Connect with us

Headline

Friday Sermon: The Language of God

Published

on

By Babatunde Jose

Language is a human construct, designed to convey ideas and concepts so as to communicate with other humans. God transcends human constructs. Further, “speaking a language” is a physical action. God is not physical.

This question presupposes the wholly inaccurate image of “God” as a physical being who vocalizes by expelling air from His lungs and further chooses to communicate with specific human words. This question is like asking “What language does love speak?”

“Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation.”― Jalal ad-Din Rumi

There is an old chestnut from WWI. Hans and Dieter are in the trenches, and on one boring evening they are speculating about who is going to win the war. Hans: We’re going to win, obviously. Dieter: Why do you say that? Hans: Well look around you. We’ve got thousands of men here and every one of them is praying to God for our victory right now. Dieter (Pointing to the English lines): But, Hans, they have just as many over there. Don’t you think they’re praying to God too?Hans: Yes, of course they are, but God doesn’t speak English.

The foregoing illustrates the follies inherent in human thinking on what language God speak; God can speak any language. God is the original source of all talents and qualities.

Apparently, there is a supposition that God speaks whatever language we do not understand, but which the local priest, imam, shaman (or other equivalent) does happen to speak, in order to … interpret God’s wishes and commands to us. There’s always a book or a handed-down lore, and it always is somehow in human language, and it always somehow needs interpretation, and it never does well (in terms of preserving ‘veracity’ and ‘legitimacy’ ) in translation. However, this has not deterred the Bible from being translated into many languages from the biblical languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. As of October 2017 the full Bible has been translated into 670 languages, the New Testament alone into 1,521 languages and Bible portions or stories into 1,121 other languages. And interestingly all services are held in the vernacular.

The God of Judaism is addressed in Biblical Hebrew through prayers, yet Jews speak to him outside the synagogue in all languages, he appears to have spoken to Jewish prophets in their language – biblical Hebrew.

Allah revealed the Quran in Arabic and is still prayed to in Arabic; despite its translation into major languages of the world. It is the most anachronistic of the Abrahamic religions.

Hindu gods are addressed and acknowledged in their rituals in Sanskrit, yet when they appear in films and TV series, they speak Hindi, Punjabi, and Gujarati etc.

The Shinto pantheon is addressed in Japanese, likewise the multitude of Chinese gods are addressed/invoked/propitiated in all manner of different Chinese dialects.

Tibetan Buddhists use Tibetan and Sanskrit in their services, yet for the benefit of those practising Vajrayana Buddhism all over the world; – services are also conducted in all manner of different languages.

Gods are perceived as being somewhat more powerful than humans, and as such perhaps can use any language they wish, when communicating with humans – they’ll use whichever languages humans will understand.

The problem of religious language is worrisome to practitioners of the Abrahamic religious traditions because it has the potential to undermine those traditions. All three faiths proclaim truths about God in written texts, commentary traditions, and oral teachings. In fact, speech about God is essential to both personal praxis and organized celebration in these traditions. Without adequate solution to the problem of religious language, human speech about God is called into question. Without the ability to speak about God and to understand the meaning of what is spoken, the Abrahamic (Middle Eastern) faiths are vulnerable to the criticism that their sacred texts and teachings are unintelligible.

The problem of religious language also provides a challenge for philosophers of religion. If there is no adequate solution to the problem of religious language, large discussions in the domain of philosophy of religion will also be rendered unintelligible.

Once a language becomes associated, with religious worship, its believers often ascribe virtues to the language of worship that they would not give to other language even their native tongues. Religious or sacred language is vested with a solemnity and dignity that ordinary languages are perceived to lack. Consequently, the training of priests in the use of religious language becomes an important cultural investment and the use of the language is perceived to give them access to a body of knowledge that untrained lay people cannot have. This is the reason for the proliferation of Imams, Alfas, marabouts, Pastors and ‘prophets’. On the contrary, services and preachments in vernacular have a spiritual and soul lifting quality which the foreign language can never achieve. The liturgy in Yoruba is a very good example. No amount of English grammar can drive home the essence of the service to a Yoruba congregation. It’s like comparing Shakespeare to D.O. Fagunwa.

If the Holy prophet had emerged among the Bantu of South Africa, the Quran could possibly have been revealed to him in Xhosa. The same reason God revealed the Torah in Hebrew. Had He decided to send His messenger to the people who spoke Urdu He would have chosen Urdu. The Quran 44:58 states explicitly: “Thus We have revealed this [Qur’an] to you in your own tongue so that they may take heed;” because He decided to send His messenger to the Arabs:“Had We sent this as a Qur’an (in the language) other than Arabic, they would have said: “Why are not its verses explained in detail? What! (a Book) not in Arabic and (a Messenger an Arab?” (Quran 41:44).  There is no doubt God raised a prophet from among the brethren of the children of Abraham: I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. Deut 18:18

It’s not rocket science: Prophet Muhammad was an Arab. For him to understand the Quran, it had to be in Arabic. Otherwise how can he understand the message and tell/teach other people. It is like God sending the 10 Commandments to Moses in Chinese. However, one does not have to know Arabic to learn Quran. 1,400 years after, the motive is to understand and live it. People waste years learning Quran in Arabic but do not understand the divine message. People should read and understand the message of Allah in the easiest possible language that they can understand, not necessarily Arabic. Arabic language is for Arabs only. There is also the issue of cultural imperialism associated with religion in a foreign language; as it is impossible to divorce language from culture. This is the main reason for the change from Latin to English and later to vernacular. It is also the major reason for the hiatus over the Hijab and other foreign paraphernalia of the Islamic religion. The head cover is patently a Palestinian (Middle Eastern) dress sense and its common to all Abrahamic religions.

Though it has been argued that the continued use of Arabic as the language of Islamic liturgy is to facilitate the universality of the Umma because it enables every Moslem to worship in the same language; second, Arabic had been used to good effect for a very long time, with the result that there was a great wealth of liturgical material in that language; third, the use of Arabic made it easier to avoid certain dangers of change and experimentation which are congenial to the modern mind; fourth, the continued use of Arabic in the liturgy would make it easier to maintain Arabic as the official language of the religion.

However, it is a fact that if one attends a Masjid, especially in this clime, 80% of the congregants are ignorant of the language in which the proceedings are being conducted, except it is in vernacular. I was asked to deliver a Ramadan lecture to members of NASFAT, Ipaja. I had to stop the lecture to change to Yoruba because majority of the people especially women could not understand English. A Yoruba Moslem attending a Hausa mosque is a glorified spectator; like a blind man in a cinema hall. Ditto for a Hausa in a Yoruba Mosque. Majority of our people who recite the Quran only do so by rote and do not understand the meaning of what they recite. There is a belief that saying prayers in a language one did not understand created a more mysterious, reverent and transcendent atmosphere, but this has been proved erroneous. It is therefore for this reasons that the Catholic Church in 1964 changed from Latin to the vernacular in its Mass.

The Catholic Church and its sacred documents were codified at the Council of Nicaea in 325, and it didn’t change for 1200 years. As a response to the Protestant Reformation, the Church called the Council of Trent in 1545. A recurring topic at the Council was Language of the Church. At the Council of Trent, they reaffirmed the Vulgate, which was a Latin version of the Bible translated by Saint Jerome in the 300s. Pope John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (also called Vatican II) in 1959. The major change initiated by Vatican II was to translate the traditional Latin mass into the vernacular; a language specific to a place. Until 1965, all Catholic Mass was said in Latin, and the Church realized that may alienate parishioners who spoke Latin only in church.

Translation is a notoriously difficult feat. It is often said that there are as many translations as there are translators. Despite its problems, the Church stood its ground in favour of the benefits to its wider adherents. This is what we expect Islam to do. Let the people worship in the vernacular. It’s only a matter of time and we will get there.

There is no doubt, when the language is not properly understood adherents could recite inappropriate verses of the Quran for prayer. Understandably, prayer and admonition are two different propositions and the Quran contain both. A congregant reciting an admonitory verse as prayer fails to communicate with God. These facts are never understood except the Book is learnt in the language of the follower. For the foregoing reasons, there is a need to free Islam from the shackles and albatross of the Arab language and culture because: God has no language. It is a spiritual feeling. Languages are just man made creations for communication. Calm your mind and try to establish a connection with the Almighty in whatever language you understand. That is the only road to salvation.

Barka Juma’at and Best wishes for a Happy New Year and a better understanding of God.

+2348033110822

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

Court Validates PDP 2025 Convention in Ibadan, Affirms Turaki-led NWC

Published

on

By

The Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has affirmed the validity of the 2025 Elective Convention of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), which produced Dr. Kabiru Turaki as the substantive National Chairman of the party.

Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Ladiran Akintola upheld the convention in its entirety, ruling that it was conducted in full compliance with the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions governing party elections in Nigeria.

The decision marked a significant legal victory for the party’s leadership and brought clarity to the dispute surrounding the convention’s legitimacy.

The ruling followed an amended originating summons filed by Misibau Adetunmbi (SAN) on behalf of the claimant, Folahan Malomo Adelabi, in Suit No. I/1336/2025.

In a comprehensive judgment, the court granted all 13 reliefs sought by the claimant, effectively endorsing the processes and outcomes of the Ibadan convention.

Justice Akintola held that the convention, organised by the recognised leadership of the party, satisfied all laid-down legal requirements as stipulated in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Electoral Act 2022 (as amended), and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.

The court found no breach of due process or statutory non-compliance in the conduct of the exercise.

In the same proceedings, the court dismissed the Motion on Notice seeking a stay of proceedings and suspension of the ruling, filed by Sunday Ibrahim (SAN) on behalf of Austin Nwachukwu and two others. The applications were described as lacking merit.

Earlier in the proceedings, the court had also rejected a bid by Ibrahim to have his clients joined in the suit.

Justice Akintola ruled at the time that the joinder application was unsubstantiated and consequently dismissed it.

Continue Reading

Headline

Opposition Parties Reject 2026 Electoral Act, Demand Fresh Amendment

Published

on

By

Opposition political parties have rejected the 2026 Electoral Act recently passed by the National Assembly, which President Bola Tinubu swiftly signed into law.

The parties called on the National Assembly to immediately begin a fresh amendment process to remove what they described as “all obnoxious provisions” in the law.

Their position was made known at a press briefing themed “Urgent Call to Save Nigeria’s Democracy,” held at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja on Thursday.

In a communiqué read by the Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) Ahmed Ajuji, the opposition leaders stated:

“We demand that the National Assembly immediately commence a fresh amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, to remove all obnoxious provisions and ensure that the Act reflects only the will and aspiration of Nigerians for free, fair, transparent and credible electoral process in our country. Nothing short of this will be acceptable to Nigerians.”

Some of the opposition leaders present in at the event include former Senate President David Mark; former Governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar; former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; and former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, all from the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The National Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Ahmed Ajuji, and other prominent members of the NNPP, notably Buba Galadima, were also in attendance.

The coalition said the amended law, signed by Bola Tinubu, contains “anti-democratic” clauses, which they argue may weaken electoral transparency and public confidence in the voting system.

At the centre of the opposition’s concerns is the amendment to Section 60(3), which allows presiding officers to rely on manual transmission of election results where there is communication failure.

According to the coalition, the provision weakens the mandatory electronic transmission of results and could create loopholes for manipulation.

They argued that Nigeria’s electoral technology infrastructure is sufficient to support nationwide electronic transmission, citing previous assurances by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The parties also rejected the amendment to Section 84, which restricts political parties to direct primaries and consensus methods for candidate selection.

They described the change as an unconstitutional intrusion into the internal affairs of parties, insisting that indirect primaries remain a legitimate democratic option.

The opposition cited alleged irregularities in the recent Federal Capital Territory local government elections as evidence of what they described as a broader pattern of electoral compromise.

They characterised the polls as a “complete fraud” and said the outcome has deepened their lack of confidence in the ability of the electoral system to deliver credible elections in 2027.

The coalition also condemned reported attacks on leaders of the African Democratic Congress in Edo State, describing the incidents as a serious threat to democratic participation and political tolerance.

They warned that increasing violence against opposition figures could destabilise the political environment if not urgently addressed.

In their joint statement, the opposition parties pledged to pursue “every constitutional means” to challenge the Electoral Act 2026 and safeguard voters’ rights.

“We will not be intimidated,” the leaders said, urging civil society organisations and citizens to support efforts aimed at protecting Nigeria’s democratic system.

On February 18, 2026, President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 into law following its passage by the National Assembly. The Act introduced several reforms, including statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and revised election timelines.

However, opposition figures such as Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi have also called for further amendments, particularly over the manual transmission fallback clause, which critics say leaves room for manipulation.

The president said the law will strengthen democracy and prevent voter disenfranchisement.

Tinubu defended manual collation of results, questioned Nigeria’s readiness for full real-time electronic transmission, and warned against technical glitches and hacking.

The Electoral Act sparked intense debate in the National Assembly over how election results should be transmitted ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Civil society groups under the “Occupy NASS” campaign demanded real-time transmission to curb manipulation.

In the Senate, lawmakers clashed during consideration of Clause 60, which allows manual transmission of results if electronic transmission fails.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (ADC, Abia South) demanded a formal vote to remove the proviso permitting manual transmission, arguing against weakening real-time electronic reporting.

The move led to a heated exchange on the floor, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio initially suggesting the demand had been withdrawn.

After procedural disputes and a brief confrontation among senators, a division was conducted. Fifteen opposition senators voted against retaining the manual transmission proviso, while 55 supported it, allowing the clause to stand.

Earlier proceedings had briefly stalled during clause-by-clause review, prompting consultations and a closed-door session.

In the House of Representatives, a similar disagreement came up over a motion to rescind an earlier decision that mandated compulsory real-time electronic transmission of results to IReV.

Although the “nays” were louder during a voice vote, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas ruled in favour of rescinding the decision, triggering protests and an executive session.

Continue Reading

Headline

AFP: How Tinubu’s Govt Paid Boko Haram ‘Huge’ Ransom, Released Two Terrorists for Kidnapped Saint Mary’s Pupils

Published

on

By

The Nigerian government paid Boko Haram militants a “huge” ransom of millions of dollars to free up to 230 children and staff the jihadists abducted from a Catholic school in November, an AFP investigation revealed Monday.

Two Boko Haram commanders were also freed as part of the deal, which goes against the country’s own law banning payments to kidnappers. The money was delivered by helicopter to Boko Haram’s Gwoza stronghold in northeastern Borno state on the border with Cameroon, intelligence sources told AFP.

The decision to pay the militants is likely to irritate US President Donald Trump, who ordered air strikes on jihadists in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day and has been sent military trainers to help support Nigerian forces.

Nigerian government officials deny any ransom was paid to the armed gang that snatched close to 300 schoolchildren and staff from St. Mary’s boarding school in Papiri in central Niger state on November 21. At least 50 later managed to escape their captors.

Boko Haram has not been previously linked to the kidnapping, but sources told AFP one of its most feared commanders was behind the mass abduction: the notorious jihadist known as Sadiku.

He infamously held up a train from the capital in 2022 and netted hefty ransoms for the release of government officials and other well-off passengers.

Boko Haram, which has waged a bloody insurgency since 2009, is strongest in northeast Nigeria.

But a cell in central Niger state operates under Sadiku’s leadership. The St. Mary’s pupils and staff were freed after two weeks of negotiations led by Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, with the government insisting no ransom was paid. Nigeria’s State Security Service flatly denied paying any money, saying “government agents don’t pay ransoms”.

However, four intelligence sources familiar with the talks told AFP the government paid a “huge” ransom to get the pupils back. One source put it at 40 million naira per head – around $7 million in total.

Another put the figure lower at two billion naira overall. The money was delivered by chopper to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in the northeast, three sources told AFP.

Due to the lack of communications cover in the remote area, Ngulde had to cross into Cameroon to confirm delivery of the ransom before the first group of 100 children were released.

Nigeria has long been plagued by mass abductions, with criminals and jihadist groups sometimes working together to extort millions from hostages’ families, and authorities seemingly powerless to stop them.

Source: Africanews

Continue Reading

Trending