Five Plus Two Does Not Equal Seven

The story of the two fishes and five loaves of bread is the only one that appears in all four gospels, although there are some slight differences. For example, John 6:9 mentions the involvement of the small boy. This story happened just after the death of John the Baptist.

When Jesus heard that his cousin was beheaded, he did what some of us do when a friend or relative dies-he went off to a quiet place to think, pray and grieve. Jesus wasn't the only person who was mourning the death of John the Baptist. His followers were also in mourning. They had lost their powerful leader. If he could be killed, then no one was safe-not even Jesus. They were seeking a new leader.

This story shows a contrast between two different parties-a party hosted by Herod and a party hosted by Jesus. Herod's party was one of lust, cowardice, rash words, hatred and murder-all because he was so enamored by the dancing of his step-daughter that he made a rash promise that led to the death of John the Baptist. In contrast, Jesus' party as shown by the miracle of the loaves and fish is one that leads people to freedom and life.

The miracle of the loaves and fish is not so much what Jesus does as what happens among the crowd in Jesus' presence. The miracle shows us God's character, the nature of the coming Kingdom, and the nature of the Kingdom in our hearts when it has transformed us. Our heavenly Father, as the head of the household, establishes the household, sustains and liberates us and guides us to spiritual fulfillment. The foundation of God's household is the duty he imposes on us to care for each other.

Jesus always seems to be asking more of us than we have to give-as spouses and parents and students and workers and on and on. He calls on us to love, even when love is difficult; to forgive, even when we have been wronged; to stand fast and firm on our principles, even when it mean standing alone. And those things are not easy to do. After all, we are not Jesus, and our powers are not unlimited, as his were.

Jesus bore witness to our spiritual duty to care for each other. There is enough for everyone when we live in right relation and harmony, but in reality there are millions of people who live in poverty and are starving.

What can we do? Well, we can do what Jesus did. Jesus took the small amount of food that was offered and used it to do his work by using it as an example for the disciples and for us. When we work together and use what we have to do God's work, God will multiply what we offer. Little is enough when God is involved.

Following Jesus is a radical lifestyle. Today, Jesus asks us if we are willing to do the same. Are we willing to give up some of what we have, that others might not go hungry? Are we willing to give out of what God has given to us?

Thanks to Craig Condon a Lay Minister from Canada, we are able to read this nice reflection. you can view the complete are by reaching craign by email at craig.condon2@ns.sympatico.ca

Peace…

Read More

Who Owns Nigeria - Christians or Muslims?

Nigeria, a country blessed by the Almighty God, is made up so many parts. All of these parts are associated with one form of religion or the other. However, there are two prominent religions that are practiced by the larger population of the country - Christianity and Islam. For obvious reasons, these religions have been struggling to maintain a leadership position or superiority over the others.

The government at the centre has always been watching the religious drama as it unfolds on daily basis. Most leaders have often been tempted to take sides with the ugly development thereby soiling their hands in the murky waters of religious extremism. In places, where the Christians are in majority, Muslims cry foul, alleging marginalization and same thing happens in places where the Muslims are in majority. In such areas, introducing oneself as a member of one religion where the other is in majority is to say the least, creating animosity.
In situations as bad as this, the central government is expected to remain neutral and unbiased arbitrator in matters of this nature. A perfect example is the seizure of all the Christian (Mission) schools by the Federal Republic of Nigeria years back. It should be noted that, the Federal Government of Nigeria acted in line with true "federalism", the nature of these schools notwithstanding. Nationals who do not subscribe to the Christian religion will be free to acquire Western Education without engendering religious jealousy. Though, without apology, the Federal Government of Nigeria, it should be noted, acted in the interest of national unity to create an environment where Muslims and Christians will feel free in a plural society, attend the same school, and interact socially, without being maligned.

The on-going debate on the government's introduction of "Islamic Banking System", which has already put the two religions (Christianity and Islam) at loggerhead is an issue that calls for public attention. The Nigerian Banking Sector which has been experiencing myriads of reform policies lately, which are carefully initiated and carried out in its leadership position, has not witnessed the kind of heat this new reform is generating.
Right thinking Nigerians have remained apprehensive over the issue due to the power of religion to create division. The planned introduction of Islamic banking model into the Nigerian financial landscape is one of the issues that have raised so much dust as result of the term "Islamic" that is attached to the name. The things that happen in this country on daily basis have made the proponents of a single and indivisible nation under the name "Nigeria" to have a rethink. As a result, there is a debate on the issue of "nomenclature" whether or not the proposed non-interest banking should maintain the name "Islamic Banking". Pundits have said that the term "Islamic Banking" will only succeed in stoking the fires of mutual distrust in a peculiar religion-sensitive environment like Nigeria. It is also seen that adopting the controversial name will be a grave violation of the nation's secular status.

The on-going debate which has actually generated so much trouble. The Christians in one hand, are accusing the Muslims of enjoying cheap popularity by allowing the government to place Islam above and against other religions in the country, especially on their purported bid to Islamize Nigeria (see Daily Trust, Monday July 4, 2011, page 30 and Thursday July, 7, 2011, pages 26-27). The Muslims, on the other hand, are accusing the Christians of being ignorant and at the same time, deviating from real Christianity, if they agree with the present Nigerian banking system that promotes extortion.

Debunking the claims of the Christians that "Islamic Banking" is a way to Islamize Nigeria, the Muslims claim that their voices have not been heard over the years in the activities of Nigerian government especially, in policy making, because according to them, Nigerian government has been operating on the English Christian Laws. The question that most Nigerians have not failed to ask as a result of this unsubstantiated claim is, "When did English Laws translate into Christian Laws?" English Laws, as we know, came as a result of British colonization of Nigeria, not through religious (Christian) imposition. It should be noted here that the Christians in Nigeria are not at home with everything in the Nigerian Constitution because, there are so many things in the law that run contrary to Christian ethics. In other words, Christians and Muslims should learn to accommodate the plurality of the Nigerian nation and desist from unwarranted utterances that could cause chaos.

 Everybody (no matter the tribe, or religion) is needed in building a united Nigeria. Christians and Muslims are expected to live in peace with one another. Every good invention or discovery to advance the nation is highly appreciated. When one part discovers a thing, the other parts benefit without subjecting the up-coming parts to servitude.

The claim that the concept of "Islamic Banking" is ominous is an understatement, because it is truly not in the national interest. A critical look at the nomenclature tells us that Islam takes the credit of banking reformation in Nigeria even when all the people working day and night in building the solid banking system are not Muslims. As a person, I have always liked people initiating good projects and programmes that will not only unite Nigeria but help in taking her to the next level. This system of "non-interest" banking as advocated by the leadership of Nigeria's apex bank is a welcome idea, but the religious colouration of it is not proper. In other words, the apex bank should develop a listening culture where people's contributions in the way it runs the activities of the banking sector should be valued. This will kill the idea of a section of the country raising shoulders over and above the others for having their names written in gold, even when the hand holding the pen and the paper belongs elsewhere.

However, the idea of one's voice not being heard in a nation like Nigeria suggests selfishness. Nigeria belongs to all of us and contributing to its growth should always be a collective work. This is why removing the religious colouration from this system of banking will go a long way in safeguarding against any form of discrimination, as the approach of the apex bank is a poor demonstration of sensitivity to the unity of Nigeria. The government should as a matter of urgency, suspend the action of the apex bank until a compromise is reached, since the idea of an "Islamic Banking" for a country like Nigeria is capable of playing one religion against another. Also, having studied the issue at hand, the government as well as the apex bank should consider the following as a way out:

1. A better, but unifying nomenclature should be adopted and the concept of "Islamic Banking" dropped hence it is capable of over-heating the already charged political and religious atmosphere of the country. It will also help in uniting all the different religious groups without engendering jealousy or religious bickering.

2. New banks should be established which will completely carry out the Islamic Banking System. This will create the needed difference from the already existing system of banking operation in Nigeria. This idea is also healthy because it will give room for competition and enhance customer's banking choice.

3. Government should create room for religious organizations to participate in the banking sector by way of owning and managing banks to their own tastes and standards. This will help in creating an enabling environment for those who hide under the cloak a country to champion or further the course of a particular religion to have a level playing ground that will expose their expertise in handling financial matters.

4. If the establishment of new banks is not possible at the moment, already existing banks will be given the option of choosing between the present banking system and the proposed "non-interest banking" system. This will alleviate the fear of imposing a particular religion over a right thinking and free citizens of Nigeria.
Nigerians should understand that the nationality of this country is not built on a particular ethnic or religious group, therefore, learning to accommodate one another means that issues of national interest should always be weighed against all odds before they are adopted or implemented. However, the accusations and counter-accusations from these religious bodies should be put to rest because they are truly unhealthy to our cooperate existence. Nigeria belongs to neither the Christians alone nor to the Muslims alone. Let us learn to love, cherish and accommodate one another. God bless Nigeria!

Vitus Ejiogu our contributor is a writer and publisher with the Fire-Brand Int"l Ministries, a media ministry that is based in Nigeria. He is the editor of FOUNDATION SATELLITE magazine also published by the ministry. He pastors a Church in Bauchi and is married with two children. You can reach him at: firebrandhq@yahoo.com or: 234 80 8181 829.

Read More