By Kola Odepeju

I doubt if Shola Fasure will ever cease to amuse the people in his blind defense of his paymaster, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola who was recently described as “Asín ti kò mò pé òhun n rùn” (the shrew that doesn’t know that it smells) by governor Adeleke of Osun for verbally attacking his benefactor, PBAT. But little can one be surprised about Fasure’s blind defense of his boss because he must justify his earnings and secondly, since he himself lacks integrity, it’s easy for him to always come out to come up with drivels in the name of defending his boss.

Fasure’s continued attempts to distort history only shows that he’s either a poor student of history or he’s simply being mischievous. But I like to believe more in the latter being in his DNA. Just like the leopard that doesn’t change its spots, so will a person given to mischief comes out regularly to ply his/her trade. This is the case with Fasure who himself doesn’t believe his own stories with respect to Tinubu/Aregbesola political relationship. Fasure has been trying so hard to distort history though; misinforming the public that Aregbesola is the one that made Tinubu but not vice-versa, he subjects himself to ridicule each time he comes out to turn history upside down and to do surgery to the already battered image of his boss.

One of Nigeria’s veteran journalists, Mayor Akinpelu came out recently to call a spade a spade by telling the public the truths about Aregbesola/Tinubu political relationship. Of course his narration wasn’t in any way different from what the general public had already known before about Aregbesola and his relationship with Tinubu. There was no addition or subtraction in what Mayor Akinpelu said about Aregbesola. All what he said about him are nothing but the truth. No attempt did he make – in the least – either to blackmail Aregbesola or tarnish his image. So my question is; when has saying the truth become an offense under the sky for Fasure to now come out again from his shell and be attacking Akinpelu, an apolitical person who was just doing his job as a social commentator?

Like Akinpelu said in his article, was Aregbesola not scruffy looking prior to his being catapulted by Tinubu? Wasn’t he a pauper before his path crossed with that of Tinubu? Was his usual and regular wear then not Jalamia? Wasn’t his car rickety and smoky like a locomotive? The point is that Aregbesola was a complete pauper before he met Tinubu, a fact known to so many people – except only Fasure – and a fact Aregbesola himself testified to in some occasions; that it was Tinubu that God used to uplift him. I recall here that Aregbesola said in one of our media meetings with him at the State House in Osogbo when he was governor that “if l had not met Tinubu, l would have also still be struggling like you people by now”.

Ogbeni Aregbesola had also said in a video which is in public domain that after God, he owes whatever he’s today to Tinubu. So only God knows where Fasure conjures his own side of the story from which l see as only tales by moonlight different from reality. His story can only be believed by fools and accepted by idiots.

Comparing Aregbesola’s case with that of Yemi Osibajo, Babafemi Ojudu and other names he mentioned in his write-up is preposterous and doesn’t align with common sense in the least. One, these are people who had recorded appreciable successes in their chosen careers and living comfortably before their paths crossed with Tinubu. They were accomplished professionals on their own as at the time their political relationships with Tinubu started; unlike Aregbesola who was a nobody by the time he met Tinubu. I say this without any fear of contradiction because l was on ground at Cresta Laurel where these people served on the transition committees set up by Tinubu then as the governor-elect.

Two, even though these people may have at one time or the other had disagreements with Tinubu, did they ever insult Tinubu as Aregbesola did? Did they display insolence to Tinubu like Rauf? Disagreements are normal in politics but attacking your God-sent benefactor is the most unwise and stupid thing to do by anybody. This is where Shola Fasure’s boss disappointed many of his admirers including this writer.

In conclusion, Shola Fasure in his warped thinking opined that “Batists have slavery in their DNA”. This, to me, is a fallacious opinion of a mind filled with ingratitude. Rather than proving Mayor Akinpelu wrong with evidence about what he (Akinpelu) said about Aregbesola, Fasure was busy attacking him and calling Batists names.

This is a fallacy of ad hominem. Of course Fasure cannot pretend not to know that politics is about hundred percent loyalty. It’s either you’re completely loyal or you take the exit door. Batists are loyal to Tinubu because he deserves it as he has proven to be a reliable and dependable leader. But if Fasure in his wrong perception of Batists as having slavish mentality in their DNA still holds on to this fallacy, then they’re by far better than Aregbesola’s followers who have ingratitude in their DNA just like their leader.

● Odepeju, newspaper columnist and political activist writes from Lagos.

The Christ Apostolic Church (CAC) has issued a strong rebuttal to comments made by Pastor Biodun Fatoyinbo regarding the life and ministry of its first General Evangelist, Apostle Joseph Ayo Babalola.

In a statement signed by Pastor Ade Alawode, Director of Publicity, CAC, the church said it was “necessary to address your recent statements… for the following three reasons: Scriptural Justification… Clarification of Truth… Defense of Legacy.”

The statement was in response to Fatoyinbo’s viral message in which he reportedly acknowledged that Apostle Babalola was highly anointed but “had no money” and went on to ask sarcastically, “Where are his children?”

Click link to read CAC’s Full Statement

Dear Pastor Biodun Fatoyinbo,

Greetings to you in the Name of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Ordinarily, we do not respond to social media commentaries or controversies. However, we consider it necessary to address your recent statements, which have been widely circulated on your social media platforms, for the following three reasons:

1. Scriptural Justification — The Bible permits us to respond wisely to folly to prevent arrogance (Proverbs 26:5).

2. Clarification of Truth — To correct the misleading narrative you are promoting about ministry and wealth.

3. Defense of Legacy — To address the inaccurate claims you’ve made regarding the life and ministry of Apostle Joseph Ayo Babalola, the first General Evangelist of Christ Apostolic Church.

In one of your trending messages on YouTube, you acknowledged that Apostle Babalola was highly anointed but “had no money”, and then went on to ask sarcastically, “Where are his children?” — a question that was both insensitive and ill-informed.

To equate anointing or ministerial success with material wealth is biblically flawed. The words of Jesus are clear:

“Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.” — Luke 12:15.

Yet, your teachings suggest otherwise.

In doing so, you promote what the Bible refers to as Simony — the monetization of spiritual gifts (Acts 8:18–24). The Scriptures do not teach that money is a sign of anointing. Rather, “the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil” (1 Timothy 6:10). Which Bible do you read and preach from?

On the Question of Apostle Babalola’s Children

Ethically speaking, Apostle Babalola had children. Simple arithmetic should help you understand that they would be advanced in age by now — possibly your grandparents’ age. What did you hope to achieve with the mocking question, “Where are the children of Babalola?”

Your statement reflects more on the kind of company you keep, but as a preacher of the Word, shouldn’t your conduct and utterances be guided by Scripture?

Where in the Bible does your brand of prosperity theology originate — one that demeans people for not being wealthy? Isn’t such a message encouraging greed, corruption, and godlessness, especially in a nation already struggling with moral decay?

Setting the Record Straight

For the sake of truth and posterity, let me correct the public misrepresentations you’ve made regarding Apostle Joseph Ayo Babalola:

1. Calling
Apostle Babalola was called by God on October 10, 1928, at the age of 24. His ministry spanned Western and Midwestern Nigeria, and extended to the Gold Coast (now Ghana), marked by undeniable signs and wonders.

2. Wealth and Lifestyle
He was blessed — but not materialistic or greedy. He gave lands to the Church, supported the education of many, fed the poor, and lived sacrificially. He housed more people than just his biological children.

When Queen Elizabeth II visited Nigeria in February 1956, Apostle Babalola was among the honored guests. Would a man in rags be granted such recognition by a colonial government? Certainly not.

He was no fundraiser, yet God supplied his needs. His diaries are filled with divine provisions like: “Ipese Olorun loni: £100.00, £50.00…”

He lived in a befitting home, drove one of the best Ford Jeeps of his time, and funded weddings, education, and apprenticeship programs — all without exploiting the pulpit.

3. Family

His children — Mama Eunice Wuraola Ogini and Apeke Adeniyi — are alive, blessed, fulfilled, and quietly serving the Lord in their respective churches. They are not loud, ostentatious, or greedy.

4. Legacy

Apostle Babalola’s anointing impacted generations. More than 66 years after his passing, his legacy continues to inspire and bless countless lives and ministries. That is true impact.

Let me pose a question to you:

When Peter said in Acts 3:6, “Silver and gold I do not have…” — was he still anointed or not?
I leave that for you to ponder.

5. Conclusion

The measure of a believer’s anointing is not in material accumulation, but in sacrificial service.

“For the Kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” — Romans 14:17.

Jesus taught:

“Whoever desires to be great among you, let him be your servant… just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve.” — Matthew 20:25–28.

Once again,
“Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.” — Luke 12:15.

May God give us all the grace to rightly divide the Word of Truth, and to walk in humility, reverence, and godly wisdom.

Pastor Ade ALAWODE (Director of Publicity, Christ Apostolic Church)

Prof Tukur Muhammad-Baba, Publicity Secretary of the Arewa Consultative Forum, ACF, has said that former President needs to do more if he will stand in for the forthcoming presidential election in 2027.

The Arewa’s spokesman said GEJ needs to sell and offer himself as an alternative, showing he’s now different from the Goodluck Jonathan we knew as a person.

Muhammad-Baba stated this on Thursday while fielding questions on Arise Television’s Morning Show programme.

The statement comes amid indications are emerging that Jonathan is ready to contest the 2027 presidential election.

The Bayelsa politician is said to be getting set to battle President Bola Tinubu for the nation’s number one job.

There has been speculation about whether Jonathan will fly the flag of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.

He said: “But, you know, Goodluck Jonathan will be a candidate. But of course, he needs to do a lot more to sell himself, to offer himself as an alternative, to show that he’s now different from the Goodluck Jonathan we knew as a person. Circumstances have turned out that some of the criticisms against him were simply political and so on.

“Well, anybody could be a candidate. But I think, given the circumstances right now in the country, the difficulties people are facing the challenging the economic conditions, it will take a lot more for a politician, whether they are from the south, the north or from the moon, to convince themselves, to convince the electorate, that they are different, or that they offer a new alternative.”