Is it not flabbergasting and absurd that Pastor Nwodu would accuse Pastor Muoka of infringing on the fundamental human rights of people to do what they like that is not illegal or sinful, when he tells members of his church and others not to drink alcohol, smoke or work in a brewery or hotel? But with his criticism, is he too not breaching the freedom of the clergyman to choose those he wants to associate with and to be the members of his church and his liberty to advice all and sundry to avoid what he thinks is not good for them or may deprive them the opportunity of making the Kingdom of God? So, I cannot join Nwodu in carpeting Pastor Muoka for his policy because he too has the inviolable right to choose the type of church he wants to run and those to be in his congregation.
Especially given the reasons why he is said to have come up with his stringent rules and position. Apart from drunkenness making Adam, the father of mankind, to go naked and to curse Ham, one of his three sons in Genesis 9:18 – 28, which I cited a fortnight ago, I understand the other one is what alcohol also did to Lot. As reported in Genesis 19: 30 – 38 his two incestuous daughters got him drunk and used the opportunity to have sex with him. Leading each of them having a son for him.
In modern – day Nigeria and in countries in different continents of the world, do we not hear of men telling the police and judges that they committed crimes, including raping girls and women because of drunkenness or the smoking of Indian hemp or use of cocaine? Including fathers making love with their daughters, sons doing so with their mothers, brothers with their sisters, female cousins or nieces and men having forced sex with non – relative girls and women in their 60s 70s or 80s. So, what is bad or wrong in Pastor Muoka banning the members of his church from drinking alcohol, smoking or working in a hotel or brewery, if he thinks this is a way he can prevent them from committing crimes? It is for those who can’t cope or abide with his rules and teachings to stay away from his denomination. After all, there are other churches for them to attend services or join to become members.
But then is it not a futile exercise to embark on a campaign against Pastor Muoka’s doctrine as Pastor Nwodu wants me to do? When I understand his church exists in 156 countries with 78 branches in India alone, a nation where 84 per cent of the population belong to Hinduism, ten per cent to Islam and the remaining six per cent to Christianity and other religions. Meaning that his church must have several millions of members in Nigeria and probably up to a quarter of a billion or more across the globe.
I have no doubt that many, if not most, of the members joined Muoka’s church because of the miracles he is said to perform regularly. Five weeks ago, in the second article in the series I told the story of Kano State – born Hadija Usman (070 – 3053 – 6345), a Muslim who originally did not believe in miracles, but who left Islam to join Muoka’s church because of the convincing cures she saw him carried out through prayers for people and what he preaches. Last month she travelled hundreds of kilometers from her base in a city in a North-Central State for the church’s three-day crusade in Ebonyi State in the South – East.
Six days ago Mr. Kalu Orieke Kalu (080-3696-1629) sent a text message inviting me to come and see the miracles going on during a service in their main church (the national and international headquarters) in the Ijesa area of mainland Lagos. For the confirmation of his story, he later sent me the name and telephone number (080-2319-5425) of a 59 – year –old woman lawyer who he said was cured of kidney problem for which she was scheduled to undergo transplant surgery. So, I don’t think the campaign by anybody can make those in Muoka’s church to pull out because of his ban on drinking alcohol, smoking and not to work in a brewery or hotel. Or stop people from joining his church after hearing the miracle healings he is said to perform week after week and the good fortune that becomes one’s lot after becoming a member of his denomination.
To be continued next week Wednesday
Professor Anele’s faux pas on Bible authors (6)
After coming up in last week’s column with evidences that Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John and the three Epistles of First, Second and Third John, today I am providing proofs that he was also the author of Revelation. The first clue to this are in the statements in verses 1, 2, 4, 9, 10 and 11 of Chapter 1 of Revelation. Verses 1 and 2 show that the Book is the record of what Jesus Christ revealed to a servant of his called John through an angel of God. And since Apostle John was the only disciple of Jesus who bore that name, it is beyond argument that he was the John referred to in those passages as the servant of Christ.
The second proof is that verse four shows that the person who wrote to the Christians in the seven churches in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea in the province of Asia (now Turkey) was someone called John. While verse nine reveals that he wrote the Book on the Island of Patmos. According to documents on the internet on the authors of the Books in the New Testament and his biography, Apostle John who like Apostle Peter was born in Bethsaida, now in Syria, was living in Ephesus before he was exiled to the Island of Patmos in the 90s. And when he died, his remains were returned there for burial in the Basilica of St. John, a church named after him.
It is said not to be correct that Revelation was written by another man known as John of Patmos because it is clear in verses 1 and 2 of Chapter 1 of the Book that the author was a John who was a disciple of Jesus Christ. Other names by which Apostle John was known were John the Presbyter, John the Evangelist and John the Theologian, reflecting his profession as a priest and preacher.
More to come on the subject