Featured
JESUS: Death and Resurrection 2
Published
4 years agoon
By
Eric
According to Catherine Murphy, in her book, ‘The Historical Jesus for Dummies’, the gospels give the impression that several Jewish groups — the Pharisees, the scribes, the priests, the elders, the Sadducees, and the high priest — teamed up to take Jesus out. They all conspired and turned him over to the Romans.
The central question is: What threat did Jesus actually pose to Rome? After all, he spent most of his time in the Galilee, which was not under Roman hegemony. If enough people so much as hoped that Jesus might be ushering in God’s reign —when Jesus entered Jerusalem (Mark 11:1–10; John 12:12–19) — Rome’s prefect, Pontius Pilate, would have intervened with force to make an example of the would-be messiah.
The interesting historical question is whether Jesus himself encouraged the crowds to hail him as the Messiah. His core teaching was that God’s kingdom was coming soon and that it alone offered true justice, peace, and good news to the people. Did he promote rebellion against Rome? Would he have prepared for a final confrontation with the authorities armed with the ‘two swords ‘he gave his disciples, one of which was used to chop off the ear of the servant of the High Priest; and which Jesus immediately glued back while rebuking him saying: Converte gladium tuum in locum suum ; ‘those who live by the sword die by the sword’. Matthew 26:52
Enter Ahmed Deedat’s interrogation of the story leading to crucifixion. See CRUCIFIXION OR CRUCI-FICTION, in which Deedat gave an exhaustive interrogation of the last day of Nabi Isa and delivered a verdict of crucifixion not being the cause of death. It was a live Jesus that appeared to Mary and the disciples: Story for another day. The intervention today is the implications for Islam of Jesus’ prophesised return.
Jesus asked his disciples; “Who do people say that I am?” Their answers—from John the Baptist to Elijah or one of the prophets—reveal how his followers understood his life and mission. Today, asking Muslim communities around the world the same question—who do you think that Christ is?—is equally revealing.
The Quran mentions Isa, 25 times, but differently each time. The Quran explains that Isa was born of the Virgin Mary (19:20–21) and is “high honored in this and the next world” (3:45–47). Thus, he is called Isa ibn Maryam, or Jesus son of Mary. The Quran also refers to him as ruh min Allah (“Spirit from God”), mushia bi’l baraka (“the Messiah—someone blessed by God”), kalimah min Allah (“Word from/of God”), and rasul (Prophet-Messenger) of God.
Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet who was given a special message—injil, or the gospel—to convey to all people. This message both confirmed what was taught in the Torah and foretold the coming of Prophet Muhammad. Thus, Jesus has a vital and unique role to play in the Muslim faith.
Like Christians, Muslims believe that Jesus will return. This is the crux of the problem. Islamic texts say that Jesus will come back on the Day of Judgment, when he will destroy the ad-dajjal—anti-Christ. This however, is a contentious issue as it relates to the Quran’s proclamation of Prophet Muhammad as the last prophet after whom there will be no other prophet: The title khatam an-nabiyyin or khatim an-nabiyyin, usually translated as “Seal of the Prophets”, is applied to Muhammad in Chapter 33:40 of the Qur’an.
In Mu’jam al-Awsat, at-Tabarani narrated a hadith with the last statement being, “So I am that [brick], I am the seal of the prophets, there is no prophet after me”
The question is: If Jesus returns, will he return as a prophet and in effect contradict Quran 33:40 and the Prophets assertion of him being the last prophet?
The belief that a new prophet cannot arise after Muhammad is shared by both Sunni and Shi’i Muslims. Some of the most prominent historical Sunni texts on creed explicitly mention the doctrine of finality of prophethood. For example, in al-Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah it is asserted that “Every claim to the prophetic office after his is a delusion and a wandering desire.” In another popular work, al-Aqidah an-Nasafiyyah, it is stated, “The first of the prophets is Adam and the last is Muhammad.”
The first modern academic to have studied in detail the history of the doctrine of finality of prophethood is Yohanan Friedmann. In his seminal article, Finality of Prophethood in Sunni Islam (1986), he concluded that “While it is true that the phrase khatam an-nabiyyin is generally interpreted as meaning ‘the last prophet’, the exegetical tradition and other branches of classical Arabic literature preserved material which indicates that this now generally received understanding of the Quranic phrase is not the only possible one and had not necessarily been the earliest.”
However, Uri Rubin holds that the finality of prophethood is a Quranic idea, not a post-Quranic one, and that the expression khatam an-nabiyyin implies both finality of prophethood and confirmation. In response to modern scholars skeptical of the early origin of the doctrine, Rubin concludes from his study “that, at least as far as Sura 33 is concerned, the idea of finality of prophethood is well-represented in the text, as well as in the earliest available extra-Quranic materials.” Rubin concludes that the texts confirm the early origin of the belief. He concludes that “there is no compelling reason to assume that the Muslims of the first Islamic century originally understood the Quranic khatam an-nabiyyin in the sense of confirmation alone, without that of finality.”
This therefore poses a problem for the ‘Second Coming’. The matter is however settled by the Quran where it said that Jesus was not killed but: ‘Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise’; (Quran 4:157–158)
If and when he returns, it will not be as a new Prophet but as Jesus, Isa of old. This is not difficult for God to do: Ref the story of Uzair Quran 2:259 and the ‘People of the Cave’ in Sûrat Al-Kahf.
Throughout history and today many Islamic thinkers have used Jesus as an important religious model. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali encouraged Muslims to pray as Jesus prayed. In ‘Arabi called Jesus wilaya (“seal of the friend of God”) because he possessed the highest knowledge of and intimacy with God. Mahmoud Ayoub, a modern Islamic theologian, has developed an Islamic Christology that explores how Jesus exemplifies the fulfilment of humanity by being fully illuminated by God’s light (tajalli).
Of course Islamic thought on Jesus differs from Christian teachings. But we also share many common beliefs: including a profound respect for the mystery of God, love for Jesus, and a willingness to learn from his life as we seek happiness with God. Perhaps here is an opening for a productive conversation between our faiths. And in this spirit of Easter, now is the time to give it much thought. Given centuries of mutual suspicion and misunderstandings as well as ever-recurring tensions; doing so in a winsome and responsible manner won’t be easy. But this is the challenge facing us in the days ahead.
Today it is Kaduna tomorrow it is Jos; the bloodletting must end. If we all follow the teachings of Christ, we would all ‘follow the commandments’ and live in peace with each other.
Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend
Related
You may like
Featured
Glo Wins ‘Africa’s Beacon of ICT Excellence, Leadership Award’
Published
3 days agoon
May 31, 2023By
Eric
Total telecommunications solutions provider, Globacom, has added another award to its kitty with the recent ‘Africa’s Beacon of ICT Excellence/Leadership Award’ awarded on Saturday in Lagos.
The 2023 Africa Beacon of ICT and Leadership Awards was held at the Oriental Hotels, Lagos and attracted the cream of the nation’s and continents’ telecom sector including the President of the Association of Telecommunication Companies of Nigeria (ATCON), Mr. Ikechukwu Nnamani, Director of Public Affairs, Nigeria Communication Commission, (NCC), Mr. Reuben Mouka, Regional Executive, (West Africa) at the Africa Data Centre (ADC), Dr. Krishman Ranganath and Digital Architect Manager and representative of Nigerian Technology Development Agency (NITDA), Falilat Jimoh.
In his remarks at the ceremony, Ken Nwogbo, Founder and CEO of Communication Week Media Limited, organisers of the BoICT Award, disclosed that Globacom won the award owing to its outstanding contributions in the last twenty years, including the 3G and 4G technologies, Glo 1 submarine cable, in addition to its unique products and services.
He added further that “The Beacon of ICT Award which was instituted to celebrate outstanding brands and the visions that birthed them has become one of the most prestigious annual awards in the nation’s ICT industry in the last 14 years”.
The organisers added that the award was also designed to celebrate individuals who have made sterling contributions in commerce and industry as well as government officials whose policies and programmes have had positive impacts on their jurisdictions.
The award was received on behalf of Globacom by the company’s representatives, Catherine Bomett, Director of Customer Care; Oladipo Olusanwo, Head of Gloworld Operation, and Obumneme Ikechebelu of Technical Department.
Related
Featured
Don’t Dare Nigerians, NLC Warns Tinubu over Fuel Subsidy Crisis
Published
3 days agoon
May 31, 2023By
Eric
The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), on Tuesday, expressed displeasure over the pronouncement by President Bola Tinubu that the subsidy on petrol is gone, without consulting relevant stakeholders and putting in place adequate measures to cushion its effect on the citizens.
The NLC, through a statement by its President Comrade Joe Ajaero, noted with regret that a few hours after the pronouncement, some marketers shut down their filling stations, and immediately there was a price hike in some places.
While describing the action as insensitive, the NLC President said it has brought tears and sorrow to millions of Nigerians instead of the renewed hope, which the administration has promised.
He also said that Tinubu’s pronouncement has devalued the quality of the lives of Nigerians by over 300 per cent and counting.
The statement read: “We at the Nigeria Labour Congress are outraged by the pronouncement of President Bola Tinubu removing ‘fuel subsidy without due consultations with critical stakeholders or without putting in place palliative measures to cushion the harsh effects of the ‘subsidy removal’.
“Within hours of his pronouncement, the nation went into a tailspin due to a combination of service shutdowns and product price hikes, in some places representing over 300 per cent price adjustment.
“By his insensitive decision, President Tinubu on his inauguration day brought tears and sorrow to millions of Nigerians instead of hope. He equally devalued the quality of their lives by over 300 per cent and counting.
“It is no heroism to commit against the people this level of cruelty at any time, let alone on an inauguration day. If he is expecting a medal for taking this decision, he would certainly be disappointed to receive curses for the people of Nigeria consider this decision not only a slight but a big betrayal.
“On our part, we are staunchly opposed to this decision and are demanding and immediate withdrawal of this policy.”
NLC argued that the pronouncement has ripple effects on the economic well-being of the people
He said, “The implications of this decision are grave for our security and well-being.
“We wonder if President Tinubu gave a thought to why his predecessors in office refused to implement this highly injurious policy decision.
“We also wonder if he also forgot the words he penned down on January 8, 2012, but issued on January 11, 2012.
“We have chosen to reproduce substantial parts of the statement for the benefit of those who did not have the opportunity of reading it then.
“As Nigerians gathered with family and friends to celebrate the New Year, the federal government was baking a national cake wrapped in the scheme that would instantly make the New Year a bitter one.
“Barely had the public weaned itself from last year when government dropped a historic surprise on an unsuspecting nation. PPPRA issued a statement abolishing the fuel subsidy. By this sly piece of paper, the federal government breached the social contract with the people.
“This government….has turned its back on the collective will. By bureaucratic fiat, government made the most fateful economic decision any administration has made since the inception of the Fourth Republic and it has done so with an arrogant wave of the hand as if issuing a minor regulation. Because of the terrible substance of the decision and the haughty style of its enactment, the people feel betrayed and angry.
“At this moment, we know not to where this anger will lead. In good conscience, we pray against violence. Also in good conscience, it is the duty of every citizen to peacefully demonstrate and record their opposition to this draconian measure that is swiftly crippling the economy more than it will ever cure it.
“By taking this step, the government has tossed the people into the depths of the midnight sea. Government demands the people swim to safety under their own power, claiming the attendant hardship will build character and add efficiency to the national economy. It is easy to make these claims when one is dry and onshore.
“Government would have us believe that every hardship it manufactures for the people to endure is a good thing. This is a lie. The hardships they thrust upon the poor often bear no other purpose than to keep them poor. This is such a time…..
“Though someday, Nigeria will have to remove the subsidy, the time to do it is not now. This subsidy removal is ill-timed and violates the condition precedent necessary before such a decision is made. First, the government needs to clean up and throw away the salad of corruption in the NNPC.
“Then, proceed to lay the foundation for a mass transit system in the railways and road network with long-term bonds and fully develop the energy sector towards revitalizing Nigeria’s economy and easing the burden any subsidy removal may have on the people.
“But we know this is about more than the fuel subsidy. It is about the government’s ideas on the role of money in bettering the lives of people, about the relationship between the government and the people and about the primary objective of the government’s interaction with the economy. It is about whom, among Nigeria’s various social classes, does government most values.
“This is why the public reaction has been heated. It is not so much that people have to spend more money. It is because people feel short-changed and sold out.
“… What this government claims to be economic decisions are essentially political ones. As there is progressive politics, there is progressive economics. As there is elitist politics, there is elitist economics. It all depends on what and who in society the government would rather favour. The Jonathan tax represents a new standard of elitism.
“This whole issue boils down to whether the government believes the general public is worth a certain level of expenditure…
“However, because the distance between the government and the people is far and the genuine level of affection is low, the government sees no utility in continuing to spend the current level of money on the people. In their mind, the people are not worth the money.
“Government sees more value in “saving” money than in saving the hard-pressed masses…
” If the government thrashed the fuel subsidy based on considerations that it will run out of naira then it based its decision on a factor that has not been relevant since the time of the Biafran war.
“…. Since In a fiat money system, the problem with the fuel subsidy is not impending insolvency as the government asserts. The serious constraint is inflation. Here we must ask whether the payment is so inflationary as to distort the economy. We have been making the payment for years and inflation has not wrecked the economy. This historic evidence refutes the imminent disaster claimed by the government.
“In advancing the argument that subsidy would lead to imminent bankruptcy, government reveals its lack of trustworthiness on important matters of fact….
“Nigerians have a collective stake in the ownership of our oil resource held in trust by the government of the day. What we need then is the effective management of this scarce resource that will beget long-term prosperity to the suffering people of Nigeria and not the present racket in which those in power abuse access and control of NNPC and oil revenue to warehouse money to fund their election campaigns.
“This brings us to another inconsistency. On one hand, the government states the expenditure is unsustainable yet on the other it claims the amount now earmarked for the subsidy will be used to fund other people-oriented programs. However, the two assertions cannot exist at the same time. If the subsidy is bankrupting us, then reallocating funds to different programs will be no less harmful. A bankrupting expenditure retains this quality whether used for a subsidy or another purpose. Earmarking the funds to something else will not change the fiscal impact. If the government is sincere about using the funds for other programs, then it must be insincere about the threatened insolvency.
“The concern about the government saving naira is purely superfluous. Officials cry that Nigeria will become like Greece. Those who say this disqualify themselves from high office by their own words. Greece sits in a terrible situation because it forfeited its own currency. Thus, it cannot print itself out of insolvency and it must save or earn euro to pay its bills. Because Nigeria issues its own currency, it does not face the same constraint.
“Again, Nigeria’s problem with the subsidy is not insolvency. Therefore, to go from subsidy to nothing is not wise economics for it “saves” government nothing. What it does is produce real havoc and misery for the majority of the people while the governing elite worship their mistaken fiscal rectitude.
“Ironically, by acting like the old gold standard fiscal constraints are real, this government will incur the very thing it seeks to avoid. It will subject Nigeria to a crushing economic contraction.
“The difference between us and the Greeks will be that their situation is the inevitable result of being a weak member in a monetary union dominated by a strong economy, while our downturn will be a discretionary one artificially induced by the backwardness of our policymakers…
“Again, we must rid ourselves of the old notion that government saving and budgetary surpluses are inherently good and that deficits are always bad. For government to save naira, that means it brings in more than it pays out. Where does this influx come from? It comes from you and me, the private sector. If the federal government saves more, it means the private sector will have less. Government surplus means private sector contraction. This shows that the administration has its priorities confused. It acts as if the people are there to help government run itself.
“The more beneficial relationship is that government should be giving people the help needed to better live their lives. The government’s position is akin to a wealthy parent demanding his young children bring home more food for him to consume than the parent gives them to eat. We would deride any parent for such meanness. Yet, this government believes this conduct is wise and prudent.
“Another argument government has presented is that removal of the subsidy will stabilize the exchange rate. This makes no sense. True, since marketers convert much of the naira from selling petrol gained into dollars, there is downward pressure on the exchange rate and foreign reserves. However, this pressure is not a byproduct of the subsidy.
“It is a byproduct of importation. With the subsidy lifted, the marketers will earn the same or more from the sale of petrol. For there to be less pressure on the exchange rate would mean the marketers would seek to exchange significantly less of the same amount of naira into dollars simply because the subsidy was removed.
“There is no logical basis to assume the new Jonathan tax will have the behavioral impact of causing importers to want to hold more naira. The downward pressure on our currency and reserves will not change simply because the imported items are no longer subsidized. In fact, the higher rate of inflation caused by the removal may make importers keener to change naira into dollars. Thus, the real challenge in this regard is for government to pave the way to increased domestic production.
“There is another “philosophical mystery” in the government’s position. They state the subsidy must be removed to end the unjust enrichment of the importing cabal. There is a major problem with this assertion. If this is truly a subsidy, there should be no unjust enrichment.
“A subsidy is created to allow the general public to pay a lesser price while sellers earn the prevailing market price. Subsidy removal should not increase or decrease the amount earned per litre by the suppliers. If the amount earned by the suppliers will diminish materially, what government had been operating was in part a pro-importer price support mechanism on top of the consumer-friendly subsidy. If this is the case, government could have abolished the unneeded price support while retaining the consumer subsidy.
“More to the point, government has failed to show how the system it plans to use will be protected from the undue influence and unfair dealings of those who benefited from the discarded subsidy regime. Because it is capital intensive by its very nature, this sector of the economy is susceptible to control by a few powerful companies.
“Most of the players will remain the same except that a few cronies of the administration will be allowed entrance into the lucrative game. Sending the economy into the gutter is a steep cost to pay just so a few friends can.
“Government claims the subsidy removal will create jobs. This is misleading. The stronger truth is that it will destroy more jobs than it creates. For every job it creates in the capital intensive petroleum sector, it will terminate several jobs in the rest of the labor intensive economy. Subsidy removal will increase costs across the board. However, salaries will not increase.
“This means demand for goods will lessen as will sales volumes and overall economic activity. The removal will have a recessionary impact on the economy as a whole. While some will benefit from the removal, most will experience setback.
“What is doubtless is that the Jonathan tax will increase the price of petrol, transportation and most consumer items. With fuel prices increasing twofold or more, transportation costs will roughly double. Prices of food staples will increase between 25-50 percent. Yet this is more than about cost figures.
“Most people’s incomes are low and stagnant. They have no way to augment revenue and little room to lower expenses for they know no luxuries; they are already tapped out. The only alternative they have is to fend as best they can, knowing they must somehow again subtract something from their already bare existence.
” There will be less food, less medicine, and less school across the land. More children will cry in hunger and more parents will cry at their children’s despair. This is what government has done. Poor and middle class consumers will spend the same amount to buy much less.
“The volume of economic activity will drop like a stone tossed from a high building. This means real levels of demand will sink. The middle class to which our small businessmen belong will find their profit margins squeezed because they will face higher costs and reduced sales volumes.
” These small firms employ vast numbers of Nigerians. They will be hard pressed to maintain current employment levels given the higher costs and lower revenues they will face. Because the middle class businessman will be pinched, those who depend on the businessmen for employment will be heavily pressed.
“States that earn significant revenue from internally generated funds will find their positions damaged. Internally generated revenue will decline because of the pressure on general economic activity. The Jonathan tax will push Nigeria toward an inflation-recession combination punch worse than the one that has Europe reeling.
“This tax has doomed Nigeria to extra hardship for years to come while the promised benefits of deregulation will never be substantially realized.
” People will starve and families crumble while federal officials praise themselves for “saving money.” The purported savings amount to nothing more than an accounting entry on the government ledger board. They bear no indication of the real state of the economy or of the great harm done the people by this miserly step.
“As stated before, the threat of bankruptcy is nothing more than a ghost of something long dead. The real consideration is not whether this sum should be spent but whether it is better spent on the subsidy or on other programs. Nigerians do not need to be wedded to the subsidy. It is not the subsidy that gives life to the social compact; the amount of the expenditure is the better litmus.
“When attempting to douse popular sentiment, government pretended that the social contract would remain intact because government would spend the money saved from the subsidy on other programs. This would be nice if supported by action. If government were sincere in this regard, it would have used an entirely different strategy…”
“In light of the foregoing, we advise Tinubu to respect his owe postulations and economic theories instead of daring the people. It could be a costly gamble.”
Related
Featured
Adedoyin Bags Death Sentence for Murder of Timothy Adegoke
Published
4 days agoon
May 30, 2023By
Eric
Osun State High Court has found Ramon Adedoyin, the founder of Oduduwa University, guilty of the murder of Timothy Adegoke.
The court, under the ruling of Judge Adepele Ojo, sentenced Adedoyin, who is also the owner of the Hilton hotel, to death by hanging on Tuesday.
Adegoke, a postgraduate student from Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), was murdered between November 5 and 7, 2021, at the Hilton Honours Hotel in Ile-Ife.
Judge Adepele Ojo, delivering her judgement on the case, held that the circumstantial evidence available to the court pointed to the killing of Adegoke while he was a guest at the hotel owned by Adedoyin.
She stated that Adedoyin’s decision not to enter the witness box did not help him, as the circumstantial evidence had shifted the burden of proof on him.
Justice Ojo also added that Adedoyin’s refusal to testify meant he agreed to the murder charge brought against him by the prosecution, dismissing the alibi pleaded on his behalf by his counsel, who stated that the hotel owner was in Abuja for several days around the time of the late Adegoke’s death.
Related


Voice of Emancipation: Removal of Fraud Subsidy

Adding Value: The Hand of Favour by Henry Ukazu

Against All Odds: Be Ready for Effective Leadership

Tinubu Announces Akume As SGF, Gbajabiamila As Chief of Staff

The Oracle: Quo Vadis Interim Government? (Pt. 3)

Friday Sermon: Who is the Messiah? Has He Come?

CBN Denies Devaluating Naira, Says Trending Story Fake

Nigerian Engineer Wins $500m Contract to Build Monorail Network in Iraq

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Will Senate President, Bukola Saraki, Join Presidential Race?

World Exclusive: How Cabal, Corruption Stalled Mambilla Hydropower Project …The Abba Kyari, Fashola and Malami Connection Plus FG May Lose $2bn

Rehabilitation Comment: Sanwo-Olu’s Support Group Replies Ambode (Video)

Pendulum: Can Atiku Abubakar Defeat Muhammadu Buhari in 2019?

Fashanu, Dolapo Awosika and Prophet Controversy: The Complete Story

Pendulum: An Evening with Two Presidential Aspirants in Abuja

Who are the early favorites to win the NFL rushing title?

Boxing continues to knock itself out with bewildering, incorrect decisions

Steph Curry finally got the contract he deserves from the Warriors

Phillies’ Aaron Altherr makes mind-boggling barehanded play

The tremendous importance of owning a perfect piece of clothing
Trending
-
News5 years ago
Nigerian Engineer Wins $500m Contract to Build Monorail Network in Iraq
-
Featured5 years ago
WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Will Senate President, Bukola Saraki, Join Presidential Race?
-
Boss Picks5 years ago
World Exclusive: How Cabal, Corruption Stalled Mambilla Hydropower Project …The Abba Kyari, Fashola and Malami Connection Plus FG May Lose $2bn
-
Headline5 years ago
Rehabilitation Comment: Sanwo-Olu’s Support Group Replies Ambode (Video)
-
Headline5 years ago
Pendulum: Can Atiku Abubakar Defeat Muhammadu Buhari in 2019?
-
Headline5 years ago
Fashanu, Dolapo Awosika and Prophet Controversy: The Complete Story
-
Headline5 years ago
Pendulum: An Evening with Two Presidential Aspirants in Abuja
-
Headline5 years ago
2019: Parties’ Presidential Candidates Emerge (View Full List)