Islam

Friday Sermon: Religion: Reflecting the Violence and Desperation of Our Time

Published

6 months ago

December 19, 2025

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

Recently, the country has been entangled in a controversy over allegations of persecution of Christians. Like in many other regions of the world, many of our difficulties mask a deeper spiritual crisis. During the twentieth century, we saw the eruption of violence on an unprecedented scale. Sadly, our ability to harm and mutilate one another has kept pace with our extraordinary economic and scientific progress.

We seem to lack the wisdom to hold our aggression in check and keep it within safe and appropriate bounds. The explosion of the first atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki laid bare the nihilistic self-destruction at the heart of the brilliant achievements of our modern culture. Here in this clime the ubiquitous cattle Fulani and their sanda have been suddenly transformed into wielding military-grade weaponry. What’s going on?

Auschwitz, Rwanda, Bosnia, and the destruction of the World Trade Center were all dark epiphanies that revealed what can happen when the sense of the sacred inviolability of every single human being has been lost.

Religion, which is supposed to help us to cultivate this sense of sacredness often, seems to have lost its influence. Almost every day we see examples of religiously motivated terrorism, hatred, and intolerance. We all look for moments of ecstasy and rapture, when we inhabit our humanity more fully than usual and feel deeply touched within and lifted momentarily beyond ourselves.

In recent decades, there has been a spiritual revival in many parts of the world, and the militant piety that we often call “fundamentalism” is only one manifestation of our postmodern search for enlightenment. This trend is very much pronounced in our clime: Especially since the dawn of the Islamic fundamentalist group Boko Haram and others.

It is frequently assumed, for example, that faith is a matter of believing certain creedal propositions. Indeed, it is common to call religious people “believers,” as though assenting to the articles of faith were their chief activity.

What matteres is not what you believe but how you behave. Religion is about doing things that change you at a profound level. The only way you could encounter what they call “God,” “Nirvana,” “Brahman,” or the “Way” is to live a compassionate life. Indeed, religion is compassion.

Religion which ought to bring some temperance into the political atmosphere and check the utterances and behaviors of political players has sadly failed. Rather, religion has formed an alliance with the political actors and in the process the conscience of the people has been killed.

In the Nigerian setting, it has been a catalogue of conflicts, bloodshed, lootings and all kinds of exploitation. This seems to confirm the Marxist perspective on religion. Lenin writes: Religion is one of the forms of spiritual oppression which everywhere weighs heavily upon the masses of the people over–burdened by their perpetual work for others, by want and isolation. . . . those who live by the labour of others are taught by religion to practice charity while on earth, thus offering them a cheap way of justifying their existence as exploiters. Religion is the opium for the people. Religion is a sort of spiritual booze in which the slaves of capital drown their human image, their demand for a life more or less worthy of man.

According to A.C. Bouquet, Religion is a fixed relationship between the human entity, the sacred, the supernatural, the self-existent, the absolute or simply God. (J.I. Omoregbe, A Philosophical Look at Religion. Lagos: 1993).

However, religion could be seen as human activities manifesting through beliefs and ritual practices in response to the Super-sensible Being, believed to exist.

Seeing as it were that man is homo politicus and at the same time homo religio, it follows that we cannot do without politics as well as religion in our everyday life. Therefore, we tend to politicize religion and religionize politics. Mixing the two however makes religion lose its sacredness and it becomes a lethal weapon.

This is the reality of our post-colonial state, particularly the capture and control of state power by a self-centered and divided political class. They whip up religious sentiments, weaponizing it and accentuating its divisive tendencies. Hence, almost all political actions are seen through the prism of religion.

The Boko Haram issue is also a good example. These misguided terrorists and their local and international sponsors have continued to wreak havoc on our society, killing, kidnapping and maiming, regardless of the religious affiliation of their victims. Yet, they have been seen as an arm of a wider Islamic tendency to Islamize the country. Interestingly, Boko Haram has refused to travel across the Niger or Benue rivers. It’s supposed Islamization has been localized to the predominantly Muslim North! Islamizing wetin?

Today, the politics of religious identification and affiliation now revolves around the religious inclination of the political leadership of the country. Hence, Muslims identify with a Moslem president and support him regardless of policy issues. This was also the case of the massive support of the Christian community for the presidency of Obasanjo and Jonathan: And the apogee of CAN in Nigerian politics.

It is, however, inconceivable and an over-stretch of the imagination bordering on incredulity for anyone to say that a President harbors an agenda to Islamize or Christianize Nigeria, the days of Jihad and Missionary Evangelism have passed. It is now all about money.

Religion and politics some may argue should not mix but it is obvious that religion cannot be divorced from politics; especially in a society where political leadership finds it very convenient to hide under the umbrella of religion. There is no doubt, as Prof Ali Mazrui noted:

In those African countries, where Islam is in serious competition with Christianity and both are politicized, the two creeds become divisive rather than unifying, destabilizing rather than legitimizing. Where religion reinforces ethnic differences on regional variation, governments become less stable rather than more… On the whole, the two Semitic religions in Nigeria, Christianity and Islam reinforce regional and ethnic differences, and make stability more difficult. (Mazrui, A.A. (1996) “Military Intervention in African Politics”. In Ralph Uwechue (ed), Africa Today. Third Edition. United Kingdom)

The ferocious gyration of Nigerians about religious matters which will not be replicated when it comes to national interest has weakened the Nigerian state. A survey of ethno-religious crisis in Nigeria reveals that blood of innocent Nigerians are shed and properties destroyed on account of this passion, fervor, emotional and emotive reactions, moral certitude, and religiosity. (Ojo, E.O. (2006) “A Survey of Ethno-Religious Crisis in Nigeria and its implication for Democracy” in Ojo, E.O. (ed). Challenges of Sustainable Democracy in Nigeria; Ibadan).

The political class cannot exonerate itself from the present predicament of Nigeria. A lot of useful energy is diverted to building religious sentiment. Rather than mobilize Nigerians to their cause as politicians, the new political elites are busy mobilizing their religious constituencies for a war against one another. With religion generating so much passion, the polarization of the nation has found full expression as the country is finally pitched as a battleground between Christians and Muslims.

“Religion does not make people good or bad. On the contrary, it is being used as an instrument of oppression and deceit in Nigeria. It appears that Nigerians have resigned themselves to fate, and this is possibly further compounded by poverty, illiteracy, and lack of political education on the part of the majority.” (Egbewole, W. O., and Etudaiye, M. A. (2011). Religion, Politics and Justice: Interplay of Forces in Nigeria).

The manipulation of religion by some powerful individuals who hide under the guise of religion to pursue selfish interests, and the greed and avariciousness of some religious leaders who patronize corrupt rulers remains part of the negative effects of religion on the polity.

Efforts by Nigerian politicians to gain ascendancy and power have led to a situation in which politics have swept away sacred precepts of religion, and in the process, contaminated the hearts of people with bitterness and enmity for the religion of others.

“The effect of religion on politics all over the world is bifocal, in the sense that it is both positive and negative. It is positive in the sense that religion, as earlier identified, is value-driven and it naturally robs off on the polity through the participation of ardent religious believers. The negative effect could be deciphered from the perspective of sectarian tendency; where religious bigots do anything in the name of religion to ensure that positions or offices are gained by their adherents. Such people stand on the position that their ideals and beliefs dominate any environment they find themselves in.” (New York Times, 2005).

Unfortunately, the North has always been the bedrock of religious crisis. Since 1992, over tens of thousands of people have died from communal-religious conflicts. Plateau, Benue, Taraba, Borno, and Kaduna States constitute the highest figure of casualties. In recent years, incidents of Christian/Muslim violence have become more frequent and bloodier.

Insecurity in Northern Nigeria has reached alarming levels, driven by a complex interplay of socio-economic, political, and structural factors, leading to significant loss of life and widespread suffering. The National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, reported that over 47,000 lives were lost to insecurity in the North before the current administration took office, highlighting the dire state of security in the region.

The insecurity in Northern Nigeria is attributed to several interrelated factors, including: High levels of poverty and unemployment have fueled discontent and violence, particularly among the youth.

The region is plagued by ethno-religious violence and land-related conflicts, which often result in killings and displacements.

Corruption and ineffective governance have exacerbated the security situation, leading to a lack of trust in government institutions.

The activities of groups like Boko Haram and other bandits, have intensified insecurity, with Boko Haram alone accounting for over 35,000 deaths in the North-East.

The consequences of this insecurity are profound, affecting various aspects of life in Northern Nigeria: Millions have been displaced from their homes due to violence, leading to a humanitarian crisis.

Insecurity has disrupted local economies, leading to food shortages and loss of livelihoods. Many children have been forced out of school due to the violence, further perpetuating the cycle of poverty and insecurity.

To address the insecurity in Northern Nigeria, experts recommend strengthening security institutions including improving the capacity and effectiveness of security forces to combat violence.

Need to encourage community-led peace building initiatives to foster trust and cooperation among different groups.

Initiate economic development issues such as investing in entrepreneurship and job creation to alleviate poverty and reduce the appeal of militant groups.

In conclusion, the insecurity in Northern Nigeria and Nigeria as a whole is a multifaceted issue that requires urgent and comprehensive action from both the government and local communities to restore peace and stability. But, it is not a religious issue. Ethnicity and religion have a curious mix in the matter.

Guide us to the straight path. The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have evoked [Your] anger or of those who are astray. (Quran 1:6-7)

Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend

In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, I wish to thank Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala for His Grace and mercies. Next week, Thursday 25^th December, our brother Babatunde Jose will add another year to his sojourn on this earth. Alhamdulillah, he will turn 76; going up in the evening of life. May it please Allah to bless the new age and may his days be long in good health. Every waking day, we move nearer the grave. May Allah teach us how to number our days and guide us into living a righteous life. For those who have walked with me this far, I thank you all, may Allah accept our prayers and supplications. It is well, even in the well!

Babatunde Jose – +234 803 311 0822

Islam

Friday Sermon: Terrorism the Curse of Islam 2

Published

6 days ago

June 12, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

If from a cursory reading of the history of Islam, especially in the age of the Caliphs and the period of territorial expansion, people get the impression that Islam is a religion of war and violence, that impression cannot be easily dismissed, even though drawing conclusions about Islam based on such impressions is simplistic, one-dimensional, naïve, immature, and inappropriate at best.

In the aftermath of 9/11 when President Bush visited the Islamic Centre of Washington DC, he remarked: “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.” This statement was met with all round condemnation and denigration by neo-conservatives and even some of the President’s compatriots. Former British Prime Minister, David Cameron, suffered the same abuse and all-round denunciation from the neo-con, when he expressed similar views on Islam.

In contrast to the above are the Islamic hardliners who are the bedrock of fundamentalism. They are the so-called Jihadists who have read their Quran upside down and out of context. They give Islam a bad name and are extremists in their behavior. Their language is not only fiery, but intemperate and attitudes towards other faiths are belligerent. They form the crux of the extremists, unfortunately for Islam, they are vociferous but in the minority.

We have them here too. Alfas and Imams who preach hate at every opportunity and poison the minds of their congregants with odious and abhorrent interpretations of the Quran and misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the Hadith.

A bunch of ignoramuses, they are the cause of much of the disagreement between Islam and other faiths. But it does not have to be so.

Repudiating this group of extremist Muslims, is the broader Muslim community that finds an echo of their own position in what President Bush said and they would like the world to know that Islam means peace and Islam is peaceful. Period!

This group is very much troubled by the hate-mongering and violent posturing of the fringe extremists among Muslims. Thus, they would like to underscore and highlight the essential dimension of Islam, which in their view is peace.

To present Islam as essentially peaceful or violent, leads to a false and an unacceptable reductionism; and trying to cast Islam in such a reductionist framework inevitably leads to either misunderstanding or misrepresentation. Islam, like any other faith should be judged by the tenets of the religion; its five pillars and the Quran, without taking its provisions out of context and the life and time of the prophet and his ‘Sahabah’ placed in the proper historical settings.

The history of Islam is also like that of many other religious communities and is not devoid of violence and warfare. There have been almost perpetual wars, conflicts, and the attending violence in the Muslim world.

The Islamic polity, which from the beginning was on a pluralistic foundation, continued to be drawn to war with other great civilizations and lesser powers of the time.

The Caliphate was also engulfed in internal schism and conflict; the Shiite and Sunni divide. Contending powers or blocks had internecine conflicts, in most cases completely de-linked and unrelated with the spirit, vision, and precepts of Islam. This continues today as we witness in the Shiite revolt in Northern Nigeria.

Islam (submission to God) being a religion of freedom, peace and justice does cover the legitimacy of fighting in the Quran as and when it is required and justified. The believers at the time of the revelation of the Quran had to face hostile opposition because of their religious views and were in many cases forced to fight to save their lives as well as to stay in their homes and to practice their religion freely.

But it is unfortunate that the misguided groups who claim they are Muslims have quoted certain verses or their parts out of context in support of their terrorist activities in the erroneous belief of passage to Paradise and so do the critics of the Quran to trace the presence of violence in Islam.

However, below are the verses which are often taken out of context, even the message is very clear being the commandment of fighting for the believers when their lives and properties were in danger: 2:191; 4:101; 8:12; 8:13; 9:5; 9:14.

Fighting was a great concern of the believers at the initial period of the religion. For the first ten years, they faced persecution and oppression and after they immigrated to Medina, the Meccans waged wars against them. There are misinterpretations in the commandment of fighting, while some groups who have entirely inverted the religion claim that they are Muslims, but they do not belong to God’s religion as mentioned in the Quran. They commit murder and suicide expecting to go to Paradise but what they would get is a place in Hell Fire.

Since these groups insist on calling themselves Muslims, they belong to one group, which is labeled “Radical Islam” or “Islamic extremists” or “Islamic terrorists” in the media. Such labeling of these groups is completely wrong, because killing innocent people is the total opposite of the religion of Islam as detailed in the Quran. Hence, they are plainly terrorists, extremists, and anarchists.

Allah said: Fight in the Way of God against those who fight you, but do not go beyond the limits. God does not love those who go beyond the limits. (Quran 2:190)

Without justice, peace is an illusion. That is human reality. Islam urges and emboldens people never to succumb to injustice. Rather, it instills courage and spirit to resist any social injustice and work collectively, creatively, and capably toward a just society, see Quran 4:135.

This pursuit of justice is not parochial or limited to only Muslims. Indeed, even though it should not be compared to the contemporary standard of human experience, during certain periods of Islamic civilization, non-Muslims, including Jews, found the best protection under Islamic rules and fled persecutions in Christendom to the Islamic polities. In this regard, we would like to quote ‘The Ashtiname of Muhammad’ (SAW).

The content of which is a testament, an eloquent testimony to the perception of the Holy Prophet (SAW) to Moslem/Christian relations:

“This is a letter which was issued by Mohammed, Ibn Abdullah, the Messenger, the Prophet, the Faithful, who is sent to all the people as a trust on the part of God to all His creatures, that they may have no plea against God hereafter. Verily God is Omnipotent, the Wise. This letter is directed to the embracers of Islam, as a covenant given to the followers of Jesus the Nazarene in the East and West, the far and near, the Arabs and foreigners, the known and the unknown.

“This letter contains the oath given unto them, and he who disobeys that which is therein will be considered a disbeliever and a transgressor to that whereunto he is commanded. He will be regarded as one who has corrupted the oath of God, disbelieved His Testament, rejected His Authority, despised His Religion, and made himself deserving of His Curse, whether he is a Sultan or any other believer of Islam. Whenever Christian monks, devotees and pilgrims gather together, whether in a mountain or valley, or den, or frequented place, or plain, or church, or in houses of worship, verily we are [at the] back of them and shall protect them, and their properties and their morals, by Myself, by My Friends and by My Assistants, for they are of My Subjects and under My Protection.

“I shall exempt them from that which may disturb them; of the burdens which are paid by others as an oath of allegiance. They must not give anything of their income but that which pleases them—they must not be offended, or disturbed, or coerced or compelled. Their judges should not be changed or prevented from accomplishing their offices, nor the monks disturbed in exercising their religious order, or the people of seclusion be stopped from dwelling in their cells.

“No one is allowed to plunder these Christians, or destroy or spoil any of their churches, or houses of worship, or take any of the things contained within these houses and bring it to the houses of Islam. And he who takes away anything therefrom, will be one who has corrupted the oath of God, and, in truth, disobeyed His Messenger.

“Jizya should not be put upon their judges, monks, and those whose occupation is the worship of God; nor is any other thing to be taken from them, whether it be a fine, a tax or any unjust right. Verily I shall keep their compact, wherever they may be, in the sea or on the land, in the East or West, in the North or South, for they are under My Protection and the testament of My Safety, against all things which they abhor.

“No taxes or tithes should be received from those who devote themselves to the worship of God in the mountains, or from those who cultivate the Holy Lands. No one has the right to interfere with their affairs, or bring any action against them. Verily this is for aught else and not for them; rather, in the seasons of crops, they should be given a Kadah for each Ardab of wheat (about five bushels and a half) as provision for them, and no one has the right to say to them ‘this is too much’, or ask them to pay any tax.

“As to those who possess properties, the wealthy and merchants, the poll-tax to be taken from them must not exceed twelve drachmas a head per year (i.e. about 200 modern day US dollars).

“They shall not be imposed upon by anyone to undertake a journey, or to be forced to go to wars or to carry arms; for the Muslims have to fight for them. Do no dispute or argue with them, but deal according to the verse recorded in the Quran, to wit: ‘Do not dispute or argue with the People of the Book but in that which is best’ [29:46].Thus they will live favored and protected from everything which may offend them by the Callers to religion (Islam), wherever they may be and in any place they may dwell.

“Should any Christian woman be married to a Muslim, such marriage must not take place except after her consent, and she must not be prevented from going to her church for prayer. Their churches must be honored and they must not be withheld from building churches or repairing convents.

“They must not be forced to carry arms or stones; but the Muslims must protect them and defend them against others. It is positively incumbent upon every one of the follower of Islam not to contradict or disobey this oath until the Day of Resurrection and the end of the world.”

Some have argued that the Ashtiname is a resource for building bridges between Muslims and Christians. The Ashtiname urges all Muslims to abide by the treaties and covenants that were concluded by Muhammad (SAW) with the Christian communities of his time.

If today some fringe elements disobey this covenant, it’s not because their actions are sanctioned, but they should be seen for what they are; not be seen as representing the faith. They should not only be condemned, but they should also be made to face the full wrath of the law.

In our next discourse, we shall examine the sources of the schism in interfaith relations and the origins of modern-day terrorism.

Barka Juma’at and Happy weekend

Islam

Friday Sermon: Terrorism: The Curse of Islam 1

Published

2 weeks ago

June 5, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

A lot has happened recently on the ‘terrorism’ front that brings to the front burner the issue of Islam and terrorism, more especially with some erstwhile Moslems and ‘friends’ of Islam beginning to ask the question: Why Islam? Misperception and confusion are starting to set in and many have begun to ruminate over the possibilities of a real connection between the tenets of the religion and terrorism.

Here in Nigeria, it has become increasingly clear that terrorism is no more the exclusive preserve of the Fulani herdsmen, Boko Haram and their derivatives, rather it has become a full-blown lucrative proposition for all comers. Kidnapping, terrorism and their variants have assumed industrial scale pursuits; and is no more limited to regions or provinces.

Recent provocative messages from Mike Arnold, a former US mayor and missionary and spokesman on the perceived Christian persecution, radical Islam and humanitarian crises in Nigeria, has made this sermon very germane. He is also the US ally of Nnamdi Kanu, the misguided Biafra irredentist: And most of all a self-styled modern-day crusader for the liberation of Nigeria from the clutches of remnants of Dan Fodio’s Jihad and the emergence of the ‘Promised Messiah’.

From the onset, let us disabuse our minds of any connection, encouragement, aiding or abetting of terror by mainstream Islam. There is no point repeating the assertion that Islam is a religion of peace.

It must also be said that the media is today enamoured with incidents of terrorism as it gives them good copy and the now proverbial’ Breaking News’ syndrome. The result of these odious presses, the activities of fringe terrorists is causing the faith what many now perceive that: “Violence is inherent in Islam. It’s a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimizes murder.”

We can say with certainty that the violence and conflict racking much of the Muslim world does not happen because its inhabitants are Muslims. Because in recent decades alone we have seen every one of these types of violence replicated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Rwanda, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Cambodia, in conflicts where next to no Muslims were involved.

Contrary to the oft-stated view that religion causes much of the world’s violence, the past century has shown the immense potential for violence of the centralizing nation-state. Some people will be quick to say that none of the countries have generated global terrorism; which is correct. The fact is that they do not make sensational headlines as religion would.

A better explanation is that none of these post-colonial nations was deemed of crucial strategic importance to the West, and so none found itself garrisoned by Western troops; whereas the countries where large numbers of Muslims live happen to lie across the Suez Canal, the Strait of Hormuz and a vast reservoir of fossil fuels, as well as the birthplace of the West’s major religion. All those things made the West a participant in the Muslim world’s conflicts and then – eventually, after many decades – a target for them.

But that is geopolitics and cannot explain the recent emergence of home-based terrorists in England, France, Germany, Belgium and the United States. However, we might ponder, why the same type of terrorism is absent in South America, even Mexico.

The reason is not far-fetched. These nations have never had exploitative relationships with the so-called axis of Islamic militarism. That is, simply the Oil kingdoms of the East.

If anything, Europe is suffering from the collateral damage of years of its injustice to the people of the ‘Fertile Crescent’. The situation is however, not being helped by the intemperate language of ‘Islam haters’ in the West. A commentator on CBS 60 Minutes did not stop at the violent acts of militant Muslims: No, he declared on the program that ‘Muhammad (SAW) is a “terrorist” who set an example opposite to that of Jesus and Moses’.

The most detestable of them all is the book by J.K Sheindlin: THE PEOPLE VS MUHAMMAD: A PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS, dubbed; ‘The trial which challenges the founder of Islam’s authority over all mankind’. In this book (worse than Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses), the author called the Prophet (SAW) all sorts of unprintable epithets, most unbecoming of a sane human being. No wonder the book was eventually censored and banned on the Internet.

We have written about this before, namely, that the sins of Muslims should not be confused with the tenets or doctrines of Islam. We absolutely agree that some Muslims use Quranic verses (out of context) to justify their murder of innocent people. But the Bible has also been used to justify murder (http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home-page/murder-in-the-bible/), the enslavement of Africans, or racial discrimination in the United States. You can also reference ‘The Slave Bible’.

Scores of Orthodox Christian Serb soldiers systematically raped tens of thousands of Bosnian Muslim women in the aftermath of the breakup of Yugoslavia. The members of the Klu Klux Klan are Christians. Can one justifiably conclude that Christianity is a racist and “evil” religion? Islam is not accorded this same treatment, and it is wrong.

On the one hand some Christian fundamentalists say how barbaric Islam is when it decrees cutting off the hand of the thief; however, when we read the Old Testament, much of the punishment prescribed there is the same as in the Qur’an. Even the evangelicals’ relentless assault on the dress of the Muslim women is contentious. Ask them about the dress of Mary, the mother of Jesus and the pious women during the time of Jesus: In the New Testament the verses read, ‘it is a shame for a woman to pray with her head uncovered. (1 Cor. 11:2-16); also, in the book of Ephesians, there are verses that read, wives obey your husbands and be silent in the church, if you have a question, wait until you get home and ask your husband. Women are to learn in silence and subjection (Ephesians 5:21-32). The Evangelical are silent on these and countless other verses that support racism against people of colour; the verse reads “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.” (Colossians 3:22).

Allah says in the holy book: O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you, make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do (Quran 5:8)

It is very easy to forget that the evangelicals and the neo-conservatives use the Bible to justify Israeli occupation of Palestine. They fund and support illegal settlement activity. They are also against peace and all “road maps” to peace. They support directly or indirectly the violence and terrorism against Palestinians fighting for their just cause against occupation. They also supported the illegal war against Iran for the “security” of Israel.

The US, Israel, India, Russia, etc. have all the WMDs and other powerful weapons which they use frequently – these nations have terrorized and killed so many and continue to do so in the name of self-defence or in the defence of their economic interest – even at the cost of so many innocent lives? It is therefore an insult upon injury when the legitimate struggle of the oppressed is termed terrorism.

We need to educate people in the fact that terrorism is not Islam; and that terrorists, regardless of religion or political ideology, are all demented fools who use their religion or ideology as a mechanism to justify their sick and twisted acts. No religion condones terrorism.

We need to educate the people that being a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Atheist, a member of the political left or political right does not equate you to being a terrorist, but rather that those who are terrorist are trying to equate themselves with members of these faiths or ideologies and are causing catastrophic damage when they hijack these faiths and ideologies for their own sick and twisted actions.

Groups such as Al-Qaeda, the IRA, The Japanese Red Army, ISIS, Boko Haram and many other groups do not represent the whole of the community they claim to represent, instead they are the exact opposite of what they claim to represent.

It is rather unfortunate that the terrorists, kidnappers and extremists that operate in our country fall under the above nomenclature. Kidnapping, terrorism and extremism have become a growth industry and are in no way religious in nature. The Fulani herdsman is not fighting for Islam. His cows destroy the farmland of both Muslim and Christian farmers.

Does the Quran or Muhammad (SAW) promote violence? Some issues in peace and violence are what we will look at in our next discourse.

Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend

Islam

Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac: Familial Bonds, Divine Promise and Human Action

Published

3 weeks ago

May 29, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

Isaac and Ishmael were both sons of Abraham but had different mothers. Ishmael was born to Hagar, Sarah’s Egyptian maidservant, as a result of Sarah’s attempt to provide an heir due to her initial barrenness (Genesis 16:15). Isaac, however, was born to Sarah herself as the fulfillment of God’s covenant promise, making him the ‘child of promise’ (Genesis 21:3). This distinction created a natural divergence in their destinies, with Isaac designated as the heir of God’s covenant and Ishmael destined to become the progenitor of a separate nation (Genesis 21:12-13).

The story told in the Quran and Islamic exegesis naturally creates doubts about Judeo-Christian renditions, yet the Torah or Taurat predates the Quran by over 3,000 years. We should therefore be cautious in treating historical facts which we are not in a position to corroborate or dismiss. No doubt in the narrations of both Judaism and the Quran, supernatural claims were involved. One supernatural claim cannot be dismissed offhand by the other. There is no doubt God made a promised to both Abraham and his wife. He also came to the aid of Ishmael and his mother during their sojourn in the wilderness.

The story of Abraham and his two sons has a bearing on the just concluded Hajj which is an essential pillar of Islam.

Ishmael, as the firstborn son of Abraham, holds a significant position in the family. Yet, his birth is not the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham and Sarah. The narrative takes a pivotal turn in Genesis 17, when God reiterates His covenant with Abraham and promises that Sarah will bear a son, Isaac, through whom the covenant will be established. In Genesis 17:19, God explicitly states, “Your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.”

Theologically, the story of Ishmael and Isaac raises important questions about God’s promises and human agency. Moreover, the relationship between Ishmael and Isaac has been interpreted allegorically by later biblical writers. In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul uses the story of Hagar and Sarah to illustrate the difference between living under the law and living under the promise (Galatians 4:21-31).

In Islamic tradition, Ishmael is considered an important prophet and an ancestor of Muhammad (SAW), which further complicates the historical and theological relationship between Ishmael and Isaac’s descendants. This adds layers of significance to their story, as it touches on issues of identity, heritage, and faith across different religious traditions.

The relationship between Ishmael and Isaac as depicted in Genesis is a rich tapestry of familial bonds, divine promise, and human action. It challenges us to consider the dynamics of God’s covenantal relationships and the ways in which God works through and despite human frailty.

While Ishmael and Isaac’s paths diverge, both are integral to the unfolding story of God’s interaction with humanity, reminding us of the breadth and depth of God’s promises and the diverse ways in which they manifest in the world.

In retrospect, Isaac and Ishmael themselves were not depicted as lifelong enemies. Biblical accounts show moments of tension and divine prophecy that have been interpreted symbolically or historically as foreshadowing conflict among their descendants, but the narrative emphasizes God’s care and promises for both sons. The perception of enmity largely arises from later historical, religious, and cultural interpretations rather than direct biblical evidence. They were both alleged to have come together to bury their father, Abraham.

What do Isaac and Ishmael have to do with the conflict in the Middle East? The conflict in the Middle East has to do with eschatology, or end-time Bible prophecy?

In Islam, the story of Isaac and Ishmael emphasizes themes of faith, sacrifice, and divine mercy, with both figures revered as prophets and significant in the lineage of the Abrahamic faiths.

Ishmael (Isma’il) is considered the father of the Arabs and an ancestor of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), while Isaac (Ishaq) is recognized as a prophet and the father of Jacob (Yaqub), establishing a lineage of prophets in both traditions. Over time, some interpretations have linked this lineage to historical and modern conflicts between Jews and Arabs. However, these interpretations are retrospective and not explicitly stated in the biblical text.

Both sons are seen as continuing the spiritual legacy of their father, Abraham (Ibrahim), and are respected figures in Islam.

The story illustrates profound themes of faith and divine mercy. Ishmael’s survival and the miraculous provision of water (the Zamzam well) in the desert symbolize God’s mercy and care for those who trust in Him.

Isaac’s birth is viewed as a reward for Abraham’s unwavering faith, representing hope and the fulfillment of God’s promises.

The narratives surrounding Isaac and Ishmael are not just historical accounts but are imbued with moral and spiritual lessons that resonate with Muslims today. They emphasize the importance of faith, obedience, and the belief in God’s mercy and providence.

The differing interpretations of the sacrifice story reflect broader theological discussions within Islam regarding lineage, prophecy, and the nature of divine tests.

Both figures are integral to the Islamic understanding of the Abrahamic tradition, illustrating the deep connections between these foundational stories across different faiths.

A central story in Islamic tradition is Abraham’s test of faith, where God commanded him to offer one of his sons in sacrifice. The Quran does not explicitly name the son, but many Islamic traditions identify Ishmael as the intended sacrifice. In this account, Ishmael willingly submitted to God’s command, demonstrating profound faith and obedience. At the last moment, God provided a ram to be sacrificed instead, commemorated annually during Eid al-Adha.

Some early Islamic sources and scholars, however, mention Isaac as the son in this test, reflecting a diversity of interpretations.

Ishmael is associated with Mecca; he and Abraham are credited with constructing the Kaaba, the holiest site in Islam. His descendants became the Arab peoples, and he is honored as a prophet who exemplified patience and submission to God.

Isaac is recognized as a prophet and righteous man, whose lineage produced many Israelite prophets, including Jacob (Yaqub) and Joseph (Yusuf). He represents the continuation of divine guidance through his descendants. It needs to be borne in mind that all prophets in Islam are Judaic prophets except Prophet Muhammad (SAW).

The stories of Ishmael and Isaac emphasize faith, obedience, and divine wisdom. They illustrate the importance of submission to God’s will, the blessings of righteous offspring, and the interconnectedness of Abrahamic lineages. The narrative of the sacrifice teaches Muslims about trust in God and the spiritual value of obedience, forming a foundational element of Islamic belief and practice.

In summary, Ishmael and Isaac are both central figures in Islam, each with distinct roles: Ishmael as the forefather of the Arabs and participant in the Kaaba’s construction, and Isaac as the forefather of the Israelites and a prophet of righteousness. Their stories highlight the shared heritage and moral lessons of the Abrahamic faiths.

Islam’s conception of Ishmael is similar to that of Judaism and Christianity. Sources for this narrative include the Quran and tafsir (i.e., Quranic exegesis); Muhammad’s (SAW) Hadith; historiographic collections by al-Tabari and other Muslim scholars; and Israʼiliyyat, which collectively refers to information and religious literature sourced primarily from the Jews for details about early prophets and messengers.

There are many versions of the construction of the Ka’aba that differ in fairly significant ways, although all have Abraham build or cleanse the Ka’aba and then immediately after, or at an unknown time, God called Abraham to establish the Hajj, or pilgrimage. The starting of the Hajj has many versions, and some scholars believe this reflects the late association of Abraham with the Hajj after Islam had developed to help remove its connection to early pagan rituals.

In other verses, such as 21:85 and 38:48, Ishmael is praised for being patient, good, and righteous. A particular example which describes Ishmael individually is Quran 19:54-55 – “And call to mind, through this divine writ, Ishmael. Behold, he was always true to his promise, and was an apostle [of God], a prophet, who used to enjoin upon his people prayer and charity, and found favor in his Sustainer’s sight.” As a descendant of Ishmael, Muhammad (SAW) is the Prophet and continues the line of prophets from ancient times.

“All the best compliments, prayers, and good deeds are for Allah. Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you, O Prophet! Peace be upon us and upon all the righteous servants of Allah. I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger”. Attahiyat or Tashahhud.

Barka Juma’at and happy weekend