RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian forces lose more than 4,800 servicemen over week

The Ukrainian armed forces lost up to 4,855 servicemen over the week, with the most fighters - 1,490 - in the Donetsk area, according to TASS calculations based on the data of the Russian Defense Ministry.

The Ukrainian forces lost: 1,180 servicemen in the South Donetsk area, 820 in the Zaporozhye area, 665 in the Kupyansk area, 485 in the Krasny Liman area and 215 in the Kherson area.

Since the beginning of the special military operation, the Russian forces have destroyed a total of 466 Ukrainian aircraft, 247 helicopters, 6,152 unmanned aerial vehicles, 433 anti-aircraft missile systems, and 11,527 tanks and other armored combat vehicles.

Russian Defense Ministry Spokesman Lieutenant General Igor Konashenkov reported on August 4 that the Ukrainian armed forces had lost more than 43,000 servicemen and about 5,000 units of various armaments, including 26 aircraft and 25 Leopard tanks, during the June-July counteroffensive.

Earlier, the Russian Defense Ministry reported that the Ukrainian army had been unsuccessfully trying to launch an offensive since June 4. Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed out that the Ukrainian troops had no success in any area. On July 23, at a meeting with Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko in St. Petersburg, he said that Kiev's counteroffensive had failed.

**West enabling Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilian targets – The Economist

Ukraine relies on Western intelligence and satellite surveillance to guide its drones toward targets within Russia, The Economist reported on Sunday. The report backs up Moscow’s claims that the West is complicit in these “terrorist” strikes.

Russia’s extensive air defense and electronic warfare capacity mean that Ukrainian drone operators often need outside help to hit targets deep inside Russia, The Economist reported, citing anonymous sources within Ukraine’s multiple drone programs. This assistance includes “intelligence (often from Western partners) about radars, electronic warfare, and air-defense assets,” the report stated.

Feedback on the success of a strike is compiled from satellites, the report noted. Ukraine has only a single surveillance satellite, meaning that any imagery collected in between its 15 daily orbits is likely provided by Western satellites.

While Ukraine often attempts to hit military targets within Russia, many of its strikes are focused on civilian infrastructure and residential areas. In the most recent incident, a small drone slammed into an apartment block in the city of Kursk, shattering windows but leaving nobody injured. Successive waves of drone attacks have targeted Moscow’s central business district in recent weeks, and although the strikes on the capital have not killed anyone, an attack on the border region of Belgorod earlier this week left three people dead.

Moscow has previously accused Ukraine’s Western backers of complicity in these “terrorist strikes.” Speaking after a small drone hit the Kremlin in May, government spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated: “We know very well that decisions about such actions, about such terrorist attacks, are made not in Kiev but in Washington." Moscow has also accused British and American special forces of assisting Kiev’s recent missile attacks on the Crimean Bridge.

According to Peskov, Moscow views the attacks as “acts of desperation,”carried out to compensate for Ukraine’s failures on the battlefield. The strikes are viewed similarly in the West, the New York Times reported on Friday. Citing US officials, the newspaper said that the drone operations are intended “to bolster the morale of Ukraine’s population and troops,” and show that Kiev “can strike back” amid its failing counteroffensive.

 

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia launches overnight air attack on northern, central Ukraine

Russia launched an overnight air attack against Ukraine on Sunday, sending missiles over other northern and central parts of the country, authorities said.

The Ukrainian military reported shooting down four cruise missiles out of up to eight total airborne targets detected, adding that the rest of the targets were "probably false".

It also said there were no immediate reports of strikes.

The governor of Kyiv region, Ruslan Kravchenko, said two people had been wounded and 10 buildings damaged by falling missile debris in one unspecified area of the region.

"Thanks to the professional work of the air defence forces, there were no strikes on critical or residential infrastructure," he said in a statement.

All of Ukraine was under air raid alerts for about three hours early on Sunday before they were cleared at around 6 a.m. (0300 GMT).

Russia has carried out a campaign of regular air strikes involving missiles and drones against Ukrainian targets far from the front line as part of its 18-month-old full-scale invasion.

Meanwhile, Russia's defence ministry said on the Telegram messaging channel on Sunday that its forces had shot down two drones overnight in the Bryansk and Kursk regions, which both border Ukraine.

"The regime in Kiev made further attempts to commit terror attacks using fixed-wing drones on targets in the Russian Federation during the night and in the morning of Aug. 27," the ministry said.

It gave no information about possible casualties or damage.

The governor of Kursk region, Roman Starovoit, posted pictures on his Telegram channel which he said showed damage caused by a drone to an apartment block in the city of Kursk, with windows blown out.

Drone attacks on Russian targets, especially in Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and in regions bordering Ukraine, have become almost a daily occurrence since two drones were destroyed over the Kremlin in early May.

The attacks have disrupted flights in and out of Moscow in recent weeks. Ukraine rarely takes direct responsibility for such drone strikes but says destroying Russian military infrastructure helps a counter-offensive begun by Kyiv in June.

** Zelenskiy says elections could happen under fire if West helps

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, responding to calls by a US senator this week to announce elections in 2024, said on Sunday voting could take place during wartime if partners shared the cost, legislators approved, and everyone got to the polls.

Elections cannot currently be held in Ukraine under martial law, which must be extended every 90 days and is next due to expire on Nov. 15, after the normal date in October for parliamentary polls but before presidential elections which would normally be held in March 2024.

Top American legislators visited Kyiv Aug. 23, among them Lindsey Graham, who heaped praise on Kyiv's fight against Russian President Vladimir Putin but said the country needed to show it was different by holding elections in wartime.

Zelenskiy, in a television interview with Natalia Moseichuk, an anchor for the 1+1 Channel, said he had discussed the issue with Graham, including the question of funding and the need to change the law.

"I gave Lindsey a very simple answer very quickly," he said. "He was very pleased with it. As long as our legislators are willing to do it."

He said it cost 5 billion hryvnia ($135 million) to hold elections in peacetime. "I don't know how much is needed in wartime," he said. "So I told him that if the US and Europe provide financial support ..."

He added, "I will not take money from weapons and give it to elections. And this is stipulated by the law."

Zelenskiy said he told Graham that election observers would have to go to the trenches. "I told him: You and I should send observers to the frontlines so that we have legitimate elections for us and for the whole world."

Ukraine would also need help setting up additional voting access for millions of people overseas, especially from the European Union, he said.

"There is a way out," he said. "I am ready for it."

Graham, a Republican, told reporters during a briefing in a bunker with fellow Senators Richard Blumenthal and Elizabeth Warren, both Democrats, that his message to Zelenskiy would be they would fight to keep weapons flowing "so you can win a war that we can't afford to lose."

He added, "But I am also going to tell him this: You've got to do two things at once. We need an election in Ukraine next year. I want to see this country have a free and fair election even while it is under assault."

Zelenskiy said those fighting Russia's invasion would have to be included. "They are defending this democracy today, and not to give them this opportunity because of war - that is unfair. I was against the elections only because of this."

 

 

English humorist, satirist, and author Terry Pratchett, once said “If you do not know where you come from, then you don’t know where you are, and if you don’t know where you are, then you don’t know where you’re going. And if you don’t know where you’re going, you’re probably going wrong.”

Origins are important because they give a sense as to where you may end up. But it is quite surprising that a nation of over 200 million people which prides itself as the Giant of Africa is being piloted by a man who has no known origin and continues to fight to ensure that it remains hidden.

Nigeria’s first leader was the late Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, who was born in December 1912 in modern-day Bauchi State at a time when data storage was rare. Despite the shortcomings of the time, Balewa has a traceable history.

Balewa’s father was Yakubu Dan Zala and was of the Gere ethnicity. Balewa’s mother was Fatima Inna, who was of Gere and Fulani descent. His father worked in the house of the District Head of Lere, a district within the Bauchi Emirate.

Young Balewa was among the children sent to Tafawa Balewa Elementary School, after the Qur’anic school. Thereafter, he proceeded to Bauchi Provincial School. Like many of his contemporaries of that era, he studied at Katsina College, where he was student number 145. Ahmadu Rabah, later known as Ahmadu Bello, was student number 87 and was two years his senior.

President Shehu Shagari was born on 25 February 1925 to the family of Aliyu and Mairamu Shagari. He attended Yabo Elementary School and then Sokoto Middle School and Kaduna College before graduating from Teachers’ Training College, Zaria. In his book, ‘Beckoned to Serve’, Shagari lists the names of his classmates, teachers, and even the palace servant who took him to school.

However, Bola Tinubu, a man who claims to have been born in 1952, cannot satisfactorily prove his ancestry. Not only is the identity of Tinubu’s father and mother unknown, but he neither has classmates nor siblings. Ahead of the presidential election, he passed off a photo of former Governor Donald Duke as his own. Clearly, there ought to be limits to fraud.

In his form CF001, which was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), he skipped details about his primary and secondary school and only stated that he attended Chicago State University in America. Curiously, this contradicts the same form he had filed in 1999 when he ran as governor of Lagos State. In that form, with which the late human rights activist Gani Fawehinmi had dragged him to court, Tinubu claimed to have attended Government College Ibadan and a non-existent primary school in Lagos. It has since been discovered that he was never sighted within the precincts of GCI.

In order to expose the truth, former Vice President of Nigeria, Atiku Abubakar, the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), instituted a suit before a court in the United States seeking to obtain Tinubu’s school records which would validate his claim before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Nigeria that Tinubu is a fraud.

Ideally, one would think that a man who is leading the greatest Black nation in the world would embrace transparency like others who have sat on the seat of power in Aso Rock. However, he hired a team of five lawyers with the sole task of making sure that his school records were not made available. Such disgraceful behaviour is unparalleled in Nigeria’s political history.

But this is not surprising since it is stated that the student named Bola Tinubu, who attended that school in the 1970s, was registered as a female at a time long before gender change surgeries were even contemplated.

Tinubu had through his lawyers dared Atiku at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal to prove one of their grounds of petition that Tinubu’s Chicago State University certificate was forged. As Atiku set out to prove his claim, Tinubu’s lawyers quickly placed a stumbling block before him by asking the US court not to make his records available.

They claim that it is no longer necessary for Atiku to have such information since the election tribunal in Nigeria has finished hearing any more evidence and had adjourned for judgment. It is obvious that Tinubu is seeking a dubious victory based on technicalities and not on the principle of law. No wonder they don’t want #AllEyesOnTheJudiciary.

Next, they said the mistakes on the certificate they submitted in court to prove Tinubu’s innocence regarding the certificate forgeries were caused by an unnamed clerk of CSU. If Tinubu was certain the clerk made mistakes, why did he send as many as five lawyers to the Illinois Court to stop Atiku from getting access to his academic records? He should have just allowed the university to explain their mistakes. Without knowing, he was inadvertently validating Atiku’s and others’ allegation that he had been trotting around with a fake certificate.

The Chicago State University (CSU) has also not acted professionally. What was so special about Tinubu’s academic records that all the unpardonable mistakes from a university as reputed as CSU would lose sleep over just one former student who American authorities established had ties to heroin trafficking and money laundering and was forced to forfeit $460,000?

How does a reputable higher institution explain Tinubu’s gender is female, his age was altered by two years, and his middle name changed from Ahmed to Adekunle while signatories were clearly different on the certificate? This is certainly more than a clerical error. How is it that only Tinubu’s certificate had grammatical errors, signature errors, and wrong fonts?

Tinubu recently sent a list of 48 ministerial nominees to the Senate for confirmation. Their credentials were scrutinized, and they were asked to defend their certificates. Would the Senate have confirmed Tinubu as a minister if he were on that list? Wouldn’t he have been chased out of the hallowed chambers of the Senate if he had come with questionable credentials?

Isn’t it tragic that a man who cannot scale a mere ministerial screening is now serving as President of Nigeria? A Nigerian tragedy indeed!

• Shaibu is the Special Assistant on Public Communications to Atiku Abubakar

Like Elon Musk or not (is there a middle ground?), it's hard not to respect his work ethic. Musk sometimes puts in 120-hour weeks, and says startup founders should put in 80-hour weeks.

Clearly Musk likes to work, but he also thinks the way he uses some of those hours helps motivate his employees. 

According to Walter Isaacson, author of the acclaimed biography Jobs (and next month's Elon Musk), Musk likes military history, and applies some of its lessons to leadership.

As Isaacson recently said:

For example, he believes that wherever Napoleon was, that's where his armies would do best, so he liked to show up late at night on the assembly lines at Tesla and SpaceX.

"If they see their general on the battlefield," Musk said, "they will be more motivated. I learned that by reading about Napoleon."

Granted, Napoleon might not be a great role model for long-term success, but still: Science says he has a point.

The Hawthorn Effect

We tend to change our behavior when we're being observed; that's the Hawthorne effect.

Since you are what you measure, if you measure 

productivity, your employees will typically be more productive. If you measure quality, quality will typically improve. In a broader sense, increased attention from bosses – or in this case, from Musk – typically improves job performance.

Still, Musk can't be everywhere at once. Neither can you.

And oddly enough, that's OK.

The Mere Exposure Effect

Imagine that you attend an in-person college class for a semester. You never speak up. You never speak to anyone. You're just there. 

Will the people in the class consider you likable? It all depends on how often you attend.

In a study published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, the same four women attended a number of different classes. Sometimes certain women would attend 

every class. Sometimes they attended half the classes. Sometimes they attended only one or two. What didn't vary was how they communicated. They never spoke.

To anyone.

At the end of the semester, students were asked which of the women they liked best. The ones who attended the most classes were consistently rated as most likable, while the ones who attended the fewest classes were rated as least likable.

That seems odd, since none of the women ever interacted with anyone. How can you decide you like me – or don't like me – if you've never talked to me?

According to the researchers:

Mere exposure had weak effects on familiarity, but strong effects on attraction and similarity.

Which is a fancy way of saying, "The more often I see you, the more I will like you." And research shows likable people tend to be more effective leaders.

But what if it's physically impossible for your employees to "see their general on the battlefield"? What if, like Musk, your business is in multiple locations: Even if you work 120-hour weeks, at best you still may see only the majority of your employees a few times a year.

Lack of presence should decrease likability.

Unless you do this. In a classic study first published 

in Human Relations, researchers gave participants profiles of two people and told them one would be a partner in future discussion groups.

Then, when asked, participants said they liked their future partner more than the other person, even though the profiles were basically identical.

According to the researchers:

When a person is in a unit relationship (meaning you're part of an organization or team or even just a discussion group) with another person, there is a tendency toward making the relationship 

harmonious.

This harmony may be achieved by liking the other person.

No one likes to be in a unit relationship with someone they don't like. So if I know I'll see you, even though I'm not sure when – a la Musk showing up in the middle of the night on the factory floor – I'll instinctively be primed to like you. 

All you have to do, when we actually meet, is not screw it up. (Which may or may not be Musk's strong suit.)

Exposure in Action

The mere exposure effect – frequent, consistent presence – is a major factor in likability. So is anticipated presence. Increased attention from bosses typically improves performance.

Want to be a better leader? You don't have to start sleeping on the factory or office floor to inspire employees to "give it their all," but you can show up more often. Stop by. Make a call. Send an email. 

Be a consistent presence, whether in person or virtually, if only for a few minutes at a time.

If doing that seems impractical – although I would argue it's not – make sure your employees know when you will show up. Let them know when you'll visit their location. Set regular Zoom meetings, even if those sessions are months apart. Send regular update emails.

When people know you will show up – even if your actual presence is infrequent – they will like you more, and be more likely to be more engaged and productive.

As long as you don't screw it up.

 

Inc

Angela Liu, counsel to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar in the US, says Chicago State University has provided two similar certificates indicating that President Bola Tinubu attended its institution.

Liu said while the first certificate was signed by three people, the other was signed by two individuals.

She was speaking in response to a submission by Tinubu’s lawyers.

According to filings by Oluwole Afolabi and Christopher Carmichael, counsels to Tinubu, an unidentified clerk of the university made an error about the date the school stated on his recently-issued certificate, thereby creating “the appearance of differences”.

The counsel of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate said while one document asserts that Tinubu was issued the certificate on June 22, 1979, another suggests that the president received the degree on June 27, 1979.

The former vice-president is seeking a disclosure of the president’s certificate from the US university.

“The document marked ‘A’ is the certificate submitted by Tinubu to INEC. This certificate is in every material respect, exactly the same as the document marked ‘B’ except for the following,” Liu said.

“Document ‘A’ is signed by at least 3 people whereas ‘B’ is signed by only 2 people.

“The document marked ‘E’ states that Tinubu was issued a certificate on 22nd June 1979 but then proceeded to forward a copy of a certificate (‘B’) dated 27th June 1979. Please note that ‘A’ is actually dated 22nd June 1979, but this document did not emanate from CSU. Only ‘B’ did.”

Liu added that “you cannot have two certificates issued by the same university, to the same person, for the same course of study, but issued on different dates and signed by two different sets of people”.

“The documents ‘A’ and ‘B’ both state that Tinubu graduated with a BSc in ‘Business AND Administration’, whereas document ‘E’ (which came from CSU) states that he graduated with a BSc in ‘Business Administration’.”

The lawyer said CSU’s website reads: “The College of Business offers a contemporary business program leading to a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration or Masters in Business Administration (MBA)”, adding that “nowhere is there any reference to ‘business and administration” throughout the website.

The lawyer argued that it was not possible for Elnora D. Daniel to be among those who signed both certificates because she was only the president of the university between 1998 and 2008.

“She was neither president of the university in 1979 – when the certificate was purportedly issued – nor was she president in 2022, when the replacement certificates were issued,” she said.

The lawyer also expressed dismay that both certificates bear different letter fonts and logos of the university.

 

The Cable

Intercontinental Marketing & Communication Consortium Limited has apologised to the Advertising Standard Panel, Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria, over the usage of an unapproved advert billboard tagged, ‘All Eyes On the Judiciary’.

The company responded to the letter of violation received by the company from ARCON through its Managing Director, Stephen Ogboko.

Ogboko stated, “We sincerely apologise for this and state that our action was not intentional. The truth is that immediately after we received the brief for the said campaign, we sent the artwork to Markus Inji Lukman, an ARCON liaison officer who has helped us vet campaign materials in the past. Lukman assured us that the material would be approved, as he had seen a similar one.”

The company apologised for causing any inconvenience, adding that it would never do anything to threaten or cause disrepute to the country’s judiciary.

Reacting to the development, the ARCON Director-General, Olalekan Fadolapo, stated that despite the apology, the company would face the tribunal.

He said, “They’ll be appearing before the Advertising Offences Tribunal and need to explain their position because it is very unfortunate. Verbal or communication of approval through verbal means or text messages doesn’t constitute approval. They are professionals; they are sworn to the advertising oath to protect the integrity of the profession. So, coming out to say that somebody within the system orally or verbally gave them approval is not acceptable. The damage is done already and they will be appearing before the tribunal.”

Fadolapo said the official who gave the purported verbal approval had been queried, adding that a committee was also looking into the process that led to such permission.

 

Punch

Text with Jesus is a new instant messaging application powered by ChatGPT that allows users to chat with Jesus Christ and other biblical figures impersonated by the popular artificial intelligence program.

Created by Cat Loaf Software, an app-development company in Los Angeles, the new messaging program features a plethora of biblical characters, from Jesus to Judas and the rest of the apostles, and even First Testament protagonists like Ruth, Job, and Abraham’s nephew, Lot. And, if your dark side ever takes over, there is even an option to chat with Satan. The app was launched recently and has been getting mixed feedback online. Reactions have varied from amusement to accusations of blasphemy and heresy, which is really not that surprising considering the sensitive topic. For some people, religion is the most sacred thing in their lives, so they don’t take lightly anything they consider offensive.

Stéphane Peter, the app’s developer and the CEO of Cat Loaf Software, has described Text with Jesus as just ‘another way to explore Scripture,’ but some users have reported that certain religious figures impersonated by ChatGPT just weren’t what they expected. For example, Jesus has reportedly been chatting in an uptight tone, while many of the other religious figures have been trained to avoid taking offensive stances on sensitive issues like gender identity, pronouns or sexual orientation.

“I updated it so it can speak more like a regular person and ensured it didn’t forget that it’s supposed to get stuff from the Bible,” Peter said about the app. “It’s a constant trick to find the right balance.”

Cat Loaf Software allegedly invited a number of church leaders to try a beta version of Text with Jesus and made several subsequent improvements, including adding Bible chapter and verse citations. It’s still not perfect, obviously, this is basically ChatGPT trained on the Bible, but it could see some success among zealous Christians.

Apparently, the app even has some monetization features. For example, unlocking some of the included Biblical figures to chat with requires a monthly fee. For example, gaining access to Mary Magdalene in Text with Jesus requires a fee of $2.99 a month.

Oh, and if chatting with the Son of God just isn’t enough, you can actually play Jesus in a video game.

 

Oddity Central

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Three Ukrainian military pilots die in mid-air collision

Three Ukrainian military pilots including a "mega talent" who yearned to fly F-16s were killed on Friday when two L-39 combat training aircraft collided over a region west of Kyiv on Friday, the air force said on Saturday.

President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who is counting on swift training of crews to fly up to 61 F-16 fighter jets promised by his Western allies, said in his nightly video address that the three men included Andriy Pilshchykov, callsign Juice, "a Ukrainian officer, one of those who greatly helped our state."

Air force spokesperson Yuriy Ihnat described Pilshchykov -- who was fluent in English and aged 29 when Reuters interviewed him in December -- as a "mega talent" and leader of reforms.

"You can't even imagine how much he wanted to fly an F-16," Ihnat wrote on his Facebook page. "But now that American planes are actually on the horizon, he will not fly them."

Ukraine's prosecutor general's office announced a criminal investigation had been opened into whether flight preparation rules were violated.

"It is too early to discuss details. Certainly, all circumstances will be clarified," Zelenskiy said.

The air force announced the crash on its Telegram app. "We express our condolences to the families of the victims. This is a painful and irreparable loss for all of us," it said.

Zelenskiy noted that the third Saturday in August is also when Ukrainian military and civilian aviation celebrate their professional day, and said the introduction of F-16s would mark a "new level" for military aviation.

"This will also bring civil aviation back to the Ukrainian skies, as it will move us closer to victory and provide Ukraine with greater security," he said.

Radio Svoboda shared video of blackened, mangled aircraft remains being removed from a field far from the frontlines at the village of Sinhury, about 10 kms (6 miles) south of Zhytomyr and about 150 kms (90 miles) west of Kyiv.

In the video, an unnamed man said he heard an explosion in the air above the school building and then two planes falling in smoke and flames. A woman described seeing two planes flying at a distance from one another than coming closer and closer to each other before the crash.

Military analyst and former pilot Roman Svitan, in an interview posted by online outlet Espreso TV, said the crash was "most likely" related to formation flying. He said the standard distance was 50-70 meters but that sometimes planes flew practically on top of each other at a distance of 3 to 4 meters.

He said the L-39 was at once a fighter, an attack aircraft, a bomber and a training plane but that in formation flying, especially at low altitudes, "there's no time for ejection."

Zelenskiy offered condolences to the pilots' families and added, "Ukraine will never forget anyone who defended the free skies of Ukraine."

** Ukraine will speed up advance on southern front, commander says

Ukrainian forces believe they have broken through the most difficult line of Russian defences in the south and will now be able to advance more quickly, a commander fighting in the south told Reuters.

Ukraine launched a counteroffensive in June, but well-prepared Russian defence lines reinforced by minefields have slowed their southward advance towards the Sea of Azov.

Ukrainian forces said on Wednesday they had raised the national flag in the settlement of Robotyne in the southern Zaporizhzhia region, about 10 km (six miles) south of the frontline town of Orikhiv.

"We don't stop here," said a commander who led some of the troops into Robotyne and who uses the callsign "Skala," eponymous with the battalion which he leads.

"Next we have (the town of) Berdiansk, and then more. I made it clear to my fighters at once: our goal is not Robotyne, our goal is (the Sea of) Azov."

Robotyne is about 100 km from Berdiansk, a port on the shores of the Sea of Azov, and 85 km from the strategic city of Melitopol. Both are occupied by Russian forces following Moscow's full-scale invasion in February last year.

Moscow has not confirmed that Ukraine has advanced into Robotyne.

A U.S. official said last week that Ukrainian forces did not appear likely to be able to reach and retake Melitopol in their counteroffensive, intended to split Russian forces in the south.

Defending Ukraine's strategy this week, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy dismissed suggestions that his country's troops were spread too thinly and repeated his belief that Kyiv would regain all Ukrainian territory that has been seized by Moscow.

"We have passed the main roads that were mined. We are coming to those lines where we can go (forward). I'm sure we'll go faster from here," Skala said.

He said two houses were still under Russian control in Robotyne: "We're fighting for them, and then we'll have full control (of Robotyne)."

Skala said Ukrainian troops had now entered territories where there were only "Russian logistics" groups, and where he made clear he did not expect Russian defences to be as difficult to break through.

"We are moving on to liberate all our territories," he said.

 

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine confirms ‘secret meeting’ with NATO generals

Western officials are regularly receiving up-to-date reports from the battlefield in Ukraine, President Vladimir Zelensky’s top adviser has said, confirming a report about a recent meeting between Kiev’s top general Valery Zaluzhny and NATO commanders. 

“There are a lot of meetings like that,” Mikhail Podoliak told a Ukrainian TV channel Saturday. According to Podoliak, Kiev’s military strategy stays “flexible,” evolving in accordance with the situation on the ground.

“The General Staff is constantly making adjustments, depending on what is happening on the front line,” the adviser said. “Obviously, these adjustments are always being discussed with our partners in order to actualize the deliveries of additional [weapons].”

The Guardian reported on Saturday that “eleven days ago, some of the most senior soldiers in the NATO alliance traveled to a secret location on the Polish-Ukrainian border” to meet with Zaluzhny and “his entire command team.” The goal of the five-hour meeting was to “help reset Ukraine’s military strategy” in light of its sluggish offensive, the newspaper said. Ukrainian and NATO officials reportedly also discussed plans for the winter and beyond.

Kiev’s much-anticipated offensive, launched in early June, has so far failed to win any significant territory, costing the Ukrainian army heavy losses in men and Western-supplied armor in the process.

The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal reported recently that US and British officials had disagreements with Ukrainian planners over tactics. It was said that one of the complaints was that the Ukrainian army had dispersed its most-equipped units along the front line, instead of focusing on a concentrated strike in one place.

After Washington’s approval, Denmark and the Netherlands promised last week to send their US-made F-16 fighter planes to Ukraine. The jets have long been on Kiev’s ‘wish list’, as the country hopes to salvage its combat operations.

Russia, meanwhile, has repeatedly warned that Western weapons would not change the course of the conflict, and would only draw NATO closer to open confrontation with Moscow. 

** West pushing everyone towards WWIII, ignoring signals from Moscow – Medvedev

Russia’s opponents in the West are pushing everyone towards World War III, ignoring signals from Moscow, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said in an interview with TASS and RT.

"Frankly speaking, it would have definitely been better if they had heard them [the signals]. In any case, the world would not have to face the threat of World War III. In fact, this is where our opponents are actively pushing everyone," he said, commenting on the idea that Russia’s tough response to Georgia’s 2008 aggression should have served as a strong signal to the US and its NATO allies of the need to listen to Moscow’s concerns.

However, "they failed to hear our signals," Medvedev emphasized.

 

Reuters/RT/Tass

On October 21, 1968, a letter was written by a group which went by the name, Egbe Mekunnu Taku, literally, Association of the Adamant Poor, to the then Military Governor of the Western State, Major General Adeyinka Adebayo. The letter explains, and succinctly too, the anger of poor and impoverished people all over the world against governments’ punishing policies. Angered by Adebayo’s jerking up of tax, from a flat rate of three, to six pounds, the association, which comprised mostly farmers, the bulk of whom were taxable workers of the time, literally dared the leopard in its den by lighting fire-lamp to catch a glimpse of its scary face. As a result of the increment, cost of living suddenly skyrocketed, even amid the civil war that the Yakubu Gowon government was fighting against the then Eastern State. Tax at this time was like the ubiquitous petrol of today which cuts across all and sundry. The Egbe Mekunnu Taku letter goes thus: “It is quite evident that there is absolutely no sale of cocoa which serve (sic) as the main source from where we the farmers get our yearly income and that we are living at the mercy of the Almighty God. We beg to say that we are at present experiencing a good hardship in regard to our individual mode of living at the farm; our old ones as well as the young ones are crying of hunger (sic) day in and day out whilst many of us go about without food at times for days… this current tax assessment is considered to be too much for the individual to meet…”

At first, Adebayo met with leaders of the unions of farmers under the aegis of Egbe Agbekoya, (Farmers Against Oppression) Olorunkoya (God is Against Oppression) and Mekunnu Parapo (Association of the poor) in Ibadan, Ogbomoso and Abeokuta. The leaders were Mustapha Okikirungbo, Tafa Popoola, Adeniyi Eda, Adeagbo Kobiowu, Rafiu Isola and Mudasiru Adeniran. On November 15, 1968, the governor again met with them at Idi-Ayunre and Olode villages, via Ibadan, flying to the former meeting venue in a helicopter, due to the bad road. He was however shouted down by anti-tax sloganeering. Adebayo nevertheless continued with this tax regime, despite the massive resentment. Believing in the power of the gun and armaments to suppress the farmers rather than a continuation of dialogue, in radio and newspaper announcements, government threatened that, “as from tomorrow, those who have not paid their tax will be blacklisted as human parasites and saboteurs and treated as such” (Daily Sketch, June 30, 1969). Thus, between 1968 and 1969, farmers, led by ringleaders like Adegoke Akekuejo, Tafa Adeoye, Folarin Idowu, Mudasiru Adeniran and Tafa Popoola, shouting, Oke mefa l’ao san! Oke mefa l’ao san! – We will only pay 30 shillings! – marched from village to village in their anti-tax mobilization against the military government, towards Mapo hall. They ransacked offices, with a complete state of anomie foisted on the region. Government’s deployment of violence to quell the peasants’ uprising only worsened the violence, leading to several deaths of policemen and farmers. The rioters set free 464 prisoners at Agodi Prisons on September 16. 1969. This was the anomic state until Chief Obafemi Awolowo met with Tafa Adeoye and other groups at the Akanran village on October 15, 1969 which created an armistice.

But for the dystopia that arose as a result of the Adeyinka Adebayo-led government’s increased tax and the graveyard calm of today, there is hardly any difference between the hardship faced by western state farmers of the late 1960s and the excruciating pains that have been the lots of Nigerians in the last three months under Bola Tinubu. Since May 29, grueling poverty, social discord and spike in rates of crime have been on the increase after the off-the-cuff removal of subsidy by the government. Government’s subsequent responses to the groaning have been more of a staccato than a respite. Nigerians cannot see any coordinated or mapped out outflow from the fuel subsidy removal and unification of Forex. Many marvel that a government whose head had serially mouthed his long-term hunger to be in the driver’s seat of the presidential office could demonstrate such gross unpreparedness and perfunctoriness towards the challenges arising from administering office.

So, last week, the governor of Edo State, Godwin Obaseki, articulated same grouse and sang same song ceaselessly sung on the streets of Nigeria since May 29. While addressing journalists in Benin City, Obaseki lacerated the buttocks of the Tinubu government, expressing shock at its inability to effectively plan a workable response to the fuel subsidy removal. The subsidy removal, the governor said, has seriously impoverished Nigerians, as well as inflicting hardship and suffering on them. Worse still, he said, the palliative policy of the government, due to its peremptory attitude to the plights of the people, has morphed into an unmitigated fraud, with the economy under Tinubu taking a turn for the worse. In all, these can be attributed to Tinubu’s effeminate grasp of the economy.

“I am shocked that people who campaigned around the country, saying that they will remove subsidies, had no clear plans on what to do after subsidy removal. They don’t know what to do and how to support those who will be victims of subsidy removal. I am shocked and scared of what we are passing through today, where the government doesn’t seem to have a plan or solution on how to respond to the consequences of the policy measure put in place by their administration. With the way they have mismanaged our national economy, we have to deal with inflation, between 20 and 25 per cent. It means that the people will feel more pain, especially the weak and vulnerable in the society, particularly our pensioners, as whatever they get as their entitlement will do only little for them,” he said.

Almost immediately after Obaseki said this, Nigerians wondered what the Tinubu government’s response would be. Permit me as I digress. When Dele Alake, erstwhile image maker of the president, gave that self-justificatory claim that the president appointed him into the Solid Minerals Resources ministry, rather than the Information ministry, because of “the nature of this sector to our economic growth and vitality of this country which is dear to the heart of Mr. President,” I grimaced. Going further, he claimed that it was “just very apt and proper for him to send me here because he knows and trusts that I have a demonstrable sense of responsibility and courage to drive the agenda.” My take was that Tinubu was smart enough to realize early that he could not afford to recreate another Josef Goebbels in the information ministry, shortly after the monumental disaster of Lai Mohammed. A combative Alake was fit and proper for the hocus-pocus of presidential elections but off-putting for a government that postures as friend of the people.

We, for a minute, forgot that this was not a continuation of the Muhammadu Buhari government and Lai Mohammed was not in the saddle, even as he luxuriated in his paradise of lies. Then, we graphically imagined the usual potpourri of governmental playing-God, hogwash and arrogance, the usual broth dished out as Aso Rock’s replies to perceived enemies, would be pelted on Obaseki. It was however gladsome when we realized that a new Sheriff of the Information Ministry had come into the saddle. He even announced that his term of office was not going to be a roller-coaster of lies. At an official reception by the ministry for him, Mohammed Idris Malagi promised that there would be no room for lies and fake news. “For me, I am actually a reporter reporting for duty and I meant it with every sense of the word. The president has asked me to come and tell you that this is a brand new Ministry of Information and National Orientation….We are going to say it as it is. Mr. President is somebody who is truthful, honest, transparent. He has said that when we come, we should own up where there are mistakes, we should own up where we erred, we should not be shy to say, ‘No this is wrong and we are going to correct it.’”

From where did Malagi get those superfluous superlative adjectives of Mr. President being “truthful, honest, transparent” and all those what-ought-nots? Or perhaps, the Minister merely wanted to flaunt his English and Literary Studies background by showing off his arsenal of ironies, paradoxes and metonyms? If not, it is a general opinion that those superlatives are misplaced for the subject under reference. As far as Nigerians are concerned, the Honournable Minister should reserve his “truthful, honest, transparent” arsenal of ironies, paradoxes and metonyms about the current managers of our destinies for his next work of fiction.

And then, in his first official reaction on behalf of the federal government, Malagi unmistakably reversed the promises he made to Nigerians. You would imagine that the disputatious ghost of Lai Mohammed had risen in Malagi. Reacting to Obaseki’s national alarm on the whimsical navigation of Nigeria’s economy by Tinubu, Malagi began his intervention from a rather simplistic and ad-hominem plank. Obaseki, he said, had of recent, “shifted focus to the nation’s economic challenges as cannon fodder to divert attention from his poor performance at the state level.” That rhyme sounded kindergarten and a refrain of bad managers of office holders. It is a familiar route always trodden by information managers who forum-shop in hazy attempts to deflect justified arrows shot at their bosses.

Even members of the APC, in their closets, are worried about the policy somersaults and reactive colour of this government. Germane issues critical to people’s lives are left unattended to. For instance, Malagi, in hitting Obaseki, demanded that leaders should align criticism with reality. Here we go, Honourable Minister: What is the reality of Nigeria today? In simple terms, the reality is that Tinubu’s economic policies in the last three months, without debate, have pauperized Nigerian people colossally, more than previous governments’. There does not appear to be any mental rigour birthing those policies as they seem to be unintended governmental reactions. What broader economic picture could a fuel subsidy removal, inflicted at the spur of the moment, have on Nigerians when the president himself confessed that it was a product of a haphazard seizure “by the spirit of courage” without any governmental blueprint? While it is true that virtually everyone – World Bank, IMF and various economic experts – “have consistently advocated for the removal of fuel subsidy because of the fiscal distortions and burden it has placed on the economy,” as Malagi said, none of those bodies reckoned that a leader would be as unconscionable as to remove fuel subsidy without a requisite well-thought-out panacea to ease its resultant excruciating pains.

Malagi then tumbled into cants, sophistries and illogical ad-hominem arguments that made his intervention very watery, self-serving and insincere. In one breath, he accused Obaseki of “benefitting from the fuel subsidy removal, which is evident in the more than doubling of the FAAC allocation” and advising that, “rather than delving into narratives which do not provide the complete picture, the focus should be on how the Edo State Government will be using available resources to drive impactful projects that genuinely uplift the people of Edo State.” In those very disjointed ripostes, Malagi literally "aimed at the man," and in the process, shifting his focus from the critical issues raised by Obaseki. While doing so, he enveloped himself in a blanket that could not allow him see the larger issues of the parlous state of the economy under Tinubu and the cries of the people. Because he could not see nor perceive the people’s cries, in frustration, Malagi then shot at the man who dared to bring out the log in Tinubu’s eye.

There is no doubt that the overwhelming cries of Nigerian people woke the Tinubu government from its somnambulist first three months in power. When it then woke up, government then rambled to offer N8000 to the “poorest of the poor.” Seeing that this would not work, it again cloned the same discredited Godwin Emefiele borrowing method to shore up the economy. Immediately, the Tinubu government then asked for a loan of $3 billion from JP Morgan, via the NNPC. Yet, the economy is gasping and clutching to straws. Tinubu hasn’t shown that he runs a government that is prepared for the acute challenges of office. Obaseki adequately articulated this effeminacy of control, a view of not only the common man on the streets, but one that is not dissimilar from those of respected economic experts. They all worry at the anti-people thrust of the three-month stay in office of Tinubu, especially the ostensible paucity of thought process that goes into his government’s economic policies.

The N185 billion palliatives is undoubtedly the most outstanding of the government’s policy. Its aim is to mitigate the grueling effect of the economy on Nigerians. Each state was allocated the sum of N5 billion. If you ask me, there is virtually no difference between this palliative and the parlous N8000 it earlier proposed. Only that, this time, the federal government has succeeded in offloading blames from the people to the governors. When Tinubu, last week, told the people to hold their governors responsible for whatever was the outcome of the palliative's distribution, it was obvious to me that the aim of redesigning the curve of the palliative tokenism had been achieved. It was a masterfully crafted scapegoatism.

Questions have been posed severally on the N5billion allocation. One is that, did it occur to government that the poor in, say Kano, are not the same in number with those in Ebonyi? If this is the case, why give them uniform amounts? Second, if the money is a loan to the states as it has been confirmed to be, why is the federal government assuming patrimony over it? Why make it look as if the Federal Government had done the states some good that needed trumpeting to the world? Again, why make this policy look like an Uncle Grisham Comes To Dinner, as if it was the newest intervention ever? The Buhari government did something similar, in what was referred to as the Paris Club payment to states.

Malagi must know by now that Nigerians believe that Godwin Obaseki has earned his epaulettes for his Nostradamus peer into the future. On April 7, 2021, while hosting the transition committee members at Government House in Benin City, just as he did last week, Obaseki raised a similar alarm. Nigeria was in huge financial trouble, the governor shouted. Reason? Buhari had ordered a subterranean printing of Nigerian money to fund shortfalls in allocations shared to states. “In another year or so, where will we find this money that we go to Abuja to share every month? Last month, we got FAAC for March; the Federal Government printed an additional N50 to N60 billion to top-up for us to share…My worry is that we will wake up one day like Argentina, the naira will be N1,000, N2,000 and will be moving because we don’t have money coming in. You are just borrowing, borrowing and borrowing without any means or idea of how to pay back,” he said.

Hell was immediately let loose. Megaphones like Malagi were amplified to the limit of their decibels. Zainab Ahmed, minister of finance, budget and national planning, led the army. “The issue that was raised by the Edo State governor, for me, is very, very sad because it is not a fact. What we distribute at FAAC is revenue that is generated…it is not true to say we printed money to distribute at FAAC, it is not true,” she said. Lai Mohammed joined the inglorious orchestra. Ingenuously called Ways and Means, it was later revealed that the government had printed money to the tune of N22.7 trillion.

Rather than waste precious time and space to demonize Obaseki, Malagi should know that Nigerians adjust themselves to listen when Obaseki raises alarm on the economy. He earned his keep by the certitude of his projections. It is old grandmother tale to use political party affiliation as cudgel of censure. Nigerians are interested in logic and facts of issues.

Then Hezekiah turned his face toward the wall, and prayed unto the LORD …… Then came the word of the LORD to Isaiah, saying, Go, and say to Hezekiah, Thus saith the LORD, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years ~ Isaiah 38:2-5

Introduction

Undoubtedly, man is a comprehensive package of God’s supernatural acts (Genesis 1:26-28). He was originally created to operate in a realm beyond and above the natural, in the class of God (Psalms 82:6; John 10:34). Notwithstanding, man still needs God, always.

At the outset of creation, before God breathed into him, man was like an effigy, a mere ceramic and empty dust moulded into shape (Genesis 2:7). Man will always require God’s supernatural energy and intervention for his daily sustenance. Happily, whenever God becomes intentionally involved, every difficult situation receives a dramatic turnaround (Psalm 126:1).

Yes, we hear the phrase “divine intervention” tossed around a lot in our society today. But, it’s quintessential wisdom for us to know what it is really, and how God steps into our peculiar situations to give us relief.

Concisely, divine intervention is when God moves and acts deliberately to change the outcomes of a situation by the act of His mercy. It is a typical miracle of God showing up in the interest of His people.

We generally point to divine intervention when there is no other explanation other than God for how something — miraculous deliverance from accident, death, shame and embarrassment, or healing from an incurable disease — happened.

Acts of God that orchestrate inexplicable victories, being in the right place at the right time for unique opportunities, or being boxed into circumstances that eventually protect people from harm’s way are all examples of divine intervention.

Indeed, there are so many situations in which we find ourselves that require God to bring us out. Recall the following real life scenarios, and see the characteristic excellencies of God’s intervention in the various issues of human life.

Israel was in a terrible and prolonged bondage in Egypt, under the rule of Pharaoh. In the end, God stepped in, and there was a great and clear deliverance (Exodus 3:8).

David also found himself in the miry clay of persecution and troubles. The more he struggled to be free, the deeper he sank. God then stepped in, and David was marvelously helped (Psalm 3:1-5).

In 2 Kings 4, a poor widow owed so much money, and the creditors came calling to take away her two sons in the place of the money owed. If God didn’t intervene, her staffs of comfort and consolation would have been removed from her.

Peter toiled! He was a very skillful and highly experienced fisherman. He went out at the best time for a great drought of fishes, yet he caught nothing because of the undercurrent activities of toiling demons. However, when Jesus Christ stepped in to help him, the story changed dramatically (Luke 5:1-15).

In Acts 12, Simon Peter was locked up in prison, to be soon beheaded by Herod, like he did to James. God intervened and set him free from an imminent untimely death.

Lazarus even died (John 11:14-45). If the Lord had failed to step in, Lazarus would have remained in the grave, and that would have been the end of his glorious destiny.

In our contemporary times, I know of a man who couldn’t even explain what momentarily held his legs at a time, and literally kept him standstill to save his head from a falling coconut fruit. I also know of a man who, against his wish, was literally forced out of a taxi that eventually had an accident in which all the commuters died.

Divine intervention is real, and all men who will gain momentum in their endeavours must ensure that the power of God is constantly at work in their lives. It’s impossible to live successfully in life without the God-Factor.

The Fragility of Man Vs The Almightiness of God’s Power

God is aware that man, today, lives in a demon-infested environment littered with several inundating challenges. Notwithstanding these negative realities, our issues can always be addressed and redressed by divine power, wisdom, insight and intervention (Isaiah 38:1-8).

Man's words, thoughts, opinions and propositions can always be reversed, but whatever God pronounces is established, forever. His superiority over all His creatures is incredible (Psalms 62:11).

All power belongs to Him, and His power is ever so rich unto us and can intervene in any area of our lives as may be required at any time (2 Peter 1:2-3). This gives a cause for elation, because if we practically connect with Him via His Word, we can literally collect anything!

He has graciously bestowed on us the power to get everything required to lead a blessed and godly life, and to establish His covenant in our lives (Deuteronomy 8:18). This power is available to all believers in Christ Jesus today, through the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:8).

Moreover, as God’s children, we’re His authorized agents and ambassadors on earth (2 Corinthians 5:20). We have received the audacity of heaven to exercise rule and to establish His Will on earth (Judges 5:20-21). What a privilege!

We must hold tightly to God! When we cooperate well with Him, and function only to His specifications, we’ll begin to enjoy incredible dimensions of an out-of-this-world experience (1Peter 1:13-19). Indeed, any attempt to live outside of God’s realm can only be a voyage in futility and frustration.

Repositioning for Supernatural Intervention

When King Hezekiah got a word regarding his imminent death, he turned his face towards the wall. In other words, he turned away from the spectators, and even from Isaiah, to hide his emotion and to focus on God in his prayers.

You also must reposition yourself to secure the intervention of God in your untoward situations. Areas requiring critical realignment include the way you receive, speak, obey and act upon God’s Word, as well as your earnest desires, pursuits and priorities in life.

Again, what you see regularly, the thoughts you allow, the people around you and, especially, how you worship God must be realigned in spirit and in truth. They critically define what belongs to your future.

Friends and brethren, what is your own present situation that you want God to take over? A spiritual attack? A reproach? A stubborn habit? A domineering sin? A miry clay experience? A delay? A financial mess? A sickness? A seemingly endless family crisis?

As God intervened in those days, He still does today (Isaiah 41:10). He doesn’t change (Malachi 3:6). He still intervenes even in very hard situations, if He’s invited. He’s alive, and nothing is impossible for Him. He can always spring forth incredible miracles.

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrew 13:8). Believe Him. Call upon Him with all your heart. Ask Him to do something in particular in your life. He will deliver you and bless you relentlessly, and you shall glorify Him.

Even now, you can receive any miracle! Just rely upon the Holy Spirit. The hand of the Lord will lift you out of every negative situation, and you shall become a blessing to the whole world. You won’t miss it, in Jesus name. Amen. Happy Sunday!

____________________

Bishop Taiwo Akinola,

Rhema Christian Church,

Otta, Ogun State, Nigeria.

Connect with Bishop Akinola via these channels:

Facebook: www.facebook.com/bishopakinola

SMS/WhatsApp: +234 802 318 4987

Most Christians do not bother with the words of Jesus. If they did, they would not be Christians. Churches carefully avoid Jesus’ words. They are not words on which a large congregational empire can be built. When the people heard the words of Jesus, they left in droves. When Peter understood the message of Jesus, he prevailed on Jesus to change it. Jesus’ words provide the small gate and narrow road that leads to life that only a few will find. (Matthew 7:14).

Deceitful money

So let us look at one of those weighty words of Jesus that Christians prefer to ignore. Jesus refers to money tautologically as “unrighteous mammon.” (Luke 16:9). This means money is fundamentally ungodly. There is no “righteous mammon.” According to Jesus, riches are deceitful. (Matthew 13:22). They promise what they cannot deliver. They promise prosperity but impoverish the soul. (Matthew 16:26). They promise peace but bring anxiety. (Ecclesiastes 5:12).

Money is man-made: it is not of God.  Indeed, it is an idol, the very antithesis of God. Money rules over men, ensuring that it competes with God for human allegiance. Therefore, our faith in Christ compels a choice.  Jesus insists: “No one can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.” (Matthew 6:24).

Jesus never has any commendation for the rich or for earthly riches. Instead, He warns: “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matthew 6:19-21). 

Jesus’ position is that man’s heart is of limited capacity. If our heart is set on worldly riches, we cannot at the same time have God; “the Desire of All Nations” (Haggai 2:7), as our heart’s treasure.

Money is not a currency of the kingdom of God. The currency of the kingdom is righteousness. Jesus insists that money does not even belong to the believer, who is redeemed without money. (Isaiah 52:3). If it belongs to us, we will take it with us when we die. We don’t because it belongs to someone else.   

Therefore, Jesus asks: “If you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in what is another man’s, who will give you what is your own?” (Luke 16:11-12).

False riches

Money constitutes false riches. The riches of this world belong to the wicked. The psalmist declares: “Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world; they increase in riches.” (Psalm 73:12). The wicked prefer the temporal to the eternal. Therefore, God is content to make this vainglorious world their inheritance. Thus, David talks of “men of the world who have their portion in this life.” (Psalm 17:14). 

What then belongs to the believer? “The LORD is (our) portion.” (Lamentations 3:24). When a man sought Jesus’ help to secure his inheritance, He replied: “Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.” (Luke 12:15). 

But how could the man have been guilty of covetousness when all he wanted was his portion of his inheritance? The man failed to understand that Jesus’ doctrine makes us heirs of God and not of men. He was guilty of insisting on what belongs to another man, while neglecting what is rightfully his portion in God.

God is interested in who we are and not what we have. He says: “I AM WHO I AM.” (Exodus 3:14). He does not say “I am what I have.” This life is not about ownership; it is about stewardship. Worldly possessions are the believer’s stewardship. We are managers of our finances, without the burden of ownership. 

In the Day of Judgment, God will require us to account for how we spent all the money that came into our hands. Did we use it to secure our temporal “future” here on earth, or to safeguard our eternal future in heaven? Jesus says sardonically: “Make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home.” (Luke 16:9).

It is not surprising then that God’s judgment is often proclaimed on those who handle money. (Zephaniah 1:11). Rich men who are not prepared to give away their wealth to the poor cannot enter the kingdom of heaven and become heirs of God. Instead of amassing earthly riches, Jesus counsels that we should endeavour to be rich towards God. (Luke 12:16-21).

Blessing of God 

Men bless with money. But Jesus says: “Not as the world gives do I give to you.” (John 14:27). Therefore, money cannot be a blessing of God. God blesses with His Holy Spirit. (Luke 11:13). 

What money buys is not of God, and that which is of God cannot be bought with money. (Acts 8:20). The blessing of the LORD makes rich, and He adds no sorrow with it.” (Proverbs 10:22). But money adds sorrow for the simple reason that it fails.   

Money failed in Egypt and in Canaan. (Genesis 47:15). Check the current exchange-rate: money has failed in Nigeria. Sooner than later, money grows wings and flies away like an eagle towards heaven. (Proverbs 23:5). 

Can we give money to God? Jesus says no. Unrighteous money belongs to Caesar; his image and inscription are on it. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21). 

What exactly belongs to God? God’s image is on man, so man belongs to God. We should give and dedicate ourselves to the Lord; while money should be given and dedicated to “Caesar.” 

Solomon says money answers everything. (Ecclesiastes 10:19). That may be true technically; but money is not the answer to most things. Solomon himself discovered that all that money gave him was vanity upon vanity.  He says: “He who loves silver will not be satisfied with silver; nor he who loves abundance, with increase.” (Ecclesiastes 5:10).

 Wisdom of God

This is what I have learnt at the feet of the Lord. Money is not valuable; we are always giving it away in one transaction or the other. The most valuable things in this world are free. The most important jobs in Christ are the ones for which we receive no wages whatsoever. The poor are far more generous than the rich. (Mark 12:41-44). 

Martins Hile urgently needed to get somewhere, so he asked the Lord for money for transportation. But the Lord said to him: “Stop asking me for money.” The Lord told Martins to go and stand by the side of the road. 

As soon as he did so, a car pulled up in front of him. “Martins, where are you going?” asked the driver, who happened to be someone well-known to him. He then took Martins exactly where he was going.

The Lord said to Martins: “You don’t need any money. All you need is Me!”  

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; www.femiaribisala.com