Let's Talk (March 14, 2015) - Transformational Leadership on Development...

Dear Evangelical (Pentecostal) Pastor, You Are Not God - Part 1

This is only the first part in a series of articles that I shall be writing over the next few weeks on this subject. Although it may be so interpreted by misinformed Christians, neither the motivation for this article nor its content is meant as an attack on evangelical pastors. That said, anyone who wants or expects me to defend my status as a Christian has another thought coming and would be wasting his/her time.  I have neither desire nor interest in joining the ranks of modern-day Pharisees who stand on high mountains of arrogance and deceit to proclaim and show off their professed commitment to Christ while taking upon themselves the role of deciding who is a Christian and who isn't; who is heaven-bound and who isn't.  It seems to me that such decisions should be left to God who alone sees the inside of the human heart and knows best. 

For anyone wondering why this is addressed to evangelical pastors, the reason is simple: pastors of traditional churches have always known that they are not God and they have always been willing to accept their status as fallible beings.  They have also always taken the words of Christ to mean exactly what He said. So they avoid judging others just because Christ said not to, and they do not take on the role of choosing who should go to heaven because they actually believe that the Psalmist was right that "...all power belongs to God". 

When a pastor in Nigeria physically assaults a child during a church service because the child denies his accusation that she is a witchcraft adherent, that pastor has obviously assigned to himself the roles of judge, jury and executioner - none of which the Bible assigns to any pastor. When his congregation watches and applauds what the pastor is doing when he does that, they become cheer-leading grave diggers at gallows in a hall that is supposed to be a peaceful solace for healing and deliverance. When another African pastor commands his congregation to eat soil and grass, and they comply, that preacher becomes an oppressive dictator holding court in a house where he is supposed to feed God's children with the Bread of life. When an American evangelical pastor preaches hate and money over salvation or tells his congregation that he saw God wearing a blue suit, he operates outside the word of God and ascribes to himself the kind of prowess that the Bible neither ascribes to, nor desires of man. When congregations applaud these pastors, they become no better than  ignorant sycophants in a jester's court.  The Bible is either right that God is a spirit or the pastor is right that God walks around dressed in suits just like evangelical pastors but I would rather believe the Bible. Spirits do not walk around in blue suits. When pastors ride around in opulence and build universities that are beyond the financial reach of members of their congregations whose sweat and money enriched those pastors to the point that they could build those universities, such pastors are no better than greedy, oppressive users who kick the ladder aside after reaching the top of a building with the ladder's aid. 

Over the last two decades since a new wave of evangelical Christianity kicked into high gear in Africa, the people calling themselves pastors can now be be found at the rate of a dime a dozen.  Too many are pastors not because of the associated responsibilities that were customary for that role but because of the financial profitability and the new powers that evangelical pastors can now wield.  For example, they can (and do often) change people's family and given names at will because they know best that the names hitherto borne by those individuals and their families were not Godly.  But here is the rub: people do not become better human beings because their names have been changed, nor do they become more progressive even in human terms.  Instead, they just become servants to the religious "emperors" who changed their names and fed them a lie that salvation through Jesus Christ is conditional. 

It is only a question of time before this and other articles in this series result in me being an object of attacks from some evangelical Christians and their pastors who will convince them that I am (or have been) used by the devil or that I am the anti-Christ.  Such a claim would ordinarily be laughable but it shouldn't be, since it would be consistent with the manipulative modus operandi that is so commonplace with too many evangelical pastors that the time has come for all thinking, well-meaning Christians to stand up and demand truth and righteousness from those who lead the church of Christ. The Church is bigger than a single pastor and no pastor should be allowed to cause the amount of damage that so many evangelical (pentecostal) pastors are causing in today's world.

Dear evangelical pastor, you are not the church; you are not the foundation of the Church; the Church does not belong to you; you are not the Lord of the Church of Christ. You, dear evangelical pastor, are not God.

Let's Talk (March 8, 2015): Immigration: The African Immigrant Experience

Let's Talk (Feb 28, 2015) - Caring for Africa's Developmentally Disabled

Let's Talk (Feb. 14, 2015): Gender Relations Among African Men and Women

NIGERIA, MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT IN 2015 - PAUL INYANG

Paul Inyang

I have resisted writing on this subject for the fear of being accused of pilling on. Words have meaning and in some cases many interpretations. Lawyers are known especially for their ability to craft words to give it a legality—giving those words some credibility especially in the courts of law. This realm is far from my reality, so I cannot tell you much about its construct and purpose. I do however know that we need these things (laws) to give us some order or at the very least provide us with something to harangue, haggle and argue about. The bottom line is that laws determines how we operate and at times gives us clear boundaries as to what is right and wrong.

Philosophers have engaged in the art of giving meaning to social constructs but have left us with a lot of ambiguity because we essentially can have as many perspectives as we want on issues,especially when it requires some sort of moral interpretation. Religion immerses itself in this area also because of the claim to possession of the clearest guides not only to morality but in the view of many the purest determinant of right and wrong. For some, the interpretations are literal and for others it involves allegories—woven as stories that guide us in making moral interpretations as well as guiding us to right and wrong. Whatever book one subscribes to, whether it is the Bible, Koran, Hindu, they all provide guidance to belief, morality, and basic rules of life—defining and naming God and His expectations. If we can stay a bit away from our beliefs for a minute and just look at them as inspirational books, then it is easy to understand why depending on interpretation people can be misled quite easily.

Politicians or so called leaders have joined the fray, unfortunately there are no guiding principles other than what we have been taught as the mainline political practices—democracy, communism and socialism to name a few. Politicians are given to parsing, invectives and vituperations—in an attempt to confuse us and validate what by any definition is immoral, contemptuous and totally unacceptable. Lest I digress, this is about words, meaning and interpretations. When is a “thief a thief" and when is corruption what it is said to be. Which law or good book justifies either? Can one tell me which one is the lesser of two evils. It is as if we can distinguish between both it then provides us justification and an explanation of its existence. Why would one in authority try to explain the difference between both—what is their motive? Please disabuse me if I am wrong—have things changed so much that everything is grey and there is nothing like “black and white” anymore? In my opinion, it is asinine to suggest that there is a difference between the two, even if true. Both are embedded in each other—stealing after all is a corrupt practice. Does it really matter if the legal definition suggests a difference and are they not birds of the same feather? I would like to know which of the aforementioned books (Law, Bible, Koran) suggests that both are right/legal. Unless we have become so morally decrepit that we cannot distinguish between right and wrong, then we can buy into such. Again, life cannot be built on philosophical constructs—in that realm, one can make arguments on both sides and has a free hand in choosing his or her point. This is real life. I may be wrong and philosophers can take issue with this but let us call a spade a spade and we will be guiding young minds in the right direction. Just my opinion—that of an overactive mind.

Paul Inyang - 2/12/2015

Let's Talk (Feb. 8, 2015) - Daughters of Africans in Diaspora