THE THOUGHT OF RELIGION

By
Olusanya Akinola (Guest Writer)

Most Scholars conclude that it is not an easy task to define religion in the actual sense. There have been so many definitions given. Okeke, V. I. define religion as “Man’s relationship with or belief in a spiritual relationship with or belief in a spiritual or supernatural being who has a ruling power; the creator and controller of the universe (Okeke 1997, 53).

There is yet another definition of religion that is similar to this: Religion, broadly, is a way of life or belief based upon man’s ultimate relation to the universe or God. In more common accepted sense however, the term religion refers to faith in a divinely created order of the world agreement with which is the means of salvation for a community and for the individual by virtues of his having a role in the community. Religion involves faith in a creed, obedience to a moral code set down in a sacred scripture and participation in a cult (Walts, 1971, 207).

The above definitions emphasize that religion has to do with belief or faith in a person (God or gods) or object and relationship with such in worship and obedience. Not all religions have sacred scripture but there will always be creeds and codes set down in one form or the other to be obeyed by the worshipers or followers.

Another very important element of religion is worship. As stated in the Encyclopedia Britannica, “Worship is probably the most basic element of religion, but moral conduct, right belief and participation in religious institution are generally also constituent elements of the religious life as practiced by believers and worshipers and a command by religious sages and scriptures (pg 1016). Thus religion as a system of belief consists of worship, moral conduct and sages who are maintainers of the proper practice.

Charles Kimball in his own book When Religion Becomes Evil submits that the word religion “evokes a wide variety of images, ideas, practices, beliefs and experiences; some positive, some negative” (Kimball 2002, 16). To him, religion might well envision individual or communal response to the transcendent, such as prayer, worship services, rituals, moral codes and so on (Ibid 16).

However, the definition that caught my attention better is the one given by Defleur Melvin in his book Sociology: Human Society. Quoting Emile Durkhelm, he opines:
All known religious beliefs, whether simple or complex, presents one common characteristic: they presuppose a classification of all things into two classes or opposed group, generally designated by two distinct terms which are translated well enough by the words profane and sacred (Defleur 1973, 537).

What Defleur calls profane and sacred the researcher will call evil and good. These are the two major concerns of every religion, always at the core of all religious activities. The worshippers or followers do all to be identified with the good (sacred) and avoid or at least appease the evil (profane). This concept pervades all religions.
Another element consistent with religion is “salvation” or “deliverance” from destruction and desire for eternal justification in life after life.

Man recognizes the existence of a power outside himself, which is essentially like himself and which is beyond his control. That was; is and no doubt, will be the religious experience (Hobbs and Blank 1982, 323). With Hobbs and Blank definition and idea of religion we can now turn our attention to look at the origin of religion.

THE NIGERIAN CONTEXT: STRUCTURE OF RELIGION

By
Olusanya Akinola (Guest Writer)

Despite the fact that religion is one of the most powerful, pervasive and universal force and phenomenon in human society there has been no consensus on how religion started. Some scholars even believe that man and religion are inseparable; stressing that the desire to worship is innate in man. However, Ade Odunmuyiwa in a class lecture postulates that man must have predated religion because without the existence of man there cannot be any religion; at least on earth.

Most of the theories postulated about the origin of religion do not adequately explain the origin of religion. For example, it has been argued that even before the “primitive man” started feeling the presence of the spirit or overwhelming “Forces” he already had a religious inclination in him. Therefore a need arose to look at man himself for the explanation of the origin of religion (Anyika 1992, 20). So looking at man we must recognize that man is made up of the material and the immaterial part. That is to say that man though physical is tangibly a spirit being just as Okeke puts it: Man is to be a complex mixture of spirit and matter i.e. body and soul. Although he shares some attributes with the lower animals, he possesses consciousness not found in these lower animals. This is said to be the spiritual element of his personality. It is the consciousness that interacts with the unknown, and it is man’s consciousness this religion is based. Thus it is held that the origin started as soon as man found himself in the physical world, (Okeke 1997, 56).

In this physical world man has the consciousness of the unknown spiritual existence that cannot be denied. Man knows that physical world is not all there is and he seeks to relate with the same through religious activities. It is inbuilt in man to worship that which is superior to him. This consciousness is one of the attributes that differentiate man from beasts. Although we could agree that man predates religion but worship (religion) is in the sub-consciousness of man since he comes to live on earth.

Specifically, there are two major divisions of religion in Nigeria. We have the African Traditional Religion (A.T.R.) and the foreign religions (essentially Christianity and Islam). Okeke sees ATR as those institutionalized beliefs and practices indigenous religion of Africans, which are rooted in the past African religious culture. These are beliefs and practices transmitted through oral traditions (myth, folktales, songs, dances etc), sacred persons and objects, etc. (Okeke 1997, 57).
A.T.R permeates all aspects of the people’s life. Its basic elements include a supreme God who occupies a unique place at the top of a pyramid, with the gods and ancestors on the two sides of the pyramid, the lower power of magic at the base and man in the middle of the pyramid under the influence of many different kinds of powers. There is also the belief in life after death, which (life) is determined by the kind of life one has to live on earth. This element in ATR acts as an incentive for a high standard of morality at all levels (Ezeanja 1979, 14-15). It should be noted that Nigerians (Africans) have a consciousness of the Supreme Being; the Almighty, before the advent of the foreign religions. For example, the Yorubas’ call Him “Olodumare”, the Ibos’ call him “Chineke” or “Chukwu” while the Hausas’ call him “Ubangidi.” These are the major three Nigerian languages. Other smaller tribes have names for the Almighty God. This Supreme Being Nigerians (Africans) seek to connect through the lesser spirits. ATR is polytheistic in nature which is the belief-in and worship of more than one god.

The two major prevalent foreign religions in Nigeria are Christianity and Islam. These two are monotheistic, which is; the belief in only one God. Christianity teaches that there is only one God but Jesus Christ is the Son of God, while Islam believes in only one God Allah and Mohammed is the prophet. There may be some other foreign religions but they are not too influential.

THE NIGERIAN CONTEXT: RELIGION AS THE OPIUM OF THE PEOPLE

By
Olusanya Akinola (Guest Writer)

The saying “Religion is the opium of the people” is accredited to karl Marx, one of the most influential political and economic ideologist in human history. Sidney Hook in his book Marx and Marxist, said that “a new religion has arisen which proclaims that history is God and Karl Marx is chief prophet” (Hook 1955, 11). By this saying he meant to make us see how the ideology propounded by Marx has influenced events of the world history.

To Marx all religions and Philosophies associated with it are projections of human needs or their compensatory fulfillments. He had a strong belief in the dignity of man. For him this consisted in striving to master one’s own fate and not submitting to the dogma of Church (Ibid, 16). In actual sense, Marx did not take religion seriously; rather he believes that every religious activity of man is to placate himself and get his needs met.

“Religion is the opium of the people.” This statement as mentioned earlier is credited to Karl Marx who was believed to have formulated the idea of Communism. Although it was Lenin that actually brought this ideology into practice in the Soviet Union as the first Communist leader; his Actual name (according to Matthew Menstrovic) was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov. Lenin set up a dictatorship communist Government; brining people under restrictions instead of freedom (Mestrovic 1966, 18-19). Coming back to Karl Marx, he felt that religion and an idea of a supreme being to be worshipped is unnecessary.

According to him, man can always take care and bring freedom and perfection without God. Then religion is unnecessary and is embraced by a society that is lazy and seeking an escape from responsibility instead of solving its own problems. He believes that religion is used as a tool of oppression against the poor.

Sincerely, in a way Karl Marx is right. Why did I say so? When examined critically, in a nation or society like Nigeria, there is no gain saying that Nigerians are very religious. A whole lot of religious activities go on every day, people seeking miracles, one thing or the other in various worship centers, instead of getting engaged in productive activities. Worst still, the level of religiosity is not commensurate with the morality and behavioral change. We see decadence in every sector of our lives. People instead seek to use religion as a means to get their needs met. So many hide under the cloak of religion to do evil. Most of our leaders are very religious people belonging to one major religious group or the other; yet, very corrupt beyond description. To get a better understanding of what we are saying let us look at the definition of the word “Opium”.
The Webster’s New World dictionary defines opium as “a narcotic drug made from the juice of the seed capsules of the opium poppy used as an intoxicant and medicinally to relieve pain and produce sleep.” In other words, opium is a tranquilizer that brings relieves from pain and produces restfulness. Now how do we relate this to the numberless religious activities prevalent in our Nigerian society especially in agreement with the statement of Marx. We could say that Max is partly right when we identify the way Nigerians try to meet their needs through religious practice. Let us look at some of those needs and the response towards them.
Security: Melvin says that most religious provide the individuals with an ideology that enables him to make sense of his life. Illness, injustice, poverty, death all may be comprehensible if they are part of the benevolent deity’s divine plan or they may simply be unimportant in comparison with the eternal realities (Melvin 1973, 543).

Most worshippers in Nigeria troop to the worship centers to seek security. Their belief is that the divine being is able to protect them and keep them secure. In fact most religion do all they can to offer the promise of security for their followers. Religious leaders has benefited immensely from this and many venerated by the followers who look up to them as their source of hope and the intermediary between them and the divine being. Religion in this sense, serves as a sedative since protection, security, poverty, illness etc. could be taken care of. But we all know that no religion in reality can guarantee security from all evil. Man lives in the midst of various kinds of insecurity. The society takes solace in their religion and their religious leaders who are equally vulnerable.

Crisis: The lives of most men are periodically touched by crisis. Whether these crisis stem from social or natural sources, they create fears and anxieties that must be handled. The individual’s religious beliefs and practices offer him ways of managing crisis without overwhelming psychological cost. Rituals such as prayer and sacrifices often take the form of appeals for divine intervention on behalf of the sufferer (Ibid 543). Most Nigerians in time of crisis seek solution through prayers of all sorts believing that the divine being would proffer solutions to their plights. Sincerely, there are so many things Nigerians are not supposed to offer prayers. They are to be provided by the state, but Nigerians look up to the divine for help.

Death: Most religion, primitive and modern have something to say about life after death, some speak of a miserable hereafter in which the spirits of the dead wonder about wailing and mourning, but others including Christianity and Islam-hold forth inviting versions of paradise, at least for the deserving. Belief in a personal immortality in a happy setting makes the death of loved ones more tolerable and the prospect of one’s own death less terrifying (Ibid 546) Hope of a happy hereafter helps most Nigerians to reconcile to a life of deprivation in this world. They now see earthly existence as no more then a temporary state leading to eternal bliss. This is opium for deprivation from the necessary things of life which the state needs to provide. It is a sedative that makes them rest with the assurance of a better eternity after death.

Social Values: Individuals who are strongly linked through religious commitment to traditional norms and values gain a source of moral strength and behavioral stability. Under such conditions, the individual is more willing to comply with the norms of his society, especially if he interprets them as having divine sanctions and is to interpret social deviance as a form of religious deviance (Ibid 545). In fact, to some extent religion functions to keep the Nigerian Society in peace and harmony. We have instances if Kings and leaders who claim to be God’s chosen representatives or even divine, thereby making a rebellion against them a defiance of God’s will. This helps to maintain social and political stability. This is opium and a sedative.
Most clergies of the religious seats attract so much respect to themselves and their words are respected and help to keep people out of rebellion. In all of these, religion is opium of the people.
However, in Nigeria especially religious influence is stronger than an opium. It is one of the most powerful phenomenal in our society. Though Marx was right in a sense to have seen religion as the opium of the people but religion is stronger than the opium.

No matter how strong the opium may be religion is stronger. Most scholars submit that religion performs some very crucial (social) function; which I meant to examine in relation to the Nigerian societies.

(1) Religion and culture: Donald Hobbs quoting Taylor says that culture includes “knowledge, belief, art, morals, laws, customs and any other habits and capabilities acquired by members of the society,” (Hobbs & Blank 085, 85). No matter how we define culture it is observable that in Nigeria the various religions professed by individuals and the community permits every aspect of our culture. Religion and culture are interwoven. Our culture is our way of life but this is largely influenced by our religious believes and ideologies. The three major religions most visible in the country i.e Christianity, Islam and African Traditional Religion, has so much influence on our culture and way of life even to the most minutest thing we do. The opium is not as strong.

(2) Religion as a dividing factor: In Nigeria religion serves as a dividing factor in terms of prejudice and discrimination against non-adherents. Nigeria has witnessed numerous religious riots especially, Muslim-Christian riots (Okeke 1997, 85). As I am writing there is a religious riot going on in Plateau State, according to the Guardian Newspaper of Tuesday, January 26, 2010 the death toll has risen to 326 deaths. This happening dearly is less than a month when a young “chap” called Abdul Mutalib attempted to blow a United States plane carrying many passengers on the flight for religious reasons. The United States is right to have made a move to blacklist Nigerian as a terrorist country. Religion is not just an opium in Nigeria, but could be a deadly stimulant.

Most Scholars believe that religion serves as a uniting factor or reduce conflict between people. For example Hobbs & Blanks postulate that “at the same time religions have functioned to reduce conflict between peoples. We are familiar with the saying, peace on earth and goodwill to men,” (Hobbs and Blank 1985, 322). I am yet to see religion function likewise in Nigeria especially between religions of different sets.

(3) Religion Retard Social change: In Nigeria religion tends to maintain a status quo, creating a situation of non-change. It makes people and organization to be rigid and fixed. This is done mostly when religion is established; it becomes conservative thereby resisting change. For example, portions of Bible as well as Koran have been cited to support the subordinate position of women in Nigeria (Okeke 1997, 58).

We can also imagine the introduction of Sharia (Islamic law) in some Northern State in Nigeria a country that supposes to be a secular State.

(4) Religion as an institution: According to Hobbs and Blank, “Religion supports other social institutions by providing guidelines for approved Behavior. In some societies religion and government are one and the same. In most societies religion at least influences the behavior of those who occupy political positions,” (Hobbs and Blank 1985, 322). This is very true about Nigeria. In fact religions serves as an institution with a conglomeration of other various social institutions, universities and colleges are now privately owned by some religious institutions. They provide needed education for the youth which the government do not really have the capacity to adequately do.

Some of the government officials are of one religious affiliations or the other and are able to influence policies based on their religious convictions. So religious is not just a personal thing, adherent demonstrate their belief and convictions in public lives.

Religion performs so many other functions that are not intended or recognized. For example, it provides individuals with business and professional contacts, marital partners (in fact in Nigeria people marry according to their religious convictions). In Nigerian religion dictate almost everything that most people do especially the kind of life style they live. People are very passionate about their faith even more than addiction to an opium. Religion is a stimulant not a tranquilizer or seductive.

Without any gainsaying, religion as a universal phenomenon that has both positive and negative functions it performs in any society. It will be wrong to dispel religion just as an opium. The Soviet Union was the first “Communist” nation and it was dedicated to the elimination of religion from the start. Nevertheless, religion has not disappeared among the people from Soviet Union (Hubbs and blank 1985, 320). In fact Communism has failed in the Soviet Union and religious freedom now attained.

Karl Marx thought that man can build without the Divine being but he has been proved wrong. Religious revivals have a way of occurring without any due to there coming (ibid), even where it is resisted. Religion is a vital part of what makes mankind human. Religion is an indispensable recipe for building a happy and stable nation. To abandon religion is to ensure the collapse of the society (Okeke 1997, 61). No matter what, every religion has something good to teach the society, we should rather look to the good side of every religion. Man cannot survive without his creator. Religion is stronger than an opium. The Soviet Union that rejected religion (God) and embraced Communism fell. To abandon religion is to ensure the collapse of the society.

Cybermission: Taking Missions to Extremity

The Church should be a place to worship God in Spirit and in Truth not “cable wires”. Nonetheless, we still have time to amend and properly fine-tune the “Mission Statement” of the Church, while engaging in this revolutionary-disoriented phenomenon. Apparently, the Cyberspace can never provide for observing of sacraments, or even Pastoring/ disciplining of flocks as the local church does. Though it might to some extent, provide “preaching the Word” to its user, but not the whole of it as compared to what you get in a local Church life. Notwithstanding, Christ commands us to “go preach to all nations of the earth” and even “to the ends of the earth,” and “make disciples of them.”

I hope we grasp this illustration. Let’s us note that Jesus did not brought to earth a religion, rather He brought to earth a Kingdom, and the only way this kingdom would be established ubiquitously on earth was only through accelerating His message and precepts to every earthen creature through any possible means. Sometimes, it is important to ignore tradition: The typical Church tradition as regards doing Mission. The post-resurrection command by Christ Himself "to Go ye and teach...," and "... to be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Sometimes, understanding scriptural injunction requires the knowledge of God, which brings us to a total submission to His Will (to go ye and propagate His Kingdom). This yields to a deep and clear understanding of His word. We need to be agile not to fall prey to the Virtual Church syndrome. In as much as I do not advocate or push for the legitimacy of the Virtual Church, but, we must have a plan as a Church in the Virtual world.

One of the post-resurrection commands of the Great Commander Himself, to “Go ye… to the uttermost part of the world” and preach the gospel. To clearly understand this statement, let us do some literary work here. The word “uttermost,” means “of greatest degree,” “at extremity,” or “at the most distant point.”

Is apparent that we live in a Cybernetic world. The world is changing its contours daily; we must take Mission to its greatest degree, to its extremity, and at the most distant point, in order to match-up with the world movements. It is pivotal that we share our unique dynamics and values as Christians especially on the “Cyberspace” so that through this, the world will see the light of God in us. As we conform adequately to this concept, we are simply engaging unconsciously in Virtual Mission. “Cybermission” or “Virtual Mission” is the new scope of mission, which must be embraced by the Church and Christians at all levels. We must equip zealous Christians for this function. All must engage in this novel approach to the traditional mission in our spare times.

As the world change and move with its vapourwares and revolutionary ideas, let us as a Church match up this challenge by instilling the Christian virtues and values to their system with the sense of drawing people to God.

Let’s hypothetically think of the Cyberspace as an imagined nation where we can make disciples for the LORD since we have to take the Word of God at extremity. Is very possible to make disciples online and then direct them to a local congregational Church where they can receive further edification, pastoring and sacramental observance. In that case, it is more fulfilling to direct Cyber-converts to a local Church nearby, than ignorantly trying to perform the whole rituals of a Biblical Church online – which is blatantly impossible.

Just some couple of days ago, on the cause of this research, a friend of mine said emphatically, that, “God can’t approve of building a Church Community on the internet because it is simply not a legitimate church; in fact, it is unimpressive to me and a trap to fence-in churches and Christian organizations to the mischievous walls of the Internet.” In his opinion, he also said something very interesting, that, once the church have fully accepted and embraced this tool, using it to run her entire programs and activities, there would be a regulation of Christian sites from the central database system.

Could this be the original idea of the inventors? Could this be a plot by them to destabilize the Church? He further referenced a passage from the bible. As we study, let us share this verse together; it made sense in a way - however. Hebrew 10: 25: “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another – and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”

His claims and comments seem real and intriguing. After this encounter, I kept on obsessing on this passage ceaselessly for some couple of weeks, and concluded that God might be speaking through him though, after all – ‘the internet’ aren’t ‘the Church’, and on the mainstream, the Cyberspace is just a novel new revolution not a ‘new Church’. This digest led me to a conclusion. The Cyberspace can only serve this one essential purpose for the Church, which is, to be used as an innovative tool for reaching-out the unreached ones and spreading the Gospel to the uttermost parts of the World. When converts are made, directing these converts to a local Church is then considered a priority.

I discovered that most Christian fanatics kick against building a Church Community on the web, simply because of Paul’s admonition in Hebrew 10: 25. “We should not forsake the gathering of our brethren as most of us are doing presently….”

Apparently, this passage certainly speaks volume. At the other end, are we just misinterpreting the context of this verse? The truth be told! People are more open, more friendly, and ready to discuss and learn issues on the internet, than what it uses to be in a typical Church arena. Rather than being at Church service, many prefer being on an internet Church service; may be due to privacy – may be. These assumptions and speculations have only resulted to an upsurge of the Cyber revolution, but the question now, is, what should the Church do? Conversely, I tender this simple practical answer to the question myself. We (the Church) can penetrate the internet and use it for ‘Cybermission’. When we have made some disciples, we can direct and engraft them to a local Church near their location for further edification (this is where Church planting is vital). After experiencing God’s presence in their newly located Church, they (these converts) will see the difference between a real Church service and those they see or experience on wire cables – there is a total difference.

I conclude with these last few words from Pope John II in his speech at the 36th World Communication Day Anniversary. Though he admitted that the essence of the Internet is that it provides an almost unending flood of information, much of which passes in a moment. On this bedrock, he concluded his speech by admonishing the Church in Cyberspace with these few words of admonition: There already exist on the Net countless sources of information, documentation and education about the Church, her history and tradition, her doctrine and her engagement in every field in all parts of the world. It is clear, then, that while the Internet can never replace that profound experience of God which only the living, liturgical, and sacramental life of the Church can offer. It can certainly provide a unique supplement and support in both preparing for the encounter with Christ through communicating, and sustaining the new believer in the journey of faith which then begins. ... The Internet causes billions of images to appear on millions of computer monitors around the planet. From this galaxy of sight and sound will the face of Christ emerge and the voice of Christ be heard? …this is the purpose of evangelization. …for if there is no room for Christ, there is no room for man …I dare to summon the whole Church bravely to cross this new threshold, to put out into the deep of the Net, so that now as in the past the great engagement of the Gospel and culture may show to the world "the glory of God on the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:6). May the Lord bless all those who work for this aim. Amen.

“To put out into the deep of the Net.” We have to take the gospel to the extreme – to the deep of the net. From this background, is now apparent that the church in Cyberspace cannot wholly provide the four essential components a biblical Church provides based on the New Testament authority. My stand on this argument still, is that, the internet should be a forum for evangelism and a call for Cybermission. I am actually not in support of having a Virtual Church Community on the internet; neither do I counter the idea. But, rather than building an Internet Church, the time spent in piling up cyber junkies to form a Cyber-Church could be spent for Cybermission, because a local Church provides that fresh anointing from God’s Word, right administration of the sacraments, and the exercise of Church discipline as earlier mentioned, which a Church built on “wire cables” can never provide. The internet might offer an extensive knowledge of the Bible, and can be use as a tool and an innovative new approach to traditional evangelism, but the crux of it all is that it does not teach values; and when values are disregarded, our very humanity is demeaned and man easily loses sight of his transcendent Infinite Creator.

FROM THE EDITOR'S DESK; HAPPY NEW YEAR…

Time they say, engraves our faces with all the tears we have not shed. The good thing about time is that it does not allow everything to happen all at once. Another year almost gone; God has really fortified His Work; we are grateful! However, with the help of the entire divinity army, we are fighting strong in high stead. We have shun the burning members of defeat, clamped on the rising lures of surrender, disappointed the luster of convenience, cuddled the apron strings of perseverance to emerge magnificently glorious. Candidly, it’s been God all by Himself.

As one of the facilitators and a narcotic reader of this blog who had functioned both as a follower and writer alike. I remember when I would post a literature and check the next few hours to see if someone had read my post; along with my partner, we consistently released God’s Wisdom to the hearts of those ready to embrace His Revelation. Oh how lovely ‘hope’ was. That was all we held on to while believing that God was happy with us because we were doing His bidding.

We relaxed in the wings of time while doing God’s bidding and without notice, with as little as the worth (and effort) of 5 loaves and 2 fishes, God supernaturally supplied, supported and supervised His provisions on us; in cash and in kind. In all modesty, the workforce at present is a jumpy 100+ and the Lord is still boasting with His works as our Knight in shinning amour.

Enjoy in our euphoria as you browse through the contents of this rousingly motivating blog. Feel the surge of current as you view our glory emerging progressively through our highly educative literature presentation within our brief stint of one year. ‘Needing what you want and wanting what you need,’ explains ‘Holy fears’ nudge of certainty. Compare your dreams with ours and take pleasure in surfing our world of revelatory writings.

Happy New Year!

BUILDING A PIOUS CHILD

“…Human Secularists are not the problem, rather a symptom of lack of Biblical upbringing”. Apparently, the children and youths of the past and this contemporary generation seem to be victims to this misappropriated direction. In our schools today, we find out that the academic system is unconsciously deleting the biblical precepts from their academic calendar, by excluding and challenging Biblical Principles, and questioning Bible authenticity. This is also done by reflexively evaluating and validating evolution, anthropology, history, psychology, philosophy and other humanitarian courses, which are based on human relativism, and hence, alternating and challenging the Bible authority. On this deluded background, our kids then, builds their thinking and philosophy towards this precepts and hence, disfiguring the original concept of the bible. This phenomenon however, creates vacuum that paves way to relativism, which gives birth to human secularists, and multi-religiosity in our society, especially in this Church. However, this had only vindicated Isaiah’s prophecy in Isaiah 53: 6, which says, “we all, like a sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way…”

Upon this bedrock, it is likely to admit that a child learns the truth at home, and then goes to school to learn facts. This statement to some point sounds rhetoric but has a valuable and profound accuracy, because a truth when proven becomes a fact. However, this is a call to parents to imbed the basic knowledge of the bible to their children - first at home, because when this teachings and principles have become path and parcel of them, it will be rarely impossible for the school system to uncerment the child’s philosophy about God and His Word (bible). The child grows with these inward understanding of the basic principles of the bible, and then efficiently - guiding it from the whacks of secularists or from what was taught in class, same applies to a child brought up in a mix religious community. Here the parents plays a very pivotal role in inculcating the knowledge of the bible first to the child, because every child learns the truth at home and then goes to school to learn some facts about the truth he or she was already used to. In that case, it is important that parent grasp the concept of building a pious child.

Were the Israelites Just in demanding for a King: How far can we wait on the Lord (I Samuel 8)

I start by first observing these two key remarks, first, by James Muhlenberg, who strictly affirms, “…that Israelites call for a King was in fact a rejection of God’s traditional role in her national life,” (Muhlenberg 1961, 87). Conversely, the NIV Life Application Bible also avers that, “…their (Israelites) basic problem was disobedience to God, their other problems would only continue under the new administration. What they needed was a unified faith, not a uniform rule.”

Sometimes in life, we can be perplexed to a point and frustrated because we are doing the will of God, same case with the Israelites. They were unable to wait on the Lord’s plan for a perfect King-match; apparently, David was God’s choice.

God’s approval of Saul as a King over Israel was only an act of remedial to the request of the Israelites, in order words called the “permissive will of God.” Nevertheless, the questions is, why did God approved their request instead of acting Sovereign? This is because, sometimes God wants us to “enjoy some of our not-well-calculated choices we make,” so that we can see the result of the wrong choice we’ve made, in order to make us have a recap of how futuristic his love for us is, so that next time we will work with Him better, irrespective of His offer.

The book of I Samuel chapter 8 shows us the two main reasons why the Israelites demanded for a King. From these pretexts, I will swing my arguments.

First, they advocated for a King because Samuel was getting old. “…all the elders of Israel met at Ramah to discuss the matter with Samuel. …they told him, you are old…Give us a King to judge us like all the other nations have,” (I Samuel 8: 4, 5).

From the above passage, apparently, the elders were skeptical and troubled about Samuel’s old age, obsessing themselves with question; what will we do if Samuel happens to die now? No doubt, that was logical, sometimes our response to our environment should be efficient and fast-reasoning, the elders made no harm in thinking about their future, but, there mistake was not to think about what God has installed for them, knowing that they were a special nation – not like other nations. For me, there shouldn’t be any comparism, because, they (Israel) were governed by God Himself. This is an evidence of the skeptic nature of the Israelites, which transcended to their children-children, they all doubted God’s abilities; this consistently happened till their ruin - alas. God knew that Samuel was getting old; definitely, He had a plan of a King or judge. The best time God squares up His value and worth has always been at the point when His children are confused – that’s when God proves Himself and shows us why He is God.

In our spiritual journey, we should always know that God knows ahead of us, same applies to the Israelites, God knew Samuel was getting old, and definitely would intentionally allow him to live longer than expected till He makes new-plan on who takes the mantle of leadership, then officially announce this through His servant Samuel. We must carefully observe from the Bible, that, Samuel’s appointment of his children as “sub-judges” was due to the intense need for Samuel from all districts and cities of Israel to regulate and demonstrate justice. As such, Samuel found it ideal to “artificially produce” his sons as “sub-judges” to coordinate the affairs of areas he might not reach immediately, Joel and Abijah weren’t full judges they were sub-judges, and would not perform every rite as a typical Judge does. Their function as judges was limited.

Secondly, they clamored for a king because Joel & Abijah (Samuel’s sons) were not like their father. “…all the elders of Israel met at Ramah to discuss the matter with Samuel. …they told him … your sons are not like you. Give us a King to judge us like all the other nations have,” (I Samuel 8: 4, 5).

Here, the Israelites limited their thinking to the contrived nature of Joel and Abijah. They perverted justice and were immoral in their doings – that was a good reason to seek out for a King. The Bible noted staunchly that Eli’s children worked against the ways of the Lord, and Eli was held responsible for the sins of his children, but Samuel wasn’t. Like the usual surmise by most preachers, God had favorites – believe it or not! Joel and Abijah were not at all like their father Samuel they were lax in moral. The reason for this, the researcher can’t foretell, but, it is impossible to note whether Samuel was a bad father. Parenthood is an awesome opportunity, and there is nothing more important and delicate than molding our children.

On this path, I always ask; why did Samuel appoint his sons as acting judges? Is simple; this could be a conjecture; the Bible said in I Sam. 8: 1, “As Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons to be judges over Israel.” He did actually, but have we ever sought out the meaning of the verb-word “appointed” used in the NIV, and “made” used by the King James Version respectively. Good, these words simply means, agreed (not necessary confirmed or official), artificially produced, fictitious, invented, contrived, it also means, decorated or furnished. In order words, Joel and Abijah simply were artificially decorated judges by Samuel to act on his behalf only at Beersheba. Also, another route to this argument is, if Samuel officially made them judges, their dominion would not be limited to Beersheba region only; definitely, their authority could have extended to other major regions. Samuel, due to his aged physiological problems decorated and synthesized Joel and Abijah as sub-judges.

From these, is apparent to note that, the Israelites motive in asking for a king was to be like other nations around them. This was in total opposition to God’s original plan. To concur with this suggestion, the NIV Life Application Bible agrees that, “It was not their desire for a king that was wrong, but their reasons for wanting a king”.

Lessons learnt from Findings

Sometimes we want to go our own way rather than follow the ways of God; this will always end in ruin. God has a profound plan for everyone, how pivotal is it to capitulate to God purpose, because it will only be nothing but the best. God’s love for us could make us pass through molding (difficult) times; in this period are set tests of our love for God. How profound is your love for God?

It was not their desire for a king that was wrong, but their reasons for wanting a king. Often, we let others’ values and actions dictate our attitudes and behavior. Sometimes our motive for asking for a thing determines how far God can go in giving us our request, or providing a remedial. Apparently, Israel’s motive was synthetic in nature. In order words, it was a fake, vague and borrowed concept. We must be careful on the motives on which we request things from God – this determines a lot.

It also calls for a need for proper interpretation of the scriptural text. The NIV or King James word “appointed” or “made” respectively, means “to decorate,” “agree” or “artificially produced something,” in order words, not original – not the real thing. We could simply say that Joel and Abijah were fake representation of judges, who were acting unbehalf of their father’s affairs while he was away from Beersheba.

Finally, as a church, when passing through hard times, and also as brethren in a Christian Community, what we need most is a unified faith as Christians, not a uniform rule.

Alack, had the Israelites submitted to God’s leadership, they would have thrived beyond their expectations (Deut. 28: 1). Here lies a clarion call for all Christian to conform to the will of God, working their salvation with fear and trembling in its time, fighting a good fight, in order to be furnished unto all good works. We can only make headway in their various ministries only after we’ve passed the test of faith.

Conclusion

Our obedience is weak if we ask God to lead us but continue to live by the world’s standards and values. In reality, the children of Israelites were rejecting God as their leader. Same with us all, we want to do thing our own way, we don’t want to be limited. Our human nature spices us up to explore the realities of this world. Same with the Israelites, they wanted to be like other neighboring nations, they despised theocracy rule.

The people of Israel clamored for a king thinking that the new system of Government would bring about change in the nation. Same with us today, clamor for fascinating things of this world thinking that it would bring about change in us, while is an end itself. We as Christians, have to be careful on the choices we make today, because it will either make us be like Christ or fake us as Christ, in order words been hypocritical Christians. Faith in God must touch all the practical areas of life.

The Great Commander and His Great Commission: How far have we gone?

The Theology of the Great Commission

First, Jesus did not brought to earth a religion, rather He brought to earth a Kingdom, and the only way this kingdom would be established ubiquitously on earth was only through accelerating His message and precepts to every earthen creature. This aim can only be achieved by Christians at all levels through fulfilling His post-resurrection command as referenced in the gospels (Matthew 28: 19 – 20; Mk. 16: 15 – 18; Lk. 24: 46 – 49; Jn. 20: 21 – 23; and Acts 1: 4 – 5, 8).

As Christians, we must understand God’s wish for all, “to seek first His Kingdom…” referenced in Matthew 6: 33, when we have done this, then we are qualified to carry on this command. Also, the first thing we must seek or pursue is to change our philosophies, and thoughts (to repent).

Its Precision

Rationalists, freethinkers and higher criticism, have seriously attacked the integrity and profound genuineness of the Great Commission, mostly on its theological ground. However, evangelical scholars have staunchly disputed these attacks, as such, abiding by its peculiar nature as the command of God. Some scholars also, have defended its authenticity and genuineness, and held its connections and value on the basis and ideas of both the internal and external evidences. How then do we know if it is legitimate? Well, the answer is simple; because it is a scriptural injunction, not just one of the writings by an apostle, but also one that came out of the mouth of our Savior – Jesus Christ; that is worth abiding by. So, for that alone we must acknowledge and wholly accept its unquestionable authenticity.

Its Worth and Value

Nonetheless, it was of distinct worth and value that the Great Commission was spoken by Jesus Christ, and through inspiration and power of the Holy Spirit recorded by the Gospel writers – what a phenomenon. This thrust of Jesus mainly focuses on our responsibilities as Christians to do Missions, and producing fruits (disciples). Pfeiffer, Charles et al. in a conversation emphasized that, “the Great Commission does not create new duties for Christianity …it sharply focuses the missionary thrust and responsibility beyond reasonable doubt and dispute” (Pfeiffer et. al 2003, 370).

How do we understand this, in a further assertion, Pfeiffer pointed clearly that, “...its singularity as the principal command of the Lord in His resurrection Ministry makes it more than just one commission among many commands to the disciples” (Pfeiffer 2003, 370).

Undoubtedly, its peculiarity and its supreme nature as an original idea of our Lord Jesus Christ made it worth obeying, besides, is direct from the Master’s mouth. Again, its restatement by writers of the Gospels made it more authentic. Witnessing to its undying custom of the early church, and the account of Luke, reveals this mystery as a dynamic principle for Christianity.

The Scope and Shape of the Great Commission

A constructive analysis on the basis for the Great Commission reveals two imperatives, “to make disciples” and “to preach to the gospel”. Logically, this idea gives a direction on how this instruction is to be carried out. From both connections, how do Christians comprehend this dual formation, which must be carried out as a whole? From Pfeiffer, “The Great Commission is like a shape with two foci,” (Pfeiffer 2003, 370). Pfeiffer made this claim because, while in the former years of the medieval times, when the missionary movement was an active service, beginning with William Carey, the chief focus then was upon the “Markan focus” -“preach the gospel”. Conversely, nowadays, it has changed its focal point, is now based on the “Matthew’s focus” – “make disciples.” However, Church planting imperative is not the riding-point for Christianity. Besides, how then do we justify the concern for doing mission in our present-day world? Because the Bible emphasizes both, to that extent, keeps them in proper and correlated form or balance.

These two foci however, were essentially supplemented by the participle “going,” referenced in (Mk. 16: 15; Mt. 28: 19), “Preaching,” mentioned in (Mt. 28: 20), and “Baptizing” referenced in (Mt. 28: 20). These forms of verb automatically conjoin the foci. Mendenshall in an attempt to credit this idea, commented; “There are no imperative verbs relative to witnessing or preaching in Luke, John or Acts,” (Pfeiffer 2003, 371). However, the dynamics of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit predominantly takes the place of the imperative, though in Luke and John gospels, we saw the connection, “thus it is written” and “receive ye the Holy Spirit,” respectively. When these phrases are forced back out of these passages, then, the idea to witness is a complete mess and rather superfluous and pointless, hence, indeed would be a complete aberration; besides, odd.

The Compound Nature of the Great Commission

An outlook on the nature and structure of the Great Commission absolutely tells of its composite nature, especially when viewed as an arbitrary-imposed-command – so say the rationalists. Its unique review and concern in the four gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), especially when referenced in the book of Acts, tells of its significance and validity, not forgetting its estimable importance to God. However, displaying its importance, and unity in the hearts of the gospel writers, and must be obey accordingly as delineated in these gospels.

Joachim Jeremias in response to the connection of the gospel writers in depicting the Commission - strictly admitted that, “they all culminate in the Great Commission and point in a common direction …is centrifugal in nature and thrust” (Jeremias 1958, iii).

A synopsis of these scriptural texts would help us have a better understanding of the presentation of this Commission, and interpreting its contextual literary connotations.

Matthew 28: 19 – 20

“(19) Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (KJV)

This passage examines the authority, the all-comprehensive goal and the extension of time or period of this task. This also unveils essentially, our nature as new creations in Christ – which involves teaching others the precepts of God.

Mark 16: 15 – 18

(15) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (16) He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (17) And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (18).They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover (KJV).

This passage reveals the power and covenant behind this Commission, and its transcendent nature. Also, the method and the geographical nature of the work – was cited.

Luke 24: 46 – 49

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.48 And ye are witnesses of these things.49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high (KJV).

Apostle Luke revealed the dead and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is the message; the universality of the work was also showcased.

John 20: 21 – 23

“21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose so ever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose so ever sins ye retain, they are retained” (KJV)

The book of John as Pfeiffer admitted displayed the, “spiritual equipment and nature of the work” (Pfeiffer 2003, 370). To add to that, this passage shows a shared authority attached to the task, and the mandate of heaven or power behind this Commission.

Acts 1: 4- 5, 8

“(4) And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. (5) For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. (8) But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (KJV).

Acts, unveils the necessity of unity among believers while obeying this task, which is attached with a paranormal power to empower others, however, this paranormal power can only be gotten through an interpersonal divine contact with the Holy Spirit.

From the above synopsis, it is apparent to say that, none of the writers in his form gives it in its completeness. The fact that each of the four writers gives the Great Commission in one form, or another, needs to be observed. None of them wrote in its totality. Each one presents it from his own outlook and illustration, however, this tells that together they supplement the whole idea, and connote a total completeness. Like Pfeiffer admitted, “Only as we see the whole outline as presented in the four Gospels do we see the total Great Commission”(Pfeiffer 2003, 370).

A study of the complex nature of the Great Commission, when solute, calls on the all-inclusive goal of making disciples, which we (the Church) must make a priority.

Its Interpretation and Correlations

The interpretation of the Great Commission scriptural texts is like a changing contour, which has maintained its movement throughout centuries, causing considerable discussions. With the rise of textual criticism from freethinkers and extremists, how do we understand the original idea in Christ’s mind when stipulating this heavenly injunction for his followers? Alternatively, would we say it was just a rhetoric expression? However, constant debate had revolved around numerous questions. Culver in a comment, stated some admirable questions that has been asked, he states,

…numerous question like, where these words spoken to the disciples as apostles of Jesus Christ? Did they constitute a part of the unique assignment to the apostolic office? Or were they addressed to the apostles as representatives of the church of Jesus Christ and thus are a part of the church’s commission unto the end of the age? ...what is the interrelationship between baptizing and teaching? Is the latter a coordinate with or subordinate to the former since the conjunctive ‘and’ is missing between vs. 19 and 20 of Mt. 28? Or is teaching associated with baptizing and not merely subsequent to it? And how are baptizing and teaching related to making disciples? What is the real meaning of baptizing ‘into’ the name? Why is the word ‘name’ used in the singular when it is followed by an enumeration of the three persons of the Godhead?(Culver 1967, 120).

These were possible mature scholarly views and questions from rationalists and scholars who had found great interest in the Great Commission injunction. However, some Evangelical Scholars has strived to seek answers to these profound questions, believing that the Great Commission was addressed to the Church, and as such must be obeyed to the end of the age and must be interpreted in the light of total revelation.

Most Scholars have done careful exegetical studies on the concept of the Great Commission, interestingly, limiting their study to that of Matthew’s passage only. Likes of Karl Barth and Robert Culver are explicit examples of these.

However, a study then, of the complex nature of this injunction, simply emphasizes the all-inclusive goal of the Commission is to make disciples of all nations, while propagating the gospel of Christ.

The revelation of the Great Commission is rooted in the Word of God, and had been firmly revealed totally in both the O.T and N.T. Like Pfeiffer’s thought, “It forms an organic unit and an integral part within that revelation, and receives its true meaning and force only if seen in this larger relationship” (Pfeiffer 2003, 370).

This revelation has being systematically revealed in the scriptures. Let’s quickly do an incisive study on some of these scriptural connections.

The Great Commission had being revealed in several interpretations, but primarily as (i). a missionary purpose and thrust of God referenced in the Old Testament (See. Isaiah 49: 6; 56: 3- 8, Jonah 3: 10; 4: 2, 11); (ii). Historically incarnated in the calling of Israel (See. Genesis 12: 1 – 3; Exodus 19: 5 – 6; Isaiah 42: 6 – 7, 19); (iii). As Life, theology and saving work of Christ as disclosed in (Matthew 9: 35; 11: 1; Luke 19: 10; John 10: 16); (iv). As the nature and work of the Holy Spirit as predicted by our Lord and manifested on and after Pentecost (See. Acts 2: 17; 13: 2, 4; 16: 6 – 10); (v). As the natur of the church of Jesus Christ reference in the book of Acts (See. Acts 2: 9 – 11, 21, 39; 13: 46 – 49; 15: 7 – 18); (vi). As revealed in the Epistles (See. Romans 10: 18; Ephesians 2: 11 – 22; 3: 8 – 11; Colossians 1: 6, 23). (vii). As a testimony to the whole world before the end comes, referenced in (Matthew 24: 14).

Consequently, the Commission was steadily revealed in the scriptures for our own admonition and concern as the Body of Christ. Should the church in the face of an upsurge in textual criticism and rationalists ignore this biblical command? Christians at all level must obey God’s command; this will pave way for better infectual zeal to spread the gospel, this obviously, is an outcome of thinking-out techniques and strategies to win the sin-sick souls for Christ, by first dedicating ourselves to be use by Him.

Lessons learnt from Findings

Jesus died, was buried, and the third day rose from the dead – in less than two months from His resurrection, He would rise in the clouds to enter back into heaven. The final words of Jesus, His last instructions before leaving planet earth to take His seat at the right hand of the Father are words that are instructive and stimulating. We call these words “The Great Commission,” for in them He commissions His disciples to take His message into all the whole world: a great task, and great words that provide great hope for mankind.

It is vital that one understands the ground for this commission; this would help for a better understanding, especially, when fulfilling this command. From this incisive study, is pivotal to note the authority of Christ, some fail to recognize the authority of Christ. This is important, because the book of Col. 1: 18 says, “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.” While Jesus walked upon earth, He demonstrated His authority over sickness, nature, demons, Satan, and sin – He still has all authority – all power – in heaven and in earth!

Secondly, the researcher understood the importance of preaching the Gospel, which was the only way the end would come – how is that possible? Romans 1: 16, tells us how mankind needs preaching in order to change their heinous philosophies. Although, II Tim. 4: 2 gingers us to preach the Word…, how important is this command. Alack, nowadays, some preachers will speak for minutes, and say nary a word concerning the gospel! On this note, it is essential to note that, it does not matter if the preacher’s words are neither eloquent, nor elaborate, nor loud, nor soft. What matters is, are his (the preacher’s) words the Truth of God? Because that’s where the power is!

The charge of the commission to win souls should not be ignored. From our findings, we noticed the importance of evangelism, how important is it for us to be concerned about the lost. As proverb 11: 30 tell us that “he that winneth souls is wise”, the researcher pulse by asking this question, how wise are we as Christians, if not by having an infectual zeal for winning souls for Christ? By having that infectual zeal for the gospel, His Kingdom will be established more-and-more on earth.

It is also important to underscore the importance of salvation in fulfilling the Great Commission, aim at saving souls. While we go out to preach, teach, baptize and disciple, we must fulfill the purpose of salvation – saving lost souls. As John Brown asserts in an editorial, “Christians must go forth with a message about salvation from sin!”(Brown 2008).

The researcher also understood the importance of Baptism. Emphatically, the Great Commission places great emphasis on baptism! As seen in all the scriptural injunctions, men place little or no emphasis on baptism, but Jesus did!

Finally, the most vital part; the importance of discipleship. “A child does not know how to eat except taught by the mother,” in the same manner, is the life of a baby Christian. New converts needs to be taught and discipled; teaching them all things as Christ had commanded in His Word – this is the basis on which the Christian faith is grown.

Its Connection to and Implications for Present-Day Christianity

John Young in his 1968 classic, Theology of Missions, sincerely admitted that, “The Great Commission does not make Christianity a missionary religion” (Young 1968, 162). Despite this conjecture by Young, other scholars on the ground of this all-important Great Commission injunction had made the same remarks. Conversely, Charles Pfeiffer, from a parallel perspective also concluded that, “the Great Commission is not an isolated arbitrary command imposed upon Christianity. It is a logical summation and natural outflow of the character of God as He is revealed in the scripture” (Pfeiffer et. al 2003, 370).

Pfeiffer while making this possible postulation base on an authority - the Bible, made reference to some scriptural passages, Ezekiel 33: 11; 1 Timothy 2: 4; and 2 Peter 3: 9.

However, Christians at all level must slot in an intensive and corporate heralding of the gospel among the nations of the world, by firmly communicating radically the gospel of Christ as written in the scriptures. The Church must lead converts and its members into an inner experience of the life in Christ through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus. By so doing, separating people from their past sinful lifestyles and experience without separating them from their culture, and engrafting them spontaneously to the congregation of believers through the practice of baptism.

Pfeiffer posits, “…renew …minds, and mold them into true Christian discipleship” (Pfeiffer et. al 2003, 371).

Based on this thought, the Church (as a whole) must embed and instill in them, the precepts or the original idea of God, rooted in the Word of God, so, making them steadfast at all times, and as such, building them to be light to others and an advertisement to their world. Upon these, such is the pattern of our Ministry as the chosen ones according to the Great Commission; none of the prerequisites must be omitted or neglected.

For Christians, no one must undermine or demean the authority or validity of this principle, which must be obeyed by the Church.

Conclusion

The Great Commander has issued His Great Commission. It is just as applicable to our generation as it was to the generation of the first century Christians. Let us learn from it, and practice it, as we take New Testament Christianity to our world!

In strive to bring out a comprehensive research work; the researchers came across the action verb “GO”, which is a command in its present participle, which literary means, “as you go”, or “while you are going”. Jesus in using this verb assumes we are going to GO – why don’t we go and make Him proud!

In view of the foregoing, here lies a clarion call to wake up to our responsibilities as Christians, and yield to this command, which must be instilled through adequate teaching both in Churches and in Christian environments. This discipline also serves as a threshold for training people of God that will invade and penetrate this world with the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and then gradually establishing God’s Kingdom here on earth. Christians at all levels must have an infectual zeal for fulfilling this command. This however, must be done diligently in righteousness so that the people of God will be thoroughly furnished unto all good works – while submitting to this Christological juridical principle.

Thanks and God bless.

The Image of God in Man: VicCounted's Perspective

The Bible avers that humans alone are "created in the image of God”. What exactly does this mean? Some have equated the image of God as being the physical characteristics of our bodies that make up the way we look.

Scholars have added light to this concept. In the creation story, man was said to have being created in the imago dei: image of God. What is this image of God in man? Danny McCann in an attempt to counteract these reactions pointed, “The image of God was reflected in Adam and Eve in their original sinless and holy condition. It obviously includes original knowledge, righteousness and holiness” (McCann © 2004, 19). Apparently, some of this nature and qualities were lost in the fall of Man, hence certainly not all of it. It remains apparent that man is still in the likeness of the transcendent infinite Creator (God) – how is that possible?

A Biblical interpretation of this term as seen in several passages interpreted man’s likeness to God as, “the immaterial aspects or function of man,” such as, reasoning, will, moral perception, the capacity for relationship, self-determination, dominion over creation, which were all distinguished into three main distinct parts in the course of this study. (See Man’s likeness to God). Upon these movements, let us unpack these definitions.

The original state of man has been stained with the fall of man. How do we understand this mystery if not by God’s inspirational insight through His Word. How then will man be restored to his original state? The term the image of God in man was interpreted adequately in the scriptures, and has its “backing” both from internal and external evidences. As the Bible is the only book that reveals in a much clearer way the likeness and image of God, for study sake, we will adopt its pre-concept in order to demystify this concept, with the intention of achieving a godly feat – this is why God’s Word is so powerful, it can give an answer to any question of man.

God Himself is “Life” and any Word that proceeds from His mouth is Life as well, and anything called “life” in this sense is pneumatically immortal. Upon this background, below are some exegetical studies on some scriptural passages that had helped the researcher with answers:

Genesis 1: 26 – 27 (Plan of the Triune God)

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”(KJV)

The Bible specifically declares that it was a deliberate plan of God to create man in His image and likeness so that he can have dominion over his creatures, by doing so man in a sense, is acting in place of God here on earth as His representatives – what a concept!

Genesis 5: 1 (A Writer’s Remark)

“…In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him” (KJV). Here, the writer was giving an opening remark on what God did, and so, addressing man as a “supreme being” made in the image of the Triune God. However, the similarity in appearance between God and man was explicitly re-mentioned in this passage by Moses (the writer of Genesis). .

Genesis 9: 6 (Life Resemblance)

“Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man” (KJV).

God declares that man’s blood should not be shed by anyone, because he is created in His image. Here, God was trying to share His supreme value and personality with mortal man – how loving. This was done by stipulating a universal guiding principle for man’s existence.

James 3: 9 (Social Commonness)

“Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God” (KJV).

Here, the King James Version uses similitude, which is synonymous to likeness or image. Man however, is warned not to misuse his tongue by cursing his fellow man who is also made in God’s likeness. Logically, this simply means that any man that curse his fellow man is naively cursing His Maker, because there is a God’s content or “symbolic feature” in every man. Man must be aware of the consequences if such act is consciously setout.

2 Peter 1: 3 – 4 (Christian Glorious Calling)

“According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (KJV)

This passage is syntactic in nature; the writer uses a phrase in verse 3, “given unto us all that pertain unto life and godliness,” and in verse 4, “partakers of divine nature,” which is God Himself in a pneumatic form (man), man have adopted the divine nature of God, which is life and righteous. This is a more Reformed view, which sees the “redeemed man” as a new creation justified by faith.

Apostle Paul enlightens more about God’s call upon us, which is glorious and attached with great and precious promises that allows us to partake in the divine nature and for the most part, escape the corruption of the world, which originates from evil desires.

Ephesians 4: 24; Colossians 3: 10 (Indwelling of the New Man)

“And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him” (KJV)

Apostle Paul advises both the Ephesians and Colossians believers to “put on the new man”. This implies that the image of God in man originally had dwindled during the fall of man to a level that brought man under a fallen state (See. Romans 3: 23).

Paul here was emphasizing on the new image (man) of which redemption in Christ was its source of manifestation. Though Scholars commonly concur that the divine image is unalienable (impossible to take away) from man. However, this does not mean that man has not soiled the image of God - ad infinitum. Therefore, it is now agreed upon that there are some “divine likeness” that were lost because of man’s disobedience to God.

GOD’S LIKENESS TO MAN

To begin with, the researcher would like to start by observing this very important statement by Rich Deem of the God and Science News Flash in a recent 2009 editorial, Deem writes,

…humans evolved from ape-like ancestors. If this is true then we are nothing more than glorified apes. However, compared to our closest "relatives", scientific research indicates that humans are unique on many fronts, including creativity, personality, abstract thinking, and moral judgment (Deem 2009).

In Genesis chapter 1: 26, God said, “let us make man in our image, in our likeness…” from this original idea, no distinction should be made between “image” and “likeness” because they are synonymous in both the O.T and N.T inscriptions. Accordingly, man is unique among all God’s creations due to its tripartite nature (body, soul and Spirit). Having the “image” or “likeness” of God simply means that man was created to resemble God. There are few other texts in Genesis where man is said to have been ‘in’ or ‘as’ the image of God, according to His likeness. Though, many interpreters have thought to locate the image of God in man’s reason, creativity, speech, or spiritual nature. It is more likely then, that is the whole of man not an aspect of him. As most scholars do stance, “man is the corporeal image of the incorporeal God” (Berkouwer 1962, 56).

In the ancient Near East, it is usually the King who is said to be the image of God, but in Genesis chapter 1, it is Mankind as a whole that is God’s representative. Significantly, man was still spoken of as the image of God after the fall: the fall of Genesis 9: 6, which depends on the belief that man represents God, so that, in a sense, an injury done to man is equally an injury done to God – logically (Also see above, James 3: 9 (Social Commonness)

.

The Bible avers that humans alone are created in the “image of God”, what exactly does this mean? Briefly, as the researcher will try to answer this deep question, and in series discuss some vital topics in order to unveil denotation of “the image of God” as regards the immaterial part of man, which sets man apart from the animal world and fits himself for the dominion God intended him to have over the earth (Genesis 1:28). This also enables him to commune with his Maker. In a recent editorial of the gotanswers.com, a Christian evangelistic website, they contributed to this effort and made a remarkable contribution on this study, dividing this likeness into three tripartite factors, which were, God’s likeness mentally, morally, and socially. Let’s briefly look into these:

Mentally:

Man’s conscious activeness and exceptional intelligence in making fiction a reality has for years being a controversial issue. The meaning and significance of God’s action into and in and through history becomes the basis for man’s inner response. He are made in His image and likeness as reasonable, intelligent and volitional beings, just as God Himself, though He is incorporeal and infinite. Simply put, Man was created as a rational and volitional agent. To be precise, man can reason and man can choose. This is a mirror image of God’s mental power and independence. This in a sense is man’s ability to create, invent, paint, write, calculate or think, these concludes that man is made in God’s likeness.

Is the human brain much different from that of our closest "relatives”, like the chimpanzees? According to Daniel J. Povinelli of the University of Louisiana's, New Iberia Research Center,

Humans constantly invoke unobservable phenomena and variables to explain why certain things are happening. Chimps operate in the world of concrete, tangible things that can be seen. The content of their minds is about the observable world (Iberia Research Center 2007).

Thus, the study of Anthropology tells of how creative man was thousands of years ago before the Patriarchs. This period marked an unforgettable artistic creation ever in history – how could man initiate such an idea. This mirrors man’s creative and conscious nature.

Morally:

Few weeks ago, on the cause of this research, Rev. Kalu Okechukwu commented on the hostile nature of man in reconciling passably with His transcendent infinite creator. In his observation, he noted that, “man was created innocent; for him not to maintain that state was an inability on his own part – he could have remained innocent if he wanted.”

In addition, another remarkable input on this study was by the gotanswers.org web magazine, in a statement opines,

Part of being made in God’s image is that Adam had the capacity to make free choices. Although he was given a righteous nature, Adam made an evil choice to rebel against his Creator. In so doing, Adam marred the image of God within himself, and he passed that damaged likeness on to all his descendants (Romans 5:12). Today, we still bear the image of God (James 3:9), but we also bear the scars of sin. (Gotanswers Report 2008)

This view was as a result of Adam’s disobedience to God, he could have remained immortal and innocent as it was on God’s mind originally. However, this also brings out some aspect of man’s likeness to God in terms of its mental effect (See Man’s likeness to God: mentally), because man was volitional – that was a part of God’s image man adopted. The researcher will avoid digressing from the main concept and maintain the study framework. Man was volitional and had the freedom to make options for himself that was part of the qualities of our being, which reflects God’s image in us.

It is Amazing to note that, man was created in righteousness and perfect innocence, which was a reflection of God’s holiness. God saw all He had made (Mankind included) and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Our conscience or “moral compass” is a sign of that original state. Whenever someone writes a law, recoils from evil, praises good behavior, or feels guilty, he is confirming the fact that we are made in God’s own image.

Communally:

Man was principally created for fellowship. Either fellowship with fellow man or with God still runs a spiral connotation. This reflects God's triune nature and love. In Eden, man’s primary relationship was with God. This implies fellowship with the transcendent incorporeal creator. In addition, God made the first woman because “it was not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Every time someone marries, makes a friend, hugs a child, or attends Church service, this depicts he is demonstrating the fact that he was made certainly in the image and likeness of the ever-loving social Father.

Even evolutionists are beginning to recognize the uniqueness of human beings. Ian Tattersall, in Becoming Human - Evolution and Human Uniqueness, says humans represent a "totally unprecedented entity" on Earth, and "Homo sapiens is not simply an improved version of its ancestors - it's a new concept"(Tattersall © 1995)

Since most austere evolutionists are consciously responding and concurring to this fact, we must be aware of God’s image in us, which are all worthy of honor and respect; they are neither to be murdered (Gen. 9: 6) nor cursed (Jas. 3: 9).

RELEVANCE FOR CHRISTIANITY

First, the researcher will like to start by bringing on this vital statement, “it is believed that after the fall, the image remained more or less intact while the moral image was destroyed – to be restored in full redemption through Christ”(Okechukwu 2009, 19)

The good news is that when God redeems an individual, He begins to restore the original image of God, creating a new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (Ephesians 4:24). That redemption is only available by God’s grace through faith in Christ as our Savior, from sin, that separates us from God (Ephesians 2:8-9). Through Christ, we are made new creations in the likeness of God (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Obviously, Adam lost his position in God’s place by being disobedient to God’s instruction. The sin he committed led to man’s depravity (sinful nature). The relationship that existed between God and man became terminated – at first. By being made in God’s image, man was expected to operate in connection with God. From the background of the above emanating issues, can we now say that God’s image is still relevant to present-day Christianity? According to J. Ellicott, in his 1959 classic, Ellicott’s Commentary on the whole Bible, emphasized more on this, he however concluded that “Man has not totally lost his original position” (Ellicott 1959). He further asserts, “The capacity/ ability that man received from God was only weakened and defiled by the fall” (Ellicott 1959). Ellicott was rather being liberal in his statements, but was conversely interpreting the original idea of the scripture as concerns this absorbing issue.

The book of Col. 1: 15 refers to Christ as the visible image of the invisible God. Relating this assertion of Paul with the view of Ellicott, one can say that the relevance of God’s image in man to the present-day Christianity is base in the person of Christ. 2 Corinthians 5: 17 tells us that “whenever any man decides to repent and turn to God, he becomes a new creature”. This experience or change automatically makes a new being out of man. Upon this, Christians now can have the Holy Spirit, who is a symbol of God’s omnipresent image. God’s Spirit in them is capable of leading and directing them to act in the likeness of God. We must not fail to understand that, even though “God and Man are not identical in a whole, they are not totally differenct” (Okechukwu 2009). In a sense, God and Man are alike because man has the ability to reason, to have self-direction or will and the eagerness to have fellowship with His Creator and fellow man.

Man was created to relate rightly with God and to be identified with freedom from sin. This position was actually destroyed at the fall. However, in Christ, we have redeemed this position because of the redemption and creation image, which sums the totality of God’s image in us achieved in full redemption through faith in Christ - that is the only source of restoration for Man.

CONCLUSION

Never has there been a journey or an embarkment, which began and never ended. Better still, the beauty of it is actually a great, beautiful end. As the Bible says, “the end of a thing matter more than its start”.

This study has obviously reached a point of necessary worth conclusion. After having clearly enumerated salient facts in a bid, reveal what “the Image of God in Man” entails in its entirety as well as the relevance and full implication of “Imago Dei” in the lives of today’s Christians, and with the aid of fitting references and opinions of authors, editors, speakers to bring out a wide range of scholarly views on the subject matter.

A reflection of God’s image in man would never be duly, let out if needed reconciliation along with re-positioning in Christ is not achieved in the life of today’s Christians, as well as in Christ’s body as a whole. More so, the offering of Jesus for the remission of man’s sins as well as for the redemption of man from the state of fall is good enough; yet not enough. Man has his part to play!

“Shall we continue to live in sin so that Grace may abound…” This is just one out of many scriptural texts that assures the reality of perfect life of liberty in Christ on the condition that sin and righteousness is eschewed. It is worthy of embrace that the relevance of Imago Dei to the present-day Christian has no substance as such if practicality of it is yet to be felt in the life of the believer. More so, an urgent call to salvation and righteous living is the real essence of divine restoration of the “Image of God”, which man once lost.

To this end, man is allowed a placed in God’s heart again – he can recover his lost position as a replica of the Almighty. His (man) one-time fall is thus nullified by virtue of the work of redemption Christ did on the Cross and all sins are atoned for, with the Blood of Jesus. The new birth is obtainable. Salvation is not far fetched and there is room for all.

“Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God”. This is true, as the shared Image of God does not in itself end here on earth. Heaven is real, and is a place meant for the redeemed ones. This is more than a wake-up call!

The Internet Church: Church in Wire Cables

In 2004, Peter Glover in his book the Virtual Church shared his views on this new revolution and the possible effects of making a Virtual Church community on the cyberspace. In his observation, Glover states:

The World Wide Web certainly has a place in supporting the general work of the Christian church. But when it comes to setting up a virtual church community on cyberspace as part of the latest communications revolution, then the surfer is no more a member of a legitimate Church, than could be a reader via the printing press (Glover 2004)

Hence, this dear-suggestion seems to out-hold the certainty of establishing a virtual church community on the web, which most Christian scholars predicts would be another road to other ends of the earth – while fulfilling the Great Commission.

In spite of this, my stand in this vital and challenging overview is that first, I believe and feel that we should understand the concept of been a Church in every age until Christ returns. Conversely, I would like to start by stating the four Bible-authorizing essentials from the New Testament perspective that makes a church ‘a church’ in the sight of God, not in our own presupposition. From the New Testament perspective, these are the essential elements a biblical church must have: Praying together for a cause, mentioned in (Acts 12: 5); Preaching the Word of God, referenced in (John 8:31,47; Gal.1:8-9; 2; I Thess.2:15; 2 Tim.3:16-4:4; 1 John 4:1-3); Administering of Sacraments, referenced in (1 Cor.10:14-17,21; 1 Cor. 11:23-30); and the exercise of Church discipline also mentioned in (Matt.18:17; Acts 20:28-31; Rom. 16:17-18; 1 Cor. 5:1-13).

Nonetheless, is of no doubt that the Church pictured in these four main contexts is however suppressed and victimize with the revolution of the virtual church. The four descriptive elements of a ‘God’s own Church’ seems to technically fall victim to the practice of the modern Church.

Glover in some other attempt tries to emphasize more on this, and said:

The great sadness of our generation is that Bible-believing Christians are finding faithful churches increasingly hard to find. And though the preaching of the Word can occur online, the Bible makes it clear that preaching ought primarily to be within the context of community church life, not apart from it. But the other two elements, sacrament observance and the disciplining of the flock, are simply impossible to administer… (Glover 2004)

In all, Glover seems to make a point. The church should be a place to worship God in Spirit and in Truth, not “cable wires”. Nonetheless, there is still time to amend and properly tune the “mission statement” of the church, while using this revolutionary-disoriented phenomenon. Apparently, the cyberspace can never provide for observing of sacraments, or even Pastoring and disciplining of flocks as the local church does. Though it might to some extent, provide some limited range of preaching to its user, but not the whole of it as compared to what you get in a local church. Notwithstanding, Christ commands us to go preach to all nations of the earth and even to the ends of the earth, and make disciples of them. However I hope we catch this illustration; let’s hypothetically think of the cyberspace as an imagined nation where we can make disciples for the LORD. However, is very possible to make disciples online and then direct them to a local congregational church where they can receive further edification, pastoring and sacramental observance. In that case, it is more fulfilling to direct cyber converts to a local church nearby, than ignorantly trying to perform the whole rituals of a biblical church – which is impossible. .

Just some couple of days ago, on the course of this research, a friend of mine told me that, “God can’t approve of building a church community on the internet because it is simply not a legitimate church – in fact it is unimpressive to me, and a trap to fence-in churches and Christian organizations to the mischievous wall of the Internet.” In his opinion, he also said something very interesting, that, “once the church have fully accepted and embraced this tool, using it to run her entire programs and activities, there will be a regulation of Christian sites from the central database system”. He further reference a passage from the bible: I will share the verse with you, it made sense in a way however. Hebrew 10: 25: “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another – and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”

However, his claims and comments seem real and intriguing. After this encounter, I ceaselessly thought about his views for some couple of weeks, and concluded that God might be speaking through him though, after all – ‘the internet’ aren’t ‘the church’, and on the mainstream, the cyberspace is just a new revolution not a ‘new church’. It would be wise to note this; the cyberspace can only serve this one essential purpose for the church, which is to be used as an innovative tool for reaching out to the unreached and spreading the gospel to diverse nations of the World. When converts are made, directing these converts to a local church is then considered a priority.

I discovered that most Christian fanatics kick against building a church community on the web simply because of Paul’s admonition in Hebrew 10: 25, that we should not forsake the gathering of our brethren as most of us are doing presently…, apparently, this passage certainly speaks volumes, but at the other end, are we just misinterpreting the context of that verse? The truth be told! People are more open, more friendly, and ready to discuss issues on the internet, than what it uses to be in a typical church arena. Rather than being at church service, many prefer being on an internet church service. These assumptions and speculations have only resulted to an increase in climax of the Cyber revolution, but the question now is, what should the church do? Conversely, I tender this simple practical answer to the question myself. We (the Church) can penetrate the internet and use it for ‘Cybermission’. When we have made some disciples, we can direct and engraft them to a local church near their residence for further edification (this is where church planting is vital). After experiencing God’s presence in their newly located Church, they (these converts) will see the difference between a real church service, and those they see or experience on the internet – there is a total difference.

I conclude with these last few words from Pope John II (may his soul rest in peace) in his speech at the 36^th World Communication Day Anniversary. Though he admitted that the essence of the Internet is that it provides an almost unending flood of information, much of which passes in a moment. On this bedrock, he concluded his speech by admonishing the Church in Cyberspace with these few words of admonition:

There already exist on the Net countless sources of information, documentation and education about the Church, her history and tradition, her doctrine and her engagement in every field in all parts of the world. It is clear, then, that while the Internet can never replace that profound experience of God which only the living, liturgical and sacramental life of the Church can offer. It can certainly provide a unique supplement and support in both preparing for the encounter with Christ through communicating, and sustaining the new believer in the journey of faith which then begins. ... The Internet causes billions of images to appear on millions of computer monitors around the planet. From this galaxy of sight and sound will the face of Christ emerge and the voice of Christ be heard? …this is the purpose of evangelization. …for if there is no room for Christ, there is no room for man …I dare to summon the whole Church bravely to cross this new threshold, to put out into the deep of the Net, so that now as in the past the great engagement of the Gospel and culture may show to the world "the glory of God on the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:6). May the Lord bless all those who work for this aim. Amen.

However, is now apparent that the church in cyberspace cannot wholly provide the four essential components a biblical Church provides - from the New Testament perspective. My stand on this argument still, is that the internet should be a forum for evangelism, and a call for Cybermission. I am actually not in support of having a church community on the internet, neither am I countering the idea. But rather than building an Internet church, the time spent in piling up cyber junkies to form a Cyber-Church should be spent for Cybermission, because a local church provides that fresh anointing from God’s Word, right administration of the sacraments, and the exercise of church discipline as earlier mentioned, which a church built on the cyberspace can never provide. The internet might offer an extensive knowledge of the bible, and can be use as a tool and an innovative new approach to traditional evangelism, but the crux of it all is that it does not teach values; and when values are disregarded, our very humanity is demeaned and man easily loses sight of his transcendent infinite Creator.