the path of righteousness and empowering us also. In this sort of holy living, no man can boast. We know we are what we are by the grace of God alone. We live our lives indebted to this grace.

What we find in churches like Christ Embassy is a perverted version of this gospel of grace. That's when we begin to hear of "another level of grace". When a man is beneficiary of true grace, he becomes a slave to the laws of God written on his heart. He doesn't use his liberty to sin. These churches pervert the gospel further by teaching that the cross has not only secured a heaven for us up there but has also secured one down here. The only trouble with this teaching is that Jesus and his apostles taught of a heaven up there, while reminding us that that here on earth we have no abiding home (Hebrew 11).

The gospel of prosperity is ruining the soul of Pentecostal churches in Nigeria. Today, churches make it compulsory that members give a tithe of their income; pay firstfruit - their January salary; and give without reservations. This is giving churches too much access to easy money. My investigations show that no other church is more culpable in this matter than Christ Embassy. The result is that the leaders of these churches are living in obscene wealth. And with the coming of money also comes it twin - the root of all evil. All sort of demonic activities begin to break loose in church organizations. In some extreme cases, people have had others murdered to cover up malpractices in the handle of church finances. If anyone where to question the way church finances are handled, they are labelled devils and thrown out. Of course the church leader that has little discipline and permits the money and power he has assumed to get to his head, will forget that he is co-equal with his wife and begin to despise her and treat her like thrash. He may also choose to ship her out to a foreign and comfortable country so that he can enjoy greater liberty. This is the making of Christian Oyakhilome's troubles. He is not to be pitied, we only need to learn from him.

Finally, we must be careful what we call church and who we call Christian. Righteousness and truth is the foundation of the church of Jesus Christ. Where these are lacking you have a den of thieves. We must also beware of who we call a Christian. Christians may err but predominantly they bear the fruit of the Spirit. It is Christians and the church, the true church, scripture enjoins us to pray for. As for charlatans and false prophets, the bible commands us to beware if them and not to pray for them.

Shalom.

My Rebuttal to the article: http://www.bayoadeyinka.com/bayoadeyinka/index.php/bloghome/entry/of-pastors-divorce-and-scandal

GOD CAN SAVE NIGERIA

The Nigerian finance minister, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, was the guest of Christian Amanpour

Iweala on Amanpour

of the CNN, yesterday, 3rd July 2014. My personal evaluation of the interview was that it was below par. If the President of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan, had not fared well in similar interviews in the past, one would have expected that the one whom Amanpour introduced as a “leading” minister in Jonathan’s government would do better and help cover her principal’s inadequacies. Unfortunately she did not do this. Amanpour asked the Finance Minister, among other things, what the Jonathan government was doing to curb corruption in the land. Rather than answer directly, Okonjo-Iweala went on the defensive and tried to dis-abuse her interviewer's mind of the reason why corruption should not always be linked to the name “Nigeria”. She said that when the western media mentions Nigeria, the word “corruption” is the very next thing they tag the nation along with. She felt this was not supposed to be. I thought Amanpour was simply being too civil and kind to the Minister because, although she mentioned the issue of Sanusi’s whistle blowing on the missing $20 billion at the NNPC, Amanpour did not talk about the sitting minister who is also alleged to have squandered billions of naira to chatter private jets for her numerous trips around the world. If Amanpour had mentioned that, Okonjo-Iweala would have been thoroughly embarrassed. 

What I gleaned from that interview was that the Jonathan government has run out of options on proffering solutions to solve the nation’s myriad of problems. And that even the best brains in his cabinet also do not know what to do. It seems to me that the country has been set on auto-pilot, being propelled through space by Providence. I shall be showing in this article that prayers to God does work and a nation whose leaders have lost the capability to lead can still rely on God to save them. As we explore this thesis we shall also consider some scenarios on ground in the country at the moment. 

Ekiti: unprecedented in Nigeria

One would think that when an election year is fast approaching, and the ruling party has been found deficient in moving the country forward, that the opposition would take advantage of these lapses and proffer better alternatives to solving the nation’s problems. The All Progrssive Congress (APC), the country’s leading opposition party, seem to be lacking in this. Following its defeat at the just concluded Ekiti state gubernatorial elections, the party also seems to be loosing ground in the South-West were it is initially supposed to possess a strong hold. The elections, which was widely reported to have been free and fair, with the incumbent governor, Kayode Fayemi of the APC, congratulating the winner, Ayodele Fayose, in an unprecedented manner, reveals something more. Which is why the electorate, even though deeply unhappy with the ruling party and its performance at the Federal level, are not willing to trade the devil for the deep blue sea. The onus is on the APC today to prove to Nigerians that it can do a better job than the PDP at the federal level. That they are a worthy alternative. Already, events playing out within the party are not encouraging at all. I am at a loss as to why the APC cannot put its head together and produce a presidential candidate other than the person of General Mohammadu Buhari. While Buhari is a fine gentleman and his antecedent as a crusader against corruption along with his perfectly untainted career in public office will serve him well, his age is a terrible set back for him. But even if the APC will field Buhari for presidency, the idea of fielding Bola Ahmed Tinubu as his running mate is down right preposterous. 

If the APC does this, it will be fielding a Muslim-Muslim ticket and that is just plain political suicide. I do not have any problem with a Muslim-Muslim ticket but a lot of Nigerians, whose votes will make the ultimate decision of who becomes president of Nigeria, do have a problem with it. At the moment in the political life of our country, two primary things determine who people vote for: it is where they come from (tribal) and what religion they profess. In a country that is predominantly Muslim and Christian, a Muslim-Muslim ticket is certain to discourage the Christian populace, and the ruling party, the PDP, will simply play on this political error and field a Christian-Muslim ticket. They will split the votes that would originally have gone to the APC and then garner the votes of those who would naturally have voted for them. The result will be the greatest defeat that General Buhari has ever witnessed in his political career and no one would be blamed for this than himself and his political associates. It is simply not done. If indeed the reports going around about the APC desiring to field a Buhari-Tinubu ticket is true, it is my candid plea with them to shelve it. A Muslim-Muslim ticket could have been permissible for the ACN in 2011

Buhari, Tinubu, Fayemi

but even the result of that election, with Ribadu as presidential candidate, coming a distant third in the election, actually proves that no one will vote a party that is considered to be mono-religious. Already the security situation in the country is not helpful for this kind of political permutation. The dreaded sect, Boko Haram, that continues to wreck havoc in the northern part of the country, is generally seen as Muslim. Those who are enlightened know that Boko Haram are only Muslim in name and do not espouse true Islamic beliefs but some extreme, perverted and violent version; the ordinary Nigerian does not see it that way. 

If on one hand, the ruling party has run out of ideas on how to solve the nation’s troubles and the leading opposition party will allow ambition and personal political agendas to colour its decisions, then the country is left at the mercy of the situations on ground and therefore the need for all Nigerians to pray hard to God to save the nation. While discussing this dilemma with a friend, he suggested the option of a military take over. I reminded him that a military rule will come with too many uncertainties. The whole country will then be at the mercy of the whims and caprices of one man or a group of men. As wobbling as our democracy is, we can still debate issues and still sway our leaders through popular public opinion. In a military rule, such cannot happen. Then we considered the outcome of the Nation Conference and how it could help solve some of the trouble with the nation. But even that one has its challenges because the outcome of that conference will still be vetted by the present national assembly that many Nigerians do not trust. When we had gone through all the options, and the situation looked bleak in every direction, we resorted to the God option. 

Some people frown at the God option because they feel that it encourages lethargy, discourages people from taking responsibility for their actions and encourages resignation to fate. This is not exactly true. A true believer in God knows that God holds human beings responsible for their actions. So that nations that refused to learn from history and chose certain paths, along with their leaders, are today in prolonged war situations. It’s a simple principle of sowing and reaping. Nevertheless, those of us who believe in God understand that regardless of our efforts and even decisions, there is a God who chooses to show mercy on all of his creation and ensures that

things work out for them. This is the reason Nigerians must turn to God to save this country from imminent collapse. God can do all things. He may give to our present leaders such wisdom and ability to be able to solve the problems of this country, so that by 2015 when Nigerians go to the poles, they would have no qualms re-electing the present government into power. God can choose to ensure that the process of choosing a presidential candidate within the APC is so well organized that, far beyond our ability to reason it out, God can raise up such pristine, sound and visionary individuals within that party who will sell such an agenda to the Nigerian people such that they would not find it difficult to elect him to office. And lastly, God can go beyond the incumbent and the opposition, and bring for this country a redemption that only God can bring. When in the summer of 1998 the maximum ruler of this country, Sanni Abacha, suddenly died and in a space of weeks the leadership of this nation was changed, those of us who were praying were not surprised at all. That same God is alive and well, and can turn situation around as abruptly as he did in 1998.

At the moment, Nigeria is on auto-pilot. The blessing of such a situation for a plane is that the plane will continue to move, without any input from its pilot. The pilot may choose to go to sleep; the plane will continue to move. The problem with auto-pilot, however, is that if the plane continues in this state for too long a time and it runs out of gas, rather than continue in its flight, it would simply nose dive and crash. The trouble with a Nigeria on auto-pilot is that our situation has a time span. It is my prayer that we find solutions to our problems as a nation before our time elapses and the country self destructs.

TITHING 107: GIVING

GIVING

A discuss on tithing will be lopsided if we do not explain the vital place of giving in our Christian discipleship. When most people understand that they are not under any obligation to tithe, their first reaction is stop giving entirely. This is understandable having been under the weight of the somewhat oppressive regime called tithing for some times. However, such individuals need to be shown that it is our duty to give to support Christians works and to give to the weak. Giving is very pleasing to God (Hebrew 13:16) and it is in His very nature to give Himself, having given us His Son Jesus Christ to redeem us from our sins. Anyone, truly converted by the Spirit of God, must of a necessity be a giver. In fact, I believe that it is that natural tendency for Christians to give that those who encourage tithing take advantage of and abuse. Though we are not under any obligation to tithe to churches, Christians should give and give without any inhibition.

The Grace of God

The scriptures show us that the grace of God is his free unmerited favor given to sinners (Ephesian2:8). When a sinner becomes a believer in Jesus Christ, the grace of God is made manifest to him first by his sins being forgiven. Then he is given a new nature – he becomes a new creation. At the same time, he is given the blessing of the Spirit of God that indwells him and helps him with life issues. The believer’s walk through life is a manifest panorama of God’s grace, as God is seen to give him everything that pertains to life and godliness (2Peter 1:3). Only Christians, of all religions in the world today, are called children of God. They are not simply creations, servants, or workers of God; rather the bible calls us God’s children. This comes about as we identify with the first begotten from the dead – Jesus Christ. So if Christ is a Son, we are then sons of God through Him. This is the manifest grace of God and indeed it is awesome. This grace is not just an intangible thing in the form of being saved through faith and enjoying peace, love and joy alone; rather this grace extends to other issues of life. Tangible things like food, clothing and shelter are things God provides for His children. When trouble comes, God is a shelter for His own from the storm. One of the greatest blessings we receive from God is the blessing of family – spouses and children. God is a giver and He has given us so much.

It is an understanding of God’s grace that should propel Christians to give. When we realize how much God has sacrificed for us and given to us because of our identification with him, it should not be difficult to give to His courses in return. The greatest motivation to give is a clear sense of how much God has given to us. This is another reason why tithing is incongruent with true gospel living. Tithing commands a giving of ten percent of one’s earning regardless of whether the individual is saved or not, or whether or not he understands the grace of God extended to him. At the end we have folks tithing with completely wrong motives and cannot enjoy the blessing of giving. However, when giving comes from an understanding of how much we have received from God through His grace, such giving will be totally unreserved and a mere ten percent may be too little to give.

Giving to the Poor

Most of the giving recorded in the New Testament church the apostles led was made to support the poor, the weak and the needy in the church. With the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the church of God was born on the surface of the earth. In Acts of the Apostles we see the Spirit of God coming to indwell the disciples with power to witness to the resurrection of Christ. The result was a large in flow of people into the church. In the church of that time there were the rich and the poor, but one could imagine that there would have been a great deal of poor folks among them as many people would have begun to suffer deprivation from family and society because of their profession of the Christian faith. It is safe to say that the very first thing the church did after it was birth was to ensure that the poor was catered for in its midst.

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul:  neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.   33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:  and great grace was upon them all.   34 Neither was there any among them that lacked:  for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet:  and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.   36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet – Acts 4

We see a communal system birth with the aim of ministering to the poor and needy. While such a communal lifestyle is impracticable in churches today, we catch a glimpse into the heart of God which is for the rich to supply the needs of the poor, such that a semblance of equality can be seen among the people of God.

The theme of giving to the poor runs through out the bible. When God instituted the tithes under the mosaic law, he instructed that those who shall be given tithe along with the priest and Levites must include the orphans, widows, and strangers (Deuteronomy 14:39) – these people would generally be regarded as the poor in their communities. The psalms speak about the blessedness of giving to the poor (Psalm 41:1; Proverbs 19:17). From the statement of Judas complaining about the expensive perfume poured on Jesus, it is clear that one of the things Christ did along with ministering to people was to give to the poor (John 12:5). Paul and Peter may have been called to minister to disparate groups of people but ministering to the poor was a common ministry they shared (Galatians 2:9-10). In fact the collections made and recorded in the epistles were mainly to minister to the poor (Acts 4:34; 1Corinthians 16:1; 2Corinthians 9:1).

These are the reasons why catering for the weak and the poor should be a leading ministry among Christians and churches. The priority of all churches that truly name the name of the Lord should be to first minister to the needs of the poor and needy in their midst. There is something essentially lopsided about having people who are in felt needs in a church that is considered wealthy. God ensures that there will be the rich and the poor in His church, in order for the rich to meet the needs of the poor so that the spirit of equality is maintained.

13 For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:  14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want:  that there may be equality:  15 As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over;  and he that had gathered little had no lack. – 2 Corinthians 8

It is indeed a very sorry sight to see churches spending millions in raising buildings, meeting the needs of the pastor, organizing year long meetings, booking adverts in the media and so on, while there are people in their midst whose needs can be met by very little. After evangelism, the church should have no other pressing duty than to ensure the poor and needy in their midst are adequately catered for. This spirit is very likely to then pass on to each member of the assembly as they make it their priority to give to those who are in need around them. The idea of socialism, community, charity and welfare which the world practices was certainly taken from the bible. Giving to the poor and needy by Christians and churches is the greatest witness to the person of Jesus Christ because then the world can see the love of God in our midst and will consider the gospel message.

The Weak

34 Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me.   35 I have showed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive – Acts 20

The western world has a concept of social welfare where people who are considered “weak” are provided for. The weak in this sense would include the elderly, children, the sick, invalid, mentally challenged, the blind, deaf, those incapacitated in one or the other, the deformed, crippled and so on. The truth of the matter is that by no fault of one, sometimes things happen to people that suddenly renders them incapable of providing for themselves. In these countries there is a strong social programme that ensures that such people are catered for. Government does this by instituting taxes on the salaries of those who are strong enough to work. Thus in addition to other things government uses money for, there is a portion set aside for the “weak”.

These are things churches should be known to be doing also. The scripture above actually showed us that this was the culture that was predominant in the first century church. Ministers and members of each church worked a secular job. There was no such thing as a full time minister who collected salary from the church. Paul said in that scripture that his own hands ministered to his necessities and those around him. Paul was never a full-time minister, as he had a job as a tent-maker. The strong were the ones that worked and these people then gave to the weak – those who could not provide for themselves. This is a culture that must be restored to the Christian church if we truly want our witness in today’s world to be heard. It is even more needed in third world countries where we reside, since the system of welfarism from government is non-existent. The church should teach the nations how the weak ought to be provided for. Therefore, there is a pressing demand for the needs of the weak to be provided for in our churches, if we do not want to end up a society where we devour each other. No one knows tomorrow. The man that is strong today can suddenly become invalid tomorrow. When a culture of welfare has been put in place either in society or the church, we all stand to benefit from it somehow.

One of the most pitiable occurrences in our world today is how young people treat the elderly. Old people spend their days serving community and the young, but they then grow old and no one is there to care for them. When they are sick, some people are looking forward to their deaths so they can feast. If society cannot take care of the elderly, the church should not be seen to abandon them too. Another terrible thing that is happening in our world is the number of people who are rendered invalids as a result of being involved in motor accidents on our terrible roads. The church should be near enough to care for these people. Then we have children becoming orphans almost overnight as we continue to loose large number of young men and women, people in their productive years, to the scourge of HIV/AIDS. These and many more are the reason why the culture of giving to the weak is so very important. The church cannot afford to continue this attitude of feasting and celebrating the rich and the strong, while we neglect weak folks in our midst – we do not know who would be the next tomorrow.

  

Giving

As we give to the poor and the weak, we should also remember to give to ministers of the gospel. There are men and women who are missionaries to far flung communities. These people are to be supported by Christian folks.

It is at this junction I need to sound a note of warning about a pervasive kind of giving that has taken hold in the church and is bringing reproach to the name of the Lord. When scriptures speak about giving to ministers in passages like Matthew 10:41-42; 1 Corinthians 9: 13-14; Philippians 4:15-19; 1 Timothy 5:17, the bible was not talking about a means of money doubling. There is a gospel that is running around these days telling people to give to a particular class of clergy called “men of God” as a means of entering into great wealth. The result is that these men, who already have established themselves as chairmen of their church finances, are further enriching themselves by making gullible worshippers give to them in a said bid to enter great riches. This is not the picture that the New Testament gave of giving to ministers. Jesus Christ was the first to speak about minister’s remuneration when he sent out his disciples in Matthew 10 and Luke 10. In Luke 10, our Lord said

3 Go your ways:  behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves.   4 Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes:  and salute no man by the way.   5 And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house.   6 And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it:  if not, it shall turn to you again.   7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give:  for the labourer is worthy of his hire.   Go not from house to house.   8 And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you:  9 And heal the sick that are therein, and say unto them, The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you

The impression we get from this passage and many other passages that speaks about giving to ministers is that the preachers of Jesus and the apostles’ times did not live on salaries. They had no financial security anywhere – this is what Christ meant by carrying no purse in verse 4. It was as they ministered to people, whatever those people were pleased to give them were they to receive. Verses 7 and 8 uses the phrases: “eating and drinking such things as they give…” and “eat such things as are set before you…” in the same context of the “laborers is worthy of his hire…” Jesus was saying whatever the people give you when you minister to them is your wage! Therefore these ministers were totally at the mercy of God who alone could move the people to give to them in response to their ministry. The concept of a minister receiving tithes, offerings and first fruits was totally alien to the New Testament.

I stated this to show a clear distinction in the kind of ministers Christians should support today. If a minister pastors a church and enjoys the financial security of a salary and his members’ occasional well wishes through gifts, that minister is not what the New Testament commands us to give anything to. He has his rewards already. The minister that needs our support are people laboring for the Lord, many of them missionaries, even social workers that take care of orphanages, etc, and do not have any source of income; these are the people we are supposed to help with our finances because many of them are pursuing laudable ministries for the Lord and do not have any financial backing from anyone. The attitude of “sowing” into the “life” of a rich “man of God” to obtain his kind of prosperity is totally unscriptural and it is the workings of Satan that he continues to use to deceive many people in organized church systems. It should be discouraged. This is the reason why giving to the poor, weak and needy is emphasized the more in this essay. It is to remind us that the New Testament placed greater emphasis on this type of charity than any other type.

In conclusion, God is very pleased with giving. God blesses every kind of giving that comes from a proper motivation in the heart. It is this writer’s desire that Christians be more selfless and give more to Christian works anywhere they find them. Many of us can reduce our expenses and consumption, so as to give more to the things of God. If we make such commitment, we can be sure that heaven will be pleased and God’s name and purposes further magnified on the face of the earth.

TITHING 106: GUILE

GUILE

The Christian man will always find himself having to ensure that his practice of faith has not degenerated to mere form and ritual, which many rightly define as religion. What makes what we do as Christians different from what other religious people do in their faith is that our actions are birth from truth – such truth that is founded in the word of God, the bible, and that is etched in our hearts. In other words the Christian man must be a sincere person – he may not be perfect but he must be true to his God and to his neighbor. This is what the Psalmist meant when he wrote these eternal words in Psalm 32: 1-2,

1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.   2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.

There are four characteristics of the Christian man enumerated in the above scripture: 1. His transgression (sin) is forgiven; 2. His sin is covered; 3. Iniquity is not imputed on him; 4. There is no guile in his spirit. Note that the first three items are what God gives to the Christian man when he comes to faith in Christ Jesus. It is what follows his justification before a holy God. This was the scripture Paul quoted when he was speaking of the faith of Abraham that justified him in Romans 4:1-4. This is the same faith we possess when we come to Christ as believers and the blessings in it all are the three items listed above. The last item, the issue of no guile in the justified man, is shown to us as an inherent characteristic of a true Christian. The Christian man has no guile: he is not deceptive, dishonest, fraudulent, duplicitous, cunning or artful deceptive (these are some dictionary synonyms to the word “guile”). The Christian man is true because the grace of God given to him through Christ came with truth (John 1:17), so there is no reason to be deceptive. Also, the worship of God that his faith consist of demands that he be true always (John 4:23-24) – and if he is faithful in the practice of his faith he would have learnt the art of truth and not to be “artfully deceptive”.

Truth is what religion is devoid of. The forms, rituals, ceremonies and procedures that religious practices consist of do not require truth in the inward part; anyone can practice any religious observance as long as he get the procedures right. This were the issues God had with the nation of Israel in the Old Testament when he gave them the many rituals in the Mosaic Laws (Isaiah 1:11-18). That is why the Law was never intended to last forever. The purpose of the Law was to point men to the sinfulness of sin, man’s inability to keep it and the coming of Christ who would fulfill the Law for all who will believe in Him. Therefore when the Law was given through Moses, the guile in man was meant to be revealed. However, grace and truth came with Jesus Christ to cleanse man from sin and guile. Today, one aspect of the Law remains with us in a perverted form and that is the ritual of tithing, and understandably guile cannot be separated from the practice of tithing. Tithing, like many other aspects of the Law, is a purely religious activity and it does not require truth in the inward man to practice it. What it requires is to faithfully carry out a religious activity every week or every month as the case maybe. Anyone can give a tenth of their income to a religious house; they do not need to be Christians to do this. They only need to believe the lie that says that by tithing we merit God’s blessings.

The first aspect of guile or dishonesty about the practice of tithing comes from its definition. What does the true biblical tithe consist of? The word tithe means tenth. However, it is a religious term used to denote the levy or tax God imposed on the nation of Israel in the Mosaic Law. This tax was meant to be given to the civil and religious leaders of the nation of Israel to ensure the proper running of the religious and civil life of the nation. The tithe from scriptures consisted only of agricultural products (Leviticus 27:30-33) and was never money. Thus when anyone teaches a concept of a monetary tithe today, he or she is teaching a deceptive gospel because the tithe of the bible was not money. With time, the practice of tithing became unnecessary in Israel for two reasons. One of them was the coming of a new dispensation in which Christ’s death and resurrection had rendered the Mosaic Law obsolete and unnecessary (Romans 10:4; Hebrew 8:13). The second reason was that the providential dealings of God with the nation of Israel makes tithing totally unnecessary today because there is no more temple in Jerusalem for the Israelites to take a tithe to; and the civil life of the nation of Israel is totally changed now. Instead of tithes, people pay their government a tax and civil life is sustained this way. When we realize that those who the original concept of tithing started with have ceased to practice it, we understand why what Christians tithe today is not the true biblical tithe and why modern day tithing is a deceptive practice borne from a heart of guile.

The religious man is full of guile. Religion requires that one puts on a façade of piety, fulfill certain rituals and please those who are observing what is being done. Those that require being pleased many times include religious leaders, family members, friends, religious associates and sometimes oneself. The practice of religion has a way of dousing an inner craving to fulfill religious obligations and many times it gives a false impression that we have given God His requirements, so we can move on to do our own thing while we believe that God will bless our efforts as we have fulfilled our obligations to Him. When God instituted the New Testament, He wanted this sort of thing to stop. He wanted our practice of faith in Him to come from the state of our heart and not in fulfilling obligations. And that is why Paul contented with the religious people of his day who insisted that physical circumcision shall be a sign of conversion. Paul resisted these people because he wanted to show them that the new dispensation does not require an outward observance or ritual to be acceptable with God. Now God wanted people to do things from the sincerity of their hearts. With this standard, every aspect of the Mosaic Law went with the old dispensation (Colossians 2:16) and the practice of tithing went with them.

A man may still give a tenth of his income to support Christian works today; just as he may give any other proportion of his income also. But it would be wrong for anyone giving a tenth of his income to claim that he is tithing because it is abundantly clear from scriptures that the biblical tithe was never money. The litmus test of whether our giving is ritualistic and religious or whether it is borne from a heart of truth is if we obey this command of scripture:

7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give;  not grudgingly, or of necessity:  for God loveth a cheerful giver – 2 Corinthians 9:7

Again we return to the state of the Christian’s heart but this time when he is giving. Two things must govern what the Christian gives: first, we must give as we purpose in our hearts. The word “purpose” here denotes freedom, free will, making one’s decision without any external interference, etc. This is the only way such giving can be done without grudging – because no one would grudge what he willingly does. Giving as one purpose in one’s heart also is the exact opposite of giving out of necessity. Necessity in this case denotes giving out of force, according to Law, or out of an imposition. Giving out of necessity is what tithing according to the law denotes. When a man is told that to enjoy God’s blessing he must tithe his income, that man is being placed under a burden to give – he is giving out of necessity. The next thing we see about giving according to 2 Corinthians 9:7 is that this giving must be cheerful. No one will give cheerfully as long as he is giving grudgingly or out of necessity, and as long as tithing is taught as a type of giving we are encouraging giving in church that will not be  cheerful.

The biggest tragedy with the practice of tithing is the fact that an un-regenerated individual might consider himself a Christian because he tithes. So because he observes a religious activity he cannot see himself as one in need of salvation. This is the problem with religion. It is obvious from this that anything a non Christian can do is not Christian – and this must include the practice of tithing. A non Christian however cannot have the influence of the Spirit of God on his heart that will lead him to give as only God can lead a Christian. This is why the only kind of giving that should be acceptable in the Christian church is free will giving because this is the only type of giving that the Spirit of Jesus can inspire  a Christian to do.

God has ordained that the Christian faith shall be one borne from a heart condition. This is why for one to be a Christian such a person must be born-again – a state that is best described in the bible as the circumcision of the heart (Philippians 3:3). Then the Christian life is to be lived out by faith (Romans 1:17b) – still a heart condition that indicates implicit trust in God through Christ Jesus. The Christian man worships God in spirit and in truth – again a heart condition of devotion and reverence of a sovereign God for all that He has done for us through Christ. Then the Christian man practices his faith through love (Galatians 5:6b) – still a heart of submission to the singular law Christ left for us to observe: love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself. It is in the process of loving God and men that a Christian man must give but this giving is again a reflection of his heart condition which prompts purposeful giving, not of necessity but cheerfully (2 Corinthians 9:7). This giving is borne from a heart devoid of guile or the hypocrisy that adorns the observance of the law; rather, there is a freedom to give as one wills. This is the reason that a giving of a tithe in the Christian church is not congruent with the spirit of the New Testament church. Tithing is of the law, whose observance too many times follows ritualistic procedures that the man full of guile can observe without qualms. However, purposeful or free will giving retains the freedom that should be present in the New Testament church.