A CRITIQUE OF THE MAIDEN EDITION OF THE KAGORO JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY: SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING SUBSEQUENT EDITIONS

 Zwandien Bobai

zbobai@yahoo.co.uk

ABSTRACT

This article reviews the “maiden” or first edition of the Kagoro Journal of Theology (KaJoT) which is a multidisciplinary academic journal of ECWA Theological Seminary, Kagoro, Kaduna State, Nigeria. This appraisal of the journal was done with the view of highlighting areas of strengths and weaknesses (if at all there are). The journal contained 13 articles from different writers across Africa. For the benefit of people who do not have access to the journal, the reviewer critiques each article in small paragraphs. General observations and recommendations were given for improvement in subsequent volumes of the journal.

INTRODUCTION

The Kagoro Journal of Theology (KaJoT) is a multidisciplinary publication of ECWA Theological Seminary, Kagoro, Kaduna State, Nigeria. This is an evangelical institution that believes in being relevant in the society, particularly in theological engagement of issues facing the present African milieu. Under the Foreword, the Editor-in-Chief, Agang (2016:ix) mentioned that “This is ECWA Theological Seminary, Kagoro’s awesome contribution to and participation in the ongoing global discourse on contemporary-challenging social, economic, political and religious matters.”

KaJoT is a blind-peer-review journal. It is so to ensure that assessors are objective in their criticism of each article. On its Editorial Board, KaJot has professors from the United States of America, South Africa and Nigeria. The reviewer believes that these professors were brought on board to ensure excellence. The edition under review was made up of 13 articles written by writers from Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya and South Africa. This review takes a closer look at each article with a view of stating strengths and weaknesses and/or areas to be improved. The reviewer concentrates more on the contents of each work rather than the caption/topic of the paper.

ARTICLE BY ARTICLE REVIEW 

Article 1 by H. Jurgens Hendriks 

In the first paper by Hendriks on public theology and spirituality, he emphasized that public theology is not something one-sidedly personal, but it is relational, focused on bringing peace to the world (Hendriks, 2016:15). In order to achieve this goal, Hendriks went back to history where he discovered that the concept of public theology first developed in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries. He buttressed the “Christian identity” as crucible in doing public theology. That is, the identify that is demonstrated in Jesus Christ who emptied himself (Phil 2:5-11) to become a blessing to all those in need, loving all (Hendriks, 2016:9). His major emphasis was on the fact that “public theology” ought to be done in a community or context. He proposes the missional praxis of the triune God (Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier) as the spirituality needed in doing “public theology.” 

Hendriks’ critical engagement of his friend, Smit is commendable. It is noteworthy that his entire work hinges on his personal works written and published elsewhere without necessary referring to other scholars on the same subject. The work reflects the “self-sufficiency” mentality of many established scholars. His “References” in the stricter sense should only contain materials quoted in the work. He had books (for instance, Fensham, Hansen and Ackermann) under the section which were not referred to in the work.

Article 2 by Sunday B. Agang

Secondly, Agang in his article surveyed the potential of “God’s sovereignty” in helping Christians cope with the menace of suffering in the 21st century. In his opinion, “faith” in God’s divine sovereignty develops antibodies against such reality of life (Agang, 2016:30).

Article 3 by Momolu Armstrong Massaquoi

Massaquoi in the third article addressed “environmental perspectives and human involvement.” In the work, he stressed that the church ought to be responsible to the environment. He said the environment is integral to the Christian faith and there is need for faithful stewardship (Massaquoi, 2016:43). 

Article 4 by Zwandien Bobai

In the fourth article, Bobai (2016:47-62) argued that educational attainment of some kind can and does affect one’s placement in the social ladder of a typical Nigerian society. He concluded with a Christian tone that societal criteria for such placements of people one against and above the other will not count in God’s sight (Bobai, 2016:61).

Article 5 by Gabriel O. Olaniyan

Olaniyan (2016:63-75) argued persuasively that “Christian leaders” have roles in sustaining Nigeria’s democracy. He used the biblical examples of Daniel and Nehemiah as the basis for which Christians can and should participate in political governance in Nigeria.

Article 6 by Helen Olomu Ishola

Pages 76-89 contain Ishola-Esan’s work on the church’s role in providing leadership and development in the context of poverty. In her submission, the church in Nigeria can contribute in diverse ways including the provision of education, healthcare, agriculture, skills acquisition, and other establishments like Banks.

Article 7 by Friday Stephen

Stephen surveyed Jesus’ encounter with the two robbers on His cross (Luke 23:32-43). The merit of his work lies in his analysis of the discourses of the first and second robbers with Jesus on the cross. He particularly mentioned that what defined their final destinations was nothing more than “the will.” He devoted time to check particularly the story of the fall of Adam in Genesis and the role of the will therein. His work emphasized God’s willingness throughout the history of Scripture (like in Jonah) to have mercy on mankind. Not only that, he accentuated that God is always ready and patient with people until a time they can admit and take responsibility for their wrongdoing (see Stephen, 2016:95-95). He also emphasized that Jesus’s acceptance of suffering on the cross was an issue of the “will.” In his final analysis, he underscored that the first robber used his “will” wrongly, in that he refused to take responsibility. But the second robber used his “will” in accepting first his wrong, and Jesus, hence his “repentance” as the topic of the work indicates. His ability to situate the story within the contours of the “will” is admirable.

However, the reviewer observes that the writer did not maintain focus on the text of his choice which is Luke 23:32-43. For example, his entire discussion on the “human will” seems to be on Adam. Another area that could be bettered next time is bibliography. Of the 11 sources used in his work, only 1 of those appeared to be a printed book. Others were mere internet sources! Another flaw eminent in the work by Stephen is the use of the word “conversion” instead of “conversation” for the dialogue between the Jesus Christ and the two malefactors on each side of His cross. This word is used twice (see Stephen, 2016:98). The use of the writer’s “genuine repentance” is one thing the reviewer grieves. Repentance does not need an adjective. Just like one cannot say a “genuine Christian” so is the case here. One is either a Christian or he is not. It follows that one either repents or he does not.

In the seventh article, Stephen (2016:90-105) surveyed Jesus’ encounter with the two robbers on His cross (Luke 23:32-43). He particularly mentioned that what defined their final destinations was nothing more than “the will.”

Article 8 by Hassan Musa

Musa (2016-106-121) surveyed Job’s oath of innocence and theological-ethics of responsibility within the context of Job’s response to his friends in ch. 31. He proposed that human dignity/responsibility is essentially who we are in God’s point of view. “Thus, our Creator’s opinion should rank first in how we see ourselves and our dignity; if we then do as Job did, we will always be more concerned about what God says about our situation than what others say” (Musa, 2016:118).

Article 9 by Mark S. Aidoo

In the following article by Aidoo (2016:122-133), it was argued that in biblical book of Exodus, a format for worship can be derived involving procession, song of praise, affirmation of faith, call to worship, prayer of confession, sermon, response to the Word, offertory, holy communion, benediction and recession.

Article 10 by Ibrahim Adamu Bakoshi

Bakoshi (2016:134-144) proposes an alternative dispute/conflict resolution in the context of 1 Corinthians 6:1-8. According to Bakoshi, Paul challenged the Corinthian church members on taking one another to courts, where unbelievers were magistrates. In his theological analysis of the text, he concluded that Paul suggested two things: being cheated or mediation which could better be done by any member of the church against the agitations of some members at that time to appear before magistrates. In his analysis of mediation, he proposed five processes thus: establishing the ground rules, finding time to talk, planning the environment, negotiating and finally settling the dispute (Bakoshi, 2016:141). The reviewer agrees with the writer on the reason for which people at that time went to court and Christians wanted to copy. According to him, “Going to courts is not for justice and truth but to glorify the economic and mental prowess of the winner. The winner becomes the toast of the society with an enhanced status having vanquished his enemy” (Bakoshi, 2016:137). His criticism of the word “litigation” as war is commendable. Instead of understanding the word like that, he preferred to use “mediation” just like in some versions of Scripture. In his theological analysis of the text, he concluded that Paul suggested two things: being cheated or mediation which could be better be done by any member of the church against the agitations of some members at that time. In his analysis of mediation, he proposed five process thus: establishing the ground rules, finding time to talk, planning the environment, negotiating and finally settling the dispute (Bakoshi, 2016:141). He recommended that pastors and theologians can be trained in the art of mediation in conflict resolution. His sources were strong ones.

His work was however, adjudged by the reviewer to be weak in the following ways: First, he appears to be making use of some “sweeping” or “generalizing” statements on his own. For example, his first sentence is, “The church has lost its greatest community marker; holiness.” I dare that he does not have a source for this conclusion; and did not and cannot prove that “holiness” is the “greatest” community marker.  From his recommendation, how can “pastors” and “theologians” be trained in another specialty? Why not train specific members of the church in that art? His paper did not mention the roles of Christian lawyers in the church today. Should the church today not start Christian law courts? In a context like Nigeria where “Sharia Courts” are almost everywhere particularly in the North, I would have expected the writer to propose “Christian Courts.” Moreover, his paper failed to identify that Christian context today ought to be miles away from the context of Paul’s Christianity. The writer should have recognized that some attorneys in courts today are Christians which was not the case in Paul’s time.

Article 11 by B. Moses Owojaiye

Owojaiye did an interesting study which he combined biblical theology on the “blood of Jesus” and “pleading” of the same amongst Pentecostals of the Nairobi Graduate School of Theology (NEGST), Kenya. His combined interviews and biblical and theological books. In his research interviews, he discovered that many Pentecostals pray “pleading the blood of Jesus” because they have been taught by their pastors to do so; while others pray using scripture (see Exod 12:7-11; and Rev 12:11) particularly for protection. In his final analysis of scripture, Owojaiye proposed that in the Bible, particularly New Testament, the blood of Jesus is “. . . a symbol of God’s atonement, reconciliation, propitiation and expatiation . . ., but none of them [referring to any Bible passage] points to the protective function of the blood of Jesus” (Owojaiye, 2016:154).

From such a clear contrast seen above, Owojaiye then concluded that “pleading the blood of Jesus” should be left “optional” provided they do so in understanding that that does not provoke God to “protect.” The reviewer therefore submits that if Owojaiye’s analysis of scripture is right and that the Bible is clear on the purpose of the blood of Jesus, then, should Christians not obey the Bible? Owajaiye seems to suggest that Christians can continue to uphold a dogma even if such does not have biblical basis. This for the reviewer is a flaw. Finally, in spite of the many sources referred to in the work, there was no section in which those sources were documented. This also is a weakness!

Article 12 by Yunana G. Tanimu

In the penultimate article, Tanimu (2016:156-173) wrote on sexuality in African Christianity in view of traditional and modern norms. The crux of the paper was the present tension traditional African Christians face with their heterosexual opinions against homosexuality movements of the advanced world. In his final analysis, he said, “Therefore, African Christians should make deliberate determination to live by the biblical model of marriage viz. heterosexual dimorphism, for the first humans were two different sexes and were commanded to be fruitful and multiply, something that would not occur in homosexual marriage” (Tanimu, 2016:172).

Article 13 by Ebere Uke Ukah and Ema Ebere Ukah

Ukah and Ukah attempted a great work in that they surveyed the possibility of “love” and “morality” in ensuring religious tolerance in Nigeria. On the onset, the authors established a view that “religion” can be an integrative and also a divisive factor in a society, particularly as that relates to “tolerance” (Ukah and Ukah, 2016:174). They went further to give the chronology of “religious intolerance” in Nigeria right from 1953 to the present Boko Haram insurgencies in some parts of Northern Nigeria. Their historical highlights are commendable. 

Their work seems to be their own reflections on the issue of “love and moral” as panacea for religious intolerance in Nigeria. For instance, even though they referred to some authors in the work, there was no section for References, Works Cited or Bibliography. Not only that, some key areas in which one would have expected them to use opinions of authors, they did not cite even one. For example, their “definition of key words” and “causes of religious violence” and “effects” of such had no single source. Surprisingly, the section which is supposed to be crux of their paper, tagged “Love and morality as panacea for religious tolerance,” it was mere personal reflection without reference to any academic source apart from portions of the Bible. As an academic journal, the KaJoT cannot keep publishing works with flaws such as the ones highlighted here.

GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE JOURNAL

The following could be observed from the journal:

It was supposed to be a “maiden” edition since it was the first. It was however, published with volume and number. This could be misleading in the sense that some people may think KaJoT has had other editions. 

There is a provision for ISSN, which I believe stands for International Standard Serial Number, used in publications whether print or electronic. It is a form of identification! This still goes back to the first observation that “maiden edition” should have been used somewhere on the front cover of the journal.

At the back of the KaJoT, there are the contents. There is another problem. Apart from the first paper by Prof. Hendriks, none another is corresponding with the main work. The back page indicates that the last article by Ukah and Ukah starts on page 241, whereas the whole journal was all in all 188 pages. The next edition should avoid this unnecessary mistake.

Some articles were extensively written by use of more than 90% popular and internet sources (see Stephen, 2016:104-105).

It can be observed that some writers used obsolete materials in their articles. In the next edition, it should be noted that only dictionaries, encyclopedias, and perhaps commentaries (without revised editions) or general “classic” materials maybe used in academic collection of this nature.

Some articles in the first edition of KaJoT were written without references or bibliography. Those of Owojaiye and Ukah and Ukah are typical examples. 

Only few articles in the maiden edition followed the theme as indicated in the front page of the journal.

CONCLUSION

The paper delved into reviewing the 13 articles published in the first edition of the Kagoro Journal of Theology in 2016. It was gathered that the journal is an interesting attempt to engage people in theological thinking and writing.

RECOMMENDATION

From this review, some points become obvious concerns that ought to be tackled in the edition of the Kagoro Journal of Theology. These include:


ECWA Theological Seminary, Kagoro as the publisher will have to be on the lookout so as to avoid the flaws identified in this review.

Assessors of papers to be featured in any edition should ensure the work they are paid for is done meticulously. Doing this should have identified authors/writers who used just any sources which are not critical like the Wikipedia. More so, some articles were written by use of the popular internet cites rather than books and articles in journals or periodicals.

Agreed that KaJoT is a “multidisciplinary” journal, there would still be need that contributors consider the theme for the volume they are contributing for. Only few articles in the maiden edition followed the theme as indicated in the title of this review.

ECWA Theological Seminary, Kagoro as the publisher will have to guard against the flaws identified in this review. The publisher may highlight and print observations such as these for assessors next time.

PS: This review was published in the Second Edition of KaJoT. For details, you may contact me through the email above.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

THE RURAL PASTOR

ON THE POPULAR "REST IN PEACE" (RIP) PRAYER: CAUTION FROM PROF B.A. SARMA

THE SUSCEPTIBILITY OF THE ELECTORATES IN AFRICA