El-Rufai and Kaduna’s antichrists

For daring a bill to regulate religious practice in Kaduna State, Governor Nasir El-Rufai’s explosively intolerant opponents, reading religious chauvinism into it all, have tagged him “antichrist”.

But from their hysteria, not the governor, but they, sound every decibel the antichrist.  By their deeds, declares the Bible, the divine Christian constitution, we shall know them!

For starters, an Auchi, Edo-based Pentecostal pastor, Apostle Johnson Suleiman, let fly his own version of Christian fatwa: the governor must withdraw the bill or he dies!

Is that the good pastor’s interpretation of Christ’s turn-the-other-cheek doctrine, in this blessed season of Easter — Christ, that was divine, yet meekly submitted to be mauled and crucified, just to cleanse humanity of sin?

Or, given the Islamic ring to the pastor’s surname, is it a neophyte getting too excitable for his own good, preaching hate instead of love, just to score one for Christianity against its great “enemy”, Islam?

But even if Islam is Christianity’s enemy (which it is not, though their doctrines differ), didn’t Christ insist you must pray for your enemies?

Besides, the irate apostle (didn’t the Bible say be angry, but don’t sin?) must be told that theocratic arrogance — which is what his show of ire amounts to — doesn’t excuse the breach of the law in a secular republic.

Threatening a sitting governor with death, for whatever excuse, could well amount to treason, if the affected high official of state decides to press charges.

Another piqued Christian brother, on his facebook wall, gleefully posted an el-Rufai picture defaced with a giant X, in red.  His furious and sweeping verdict: “This Uncircumcised Philistine!  Cannot stop the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in Kaduna State!!!”

But pray, is the proposed  “Bill for a Law to substitute the Kaduna State Regulation of Religious Preaching Edict No. 7 of 1984” targeted solely against Christians?  Hardly, though this emotive reaction would suggest otherwise.

Just as well it is nothing but hot fallacy.  Calling a fellow citizen “uncircumcised Philistine” could satisfy religious bile.  But if you distil history from theology, that phrase clearly belonged to the pre-Christian era, the Judaist era, when the ancient Israelites fought turf wars against virulent opposition in the Promised Land which, by the way, belonged to some people before they got there.

Judaists, if they wish, could luxuriate in such cavalier bigotry.  Not Christians.  Though Christ talked of Jews and Gentiles, there was nothing chauvinistic about it: just a realistic aggregation of humanity, beyond just Jews, since all, according to the Christian creed, are entitled to Christ’s redemption.

The Nation