A Preacher's Diary

God Can Turn Persecutors into Preachers

2012-02-12T14:49:00.001+05:30

Christians in India who dare to share their faith with fellow citizens often face physical assault and abuse at the hands of fellow citizens. This doesn't surprise followers of Christ. The Lord Jesus warned his disciples that they shouldn't expect a better treatment from the world around them than what was meted out to their Master.

When I read about the increasing instances of persecution against Christians in India – particularly against those engaged in evangelism – I pray earnestly that God will keep repeating His ‘act’ in Acts 9 in our cities and villages. In Acts 9 we read about an astounding “turning point” in the history of the early church. A zealous Jew whose life’s mission was to “search and destroy” Christians was ambushed, overpowered and won over by the Lord Jesus Christ!

Saul the Benjamite was a Jew born of a Jew, a Rabbi trained at the feet of the renowned guru Gamaliel, and zealous to protect the ancient religion of his fathers. He proved his zeal by hunting Christians. He went from house to house and dragged Christians off to prison. He supported the mob that stoned Stephen, the first Christian martyr, to death. And to think that Jesus intervened in the life of such a man with such a great manifestation of divine glory and power!

Which Christian in the early church could ever have dreamt of Saul the Pharisee becoming an apostle of Jesus Christ? When Jesus broke the news of Saul’s conversion to Ananias, a Christian in Damascus, Ananias found it hard to believe! Ananias answered, "Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he did to your saints at Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on Your name."

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. He hasn't stopped changing persecutors of Christians into preachers of the gospel. And I believe the church in India should pray for divine intervention in the lives of misguided people who spread hatred and violence.

Sergei Kourdakov, a young KGB officer, who persecuted Russian Christians brutally, studied the lives of his victims. He noticed that the Christians he persecuted were hard working and honest citizens of USSR unlike the regular communists. He resigned from the KGB, fled to Canada, became a Christian, and wrote his autobiography, “The Persecutor.” At the age of 22, he was allegedly killed by the KGB.

Reza Kahlili (not his real name) was a member of Iran’s Revolutionary guards that enforced the brutal rule of Khomeini . Opponents or dissidents were killed with impunity. The overflow of violence in the name of Allah shocked Reza. He defected to an ‘enemy’ country and renounced Islam. Later, his search for the true God led him to the Bible and to Jesus Christ. His autobiography “A Time to Betray” is a thriller.

Dara Singh and Mahendra Hembram escaped gallows when the Supreme Court of India ruled that their ghastly act of killing Graham Staines and his sons was not a “rarest of rare” case. Having killed a man and both of his sons, the convicts resolutely eliminated every male in the Staines family. Who knows? God in his mercy must have spared the lives of these killers so that they will one day surrender before the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.

Biskesan Pradhan, 47, was murdered in Kandhamal district of Orissa in 2010. He was a former leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Why was he murdered? He had decided to follow Jesus Christ three years before his martyrdom.

When will some of his killers be arrested by none other than Jesus Christ? When will the proud leaders who set themselves against the gospel be struck by a revelation from above? It may be sooner than we think. There is nothing impossible with God.

“One thing I do ...”

2012-02-11T11:59:00.000+05:30

Focus is vital for success in life

Imagine what would happen if your two eyes saw two different things at the same time! There are animals that have compound vision. They can see multiple images at the same time and still stay sane. A human who sees different images at the same time might become insane.

Yet this is what many people do. They set their inner eyes on various unrelated goals and still hope to achieve great things in life. Will such people ever succeed?

We are able to drive a nail into a wall because a nail is sharp. All the energy that’s delivered to the nail via a hammer gets focussed on the tip of the nail. The resultant pressure drives the nail in. Similarly, when we focus all our resources on the “one thing” that we need to do, we will see results. “One reason so few of us achieve what we truly want is that we never direct our focus; we never concentrate our power. Most people dabble their way through life, never deciding to master anything in particular.” (Tony Robbins) Alexander Bell put it this way: “Concentrate all your thoughts upon the work at hand. The sun's rays do not burn until brought to a focus.”

There should be a single overarching goal in our life. And in the pursuit of that one grand goal, we may have to achieve several small term objectives. These objectives are stepping stones that lead us to the grand purpose we have set before us. At any given time, we focus on one task that leads us closer to the objective. The closer we get to each of our short term objectives we know that we are getting closer to our long term goal.

Instead of thus moving in a single direction, some people try to chase several objectives that pull them in different directions. As a result, they spread themselves too thin. They are unable to give their best in each endeavor they chose. Mediocrity prevails in each of their tasks.

Why do people bite off more than what they can chew? Why do people have their finger in too many pies? Probably they think that they will be judged by the volume of their activity. Some may even be driven by a feeling of guilt. They might think that God has gifted them with various abilities and that they should be faithful with each and every “talent” they think they possess. This could be a result of a faulty interpretation of Jesus’ parable of talents. Jesus’ narrated the parable of talents so that his disciples would realize one thing: that there would be a time gap between his first and second coming. Each servant was entrusted with a certain number of talents. Multiple “talents” do not represent multiple gifting! “Talent” refers to a sum of money given to them. The servants who received the “talents” from their master did not go about doing different things. They were focused on one thing—the increase of their master’s fortunes.

We should be careful to distinguish between the central goal of our life from the variety of interests that we may have. We may have a taste for numerous good things in life. That doesn’t mean that we should follow each and every inclination. If we do so, we will dissipate our energy in different directions. We’ll fail to make a significant contribution.

Jesus the Messiah did just what His Father asked him to do. Therefore, he was able to accomplish the Father’s expectations. At the end of his earthly ministry, while on the cross, he said, “It is finished” and gave up his spirit. He had successfully accomplished everything that the Father had entrusted with Him. Jesus’ disciples should follow His footsteps. Let us not dabble in a lot of things to show that we are doing a whole of things for God.

I guess it takes a lot of humility to convince ourselves that each of us is just a cog in God’s grand machinery. Indeed a lot of things need to done in this world. A lot of things need to be accomplished for God. But God does not want one man to do everything. He has apportioned His grace to each of us so that we may focus on the little that has been assigned to us. Let’s not question God’s wisdom. By restricting ourselves to the “one thing” that we can do best, we affirm God’s ability to accomplish His purposes through a host of his servants.

The apostle Paul is often referred to as a man of “one thing.” Forgetting the past, he pressed on toward the “goal for the prize of the upward call” in Christ (Philippians 3:13-14). Paul taught the Corinthians that God would judge every Christian worker according to quality of his work, not “quantity.” The world looks for a huge volume of work, big figures and a super large footprint. God looks for quality. Paul compared the ministry of God’s servants to “gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, and straw.” (1 Cor 3:12) Those who come to God with hay might have truck loads of hay for display. Those who come before God with precious stones or precious metals might not have large volumes to make a big show. Their work may not be conspicuous. But it sure is be “big” in terms of value. Our motives and works are tested by the fire of God’s standard. Those works/motives that meet God’s standard will be eligible for a reward.

Steve Jobs, the American icon in the world of business said: “That's been one of my mantras - focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it's worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains.”

Pogrom Torn Kandhamal Revisited

2012-01-02T00:26:00.000+05:30

Christians in Kandhamal were planning to celebrate Christmas in a big way in 2011. That's when a group called for a bandh (a general shutdown) of the whole district for four days from Dec 24, 2011.

Sensing foul play in the selection of the dates, Christians protested. A bandh not only keeps business establishment closed; it also paralyses the life of people. Roads will get blocked by tree trunks. Such an atmosphere is suitable for persecuting Christians.

The Union government and Odisha state government put police force in full alert. The district collector and police chief personally oversaw security arrangements and visited churches to reassure Christians.

The District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police Reassure Christians on Christmas Eve

Yet, on Christmas eve, the 24th of December, the house of a Christian near Baliguda was burnt down by people who were upset about his decision to adopt Christian faith. Due to Christmas and the revised one-day bandh on December 26th, news is just trickling from this remote area. The affected family did not wish to file an FIR due to fear. Later, an FIR was filed.

Mallick and family: Their hut and all belongings were burnt on Dec 24, 2011

Kandhamal – the territory of the people group called Kandh – is a hilly region that is 600 to 1200 m above MSL. Winter temperatures can dip to zero *C or below in some areas. The higher latitude brings about lower temperatures than what is found in the southern hill stations.

The Kandhs are rice eaters. They eat fish and meat occasionally. A typical meal consists of rice, dal and a vegetable dish. My visit coincided with the rice paddy harvest. Fields bore a golden post-harvest hue. Villagers – mostly husband-wife teams were busy threshing the grain. Some beat the grain out of the sheaves while most use cows and bulls to thresh the sheaves. Interestingly, none of the animals were muzzled. I don’t know whether this practice was influenced by the biblical injunction against muzzling oxen that threshed grain.

Kandhamal received the gospel in 1914 when a few British missionaries arrived there! Missionaries arrived at a village called Mallikapodi and established a church there on April 12, 1914. These missionaries trained young boys to read and write. They educated them to grade V level. After that, these boys were sent out as teachers, preachers and doctors! This is how Mallikapodi became the centre of evangelistic activities in Kandhamal district a century ago. The neighbouring town G. Udayagiri boasted of a mission hospital that functioned very well under the stewardship of British doctors.

The local tribal language of Kandhamal is Kui. British missionaries learned Kui. They encouraged these people to be faithful to Kui instead of making a complete transition to Odiya, which today is the official language of Odisha state.

My hosts claim that Kui is very similar to Malayalam. How do they know it? “Ten percent of our district’s population is in Kerala. Most are in Ernakulam district, in Perumbavoor, working in various plywood industries,” explained Br R Nayak who joined us from Berhampur. He works in a bank. “The population of Odiyas in Kerala is so large that some theatres in Kerala exhibit Odiya movies.” That was news to me!

Br R Nayak wonders whether a group people from Kerala or Tamil Nadu had long ago inhabited the hills of Kandhamal. He could be right. Many centuries ago, the large Tamil empire included the present Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry, Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Sri Lanka, Singapore, and parts of Malaysia. Probably a group of Tamil soldiers who fought to extend the empire to Odisha settled in the hills of Kandhamal to give rise to today’s Kui speaking Kandhs.

Tribal folk of Kandhamal were never Hindus. They were animists.
Yet, they get wrongly classified as Scheduled Castes

To prove his point, he showed me tattoo marks on his mother’s face. Those marks, he said, were characteristic of tribal people. The Kui people were once ruled by Ghumsar. (Hence, Udayagiri is known as Ghumsar Udayagiri.) “Our girls were very pretty,” R Nayak said. Indeed they are! “The king used to capture our young girls and violate them. To prevent such atrocities, elders subjected their daughters to this painful procedure. They wanted their girls to look ugly so that the King and his men would leave them alone! When you can’t defend your women with your might, the next best thing might be to make them less attractive targets.

Br R Nayak explained to me that the Kandhs, like other tribesmen of India, were animists. Hinduism was alien to them. As a boy, he had helped his father to conduct animistic sacrifices. Like Isaac who accompanied Abraham to Mount Moriah, R Nayak used to carry a chicken and follow his father and other folks to the jungle. His father sacrificed the chicken on a rock. Later, the entire gathering enjoyed a ritual meal. These tribal people never knew the gods of the rest of India. They never carried coconuts or flowers to temples. All these practices were later introduced to tribal areas by settlers from outside these regions.

How did the infamous riots begin in 2008? Christians were blamed for the murder of the Swami L. Saraswati. Christians were also accused of slaughtering a cow. These rumours triggered the pogrom.

Most of the attacks took place at night. Several hundreds of Christians were chased out of their homes. Their houses and churches were destroyed and burnt. Many were mercilessly killed. Those who managed to escape slaughter took shelter in the forests and hills. Violent mobs pursued these Christians into the forests to kill them. These outrageous killings went on for three months.

Several families live in tents 3 years after the 2008 riots! Several church buildings are in ruins.

Wealthy Christian leaders who had vehicles sped away to the plains – to Berhampur or to Bhubaneswar, the State capital. Some fled to Kerala. Poorer Christians were left in the hills to suffer like sheep without shepherds. Later, in the relief camps, Christians decided to reject the leadership of all those leaders who had fled to escape persecution.

The local pastor of a Kandhamal Church fled to the forests in the hills. He took his wife, three daughters and his 2-year old son farther into the forests than any other member of this church. They survived on biscuits which they managed to take with them. The pastor was especially scared because the rioters mainly targeted pastors and Christian leaders. And then, being a father of 3 young girls, he was naturally anxious for their safety. Were there wild animals in the forest? I asked the pastor. “We did not see any large animal. But there must have been snakes everywhere. God protected us. We returned to G Udayagiri town after a few days and got enrolled in the relief camp. After a few weeks, we went to our native village in the neighbouring district.”

A saffron flag planted at a church reconstruction site to intimidate Christians (Dec 2011)

Pastor D Nayak was not at home when a mob struck his house. They used a cooking gas cylinder in his house to blast his house. His wife and two sons – both under ten years at that time – ran away into the hills. They managed to reach Udyagiri by taking a jungle short cut. They sought refuge in a camp set up by the government. Later, the pastor found his sons in this relief camp. They lived there for six months. Life in the “relief camp” was terrible. They did not have anything except the clothes they wore when they escaped the violence. The relief camp was more or less a prison. They were not allowed to go anywhere except for an hour or two every day. This was in fact to provide them security. An elderly man who went out to shop for his monthly rations was found dead by the wayside.

Pastor D Nayak and his family were invited to live in a friend’s house in Pondicherry for two weeks. They enjoyed the journey and the stay. Mrs. Nayak could get psychiatric help from JIPMER for the condition she faced after the riots began. They then returned to the relief camp.

Pastor D Nayak remembers with gratitude a group of Christians who came all the way from Kollam in Kerala to help these poor Christians. Various Christian agencies stepped in to build houses. EFICOR built around 450 houses for those whose houses were destroyed. The government too gave some money to each family to rebuild homes and lives. Another Christian group provided clothes and a few hundred sarees for the women.

A few days before the pogrom, Pastor D Nayak met his friend who was a businessman in Udayagiri. He told Nayak, “I have a heart problem. I don’t know how long I’ll live. I am glad we met today.” A few days later, militant Hindus took him away from his house. His wife followed him. Their sons saw the direction in which their parents were taken. The man was tied up and his wife was raped in his sight. Later, the two were butchered and pieces of their body were thrown into a river nearby. Two days later, the decomposed body parts were discovered in downstream.

Complete details about the 2008 pogrom against Christians in Kandhamal will never come to light. Dozens of Christians refused to testify in court against their neighbours. These Christians feared that the accused would hurt them after serving time in prisons. Magistrates and police officials were baffled. Hundreds of murderers, arsonists and rapists thus had to be acquitted.

ANGELIC RESCUE

Pastor Nayak recalls that persecution of Christians in Kandhamal did not begin in 2008. There were several instances of persecution before the 2008 pogrom. However, these went unnoticed. Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati was behind many of these attacks. He took initiative to convert animistic tribal folks to Hinduism and to “reconvert” local Christians to Hinduism. Media coverage was poor in the past. Communication systems and roads were quite primitive. Therefore the outside world did not know about these atrocities.

In 1988, at the age of twenty, D Nayak went to a local village market with a friend. A large crowd was present there, buying and selling. Suddenly, a group of Hindus surrounded him and his friends. Some beat them while others pelted them with stones. The mob shouted slogans praising Hinduism and denouncing Christianity.

The young men bled profusely. D Nayak’s while shirt turned red. Huge lumps appeared on Nayak’s head and face due to the stoning. The two men were led to a local Shiva temple. They were taken to the inner sanctuary where the main idol was kept. The leader of the mob drew a sword and asked the men, “If you will renounce your Jesus and accept Hinduism, we will let you go. Otherwise, we’ll butcher you.” Nayak replied that he wouldn’t recant his faith in Jesus. He said that he was prepared to die.

All of a sudden, a tall well-built young man entered the room. The man who threatened to kill the young men dropped his sword and began to tremble. This tall man asked the young men to get up and follow him. D Nayak didn’t understand what was happening. No one who bayed for his blood objected when he was being led out. This mysterious tall man led him to the local police station. A few minutes later, he brought out the second young man too to the station. After that, he disappeared.

While they were at the station, they saw Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati travelling up and down in his vehicle. The swami was obviously supervising the entire operation, encouraging the crowd to do these hate crimes. The police did not take the matter seriously. No case was registered against anyone. They were made to sit in the station till dusk. Later, they slipped out of the police station and walked home. Until today, Pastor Nayak doesn’t know the whereabouts of the man who rescued him. The God of the Bible had rescued his servants from certain death several times by sending his angels. Probably this was a divinely co-ordinated angelic rescue.

A Fallen Star

2011-12-13T12:20:00.001+05:30

Meet Tony. He's a Brahminy kite. You won't find him flying high, riding the warm currents of Kerala's skies, scanning the ground or the backwaters for his next meal. He has never dived into the Meenachil river to catch a fish. He's never known the pleasures of striking a moving target although Kottayam has no dearth of mice and small animals.
Tony just sits by the wayside on a stone unafraid of passersby. When I stopped my noisy diesel car to take his picture, he just sat there and posed for me!
Tony is a special kite. He lives with chicken in a chicken coop. He fell from his nest in his early days. People who lived in the neighbourhood rescued him from attacking crows. Ever since, he has been under a family’s care. The only friends he has are a few hens and chickens!
The nature versus nurture debate might benefit from this case study. Has Tony ever had an identity crisis? Has he ever asked ‘What am I doing here among these chicken?’ Does he ever drool after tiny chicks that parade in their fur coats? Why doesn’t Tony just fly away? Or is he unable to fly because he did not attend his mother’s flight school?
What does Tony think he looks like? No hen or chicken will oblige to hold up a mirror to Tony so that he may discover who he truly is! Instead, studying the features of his companions, Tony will believe that that he is one of those rather flightless, noisy fowls.
The instant I saw this bird, I knew this was a great parable or an illustration. Surely this isn’t a portent of the peaceful millennium -- a time when strong predators would live in peace with their prey. Here is an unfortunate creature that’s in the wrong company. Similarly, there are people who live blissfully unaware of the tremendous potential God has bestowed on them. They're in the wrong place surrounded by the people who don’t share their innate desires or inclinations.

A Brahminy Kite fishing in Kerala (c) Simon Thomsett

I think of Moses, God’s chosen deliverer for Israel, who lived in an Egyptian palace. Although it was God’s providence that kept him there in the initial years of his life, he came to realize that he was in the wrong place with a wrong identity. That’s what made him defend a fellow Israelite, albeit through a criminal act. We think that he fled Egypt out of fear. That’s just one side of the story. His decision to flee Egypt is praised in the New Testament. The writer to Hebrews says that Moses fled Egypt by faith in Christ, willing to suffer the alienation from sin’s pleasure for the sake of Christ!
How about you? Do you make compromises to remain in a zone of comfort that demands little effort? Are you willing to recognize your God-given capabilities and to take up challenges? Are you willing to venture out into new frontiers far above your current estate?

One-Way Traffic of Religious Conversion!

2011-12-12T16:42:00.000+05:30

Islam welcomes converts to its fold. But if one chooses to leave Islam, he/she could be putting his/her life at risk! The same rule applies to many other religions.

Even as the nation is witnessing the washout of another session of Parliament, there's an atrocious incident that took place in Jammu & Kashmir that deserves urgent attention of the whole nation. The pastor of All Saints CNI Church, Rev. Chander Mani Khanna, was falsely accused of "forced conversion" of Muslim youth to Christianity. Muslims religious leaders in Kashmir behaved as if they were running a parallel judiciary and issued summons to the pastor in order to seek an explanation from him. It is said that Muslim fundamentalists and separatists are instigating religious leaders to fight religious conversions.
Muslims in Jammu andKashmir were angered by video clips that were posted on YouTube showing thebaptism of a few young people. They identified the pastor who baptized theyouth and charged him with enticing Muslim youth to Christianity. Over theinitial days when Muslim religious leaders issued summons to Rev. Khanna, theState Government - busy with its agenda of repealing the AFSPA - looked theother way. And finally, without ascertaining the facts the police swung in toplease the Muslim powers that be. On November 18 the pastor was arrested andsent to judicial custody for 15 days. Pastor Khanna was arrested forcreating “enmity” between religious communities and hurting religioussentiments. The police allegedly beat up the young men who had taken baptism.
The Rev. Khanna hadstated that the young people whom he had baptized were attending his church forover a year. When people who attend a church for such a long time ask forbaptism, there's no reason why they should be denied the privilege of followingJesus Christ.
The zeal with which Muslims pursue their Da’wah (mission) and convert thousands of Europeans to Islam is known to all. Islam regards every other religion as false. There are "government approved conversion centers" in Kerala where people of other faiths can convert to Islam. There may be other such centers in various Indian states. Did anyone have a problem when A. S. Dileep Kumar converted to Islam and became the now famous A. R. Rahman? Were there any complaints when Divya Bharti or Madhavikutty converted to Islam? If people might convert to Islam, why can’t they convert from Islam to other religions? Such converts from Islam are regarded as kafir and their murderers are promised heaven!
This incident raises anumber of questions. Is this a free country? Does every individual in thiscountry have the right to choose a religion of his liking? Or, is it only a fewreligions that deserve to proselytize people of other faiths? When theConstitution gives people of each religion the right to practice and propagatetheir religion, did the architects of the Constitution anticipate thatconversions could create “enmity” between religions? Or did they over-estimatethe tolerance level and maturity of Indians?

Words such as “freedom” – at the level of the individual – have no meaning in India. Each individual, it is believed, should pursue the religion of his parents. Even in the 21st century, many Indians believe that one should follow the profession of his ancestors! Parents decide who their son or daughter should marry. Not many Indians can choose a spouse of their liking.

All converts to Hinduism are welcomed and their “homecoming” is celebrated. All converts to Islam are welcomed with shouts of “Alhamdulillah.” But converts from these religions to the Christian faith are hounded, excommunicated, tortured, paraded naked, and killed. Religions that welcome converts to their fold must give their fellow beings freedom to leave their fold too! Why should there be just a one-way traffic in the matter of religious conversion? India is not free until each Indian has the freedom to speak and act according to his conscience and convictions.

This article was originally published as editorial in Praise The Almighty newspaper released on 1 Dec 2011.

A Few Wise Men, A Mad Idumean, and An Infant King!

2011-12-10T19:16:00.001+05:30

Christmasseason is fast approaching. While preparing a few Christmas messages, I read theinitial passage in the second chapter of the Gospel of Matthew:

2:1 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, 2 "Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him."
3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 Gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. 5 They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea; for this is what has been written by the prophet: 6 'and you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.'"
7 Then Herod secretly called the magi and determined from them the exact time the star appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him."
9 After hearing the king, they went their way; and the star, which they had seen in the east, went on before them until it came and stood over the place where the Child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 11 After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Then, opening their treasures, they presented to Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 12 And having been warned by God in a dream not to return to Herod, the magi left for their own country by another way.

From mychildhood, I’ve heard all kinds of sermons on this passage. Taking a seriouslook at this passage, I don’t find some of the things I heard in sermons.For example, this passage does not say that the wise men came directly to theKing Herod’s palace enquiring about the “King of the Jews.” The wise men cameto Jerusalem and asked a number of people about the newly born King. They wereprepared to travel around and find the baby. Finding a baby - the right baby –was no easy task. Reports about their hunt for an infant King reached Herod’sears!

It isinteresting to note that King Herod was troubled when he heard about the birthof a “King of the Jews.” Obviously, any King would love to protect his dynastyby nipping trouble in the bud. But there’s more to it than meets the eye.

The wisemen sought a baby who was born “King of the Jews.” Herod wasn’t a Jew from the Israelitestock. He was an Idumean (Edomite). A large number of Idumeans had converted toJudaism in the second and first centuries BC. Although a Jew by name, Herodnever led a pious life. Wicked as he was, he even murdered members of his ownfamily. To pacify Jewish objections tohis decadent life, he sought to win them over by taking up huge constructionprojects. The expansion of the Jewish Temple was one such project. When such amad Idumean heard about a true Israelite baby who would be King of the Jews, hedecided to act upon that information without first ascertaining the credibility of the star gazers.

Indeed, Herod and most Jews of that time believed that the Messiah would set up a political kingdom. Herod can't be faulted for thinking thus; even Jesus' disciples thought so! They failed to understand that the divine kingdom that Jesus announced was a universal, spiritual and heavenly kingdom.

Why was allJerusalem troubled? Did the people not wish to welcome a Messiah? I guess thepeople were troubled because they knew Herod’s nature. The prophet Samuel ofold was scared to visit Bethlehem to anoint David when Saul was on the throne.Similarly, the people of Jerusalem feared for the lives of their boys. Theyknew Herod – the mad King who killed his wife Mariamne – would get ticked offby any news about another king.

Herod didnot summon the wise men straightaway. Cunning as he was, he wished to surprisethe wise men with information that could help them locate the infant King. Heknew where to locate that information. He summoned the chief priests and thescribes! The learned lot knew the Scriptures and ancient prophecies. They told Herod that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem.

Then theKing secretly summoned the wise men. He commissioned them to locate the royalBaby. Neither the team of scholars nor the king who took credit for the former’sknowledge was willing to walk around the countryside doing a door-to-doorsurvey! Probably the Jewish scholarsdidn’t want to be polluted by a ritually unclean mother who could still be in the days of puerperium.

Beforethings got out of hand, God took up the reins of this Royal Commission ofEnquiry! He let the wise men see the star which they had seen in the East. He led thewise men to the humble house where the Savior was born. They worshipped theKing—just the King, not his mother. The gifts they brought for Jesus – gold,myrrh and frankincense – were fit for a King. God in his mercy provided for afamily that badly needed some gold for an overseas journey to protect the baby. Praise God for His care! Praise God for His Sovereign rule over all kings andauthorities.

The custodians of Jewish Law and messianic prophecies missed a golden opportunity to welcome their Messiah. Their King sought to destroy the Messiah. Those alien to this great heritage sought out and worshiped the Messiah. Matthew has clever way of bringing God's design for the Gentiles into the Gospel written specifically for the Jews!

Even today, those seeking the Messiah are the real wise ones. Of what use is knowledge if we can't persuade our minds and bodies to act accordingly?

Please visit www.PhilipEapen.com to learn how you may partner with the Eapen family in their endeavor
to communicate the Good News of Jesus Christ.

Besides, visit my page on Facebook.

The Gospel and Prosperity

2011-12-04T01:24:00.001+05:30

Recently I took part in a discussion with Christianprofessionals. When the question of “prosperity gospel” came up, one of themsummed up the classic evangelical position. He said, “The Gospel is aboutsalvation, about Jesus Christ and his work for us on the Cross. It’s not aboutgetting richer.”

And yet, a little while later, in his prayer for the children inthe gathering, he prayed: “Lord, bless our children’s studies. Let them securethe top position in their respective classes. …” I found that interesting.Christian preachers in the Third World preach, “Believe in the gospel and theLord will save you from your sins. He will heal your sicknesses. He willdeliver you from your debts and your poverty.” Critics have always found thisvery objectionable. And yet, these very critics forget their theology when theypray for their children’s studies or when they advice their children.

Grades/marks are for children what money is for adults. In thedog-eat-dog world of academics, the guys who score the highest grades becomethe “top dogs.” Those who oppose any mention about God blessing the poor shouldindeed tell their children: “Kids, be content with what you have. If you havejust enough grades to pass, that’s good. The love of grades is the root of allevil. You can’t serve God and Grades. And just because you’ve good grades, itdoesn’t show that you are godlier than your friend. Or just because you scoredlow grades, it doesn’t mean that you are poor in faith. Contentment withgodliness is great gain.” Verily, verily, I tell you, our kids will be a lothappier if they hear this from us!

Instead, the most vociferous critics of “Pentecostal prosperityGospel” tell their children that there is a link between their relationshipwith God and the grades they secure in school! They encourage the children toexercise their faith in God, to work hard, to succeed, because they “can do allthings through Christ who strengthens” them. This might show that deep insidewe all crave for a correlation between our faith in God and our earthlycircumstances.

It is high time we re-examine our criticism of preachers whomention God’s blessings on His people. The double-standard employed by criticsin their personal lives is only one of the reasons that should lead us to it.The most important reason is that critics in India or other developingcountries, instead of thinking on their own, are just mouthing the words oftheir friends in the US.

When American critics speak out against “prosperity gospel” theyindeed have a case. They see super rich, jet-setting evangelists who promiseprosperity to everyone who donates to them! They claim that the godly willnever be sick or poor. They show off their riches as “proof” of God’s blessingthat came as a result of their faith. The gullible keep donating to these richpreachers. (They forget Scriptural warning that those who give gifts to therich “will only come to poverty” Proverbs 22:16. In fact, it is thesesuper-rich preachers who should be giving to the poor that throng to theirmeetings!) This American short-cut to be super-rich deserves ample criticism.

However, the objections raised against these preachers of“prosperity gospel” need not apply to all preachers who proclaim that the God ofthe Bible is a God who blesses. This is because the word “prosperity” meansdifferent things to different people. An “ordinary American” has everything – ahouse, one or two vehicles, heating/AC, modern household appliances, etc. –that would make him appear “super rich” to a poor Kenyan or Indian Christian. Apoor Nigerian or an Indian who prays for God’s blessings or “prosperity” mightjust be asking for deliverance from a persistent debt or for a house and amotor-cycle. He might just be wishing for food security for his family. If an“ordinary American” Christian sits in judgment of such a man and says, “TheGospel is about salvation from sin; be content with what you have,” it wouldappear that only Americans are entitled to the comforts of life.

It is heartening to see that Christians in the West are slowlyrealizing that the debate on prosperity should be addressed from the perspective of the poor. This is partly because the Pentecostal/Charismatic preaching has broughthope to the lives of millions of poor Christians in Nigeria, Kenya, SouthAfrica and India. Grant Brooke, in his Huffington Post essaytitled “The Case for the Prosperity Gospel,” (3 Oct 2010) claims that theoften-despised “prosperity gospel” is indeed working wonders in the lives ofthe poor. Instead of blaming others for their condition, the poor now thinkthat they can do something to get themselves out of their misery. They pray.They work hard. They quit habits that eat up their money. They save. Theyinvest. And they give to those in need.

Brooke seeks support from David Martin, the author of “Tonguesof Fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America” –

“church-goerswho believe in God-given prosperity are more autonomous, economicallyresponsible, self-confident, and optimistic about life outcomes than theirMainline Protestant and Catholic counterparts. He [Martin] called this belief"betterment" and argued that it bore itself out in greater chancesfor upward mobility into the emergent Latin American middle class. A belief inone's own prosperity, Martin suggests, is often a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

In a similar vein, secular journalist Peter L Weber praisedPentecostals for preaching hope in the midst of global financial crisis inspite of the negative press they received from within the Christian fold. Heattended a Pentecostal meeting and heard it for himself. He summarized themessage as One, "God does not want you to be poor!" And, two,"You can do something about it!" Then, from a sociologist’s perspective,“As I left the church, I asked myself: Would I really want to quarrel withthese messages?” Of course not! That’s why he concludes:

“There is no sentimentality about poverty in the prosperitygospel. There is an appeal to people not as victims but as responsible actors.There is also the confidence that generally people know what is best forthemselves, better than any well-meaning outsiders. It is no wonder, then, thatresearch data, from South Africa for instance, show that Pentecostals have anunusual degree of self-confidence and optimism about the future.” (“Penniesfrom heaven,” Wall Street Journal, Oct 24 2008).

This doesn’t mean that all Pentecostals have identical, biblicalviews about prosperity. Many would need correction.

The Bible certainly speaks about improving the materialcondition of the poor. Why else would the Bible encourage giving or lending tothe needy if not for improving their lot? And certainly, God doesn’t forget orneglect the cheerful giver. God repays him a good harvest, as the apostle rightlypoints out in 2 Corinthians 9:6-10. God doesn’t bless the giver to make himsuper-rich! (This is where many of us get it wrong!) Instead, God blesses thecheerful giver and returns a rich material harvest so that he might increasehis giving (2 Cor 9:8, 11). The Bible’s focus on giving reveals God’sconcern for the needy—not His desire to make the rich super-rich! Thosewho receive God’s blessings in accordance with 2 Corinthians 9:6 should notsay, “I gave liberally and cheerfully; therefore, God has blessed me and hasmade me super-rich.” Instead of letting their expenditure and standard ofliving grow unrestrained with their growing incomes, they should learn to captheir expenditure in order to increase their giving.

And to whom should we give? It will be well with us if we giveto those in need. As a Christian, you are NOT obliged to give to someone whosestandard of living is higher than yours. God doesn’t want the poor to pay for arich man’s fancies. This applies to the Church as well.

A Christian need not support a pastor who is better off thanhim! Sounds strange? That’s biblical. That’s what the apostle Paul taught in apastors’ conference held in Ephesus! He taught the pastors there that theyshould work and support the poor. “In everything I showed you that by workinghard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the LordJesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”(Acts 20:35) That’s it! A pastor must not be supported by a member ofhis congregation who’s poorer than him. Instead, the pastor must give to thepoorer members! (Any other instruction given anywhere else – such asGal 6:6 – regarding the support of teaching pastors must be subject to thisgeneral regulation.)

“Then why did the apostle receive gifts from the ‘super poor’Philippi Christians?” you might ask. Paul was a prisoner in Rome. Whateverriches he might have had at other times, as a prisoner in an alien city, Paulwas poorer than the Philippi Christians who faced extreme poverty. ThePhilippians jumped at that opportunity and gave to Paul! That was commended byPaul in his epistle.

Pentecostal preaching about God’s blessings and “prosperity”should thus be tempered with these Biblical attitudes towards giving andtowards receiving blessings from God. We will then understand the real purposeof God-given prosperity. Thus, we will be better stewards of the resources Godplaces at our command.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ brings total transformation to anindividual and to a society. Such a transformation is not just aboutdeliverance from sin, the destruction of criminal networks, and the reductionof crime. The gospel also brings about a better work ethic to a nation. It canhelp a nation to live within its means and overcome its debt (and the USA canafford to learn from this!). It can convert a perpetually borrowingindividual/country into a liberal donor! The gospel is the only hope foreradicating poverty. The Gospel goes beyond charity to justice – to bring aboutradical transformation to our world. And it all starts at the level of theindividual!

An "Indian Christian" Housewarming

2011-11-27T23:13:00.001+05:30

I had a wonderful time today in the outskirts of Thrissur town, the cultural capital of Kerala in southern India. An elderly couple invited me to their housewarming function. Even though they are followers of Jesus Christ, unlike their relatives, I found much love and co-operation between members of this extended family.

There were no pastors or priests to conduct any religious ceremony or to deliver long-winded sermons. A lamp was lit by the couple. Although there are 'Indian' religious overtones to the lighting of a traditional brass lamp, there are several ways of adapting this to reflect Biblical truths. Jesus is the light of the world and His disciples are called to be like a lighted lamp. The church of Jesus Christ is represented in the Bible as a lighted lamp.

An overflowing bushel represents prosperity and God's blessing. Christians all over Kerala make it a point to boil some milk before they cook any other thing in the new house. Milk being the primary (or first) human food, this practice is quite non-controversial. They let the milk boil over to usher in prosperity.

Soon after, the whole gathering was invited to join us in prayer. I read Psalm 91. Those gathered there listened intently.

After a brief introduction, we prayed and dedicated the house for the glory of God. This was followed by a typical Kerala-style vegetarian feast served on banana leaves!

“For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother …”

2011-11-14T18:10:00.001+05:30

Genesis 2:23-24. ‘The man said, "This isnow bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, becauseshe was taken out of Man." For this reason a man shall leave his fatherand his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.'

When senior pastors in Kerala, India, hear someonetalk about Genesis 2:24, they see red. These Malayalam speaking Pentecostalpastors who solemnize marriages have taken it upon themselves to attack anyonewho correctly interprets the verse, even during wedding ceremonies.

What’s so irksome about Genesis 2:24? It justsays that a man [who marries] will leave his father and mother and will bejoined to his wife and live in conjugal bliss. We are told that in thisapparently harmless verse resides the power to destroy Indian “family values.”According to Indian “family values,” a son who marries must live in hisfather’s house. (In some matriarchal societies, this rule applies to thedaughter as well!) Genesis 2:24 does not prima facie gel in with thistradition. Therefore they bend backwards to interpret it thus: “This verse doesnot talk about a literal ‘leaving.’ You can stay in your father’s house andstill ‘cleave’ to your wife and give her prime position in your life!”

Who did ever teach these preachers the art ofHermeneutics? If the “leave” in Genesis 2:24 is just figurative instead ofbeing literal, then the “cleave” too should be taken figuratively.“They-shall-become-one-flesh” too should not be taken literally. The son and thedaughter-in-law can then – in a very “Indian” way – sleep in two differentrooms and consider figuratively that they are “one flesh!”

Genesis 2:24 is as plain as daylight. Itdefines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It defines a familyas consisting of a husband and a wife! (Even a childless couple is a completefamily because children and parenting are an added blessing.) In addition, thisverse tells us a man who marries becomes the head of a new family. He moves outof the sphere of his father’s and mother’s authority to establish his ownfamily where he will be king and his wife will be queen. Such a transition ispossible only if the son moves out of his father’s house. As long as he remainsin his father’s house, he will continue to be ruled by his father. The twofamilies will share the same kitchen—a sure recipe for disaster inmother-in-law – daughter-in-law relationship! Although this is one of thestaples in Indian cinema, our pastors who don’t see “evil” cinema areunperturbed by this. After all, they might argue, didn’t God createmothers-in-law to tame these shrews called daughters-in-law?

What about the great Indian “joint family?” Weread in newspapers about the “unfortunate” transition that is shaking up India.Joint families are giving way to nuclear families! I see it as a positive thingbecause “joint families” aren’t such a paradise as its supporters claim.

An Indian joint family is called a “Hindujoint family” or a “Hindu Undivided Family” (HUF). It consists of a man and hiswife, their sons, daughters-in-law, unmarried daughters, widowed daughters, andgrandchildren. These are the characteristics of a HUF:

· The family is headed by a patriarch, usuallythe oldest male called "Karta", who makes all decisions oneconomic and social matters on behalf of the entire family. All memberslive under one roof.

· All members share the same kitchen. Thepatriarch’s wife generally exerts control over the kitchen, child rearing andminor religious practices.

· Family ties are given more importance thanmarital ties.

· Three generations living together (thoughoften two or more brothers live together, or father and son live together orall the descendants of male live together).

· Income and expenditure in a common pool -property held together.

· A common place of worship.

· No division of property until the death of theKarta (head of family or older male person).

("Hindu JointFamily," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org, accessed on Nov 14, 2011).

I don’t understand how a Bible-believingChristian can support a paradigm called Hindu Undivided Family. Almost everyfeature of HUF goes against the spirit of Genesis 2:24. The most unbiblicalfeature is this: “Family ties are given more importance than marital ties.”This means that a son will be more attached to his father and mother than tohis wife. (Should we look anywhere else for the prime cause of mother-in-law –daughter-in-law clashes?) Is this not just the opposite of what Genesis 2:24says? If the patriarch is the one who takes all financial decisions, then aren’t hismarried sons just puppets or slaves? How then can our pastors say that a sonand his wife can maintain the integrity and autonomy of their family even whenthey live with their parents?

In 2005, I was invited to speak in awedding service in Bangalore. I clearly explained Genesis 2:24 to the couple and totheir parents. I urged the parents to release their son and daughter to start anew family of their own instead of ruling over them. Soon after my speech, thesenior pastor of the Malayali church did his best to annul what I said. (It isnot unusual for grey-haired pot-bellied pastors to ride rough shod over youngerpreachers!) But his crass language and desperation left a black mark over an otherwise beautiful wedding. He said, “It is written, ‘Children, obey yourparents.’ Don’t follow these latest fads. You two are to obey your parents aslong as they are alive.”

The Bible commands “children” to obey theirparents. The problem with children is that they grow up. They cease to bechildren after a certain age. The man and woman who got married that eveningwere not children; otherwise, it would have been a ‘child marriage.’ Eventhough we've stopped the practice of “child marriage” we still treat youngmen as “boys” and young women as “girls.” No wonder parents wish to control andorchestrate everything – from selection of life-partners to the clothes thatare worn on the wedding day.

Recently, I was at meeting where a popular,well-travelled Keralite preacher said, “The Bible promotes joint families.Those who parade Genesis 2:24 in favour of nuclear families must know this. Ason who marries should live with his parents. How else will Psalm 128:6 befulfilled? His parents must see their children’s children!” The audience seemedto applaud this great argument! This preacher fears that Genesis 2:24 will leadChristian men and women to neglect their aging parents. It is this fear thatmakes most of these Kerala preachers react so sharply and mistakenly againstGenesis 2:24.

Let’s face the facts. When a son gets married,his father and mother are usually in their fifties or sixties. The parents caneasily afford to let the son move out and make a nest of his own. (Even birdsdo that, don’t they?) Ideally, parents should be allowed to live on their own as long as they can take care of themselves. By the time the son and hiswife get established, or by the time they complete their family, their parentswould have grown older and weaker. At such a time as that, the son can bringhis parents to his house. There is a whole lot of difference between a sonliving in his father’s house and a father living in his son’s house! There isa whole lot of difference between a daughter-in-law getting kicked around inher mother-in-law’s house and a mother-in-law living in the daughter-in-law’shouse!

Very often Western families are seen in a badlight in India. We are told that Westerners don’t look after their agingparents. Unlike most Indian pastors who go abroad and live in Indian homesabroad, I’ve lived with Westerners in their homes as their guest. I’ve seen howEnglish families look after their aging parents. There may be exceptions butexceptions prove the rule. Our fear that our Indian families are going the“western way” is unfounded and unreasonable.

Genesis 2:24 therefore does not promoteneglect of elderly parents. Instead, it gives a young family enoughspace to get established so that they can look after their parents when theneed arises.

We are reminded that retirement homes or“old-age homes” are increasing in number in the state of Kerala. Elderly peoplein increasing numbers are getting “dumped” in these homes. What is to be blamedfor this trend? The easiest target that’s to be found is obviously the “nuclearfamily.” In Genesis 2:24, these militant preachers see a plausible Scripturalbasis for sustaining nuclear families. Therefore, they deliberately suppressthe truth in this verse. I wish to submit that the nuclear family is not to beblamed for the apparent rise in the number of old-age homes or for the neglectof aging parents.

In Kerala, when a son gets married, he and hiswife leave to the city where they live and work. This is not because theyfollow Genesis 2:24. Most young people have to leave Kerala to find a good job.(Our pastors are only too glad to pray and send these young folk off.) Once a year or once in few months, the couple visits their parents. If they liveoutside India, this reunion might take place only once in few years. Kerala hasa number of such elderly couples who stand guard to 'empty nests.' Their onlycompanion might be a dog or a cow that they tend so dearly. (Some of theseelderly parents are alone in Kerala because they chose to settle down in Keralaafter a long career in alien cities.)

“How cruel can these sons and daughters be?Can’t they look after their parents? This generation has become so corrupt.”This is how pastors, journalists and politicians condemn Kerala’s sons anddaughters who live and work out of the state or country. Should we be so naiveto believe this rhetoric? If these sons and daughters should return to theirnative towns and villages in Kerala, will these critics provide jobs or asteady income to them?

The best thing for aging couples is to leavetheir native place in Kerala and join their son or daughter in anotherstate/country. The sons/daughters might find it extremely difficult to relocate to Kerala to look aftertheir parents. Why do we imagine that these sons/daughters never invite theirparents to come over and live with them? Most elderly parents who live alone in Kerala do not wish torelocate. They are so much in love with their “soil” or with the house that they built. They may also be too proudto live under their son’s or daughter’s roof. Should these unwilling parents be forciblyrelocated to their son’s or daughter’s home? I don’t think so. In extremecases, these parents have to be admitted to an “old-age” home. There are sons/daughters/ daughters-in-law who wilfully neglect their parents even if theseparents are willing to relocate to distant cities. Generally, this is not thecase. Not all old age solitude is cause by neglect. It is often a result of elderlypeople’s romantic notions about Kerala or a result of their unwillingness to betheir son’s dependents.

The Bible should be the light that guides us.Tradition and cultural practices must be judged in the light of the God’s Word.The Indian society needs the light of God’s Word. So, instead of forcingChristians to adopt the Hindu Undivided Family pattern, pastors and preachersmust encourage them to obey God’s Word. Only then will the Indian society betransformed. At least, young Indian wives will be liberated from harassment from demanding mothers-in-law.

Fundraising and Integrity

2011-10-30T23:29:00.000+05:30

If you are the kind thatsmiles when you hear the two words "integrity" and"fundraising," you probably belong to a large group of Christians whowonder whether these two words can appear together in one sentence. It iscommonly thought that only those fundraisers who shun integrity and use deviousmeans are successful in fundraising. The sad fact is that the actions of a vastmajority of leaders strengthen this popular suspicion.

Leaders of churches,not-for-profit organizations, seminaries, etc., are under tremendous pressureto raise funds. People evaluate an organization on the basis of its activitiesand growth in various parameters. If an organization should be rich inactivities and should register numerical growth, it would need a good supply ofmoney. This is sufficient to test any leader. The strength of his/her moral fibergets stretched to its breaking point. Day in and day out, they have just onequestion in their minds, "How can I raise more money?" They cease tosee people as God sees people. They begin to see people as "walkingwallets." The first thought that comes to their minds when they see someoneis, "How can I convince him to part with some money?"

Many leaders give in tobaser instincts to keep the cash register ringing. Honesty is the first casualty;falsehood creeps into the system. Some go to the extent of "whatever ittakes" to get money from various donors. After all, all these leaders arefishing in the same waters for money! If one has to get money, he has to makesure that some others don't get it.

For example, the head of amission organization has to convince a potential donor to sponsor his organizationinstead of another. A neat presentation accompanied by some good wining anddining might do the trick. The graphs have to be very precise. The number of"workers" or "seminary graduates" or "orphans"(depending upon the nature of work) must be shown to increase year after year.To ensure a positive slope on the graph, many leaders go shopping! They doleout money to workers who belong to another organization saying, "Youremain with your organization; only think, I'll include your name in myteam." Who can count the number of such "workers" who are on thepayroll of several Christian organizations? Poor donors! They don't ever gettogether to verify these numbers.

Many philanthropists indeveloped countries are concerned about the plight of underprivileged childrenin India. When they meet an Indian "leader," they ask, "Whydon't you start an orphanage in India?" Seeing the golden opportunity,some "leaders" fall for it. When they return to India, they find itextremely hard to locate legally available "orphans" (those surrendered by a parent/relatives). There are allegations that someorphanages hire agents to supply them children from poor households. Offeringfoster care is not bad. But what if we get drawn into the nets ofchild-traffickers? Of course, poor children stand to benefit from charity. Butdoes the end justify the means?

Some of thesephilanthropists and NGOs are very secular minded. They say, "We willsponsor your charity if you will not preach Christ." Some leaders mightget drawn into this trap to get the money. But they soon realize that they havesold their souls. They then, with a guilty conscience, resort to sharing theirfaith with those under their care.

When will we realize thatGod doesn't look at an organization’s budget to determine its success? Goddemands an account for what He has given us—not for what is in other people'spockets. If God has given you money, praise Him and work with it. If He givesyou only a little, praise Him and be faithful in that little. This will bring awhole new perspective to fundraising.

Whatever has happened to"faith" missions—those that upheld the good old assertion that God's work done in God'sway will not lack his supplies? Christian leaders in India seem to have lostsight of the rich heritage of faith that George Muller and Hudson Taylor havepassed on to us. These mighty men of faith did not even wish to beg for money.They did not wish to publish their needs. They knew that they served the mightyGod who knew every need. If we can't match their faith, and if think that weneed to let potential sponsors know of opportunities, can't we at least behonest and sincere and dignified in the whole exercise?

From "Faith Leaders" to "Proud Leaders" to "Fleeing Leaders"

2011-10-14T21:55:00.001+05:30

The recently concluded "Faith Leaders Church of God" convention at Kochi, Kerala, christened "Music Splash 2011" is in the news for all the wrong reasons.

The people of Kerala woke up on Thursday, 13 October 2011, to read/watch a rather alarming news - "Lookout notice for US Evangelists"; "Detained US Pastor goes missing in Kochi." Christians who had attended the three-day gospel meetings were embarrassed and confused.

News reports varied in detail. It was reported that the Kochi city police came to the meeting venue - the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium grounds - on the final evening to stop Rev. William A. Lee from preaching at this public meeting. Newspapers reported that Rev. Lee escaped from the stage after he sniffed trouble. Rev. Lee was on a tourist visa that did not permit him to preach at a public meeting. [Rev. Lee later claimed that he was unaware of such a restriction placed on tourists.] The police wanted to deport him for violating this visa condition. However, having found that he had fled the city, the police filed a "First Information Report" against him. They also intimated all airports in the country to prevent his flight from India. Having thus been cornered, latest reports suggest, Rev. Lee was willing to surrender before the Kerala police.

Rev. Lee seated on a stage with leaders of "Faith Leaders Church of God"
(Picture from Faithleaders website.)

Unlike Rev. Lee, the internationally acclaimed singer Dr Ron Kenoly and his woman associate did not flee or abscond. They were allowed to leave India on Thursday without getting blacklisted or deported!

Interestingly, the "Faith Leaders" who invited Dr. Ron Kenoly and Rev. William A. Lee went underground. They switched off their mobile phones. The police were unable to contact them. (Even the FaithLeaders.org website seems to have pulled down some key pages that reveal information about their leaders!) So much for "faith leaders!"

The police however was in possession of Rev. Lee's mobile phone number and made efforts to track him.

I am sure that the police in Kochi were aware of Rev. Lee's stay in Kerala. It is reported that the police advised him to leave the country without preaching in any meeting. We don't know if this is true. If true, then Rev. Lee and/or his hosts were bent on testing the Kerala Police. Both Rev. Lee and the organizers are responsible for shaming themselves and the Christians of Kerala. Rev. Lee should have known that he's not allowed to preach in public meetings when he is in the country on a "tourist visa."

Although it was reported that the Central Intelligence Bureau had informed the city police about Rev. Lee's violation of visa conditions, I doubt whether the local police needed such inputs. Why would the city police need inputs from a federal intelligence bureau when the organizers of the "Music Splash" put up huge billboards in the city announcing the arrival of Rev. Lee and Dr Kenoly? The billboards shouted out loud that Rev William Lee would preach the Word. How could the organizers be so bold and presumptuous as to announce that an American on tourist visa would preach on "God's Procedural Justice?" What an irony! Were the organizers testing God's Procedural Justice or were they testing their money power, assuming that local law enforcers would look the other way? (Each of these billboards costs a fortune by Indian standards. It's not just these billboards. There were other evidences that revealed the deep pockets of the organizers.)

Giant Billboards were put up at vantage points in Kochi portraying a father-son duo as the promoters

The police in Kochi knew very well that Rev. Lee was on a tourist visa and that he was scheduled to preach at a public religious meeting. Yet, they looked the other way and let him preach for three days. What then forced the police to crack down on Rev. Lee during the final hour on the final evening of "Music Splash 2011?"

On the final evening, as on the previous two nights, Dr Ron Kenoly sang worship songs and led the crowd in worship. A team of police officials arrived at the meeting venue and warned the organizers that Rev. Lee should not be allowed to preach while he holds a tourist visa. They also wanted the meeting to be wound up by 8:30 pm.

Before Rev. Lee came on stage to preach, one bearded local pastor, came on stage and engaged in a vulgar exercise of boasting, to put it lightly. His speech implied that the Music Splash 2011 was a program designed and executed to highlight the glories of his relatively new denomination. It sounded like, "Look, we can do it without the help of any other denomination!" Christians who were present in that meeting were quite upset by this man's talk. They understood one thing clearly: This meeting was not about God's glory or about the salvation of souls. It was about glorifying a denomination. The expensive hoardings, state of the art photography, camera jib crane, dolly, high tech DJ-lighting, laser projectors, high-end sound system, flashy luxury sedans, the showcasing of "imported" preachers--all these added up to show that "Faith Leaders Church of God" is a rich and powerful organization. No wonder these "faith leaders" did not team up with any other church or Inter-church fellowship in Kochi City or Kerala for "Music Splash 2011."

This local pastor went on to compare his organisation with other churches in Kerala. He said, "People who organize crusades in this land collect money from Christians. But, as you see here tonight, we do not even collect an offertory. We don't come to you with a begging bowl." (This is not a verbatim translation; this is the import of what he said.) This vulgar statement turned off the crowd. It was a cheap display of organizational wealth. I wish Dr. Ron Kenoly and Rev. William Lee understood Malayalam! The reputation of these preachers were put on the block by a handful of unscrupulous Christians. Our man wasn't through yet. Instead of silently complying with the police directive to stop the meeting by 8:30 pm, this arrogant pastor shouted out his folly, challenging the authority of the police. He said something to this effect in the local language, "Some time ago, a couple of policemen came here to tell us that the meeting should be wound up by 8:30 pm. I wish God would touch these men ...#@$%^&*** (speech in other tongues)" That was the last straw that broke the camel's back, according to eye witnesses.

Minutes after Rev. Lee started his sermon, police teams arrived at the venue to pull up Rev. Lee on charges of violating his visa conditions. Rev. Lee - following the advice of his hosts - escaped via backstage. If Rev. Lee had just stood his ground, the police would have politely taken him to his hotel and then put him on a flight to the US. Absconding! That's the last thing a Christian preacher should do when he/she is caught on the wrong side of the law. Probably, Rev. Lee feared that he would be arrested and tortured or that his story would make another episode of "Jailed Abroad." It's only criminals who go into hiding in this land. The organizers of Music Splash did a great disservice to the gospel by asking Rev. Lee to disappear from the scene.

Several websites reported on Oct 13 and 14 that the Rev. Lee was absconding. However, for the past 12 hours (Oct 13), the media is relatively silent about the issue - except for random reports that Rev. Lee had fled Kerala state. Where could he have gone at night from Kerala? Even though it was reported that Rev. Lee would surrender before Kerala Police by Friday, there's no sign of him. Press photographers and reporters waited at the Palarivattom Police Station till late in the afternoon to catch a glimpse of Rev. Lee. But today's (Oct 13) shroud over the whole episode suggests that there's more here than what meets the eye!

This is a good lesson for preachers who intend to come to India. They should seek to be on the right side of the law - especially if they intend to preach in public meetings. Visa rules that place restrictions on Christian missionaries or preachers may be here to stay. There's no use protesting against such discrimination or "selective enforcement of law" unless the Indian Church rises unitedly to fight these funny rules.

Update on October 15, 2011:

Rev. William Arthur Lee Jr., being taken to a court room in Kochi on Oct 15 2011. (Courtsey: The Hindu.)

Rev. Lee was arrested and produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's court in Kochi. He was remanded to judicial custody till Oct 18. That means, he must have been sent to a sub-jail.The unscrupulous organizers of "Music Splash 2011" are still absconding! (Report from an English Daily) What dependable friends!

"At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me; may it not be counted against them. But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me (2Ti 4:16-17) May the good Lord comfort and encourage Rev. Lee and give him a safe passage from here!

Update on Oct 17, 2011:
Rev. Lee was remanded to judicial custody on Saturday, Oct 15 2011. He was therefore taken to the Ernakulam Sub-jail. (To know about conditions in the subjail, click here.) By Saturday evening, Rev. Lee complained of chest pain. He had informed the court that he needed medical attention for a heart condition. So, the jail authorities took him to the Government General Hospital from where he was referred to the Government Medical College in Trissur, 70 km from Kochi.

Today, I visited the court of the First Class Judicial Magistrate. Rev. Lee's lawyers requested the magistrate to advance the hearing of Rev. Lee's bail petition by a day. The court however turned down this request. The bail plea will come up for hearing tomorrow (Oct 18).

When I was in the court room, I heard a loud blast. No one in the court seemed to be perturbed! A woman whispered to another, "There's a temple adjacent to the court complex." Temples in India blast loud crackers routinely as a part of their rituals. They don't get penalized for contempt of court. However, if your mobile phone should ring in a court room, you could be sent to jail.

Update on Oct 18, 2011:
Counsels for Rev. Lee moved a bail application. The court heard it today. Today was a day of hectic parleys! Finally, by 5:15 pm, Rev. was brought to the court from Thrissur Medical College. The court asked him a question about the violation of a visa regulation. Rev. answered that this was the first time he was getting into trouble; he pleaded for leniency.
The court sentenced him to simple imprisonment for three days and ordered him to pay INR 10,000 as fine. Taking into account the three days of judicial remand as simple imprisonment, the court ordered that he be deported from the country.
Several pastors belonging to the "Faith Leaders Church of God" were present at the court. Their leaders are still absconding. Instead of owning up their fault and apologizing to the Christian community for the embarrassment caused, these pastors point fingers at rival denominations for setting them up!
Dr. Billy Graham's example is truly great. He wouldn't arrange a crusade in any city without securing the unanimous support of all (evangelical) churches. May the Lord bring greater unity among His people!

Don't the Palestinians Deserve a State?

2011-09-30T02:49:00.000+05:30

Last week, President Mahmood Abbas presented a formal application to the UN for recognition as an independent state. India, along with a number of countries, supported this application. For once, India got her act right because she sided with the Palestinians who have suffered untold torture and injustice at the hands of a high-handed Jewish state. The European Parliament too has affirmed the Palestinian application.

There are probably only two sets of people who wish that Palestine should be denied statehood. The first group consists of conservative Jews. Reports in the Israeli media claim that around 100,000 American Jews have signed a petition addressed to President Barak Obama, asking him to use the US veto to deny Palestinians an independent state.

The second group certainly consists of Christians who hold a mistaken and misplaced view that Israel has a divine right to Palestine as their homeland. The New Testament says that even Abraham, the forefather of all Israelites, looked to heaven to inherit a heavenly promised land! Conservative Christians who carry the New Testament seem to be oblivious to the reality of progressive revelation and to the resultant power of the New Testament to redefine many concepts of the Old.

The seeds of the many revolutionary thoughts found in the New Testament were already sown during Old Testament times. Only think, many "stiff necked" Jews did not understand God's syllabus! It took a terrible storm and a giant fish - all controlled by Yahweh - to get an unwilling Jonah to preach God's love and justice to the Assyrians who lived in their capital city of Nineveh. Even after discharging his duty to God, Jonah could not understand God's love to all humanity.

The prophet Amos minced no words when he voiced God's impartial love to all nations. I don't think there's another verse in the Bible that snubs Jewish pride and sense of exclusivity better than Amos 9:7. "Are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O people of Israel? says the LORD. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?" (Amos 9:7). The land of "Palestine" gets its name from Philistines. God is no respecter of persons or nations.

Israel's right to Palestine was always conditional to obedience to God. While reading God's words to Abraham in Genesis, we may not find any condition there. But the Pentateuch doesn't end with Genesis. God weeded out 600,00 of Abraham's descendents during the grand Exodus that lasted 40 years. Of that generation, only Caleb and Joshua entered the Promised Land. Many centuries later, the land "vomitted" the tribes of Israel. Only three tribes (who constituted the nation of Judah) returned to Palestine. The ten tribes that constituted Israel never returned. The Jews who returned to Palestine learned to share the land with settlers other nations.

Whenever the Old Testament predicted an exile or punishment upon the Jews, a promise of restoration was given along with it. However, after John the Baptist and Jesus predicted Israel's and Jerusalem's destruction, no promise of restoration was given. In fact, Jesus even took away their privileges as God's special people when He said, "I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produce the fruits of the kingdom. (Mat 21:43) They can enter it today only through Jesus Christ, like any other Gentile.

Jesus never took sides with Jewish Zealots. He never gave hopes of political liberation from Rome although Jews of his time were living in exile in their own land. Instead, he shocked them by asking them to leave their houses and lands to follow Him! Jesus offered the real Promised Land to Jews - the heavenly Paradise where they could sup with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Those who rejected that offer, Jesus said, would be shut out in eternal darkness. "I tell you, many will come from east and west and will eat with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the heirs of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Mat 8:11-12 NRS) A Jew who believes in Jesus has already set foot in the Promised Land offered by Jesus - whether he's in Moscow or Romania or New York.

It is against the spirit of the Gospel to say that Jews - who rejected the Messiah of God - have a God-given claim to Palestine. It is common knowledge that the State of Israel was formed in 1948 after much lobbying and unmentionable tactics played by out by Jews who never feared God. Godly Jews were always against these methods. Christians must stop portraying the God of the Bible as a partner and promoter to the lawless antics of an unrepentant people.

"But shouldn't there by a State called Israel in order that Biblical prophecies may be fulfilled? Shouldn't there be a Temple in Jerusalem before Biblical predictions of Second Coming can happen?" Such are the questions asked by conservative Christians! It is God's responsibility to fulfill His prophecies, not ours. Predictions of tribulation and Second Coming given in the New Testament certainly require the presence of a Temple to be fulfilled. These predictions were made by Jesus and John and Paul when the Temple was already standing! And Jesus said emphatically -"Verily, Verily" - that his predictions would come to pass in that very generation (Matt 24:34). And we, foolish as we are, think that a new Jewish Temple has to be built for the fulfillment of Jesus' predictions! It doesn't even occur to us that a restoration of a Jewish Temple and animal sacrifices would be like spitting on the face of Jesus, the Lamb of God! This Judeo-Christian insistence on a new Temple can even lead to another World War.

Palestinians who lived in the land for the past 2000 years have suffered torture and murder at the hands of Jews for more than sixty years (Read, Grace Halsell's article). These were not reported in the world's media because most media houses are owned by Jews. The US talks tough against countries that violate human rights and religious freedoms. Why was Israel never put on that list of "countries of special concern?" Try preaching the gospel in Israel. Hands similar to those that stoned Stephen will pull you up!

The long and short of this is: Palestinians deserve to live with dignity in the land that's home for them for the past 2000 years. Those who oppose a UN resolution for grant of statehood to Palestine will lose their honour. They also lose their right and opportunity to preach the gospel to all nations, especially to the nations in the 10/40 window. America's Israel-centric foreign policy is the biggest hurdle in the path of the Gospel.

"I will" - God's decisions to Match Israel's

2011-09-24T22:09:00.006+05:30

I read the initial chapters of Hosea. Hosea and Amos prophesied to the northern kingdom of Israel in 8th century BC, admonishing them to return to Yahweh.

In the second chapter of Hosea, it is interesting to see how God responded to each of Israel's decisions. When Israel said, "I will go away", God also had some things to say. God decided to cut off Israel's prosperity so that she would be forced to seek her "first husband."

Later, when Israel said, "I will return", God responds with several "I will"s to bless her.

Israel’s decision

⁵' I will go after my lovers; they give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink.

God’s response

³I will strip her naked and expose her as in the day she was born, and make her like a wilderness, and turn her into a parched land, and kill her with thirst.

⁴ Upon her children also I will have no pity, because they are children of whoredom.

⁶ Therefore I will hedge up her way with thorns; and I will build a wall against her, so that she cannot find her paths. ⁷ She shall pursue her lovers, but not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them. Then she shall say, "I will go and return to my first husband, for it was better with me then than now." ⁸ She did not know that it was I who gave her the grain, the wine, and the oil, and who lavished upon her silver and gold that they used for Baal.

⁹ Therefore I will take back my grain in its time, and my wine in its season; and I will take away my wool and my flax, which were to cover her nakedness.

¹⁰ Now I will uncover her shame in the sight of her lovers, and no one shall rescue her out of my hand.

¹¹ I will put an end to all her mirth, her festivals, her new moons, her sabbaths, and all her appointed festivals.

¹² I will lay waste her vines and her fig trees, of which she said, "These are my pay, which my lovers have given me." I will make them a forest, and the wild animals shall devour them.

¹³ I will punish her for the festival days of the Baals, when she offered incense to them and decked herself with her ring and jewelry, and went after her lovers, and forgot me, says the LORD.

Israel’s Repentance

^7bI will go and return to my first husband, for it was better with me then than now

God’s response

¹⁴ Therefore, I will now allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her.

¹⁵ From there I will give her her vineyards, and make the Valley of Achor a door of hope. There she shall respond as in the days of her youth, as at the time when she came out of the land of Egypt.

¹⁶ On that day, says the LORD, you will call me, "My husband," and no longer will you call me, "My Baal."

¹⁷ For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth, and they shall be mentioned by name no more.

¹⁸ I will make for you a covenant on that day with the wild animals, the birds of the air, and the creeping things of the ground; and I will abolish the bow, the sword, and war from the land; and I will make you lie down in safety.

¹⁹ And I will take you for my wife forever;

I will take you for my wife in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love, and in mercy.

²⁰ I will take you for my wife in faithfulness; and you shall know the LORD.

²¹ On that day I will answer, says the LORD, I will answer the heavens and they shall answer the earth;

²²and the earth shall answer the grain, the wine, and the oil, and they shall answer Jezreel; ²³ and I will sow him for myself in the land. And I will have pity on Lo-ruhamah, and I will say to Lo-ammi, "You are my people"; and he shall say, "You are my God."

Where do you stand in your relationship with God? Have you forgotten Him? If so, it's time to return to God and to respond to Him, remembering our first love to Him. God's love is forever.

Test What You Hear

2011-09-21T22:37:00.010+05:30

I recently came across the writings of a "young and dynamic" evangelist from India. He claims to have received a divine calling upon his life to become an evangelist or preacher, when he was a child. However, I do not understand why he went to Journalism school and later to B-School instead of going to a Bible school.

Is a Bible-School training indispensable for ministry? Training is essential. Whether it's obtained in a Bible School or at home, some form of theological training is indispensable. It is wise to set apart time and go for studies/training without other engagements. Not all who go to Bible school overcome their frailties. Those who do not continue their personal study after obtaining a theological degree are not far removed from those who haven't had any training.

There are "doctors" in India who practice medicine without any training in medicine! We call them quacks and the State prosecutes them from time to time because they are a hazard to public health. Untrained preachers who undertake self-styled theological exercises are a hazard to the Body of Christ. At the least, those who claim to be ministers of the gospel/Word of God must be open to continuous learning and correction.

What happens when preachers refuse to do that? They come up with funny teachings. Here's a piece of theology from the pen of our "young and dynamic" preacher. My attempt to correct him failed. It is my duty now to warn the Body of Christ. I quote below:

Is there something known as a ‘father’s demon’? What does it mean?

Simply look through the Bible and you will see many repetitive patterns of sins, sicknesses and circumstances being passed on from one generation to the other.

Abraham’s weak heart told him to call his wife as his sister to keep himself alive. His son, Isaac, behaves the same way when faced with a similar situation and ends up calling his wife as his sister as well.

Also, the cycle of famine in the life of Abraham repeats after many decades in the life of his son, Isaac.

What is even scarier is the behaviour and characteristic similarities that are passed down from one generation to another. Many characters in the Old Testament are proof of this: Sarah was barren, then Rebekah was barren; for both David and Solomon, women were their weakness; and many in the line of kings in books of Kings followed in their father’s footsteps of idol worship.

Dad is an alcoholic; the son ends up being the same. Mother suffers from diabetes, and so does her daughter. Debts that chased the parents are now after the children. The same demon that has been tormenting the parents is now haunting the children!

You cannot defeat something that you do not believe exists. Whether you believe it or not, there are certain issues that do not go away unless you identify and break that hold over your life.

A young man held my hands and wept the other day saying that he was struggling with a similar type of destructive anger that his dad had. Another young man, who confessed that as he grew up watching his father being a womanizer, now struggles with the same issue.

I never imagined that people could come up with such a strange explanation for human behavior. The Bible doesn't explain why Isaac followed Abraham's example in going down to Egypt or in lying about his wife. Similarly, the Bible is silent about what drove Solomon to mega polygamy or about the cause of Rebecca's barrenness. And yet, this charismatic preacher had the audacity to explain all these in terms of "The Father's demon!"

There are several indicators of danger in the above write-up:

The explanation offered for Isaac's or Solomon's behavior (Father's demon) is extra-Scriptural and even anti-Biblical.
This explanation is extrapolated to explain not only sins but also "sicknesses and circumstance."
The "father's demon" is used to explain how Sarah and Rebecca were barren! (This demon should then be re-named as "mother-in-law's demon")
"Many characters in the Old Testament are proof of this" - does this preacher have any idea of what a "proof" is? The very thing he attempts to explain becomes proof!
This preacher cleverly avoids several details in the Old Testament that goes contrary to his theory. Isaac did not take his wife Rebecca's servant as his own wife although his father Abraham did so. There were several kings in Judea and Israel who departed from the father's evil ways and did what was good in the eyes of God.
Instead of letting individuals take responsibility for their behavior, this kind of foolish theories help in shifting the blame to some "father's demon." Sounds more like a Buddhist theory. The reference to "cycle of famine" definitely points to an Eastern religious mindset.
The dynamic preacher forces people to shut off their minds and believe what he says - "You cannot defeat something that you do not believe exists." Wonderful. He conjures up an extra-biblical theory about a non-existent "father's demon" and wants his followers to believe in it and then defeat it !!! He may not know that Jesus defeated, disarmed and bound the Devil. "Defeating" the "father's demon", he says, is a Christian's job.
He jumps from the Bible to people's lives and offers a number examples to "illustrate" his theory. Not even once does he "prove" his theory. He does not even entertain the possibility of another view that can explain why sons follow their father's footsteps in sin.

Without a second thought, the followers of any miracle-working, anointed preacher swallow whatever their heroes say - hook, line and sink. They do not even ask how their favorite preacher arrived at such conclusions. Miracles and the operation of spiritual gifts are taken as tokens of God's approval for all that they teach.

When we come across any view or claim, we need ask ourselves a few questions:

What is this writer (or, even an advertisement) claiming?
What are the presuppositions (supporting statements) behind this claim?
Are these presuppositions true?
What are the sources of these suppositions?
Is the conclusion or claim a logical result of the presuppositions?

Let's analyse one of the claims given above. I've tried to list presuppositions stated explicitly and those that are implicit in the text.

Presupposition: Abraham went to Egypt to outlive a famine.
Presupposition: Abraham lied about his wife to an Egyptian ruler.

Presupposition: Isaac is Abraham's son
Presupposition: Isaac went to Egypt to outlive a famine.
Presupposition: Isaac lied about his wife to an Egyptian ruler.
Intermediate Conclusion: Sons imitate their father's sins/behaviour
Intermediate Conclusion: Sons go through their father's misfortunes/diseases

Presupposition: Demons/Curses are the cause behind every misfortune/ sins/ disease
Intermediate Conclusion: Demons/Curses are the cause behind Abraham's misfortune, his journey to Egypt and his lying

Presupposition: If a son goes through a circumstance similar to his father's; or if he commits sins once committed by his father, then, it must be a demon that makes him sin/suffer.
Presupposition: The demon(s) that afflict the son must be the very demons that afflicted the father.
Presupposition: A demon that resided in a father or a curse that afflicted the father can and will pass on to son(s).
Intermediate Conclusion: Abraham's demon/curses afflicted Isaac and replicated the sins/circumstances of Abraham's life in Isaac's life.

Final Conclusion/Generalisation: A father's demon replicates misfortunes/sins/diseases in the life of a son.

(The argument in the quoted text continues ... to show how such a son can be delivered. For saving space and time, I stop with this.)

If you carefully direct the questions that I listed at these presuppositions and conclusions, you will discover that several of the key presuppositions are false. They are baseless. And hence, the conclusion too is flawed, illogical, and terrible.

One of the first things that I teach my students - before I teach theology - is the art of Christian thinking. A Christian's mind should be a renewed mind that applies God-given faculties (including logic and reasoning) to every thing he believes/encounters. Every true Christian teaching will pass the test of logic. Is faith contrary to logic? No! Faith is perfectly logical. God's thoughts are not illogical. They might go beyond human thinking; but they never are contrary to reason.

My hope and prayer is that Christians and their preachers/teachers will learn to think right and to test every teaching. Let's glorify God through what we teach and believe.

Team Anna: Anti-Corruption or Anti-Democracy?

2011-08-16T17:18:00.002+05:30

As Praise The Almighty goes to press, we get reports of the detention of Team Anna and their supporters. As a well-orchestrated drama, Anna and his supporters have rejected an offer of bail. They have been shifted under judicial custody toTihar jail. Life has come full circle, at least for Kiran Bedi, who was once upon a time the officer in charge of Tihar jail.

Following their initial agitation, the government of India co-opted Anna Hazare and some of his supporters in the process of drafting the Lokpal Bill. There were differences of opinion on a range of issues including on the question whether the Prime Minister and the judiciary should be brought under the purview of the Lokpal bill. The government went ahead with the preparation of their draft and got it through the Cabinet. Now, the bill is the property of the Indian Parliament and is under due process of approval.

Team Anna wants India to believe that they are fighting corruption. According to Anna Hazare, every politician is corrupt. Therefore they think that Parliament or the government is incapable of drafting a fair piece of legislation that can fight corruption effectively. Team Anna thinks that only they can draft an effective bill and therefore they want the government to adopt their version of the bill. This, at best, is the tyranny of the so called "civil society representatives."
Team Anna's current agitation is not about corruption. It is a struggle to discredit Parliamentary democracy. It is an attempt to usurp Parliament's exclusive powers to make law in this country. How else should the attempt of a group of individuals to dictate terms to Parliament be interpreted as?

The Oppositions parties at the Centre are supporting Team Anna. Instead of providing constructive opposition in the Parliament through fruitful debates, members of Opposition parties disrupt Parliament and waste tax payers' millions. And then, after abdicatiing their responsibility to function inside Parliament, they outsource their task to groups like Team Anna. Thousands of people all over India are supporting Anna Hazare by coming out on the streets. This can't happen without the support of Opposition parties who now have no other issue to hang on to. By jumping on to the Anna bandwagon, they too are joining an exercise to tear down parliamentary democracy in India.

The government has made it abundantly clear that it is committed to fighting corruption and that it is for the citizens' legitimate right to protest. All forms of legitimate protest in a democracy should be within the framework of law. Those who challenge Parliamentary democracy and local laws designed to protect public order are a threat to this country as much as corrupt politicians are.

In case there are legitimate concerns about the Lokpal bill, then, concerned parties can take the government to court. Or, these so-called "civil society representatives" should contest elections and become law makers in Parliament to make amendments to the present bill or law. Who prevents these self-assumed "representatives" of Indian public from entering active politics? If they are opposed to politics and Parliamentary democracy, are they asking for martial law or monarchy?

Let's Just be "Christian"

2011-08-01T10:56:00.001+05:30

Any talk on caste-based reservation in India is a sensitive issue. There's a broad range of opinions on this matter. People have lost their lives fighting for and against reservation. Recently, Christians who wish to preserve their Hindu caste identity demonstrated in the Capital, demanding that they be included in the Government's caste-based reservation schemes.

Caste-based job reservation system was initially introduced for a period of twenty years. Politicians whose eyes are always on their vote banks extended it for more than six decades. Yet, what has this system of reservation achieved? These politicians testify that reservation has not helped Scheduled Castes as a whole. We may be able to point out a few people who made it to the top. But communities as a whole have not benefited from it.

The root problem here is the caste consciousness that's within people. Members of apparently "low" castes consider it their sacred privilege to remain at the bottom rung of any society. They are programmed by their caste system to desire nothing more than what their forefathers aspired for. Thus, they and their children believe that they can do only what their parents did. Once, a pastor tried to convince young people of a particular group that they could aspire to get better jobs and living conditions. The parents and elders of these youth criticized the pastor for leading their wards astray. He was shocked to hear their response. They said, "Our guru Maharshi cleaned up his village and removed animal carcass. We are proud to follow his footsteps. Our forefathers were sweepers. We too will do that very job!"

As long as member of these so-called "low castes" are made to live within their caste boundaries, they will continue to take pride in that identity and continue in their state of social isolation and backwardness. This is what caste-based reservation does. Reservation forces people to hang on to their caste identity and caste consciousness. Reservation will not do away with caste system. Instead, it will perpetuate it forever. Caste-based reservation will fortify a faulty social stratification that was invented by some clever group to keep people subjugated and deprived. If caste-system should vanish, then the Government should de-recognize this religious system. The Government should also refuse to identify people on the basis of caste. All classifications such as "Scheduled Caste" should be wiped out of government systems and laws. Once caste-system is thus totally rejected and repudiated by the Government, it will begin to make an exit from our society. On the other hand, as long as the Government affirms this religious stratification by making it the norm for granting goodies, this accursed, inhuman system will thrive in India.

The Church in India has been a failure in dealing with caste system. Instead of rejecting this Hindu system, Christians continued to cultivate caste consciousness. People who converted from "low" castes held on to their Hindu caste identity and those from "upper" caste continued to discriminate against the others. Both groups are guilty of holding on to a caste mentality.

The Church in India will do a great favour to this nation if it will stop dividing Christians on the basis of caste. Let us stop dividing the Church into "Dalit Christians" and "non-Dalit Christians." Such a caste-based stratification is basically Hindu in origin. Why do we let a Hindu worldview rule the Church? If you are a true Christian, you will not call yourself a "Schedule caste Christian" or as a "Brahmin converted Christian." You will be happy to call yourself a "Christian."

Affirmative Action? Yes! Caste-based Reservation? No!

2011-07-31T18:51:00.003+05:30

"Dalit" Christians have been demanding justice from the Government of India for the past several decades. The latest rally in the Capital was the latest instance of their struggle.

The Government of India provides special consideration to members of the "Scheduled Castes" at the time of college admissions, recruitment, and while deciding promotions in government offices. However, members of "Scheduled Castes" who embraced Christianity and Islam were excluded from the benefits of these affirmative actions through a controversial Presidential order of 1950. Specifically, the paragraph 3 of the order - "no person who professes a religion different from Hindu, shall be deemed to be a member of a ‘Scheduled Caste’ - goes against the basic principles of equality and justice enshrined in the Constitution of India. Article 15 says, 'The State shall not discriminate against any citizen only on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.' Similarly, Article 25 states: 'all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.'

It is abundantly clear that the Government of India has been discriminating against some sections within Scheduled Castes on the basis of religion. This discrimination is illegal. If college admissions, jobs, and promotions are given to members of Scheduled Castes, common justice demands these should be extended to all members who belong to Scheduled Castes.

The people of India know very well that those who framed the controversial Presidential order of 1950 were more concerned about preventing mass conversions of Scheduled Caste communities to Islam or Christianity. The Christian leaders who gave their assent to such measures of discrimination did not take into consideration the wishes of Christians who came from Scheduled Caste communities.

Having said this, I wish to address my Christian brethren who are staking a claim for their share of the Reservation Pie. I am of the opinion that these my Christian brethren should not identify themselves as "Scheduled Castes." I am aware of the discrimination and rejection they have experienced within the Christian fold. I don't think such divisions within the Indian Church will vanish quickly or easily. Yet, I would request my agitating brethren not to demand favors from the Government of India on the basis of caste identity.

Why do I say this? If you have embraced Christian faith, you need to accept the Bible's claims about the human family. The Bible does not stratify humanity on the basis of their occupation, color, physical features, language or any other feature. The only division that God has ordained within humanity is the gender division. By hanging on to your former caste identity, you are not only affirming an ungodly, unbiblical, and cruel system of human exploitation; you are also depriving yourself of the right to proclaim what the Bible teaches about the fundamental genetic unity of the human race.

You may rightly ask, "How many of these 'general category' Christians have the moral right to uphold biblical teaching on the unity of human family? They don't claim caste status. But they subscribe to the Hindu caste worldview and look down on us."

Conceded. "General category" Christians who look down on their brethren who came from Hindu Scheduled Castes are guilty of maintaining a "caste outlook." They too have deprived themselves of the right to uphold the Bible's teaching on the unity of the human family. These "caste minded" Christians are equally guilty of subscribing to a non-biblical worldview as are the Christians who hang on to a caste identity assigned to them by their former religion.

In that sense, there are very few Christians in India who can say that they have the moral right to profess the Bible's teaching on the unity of the human family. I prefer to be a part of that minority.

I would go a step further and state that it is high time for India to scrap caste-based admission/job reservation system. By following a caste-based Reservation system the Government of India is guilty of affirming a religious worldview. If India is a secular country, it should distance itself from the worldviews of religions.

The Hindu caste system (varna or color system, literally!) is unique to the Hindu religion (or "way of life" or whatever it claims to be). Only those who follow that religion should subscribe to that system. In my opinion, even Hindus should consider scrapping the caste system because it is worse than racism. Even today, only Hindus who hold extreme views wish to promote this inhuman system of social stratification.

In global fora, Indian officials, due to their personal religious beliefs, take extra pains to convince human rights activists that caste-system is not racism. By the way it is practised in India, caste system is worse than racism. In the West, slaves from Africa were allowed to work inside the homes of their White masters. In India, a person from a "low" caste is not permitted to enter the house/premises of a "high" caste person!

Job/admissions reservation or some other form affirmative action may be needed for the elevation of ALL who are downtrodden in India. The criteria for determining who is eligible for such affirmative action should NOT be religion or a "caste system" borrowed from a religion. Affirmative action should be based only on the degree of economic backwardness an individual faces.

If we follow a caste-based reservation system, it only strengthens the centuries-old deplorable system of social stratification. It creates a competition among the people to determine who is more "backward." India may be the only country in the world where people boast about their degree of "backwardness" in comparison with the claims of other communities. Caste-based reservation is also a disincentive to performance and merit.

If caste-based reservation continues, not only does the government continue in affirming a religious world view, it generates and propagates a new kind of injustice. There are thousands of Class I officers in the government who have benefited from caste-based reservation. Not only did they secure their cushy government jobs, but also they climbed the ladder of promotions faster than their "general category" colleagues. Even as they live in government bungalows in district/state/national capital cities, even when their children have equal or better access to all educational facilities, they will benefit from caste-based reservation. This too is unjust. We should not try to correct one injustice with another injustice. If we have succeeded in replacing the tyranny of a Brahminical system with the tyranny of the so-called "scheduled castes", we haven't achieved anything positive.

If Christian "Dalits" get the benefits of reservation, after two or three decades, their children and grandchildren too will "enjoy" the benefits of this unjust system. I wonder whether any Christian "Dalit" parent or grandparent will then say: "I received the benefits of reservation. Let my child/grandchild now apply in general category." Will they then have the same sense of justice that they claim to possess now?

If I go a step further, I'll say that reservation in any form in unjust. Reservation of any kind is like lowering the bar for some people. We can have affirmative action without having reservation quotas. Therefore, let us not think that affirmative action and reservation are the same.

Think of what happens in sports. India was ruled by foreign powers for centuries. As a result, we have suffered injustice. We are at a disadvantage. Our people are poorer; our athletes don't have the best equipment. Our sports men/women don't stand a comparison with their counterparts in other developed nations. Citing all these reasons, can we ask for "reservation" in Olympics or in Cricket? Can we ask for a shorter cricket pitch when India is batting? Can we ask for relaxed conditions when our team is fielding? Will the IOA allow our sprinters to stand 20 meters ahead of other competitors in a 100 meters race? Let's face it. India and Indians have many disadvantages when compared with other countries and their sports people. These disadvantages that we suffer make our victories all the more sweeter, our medals all the more valuable. If the Indian cricket team was given special concessions at the World Cup Tournament on account of all the disadvantages that we suffer, we wouldn't have savored the victory our Team won!

As Christians, we believe in a God who lifts the poor from the dung heap and seats them with princes. God is a specialist at this. There are numerous instances recorded in the Bible to prove this. God liberated a nation of slaves and gave them a homeland. God brought Joseph from obscurity and made him the Governor of all Egypt. God brought David from the sheepfold and made him the King of Israel. God exalted a despised Moabitess to be the great grandmother of the Messiah. God made four prisoners of war reigning satraps in the empire of Babylon. A humble girl from Nazareth became the most blessed of women by bearing the Savior. I could go on and on. God doesn't work through reservation. He has his own ways of exalting an individual, a family or a community or even a nation.

Let me conclude with these Bible passages:
Ps 75: 6-7 "No one from the east or the west or from the desert can exalt a man. But it is God who judges: He brings one down, he exalts another."
1 Peter 5:6 "Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time."

What does it mean to be “born-again”?

2011-07-15T23:36:00.007+05:30

Click To Listen/Download Audio Version (mp3 128kbps)

The world today identifies the term “born again” with evangelical Christians who make it an essential criterion for salvation and for calling oneself “Christian.” “This spiritual new birth is also referred to as spiritual “regeneration.” A person is said to be “born again” when God gives him a new spiritual life.

Evangelical Christians claim that this spiritual regeneration happens when someone prays the “sinner’s prayer” and accepts Jesus Christ as his/her personal Saviour. Among evangelicals, there are those who claim to be of the Reformed tradition. They are also known as Calvinists. The Calvinists claim that it is not the “sinner’s prayer” that brings about the spiritual regeneration. Instead, they say, it is “regeneration” that enables the sinner to pray the “sinner’s prayer.”

Whichever comes first, the question before us today is, ‘Is this definition of regeneration based on the Holy Scriptures?’ Does the Bible say that a person gets born anew when he/she prays the “sinner’s prayer”? Or are we saying this on the basis of our experience?

You may wonder why I ask this question at all. All gospel preachers worth their salt have preached this for nearly three centuries. Popular evangelists such as Dr. Billy Graham made the term “born-again” a household phrase. At the end of their gospel presentation, they extend an altar call and help people pray the sinner’s pray. This practice is now getting abridged. Instead of asking people to come forward and say a “sinner’s prayer” of repentance, preachers ask their listeners to lift the right hand to indicate that they have believed in the gospel.

Let’s look at the often quoted passage in John’s Gospel. The Gospel of John, chapter one, verse eleven reads thus:

“He came to his own home, and his own people received him not.
Verse 12 and 13

But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”
This passage clearly says that those who received Jesus were given the right to become children of God. In other words, God gave such a right to those who believed that Jesus was what He claimed to be, namely, the Son of God. Therefore, evangelical Christians have taught that those who “receive” or “accept” Jesus are born of God.

Now what do we usually mean by “accepting” Jesus? If a person believes Jesus’ claims, if he trusts in His atoning work on the cross, prays a penitent prayer asking for forgiveness for all his sins and invites Jesus to “come into his heart” we say that the person has “accepted Jesus” as his personal Saviour. These are the steps advocated by evangelicals to receive salvation or the new birth. Anyone who goes through these steps is assured that he/she is “born again.”

The verses quoted above do not say that those who received Jesus became the children of God. It just says that those who received Jesus were given the “power to become children of God.” But how exactly does one become a child of God? This passage does not spell it out. Moreover, it does not spell out how people were supposed to “receive” Jesus. The context clearly gives us the impression that to “receive” Jesus was the opposite of what most Jews of his time did—“his own people received him not.” The chapter begins with claims about the divinity of Jesus. Those who received Jesus certainly had to accept and submit to his divinity and to his new mission as the “lamb of God.” Some Jews of that time received Jesus and his claims. But how did they express this? How were they expected to show that they “received” Jesus?

Our evangelical friends are quick to point out Romans, chapter ten, verses nine and ten.

Paul says that the word of faith that he’s preaching is this: “That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.”

At first glance, it would appear that Paul is giving us a formula for “receiving” Jesus. This is what happens when we quote this piece of Scripture out of context and then marry it with John 1:12. How can we combine or connect John 1:12 with Romans 10:9, ignoring their respective contexts, and then claim that we have a formula for “becoming children of God”? This illicit mating of John 1:12 and Romans 10:9 has been going on for decades even though it goes against every sound principle of Biblical interpretation. I am surprised that our “recommended procedure” for being “born anew” does not get questioned even by the scholars of the New Testament in our midst.

I think this is also a classic example of how we interpret the Scriptures on the basis of our experience. All born-again Christians have a testimony. They say that they experienced a sense of joy and peace when they first “gave their heart” to Christ, when they first prayed the sinner’s prayer. And therefore, they derive their definition of spiritual new birth from that experience. No one is questioning their experience. People do get joy and peace when they respond to the gospel and pray their first prayer of repentance. But that is no indication that they are “born again.” Our definition of spiritual new birth or our procedure to be “born again” should be derived from Scripture and NOT from our experience.

Let us see how Nicodemus “received” Jesus. One night, this senior Jewish rabbi visited Jesus. Having seen or heard about the miracles and signs that Jesus did, he was convinced that Jesus was sent by God.

“Rabbi,” he said, “we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him,” he said. Nicodemus deserved to be commended for his honest evaluation of Jesus. Truly, he did what other Pharisees did not do. He verbalised his faith in Jesus’ teachings and works. He was different from the Jews who did not “receive” Jesus; in fact, by our standards, he “received” Jesus and had the courage to confess his faith.

Jesus was however not impressed with Nicodemus’ confession! Taking into consideration the role and status of Nicodemus in Jewish religious life, Jesus revealed to him the secret of entering the Kingdom of God. In fact, Jesus told him the essential condition that any sinner should meet before he/she would be allowed to see or enter the Kingdom of God:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

How can a person be born again? That’s what Nicodemus wanted to know. So, Nicodemus’ asked Jesus “how” a person could be born again when he is old.

Jesus said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’” (John 3:3-7)

This answer is crucial because Jesus explained “how” exactly a person may be born again. A person gets born again “of water and the Spirit.”

There are two things worth observing here. First, Jesus’ statements in verse 3 and 5 are not two different sets of conditions for entering the Kingdom of God. In verse 3 he talks of “seeing” the Kingdom and in verse 5 he talks of “entering” the kingdom. “Seeing” the Kingdom of God and “entering” the kingdom of God are two different ways of saying the same thing. In verse 3 Jesus stated the condition. In verse 5, Jesus explained “how” a person could be born again.

Second, Jesus placed the responsibility of “being born again” on Nicodemus. This is where the comparison between natural birth and spiritual regeneration gets strained. When a child is born, the child has no role to play in the matter. Every baby is passive during its birth. However, in this spiritual new birth, the sinner is not passive. If a sinner has no role to play in spiritual birth, Jesus would have said, “God will give you a new birth to whomever he chooses.” Instead, he said, “You must be born again” Verses 3 and 5 squarely place the responsibility of being born again on the sinner who needs spiritual life. Nicodemus understood this well. That’s why he asked, “How can I be born again?”

Now, let’s look at the meaning of verse 5. What does the phrase “born of water and the Spirit” mean? Some think that birth through water refers to natural child birth while birth through the Spirit refers to a spiritual regeneration. In other words, they say that Jesus was saying, “It is not enough to be born naturally (of water) into the world; a person should be born of the Spirit once he is grown up.” In fact, there is nothing in this passage to suggest that Jesus was referring to two separate births in verse 5. Jesus spoke only of one spiritual birth. That one spiritual birth takes place “of water and the Spirit” (Cf. New Jerusalem Bible).

John Calvin, an influential Reformation leader, interpreted verse 5 by subsuming water into the Spirit. He read it as “unless one is born of water which is the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.” Thus, Calvin said that “water” and “Spirit” in verse 5 are one and the same. This too is mistaken. Both the factors – water and the Spirit – are important. One should not be sabotaged by the other (Marvin R. Vincent, Vincent’s Word Studies, 1886).

So, how do we go about interpreting John 3:5?

A key to understanding this new birth through water and the Spirit is found in verse 10 and 12. Jesus expected Nicodemus to understand his teaching regarding the new birth. After all Nicodemus was a Jewish rabbi, a ‘teacher of Israel.’ When Nicodemus questioned Jesus, “How can these things be?” Jesus shot back, “How can you be a teacher of Israel and still not understand this teaching on new birth.” In fact, Jesus was not referring to something that that was totally unheard of among Jews.

The Jews of Jesus’ time, as in modern times, practised different kinds of washings. These “washings” were sometimes more than just a washing; they were immersions. Vessels bought from the market place were thus subjected to ritual immersions. Priests who served in the Temple immersed themselves both before and after sacred services. People who repented of certain sins immersed themselves once or many times, depending upon the gravity of the sin, to cleanse themselves from their sin. This was in addition to the atonement made through sacrifices. The atonement was for forgiveness and the immersion was for cleansing from the sin. The baptism of John, a baptism of repentance, was a similar baptism. Ritual immersions were performed at various times for various reasons. Men and women who were ritually polluted by sexual union, women who completed their monthly periods of ritual impurity, people who were polluted by such women or things used by them, people who were made unclean by corpses—they all practised ritual self-immersion in order to be ritually clean.

The highest of all “washings” was the immersion associated with conversion to Judaism. A convert was baptised in the presence of at least three witness in “living waters”—that is, water from a flowing natural source). A convert had to repent of his sins and confess his faith in the God of Israel. Such a person was considered to have received a new birth.

“The baptismal water (Mikveh) in rabbinic literature was referred to as the womb of the world, and as a convert came out of the water, he/she was considered to have experienced a new birth. Thus, he got separated him from the pagan world around him. After the convert comes out of these waters, he is referred to as “a little child just born” or “a child of one day.” These facts can be verified by consulting the Jewish Talmud or any Jewish Encyclopedia (Yeb. 22a; 48b; 97b). (For details, see Ron Moseley, “The Jewish Background of Christian Baptism,” http://www.haydid.org/ronimmer.htm; Cf. http://mikvah.org)

In the gospel of John chapter 3 verse 5, Jesus was referring to the baptism offered by John the Baptist. In chapter 1 of John we read of John’s baptism. The Pharisees and the scribes had rejected John’s baptism and thereby God’s purpose for them (Lk 7:30). “John's rite had a real and legitimate relation to the kingdom of God which Nicodemus must accept” (Vincent).

Jesus was also referring to the Christian baptism which he would institute after this death and resurrection.

Such an understanding is not only consistent with the Jewish practice but is also consistent with the context of the passage. The first chapter of John refers to John’s baptism of repentance and to Jesus’ baptism. The first miracle of Jesus – that of turning water into wine – alludes to the new life brought about by God through a believer’s baptism. The latter half of chapter three describes John the Baptist and his ministry. The fourth second chapter begins with a mention of how Jesus drew more disciples than John. More people came to Jesus’ disciples to accept baptism. Further down in chapter four, we read of Jesus’ gift of “living waters” – a term used by Jews to refer to their highest baptism – the baptism given to converts in a body of flowing water such as a river or stream. In fact, the Gospel of John is a “wet” gospel; it is full of allusions to water baptism even though there are no explicit directions about baptism.

How was the baptism offered by Jesus different from the Jewish baptism? Jesus brought in the dimension of the Holy Spirit to an existing practice of Jewish proselyte baptism. His Messianic Kingdom was to be marked by the Holy Spirit’s power. Thus, Jesus in John 3:5 gave a complete definition of Christian baptism as seen in Titus 3:5. The Holy Spirit’s unseen presence brings about spiritual regeneration as a repentant believer obeys the gospel in the waters of baptism. Thus, Jesus maintained continuity with the Jewish practice of cleansing by immersion. At the same time, he brought in the age of the Holy Spirit.

In the light of all this, the “new birth” introduced by Christ can be understood as the regeneration brought about by the unseen work of the Holy Spirit when a repentant sinner accepts water baptism to identify himself with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Vincent’s Word Studies, published in 1886 notes that both the visible water baptism and the invisible regenerative work of the Spirit are equally important and that they are “inseparably blended” together The operation of the Spirit in the life of an obedient, repentant sinner elevates the outward rite of baptism from the level of a “mere symbol.” According to Vincent, baptism becomes a “veritable vehicle of grace to the recipient, and acquires a substantial part in the inauguration of the new life.” Without the work of the Spirit, the outward rite is empty, without any regeneration in the inner being.

In the light of this study, I am forced to adopt a better and more correct understanding of what it means to be “born again.” A person is born again by the will of God and by the renewing work of the Spirit of God, when he/she responds to the gospel of Jesus Christ in faith, repentance and obedience in the waters of baptism.

In all our proclamations of the gospel we should not expect a response that is short of the biblical new birth. No altar call should stop short of the call to repent and to receive baptism. Peter’s first altar call on Pentecost should be a eye-opener for all evangelists: “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38; Cf. Matt 28:18-20).

Q. Can a sinner be considered as a regenerate “born again” Christian after he has repented of sins and placed his trust in Jesus’ atoning work even though he/she has not been baptised?

Not according to Jesus’ definition of what it means to be “born again!” The Holy Spirit has certainly started His work in a repentant sinner. Such a person, who trusts in the atoning work of Jesus Christ may be assured of forgiveness. Yet this person has neither been cleansed of his/her sins nor been “born again” as per John 3:3-5. A few passages from Scripture should make this clear.

Paul met the Lord Jesus on the road to Damascus. He could have considered that encounter as the defining moment in his life. When Ananias met Paul, he encouraged him to take baptism at once without wasting a moment, “Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name” (Acts 22:16). Jesus’ teaching on regeneration should help us understand Ananias’ words. A “mere ritual” cannot wash one’s sins away. In answer to the candidate’s earnest prayers (“calling on His name”), God forgives his sins and regenerates him in the waters of baptism through the renewing work of the Spirit. This verse tells us how penitent and prayerful a sinner should be as he/she accepts baptism.

Paul says in Titus 3:4-5: “But when the kindness of God our Saviour and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit …”

When Paul refers to the reception of God’s salvation, he says, God “saved us … by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” The washing of regeneration is translated as the “washing of rebirth” by NIV and NRSV. This is an explicit reference to water baptism even though the word baptism is not used. (In fact, English language does not have its own word for baptism; the word ‘baptism’ is a sort of transliteration of the Greek word). Baptism is not just any washing. It is washing that brings about “new birth” or regeneration when combined with the renewing activity of the Holy Spirit. Note how the washing and renewing go together. The works of the baptismal waters and the Spirit are purposely hitched together. Paul’s words here allude to Jesus’ words in John 3:5—“born of water and of Spirit.” There is an allusion to baptism in the Apostle Paul’s exhortation to husbands in Ephesians 5:26 and in Hebrews 10: 22.

Q. “I experienced joy, peace, love, victory over sin and the presence of God years before I took water baptism. How can you say that I was not “born again”?

It is not I who say that you are not born-again. After having placed your trust in Jesus for your salvation, you should have proceeded to “wash away your sins” (Acts 22:16) in the waters of baptism, thus fulfilling Jesus’ condition for being “born again.”

In comparison to your former state, you must be experiencing joy, love, etc., after you found faith in Jesus. Our understanding of what is meant by “born again” should not depend upon these experiences but on the Word of God. God can choose to work in exceptional ways as with Cornelius and his family who received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. This exception however does not change the rule. We do not study the Scriptures on the basis of exceptions but on the basis of the regular principles.

Q. Does John 3:3-5 teach that Christian water baptism is essential for salvation?

John 3:3-5 indeed teaches that Christian water baptism is essential for anyone to see or enter the kingdom of God. Before you dismiss this as heresy, please proceed to read the following explanation.

I wish to submit that the above statement does not contradict the doctrine of salvation by faith in Christ’s atoning sacrifice and resurrection! We all are commanded to preach the gospel. How should a repentant sinner who listens to our preaching accept Christ’s death, burial and resurrection as his/her own? How does the Bible expect a sinner to tell God and the world that he “believes” in Christ?

We have devised ingenious ways to make people express their “faith” in Christ’s atoning work. We ask people to raise their hands, to get up and walk down an aisle and to repeat the sinner’s prayer after us. We then assure them that they are now “saved.” Does the Bible endorse our current practices? Does it teach us that this is the way we should lead a repentant sinner to express his/her faith?

The Bible clearly teaches us that there is one God-approved way of “believing” and “accepting” Jesus as our personal Saviour and Lord. God expects every repentant sinner who responds to the gospel to come forward in faith, confess Jesus Christ as the risen Lord and take water baptism. This is God’s prescribed manner for sinners to accept God’s free salvation. Is there a better way of making Christ’s death, burial and resurrection one’s own than through water baptism?

When the Bible clearly states time and again that God’s style of doing an “altar call” is to call repentant and believing sinners to the waters of baptism, why do we abbreviate and alter it? Next time you “lead” a sinner to Christ, lead him or her to the water’s of baptism. Baptism is the biblical way of accepting Jesus Christ as one’s personal Saviour. This is why Jesus referred to believer’s baptism as a spiritual new birth. “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (These are not two births. This second reference to the new birth in Jn 3:5 is an amplified way of stating the truth stated earlier in Jn 3:3. In fact, Jesus was answering Nicodemus' question in v. 4, telling him how he can be born again.) In the water’s of baptism, a repentant and believing sinner becomes “born again” of water and the Spirit.

The apostle Peter made it abundantly clear as if he were answering the above question. He wrote,

“Corresponding to that [Noah’s ark],

baptism now saves you—

not the removal of dirt from the flesh,

but an appeal to God for a good conscience—

through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” 1 Peter 3:21.

Baptism now saves you … through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Who will identify himself with the death and burial of Jesus Christ? God will identify him with the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Cf. Romans 6:4-5) so that he should live forever. Should anyone now dismiss water baptism as a secondary, optional expression of one’s faith?

Q. Does one become “born again” before exercising saving faith?

In order to highlight and preserve the truth that God is the one who regenerates a sinner, giving him/her a new spiritual life, Wayne Grudem says we do not have any role to play in this regeneration—not even in getting ourselves to the point where God can give us this new birth. (Wayne Grudem, “Regeneration: What does it mean to be born again?” http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/regeneration _grudem.html)

“In some of the elements of the application of redemption that we discuss in subsequent chapters, we play an active part (this is true, for example, of conversion, sanctification and perseverance). But in the work of regeneration, we play no active role at all. It is instead totally a work of God.”

As a corollary to this understanding, he goes on to say that “it is natural to understand that regeneration comes before saving faith. It is in fact this work of God that gives us the spiritual ability to respond to God in faith.”

Now, this is why I beg to differ from Grudem. Jesus said to Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (John 3:7b). It is clear from this statement that Nicodemus had to do something about being born again. The onus for getting this new birth was on Nicodemus. Nicodemus understood that he had to do something in this business of getting “born again” even though he did not understand what this new birth was all about. That is why he asked Jesus, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born, can he?” (Notice the words denoting action)

To under gird the total passivity of a sinner before and during regeneration, Grudem stretches the analogy used by Jesus. He says that a child that is born has no role to play in the whole process of birth.

“We did not choose to be made physically alive and we did not choose to be born -- it is something that happened to us; similarly, these analogies in Scripture suggest that we are entirely passive in regeneration.”

Yes, indeed we are entirely passive in regeneration. But we need to respond actively to the gospel in order to reach the point of regeneration.

If Nicodemus had understood this “born again” stuff the way Grudem understood it – that is, if Nicodemus understood that he would be totally passive in and before the process of being born again, he would have asked Jesus, “How can a man be born when he is old? His mother cannot get him into her womb a second time, and give birth to him, can she?”

If Nicodemus did not have any active role in letting God give him a new birth, then why doesn’t God just give him the new birth without telling him, “You must be born again?” Indeed, the work of regeneration – of giving us new spiritual life – is an act of God. But to say that we have no active role in getting ourselves to this point of God’s act is contrary to the Scriptures. And worse, to say that regeneration occurs before the exercise of saving faith is like putting the cart before the horse!

A "one man salvation army"

2011-07-10T15:28:00.005+05:30

Meet Br. Narayanan, a street preacher in the city of Kochi. His one passion is to preach the gospel. He goes around the city on his bicycle and preaches the gospel to anyone who is willing to listen.

I met him yesterday on a busy road. He was proclaiming repentance and faith in Jesus Christ to a vegetable vendor and a few others who were standing there. All of them, including a woman, mocked him, "You change yourself. Find yourself a job and earn your bread through honest labour!" But Narayanan continued with his warnings and admonitions.

Narayanan was a devout Hindu. He was a labourer who did odd jobs for daily wages. One day, while he was working in a coconut grove, a pastor gave a gospel tract to him. He read it and found answers to his life's questions. He immediately believed in Jesus Christ and asked the pastor to pray for him.

Ever since, God gave a burden in his heart to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ boldly. He also sells perfumes for a living. The brief case kept on the bicycle's carrier is full of perfume bottles.

After his "sermon" to the vegetable vendor, I spoke to him. He began to share the gospel with me. He was glad to know that I believed in Jesus Christ. Then, he shared his testimony with me and encouraged me to preach boldly. In fact, he gave me a crash course in evangelism. I paid attention to everything he said. He prophesied to me. Probably he didn't realize it. But God spoke to me through this man.

When I parted with him, it was dusk. Narayanan continued his "business" and his vocation. I felt that I had met apostle Paul or someone like that. I wish I could be as bold as him! How I wish there will be more bold witnesses for the Lord Jesus Christ!

Reverse Engineering Won't Always Work!

2011-07-01T12:28:00.002+05:30

Ever heard of an Arab who visited India's water-rich west coast and fell in love with the abundance of water? He lived in a luxury hotel and enjoyed every bath and shower. A day before he was scheduled to check-out, hotel staff heard loud sounds coming from his room. They politely inquired to find out who was hammering away in a room. They found the Arab in his bathroom. He was trying to pluck out the expensive taps in the bath and shower. When they tried to find out why he was causing damage to hotel property, he said, "Tomorrow I'll be returning to my country. I wish to have a constant water supply in my tent in the desert. So, I wish to carry these magical taps with me!" The hotel staff were too shocked and amused to respond.

The large systems of water purification, distribution, storage and pumping were hidden from his sight. Yet, he went ahead with his dream project of turning his desert into a garden. We may laugh at the foolish Arab who thought that the taps in his bathroom were the source of uninterrupted water. Yet, we see similar instances all around us.

The leaders and people of India want to see India become a "developed" country. Former President Kalam used to challenge the nation to become "developed" by 2020. What do we mean by "developed" country? We are of course referring to the First World - countries mostly in the West who achieved amazing levels of progress in education, cleanliness, public health and hygiene, technological supremacy, military might, economic well-being and welfare of their citizens. When we visit these countries, we are often spell bound and amazed. We wish our India too would become like these countries. We try hard to figure out the secret behind the success of these countries so that we may copy their success. Like the Arab who thought, "I would like to have that tap in my tent", we focused our attention on various external aspects of Western countries.

Many think that we can copy the success of the West by copying their educational system - good schools, colleges, universities, academic programs, popularization of the English language, etc. Some others think that we should mimic the West's technological developments - widespread telecommunication networks, television and print media, defence systems, space programs, good power supply, excellent road networks, modern transport solutions, etc.

My contention is that even if India should successfully mimic Western countries in all these fields - be it education, infrastructure, technology, communications systems, military, language, business, economic systems, government processes, etc. - we will still be like the Arab who thought that the secret of India's abundant waters was inside those wonderful taps.

Instead of mimicking the external features of the developed West, we should seek to identify the real secret of their success. First of all, the Western 'developed' world was founded on Christian principles from the Bible. (It is true that much of the West has abandoned Christ and His Church; still they haven't shaken off the Christian culture!)

We can get the best bullet trains or metro cars to Indian cities; but we cannot make our people stand in a queue or prevent them from littering or spitting inside these sleek vehicles. "Love thy neighbor like thyself" is not a part of any Indian religion. This Biblical principle is at the heart of Western civilization. That's why they queue up. That's why their bus drivers help passengers with their luggage! That's why their drivers don't honk. That's why they obey traffic rules. That's why they say "Thank you" and "Sorry." (Exceptions are there. But they remain exceptions.) The lack of such a culture in India is obvious to anyone who observes India's traffic. I am reminded of this reality each time my neighbors - a pack of engineering students who can beat the "Three Idiots" - blast their audio system at full volume.

Another foundation of Western civilization is a firm belief that material universe is essentially good and orderly. From this came the desire to study the Universe and the emergence of science and technology. Even with the arrival of science in India, our people take a holy dip during an eclipse while our friends in the "developed" countries conduct experiments and observations. Connected with this scientific temper is a firm grounding on reason and logic. Even their religion is subjected to rational study and investigation. In fact, there is no religion that has welcomed rational criticism and study other than Christianity. No other religion has a discipline called Theology. Which Indian or Eastern religion will welcome critical study or scrutiny without a protest?

Mere imitation of the external features of Western civilization will not make us "developed." We, the people of India, should first get "developed."

The Great Indian Circus

2011-06-15T09:29:00.003+05:30

During the past two weeks India witnessed a grand religio-political circus. The nation watched these events over and over again on television channels that covered these events as if it were the Indian version of Olympics. We have heard enough and more from the agitators, political parties, and news analysts. Watching these events on TV and listening to heated arguments on news shows have made us numb.

"Civil" society members called the government names while government spokespersons questioned the credentials of "civil" society leaders. A scheming yogi slung mud at government interlocutors---that too after he'd allegedly struck a deal with the government. Government agencies returned the favour by evicting him and his followers at the dead of the night. The yogi demonstrated his yogic prowess by jumping off a high platform to emerge later in women's garb! (He however did not get enough time to shave his beard off!) The white salwar suit looked good on him! Yes, he appeared before television cameras wearing that fancy dress! The woman who "lent" her clothes to the holy man too appeared on television--lest the woman-sized yogi should fail to return her clothes, feigning ignorance about the real owner.

A lot of people made politically correct noises in protest against the government's "midnight act." Even those "civil" society members who had been inducted into a committee to draft an anti-corruption legislation abstained from a crucial meeting to show solidarity with the evicted yogi. The nation's principal opposition party too let the yogi take over their role of opposing the government. The leaders of the party protested for a day. That included a special dance by the nation's leader of opposition leader. The ruling party took a "dig" on her saying she'd desecrated the final resting place of the Mahatma. She however boasted about her resolve to dance to patriotic songs till her last breath. The sentiment that no one should make merry at the solemn memorial to the Father of the Nation was lost on this patriotic lady.

After hours of arguing before television cameras, the yogi, the "civil" society leaders, the Diggers and Big Mouths haven't reached any valuable conclusion. Worst of all, so-called "national" level television channels were gleefully covering 24x7 a yogi who wouldn't stop talking until he was hospitalised. To counter-balance that talkathon, the honourable Prime Minister place one heavy, precious sentence on the balance: the late night police action was unfortunate but unavoidable! Brevity, though a sign of wit, did not satisfy the television channels nor the masses that craved for a prolonged verbal fight.

At the end of this long-drawn tamasha, the opposition party has tied itself in knots. It does not know how to justify its support to a yogi who called for armed resistance against the government. It does not know why a state ruled by them let another yogi die unnoticed while on a fast against that government. The ruling party, on the other hand, is licking its wounds. After letting "unelected" and "unelectable" people into a committee to draft a law, it is now harping on the exclusive constitutional privilege of Parliamentarians to make laws. It is a pity that this nation and those who burden themselves with the task of leading the masses cannot think clearly. The government's policy seems to be "Act in haste, regret at ease."

Those who demand that the government should act in a particular manner use temper tantrums like a child. "Give me this or else I will ..." cries a toddler, throwing a tantrum. Worse than this childish behaviour, the proponents of such means of "protests" call it "satyagraha" and glorify these tantrums. Are Indians the only ones in the world who know how to protest? If "civil" society members wish to be heard, they ought to maintain civility and tact while trying to influence a government. Exerting influence on a government is inevitable. Business houses and interest groups do exert their influence - either good or bad - without raising so much dust. They do it in a "win-win" way unlike today's so-called "civil" society leaders' "we win, you lose" method. And therefore, business houses and industry get away with their wishes, at least many times if not always.

No takers for Sarah's example?

2011-05-01T12:40:00.009+05:30

The most hyped wedding of recent times - that of Prince William and Catherine Middleton – was watched by 2 billion people worldwide. All the pomp and splendour aside, it was the wedding proper led by the Dean of Westminster and solemnised by the Archbishop of Canterbury that caught my attention.

The simple, short and profound liturgy and ceremony were beautiful. It highlighted Scriptural truth about marriage’s divine origin, purpose and permanence. Besides, the Lordship of Jesus Christ was highlighted in the liturgy as well as the sermon. The sight of a future King of United Kingdom and his bride kneeling in prayer before Jesus Christ, the King of Kings, carried a key message to a global audience.

Brushing aside such spiritual undertones, global media houses picked up various titbits that they thought would amuse their viewers or readers. One such thing that they highlighted was the bride’s preferences regarding her marriage vow. They said that Ms. Middleton had refused to vow her obedience to her husband in line with modern concepts about husband-wife relationship. Ms. Middleton vowed to “honour”, “love” and to be faithful to her husband. It seems the late Princess Diana too had preferred a vow without the words “to obey.”

At the end of the gala wedding and celebrations, we saw the creation of a new royal family in which the husband will not dare to command his wife regarding any matter. The wife too does not expect her husband to give her any orders or directions for she did not promise to obey him. If marriage ought to reflect the relationship between Christ and His church, the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will portray a strange Christ and an even stranger Church that has no commitment to obey her Lord!

Should a wife obey her husband? Evangelical Christians who claim to be devoted to the Bible and to doing God’s will are divided on this issue. Many believe that the New Testament does not command a wife to obey her husband. They are quick to point out St. Paul’s injunction to all Christians to “submit to each other” (Eph 5:21). Of course, they say, the New Testament commands wives to “submit” to their husbands in the following verse. But, using verse 21, they say that husbands too should submit to their wives! They also acknowledge that Paul commanded wives to honour and love their husbands. But their strongest argument is that Paul exhorted children to obey their parents in the Lord (Ephesians 6:1) and yet he did not command wives to “obey” their husbands.

My intention is not to convince women that they should obey their husbands. Let those who do not wish to “obey” refrain from it; ultimately each person has a free will. But Christian women who do not want to obey their husbands and those who eagerly wish that women be freed from such demands should cease from misinterpreting the Holy Scriptures to suit their ends.

I am tired of seeing Ephesians 5:21 misinterpreted even by people who claim to be theologically trained. They use the injunction in 5:21 (“... and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ”) to sabotage 5:22-24 which says,

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.
24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. (New American Standard Bible)

The verse 5:21 serves as a summary of what St Paul teaches from 5:22 to 6:9. Those in the body of Christ must submit to one another. But how do you submit to one another? There is a certain way to do it. That is explained in the passage from 5:22 to 6:9. Wives “ought to” submit to their husbands “in everything” “as the church is subject to Christ”; similarly, children must obey their parents (6:1); slaves must obey their masters (6:5). If we say that husbands ought to submit to their wives (as some say in the light of Eph 5:21), we must also say that parents should obey their children and that masters must obey their slaves! We may not be willing to go that far! Let us therefore refrain from sabotaging Ephesians 5:22 with 5:21.

It is true that the apostle uses the word “obey” in Eph 6:1 and 6:5 but not in Eph 5:22-24. However, he uses other words and word-pictures to say in a quiet elaborate way that wives ought to obey their husbands. Interestingly, the apostle uses the illustration of “head” and “body.” He says that the husband is the wife’s head just as Christ is the head of the church. We cannot dilute the meaning of “head” without at the same time diluting the authority of Jesus Christ over his Church. When we speak of a “head” and “body”, we are not speaking of two different entities in opposition to each other but of parts of a whole. Such is the union between a man and his wife. What would you call a “body” that does not obey its “head”?

Christian women have cited numerous questions to prove that the Bible’s command (that wives submit to their husbands in “everything”) is impractical and unwise. All these questions may be rephrased to this one: “What if the husband asks the wife to commit a sin?” It is obvious that our duty to God has a priority over every other duty. Just as we would defy a state edict that would force us to sin against God, a Christian woman’s decision to obey God rather than her husband’s sinful demands is justified.

Finally, Peter’s instructions to families are noteworthy. While elaborating on how godly women ought to decorate their lives with good works in order to lead their unbelieving husbands to Christ, Peter says, “For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands; just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.” (1 Pet 3:5-6)

If Paul did not use the word “obey” while exhorting Christian wives, Peter makes up for that. For Peter, “submission” is obedience. Therefore, he cites the example of Sarah who obeyed her husband Abraham. The kind of submission that Sarah displayed may be abhorrent for a modern ‘enlightened’ woman.

Which 21st century Christian woman would want to call her husband “lord” (meaning “master”) or “Sir”? I don’t think the women of Peter's times were made of a different fiber. Peter, however, was not bothered about how well Christian women of his time would receive his instructions. He wrote what the Holy Spirit wanted him to write. We are not talking about what’s politically correct but about what is correct in God’s sight.

The Bishop of London, Richard Chartres, rightly said in his Royal Wedding Sermon: “In a sense every wedding is a royal wedding with the bride and the groom as king and queen of creation, making a new life together so that life can flow through them into the future.” The bride and groom are queen and king in their own house too. The elevation of a husband as the King in his family does not belittle the wife. Instead, it elevates her as the queen of the household. The opposite is also sadly true! A live dog is better than a dead lion! A poor man who is a king in his house is better off than a Royal who is not a king in his family.

God is serious about the images and symbols he wishes to create or maintain through our lives. God wants marriage to mirror His relationship with His people. Men therefore are commanded to love their wives just as Christ loved the Church. Wives are for the same reason commanded to obey and submit to their husbands just the Church ought to submit to her Lord Jesus Christ.

India: Time to wake up!

2011-04-17T13:02:00.003+05:30

Dr. Binayak Sen and his family could not ask for a better new year gift. The Supreme Court granted the good doctor bail. Although Dr Sen will not be out of prison before Monday, the Sen family is cautiously jubilant. They are cautious because the legal battle is not yet over.
It's a long way to complete victory for the celebrated human rights activist. Sen has challenged his conviction and life sentence before the Chhattisgarh High Court which had refused to suspend the punishment pending the appeal.

Yet, there is cause for jubilation. It's not just the bail. The Supreme Court's observation that there is no valid case of sedition against Dr. Sen is great. "No case of sedition is made out," a bench comprising justices H S Bedi and C K Prasad observed while granting bail to 61-year-old Sen. The bench, which preferred not to give any reasons for granting bail said, "We are a democratic country. He may be a sympathizer (of Naxalites) but it did not make him guilty of sedition." Will the mere possession of Gandhi's biography make someone a Gandhian, asked the Court. The Chhattisgarh government counsel was stumped there. How can Dr Sen be convicted of sedition if pro-Naxal literature or notes were found in his possession?

The Highest Court's question has triggered a debate about Indian laws on sedition. The Union Minister of Law, Mr Veerappa Moily has admitted that the 150-year old law on sedition needs a revision. He has even gone ahead to ask the Chhattisgarh government to reconsider their police investigation against Dr. Sen. “In consultation with the home ministry, the Law Commission would be asked to take a fresh look at the sedition law in the country, which appears to be outdated now,” Moily said.

The section 124A of the India Penal Code, crafted by the British rulers of India to be used against freedom fighters, needs urgent revision. A penalty of life imprisonment prescibed by that statute was slapped on Dr. Sen, a pediatrician who dedicated himself to the service of the poor. Talk about outdated laws! India has dozens of such useless, stupid laws. Every five years, we send our representatives to the Parliament. A concerted effort by sincere law makers can easily rid this country of senseless and outdated laws. Yet, most of our lawmakers get too busy with politicking and bickering that they are left with no time to think or act in the best interest of the country. If the MPs do not have the time or inclination, let them delegate this task of cleaning up our statute books to a group of learned judges or law experts.

A group of Nobel laureates and human rights activists from across the globe had written to the Prime Minister of India to take suitable action to liberate Dr Sen as a free man. Yet the PMO seems to have taken refuge behind the usual "the-law-will-take-its-course" excuse. Could not the Prime Minister's Office do anything to correct the errors or malpractices of a vindictive state government? Even now it is not too late to act.

Any sensible Indian knows that the Chhattisgarh government is waging war against a human rights activist just because he spoke against a policy of the state government. The dirty-tricks department of the state slapped charges of sedition on Dr Sen and pushed him through a trial to conviction. Is this going to be fate of anyone who challenges government policy? It is an open secret that the governments in India - at the Center and at State levels - will let their "hounds" loose on anyone who criticizes government or national policies or practices. Several departments of the government could be potentially powerful tools in the hands of corrupt and immoral leaders.

A vindictive government is indeed dangerous. We need more agitations led by men like Anna Hazare and millions of apolitical Indians to bring government machinery to its knees or to force it to take suitable action. The political class has failed this country for over six decades. It's time India rise up and demand a true change.

Churches that Abuse!

2011-04-08T22:44:00.003+05:30

I just finished reading Ronald Enroth's "Churches that Abuse." The author says that he found it very difficult to write this book because it's all about the negative traits of some abusive churches. If writing negative things is not an easy task, reading such a book is equally difficult. The stories of people who were trapped in abusive churches are so heart wrenching. The author warns us that the tendency to become abusive is very much real and ever present in the Christian world.

How can educated, enlightened people get attracted to such abusive churches? How can one continue in an abusive church once they realize that something is amiss there? The answers don't come easily. It's easy for anyone to get caught up in an abusive church. Chances are that people who get sucked in sink deeper in because they tend to ignore the warning signs and lights that go off in their minds.

I feel that most Pentecostal churches in Kerala and those outside Kerala consisting of Malayalam speaking Pentecostals are abusive in varying degrees.

For those who may not be willing to read Enroth's book, I have summarized the message of the book below. I hope that pastors who read this will repent and adopt a more biblical and Christlike leadership. I hope that Christians who find that their churches are abusive will opt out of such churches without delay.

****************

MARKS of an abusive church: If any one or more of these are seen in an church, you can be sure that it is an abusive church.

• Excessive control of members by leader(s)
○ Pastor(s) accountable to no one and is beyond confrontation
○ Leaders use guilt, fear, shame, punishment, etc., to enforce obedience or compliance to their standards
○ Those who disagree are subjected to public rebuking and humiliation
○ Members are not expected to think on their own or contradict the leaders. Critical or logical thinking and skepticism are branded as works of the flesh or of demons
○ Members are told not to rely on their feelings, emotions or intuitions
○ Attendance to church meetings are mandatory and absence is not tolerated
○ Members have to take their pastor's permission before they do anything - go on a vacation, build a house, plan a wedding, choose a life-partner, etc.
○ Pastor or his wife gives detailed instructions to members regarding matters of personal discretion: clothes, food, weddings, sexual relations among married people, finger nails, nail polish, beards, under-garments, etc.
○ Members are encouraged to spy on each other and report to the leader. This can take the form "confessing of one's sins" to one's personal mentor. A chain of reporters is thus created.

"Potentially abusive churches foster an unhealthy form of dependency, spiritually and otherwise, by focusing on themes of submission and obedience to those in authority."

• ELITISM: Members are taught that their church is superior to all other churches. Going to any other church is pictured as a backward step.

• ISOLATION:
○ Members are encouraged to cut off ties with spouses, relatives and other churches
○ In abusive-church situations, the "spiritual family" often displaces the biological family, and church leaders assume the role of surrogate parents.
○ Some churches keep their members in special homes, cut off from the rest of the world.

• TEACHING/Preaching:
○ Teaching is based on experience and special revelation rather than sound interpretation of the Bible
○ Congregation has to "swallow" what is preached and "follow" the leaders
○ Undue emphasis is given to any one doctrine or to the supernatural gifts such as prophecy, exorcism, and healing.

IMMORALITY:
• Members are encouraged to mingle with members of the opposite sex. Spiritual reasons are given to encourage such intimacy with people who are not married.
• Spiritual reasons are given for the leaders attempt to get physical proximity to women members.

• ASCETICISM and Rigidity in lifestyle:
○ Renunciation of wealth and property - often members had to donate proceeds to the church
○ An emphasis on harsh and long periods of fasting
○ Rejection of good clothes, jewelry, TV, stereo systems, etc.
○ Rejection of socially accepted customs such as dating (in the West)
○ Double standards: :Leaders live in comfort while they enforce harsh living conditions on members

• CRUELTY:
○ Members may get punished for disobedience. Punishment may include beatings, humiliation, stripping, etc.
○ Even children are forced to fast for several days and are subject to severe beatings
○ Denial of medical aid to sick adults and children in the name of faith. When these lead to death, these abusive churches attract the attention of law enforcement and of news media.

In the light of these signs, I would like to point out
common abusive practices in Kerala's Pentecostal churches

• Abuse of the Pulpit: Pastors and preachers take pleasure in attacking individuals through sermons - derogatory remarks, twisting of scriptures, etc. to target a person or group
• Anti-intellectualism - Commonplace rejection of logical thinking, higher education; disparaging remarks about those who secure degrees and higher education
• Exclusiveness: Pastors teach members that their local church is superior to all other churches - including those in their denomination! People are encouraged to travel long distances to attend one particular church even though they have churches of the same denomination in their towns/cities.
• Autocratic Pastors who force congregation to submit to whatever they teach or command. Examples from rebellion are commonly quoted from the Bible (Korah, Miriam) to win unquestioning obedience.
• GAG ORDER: No amount of criticism is tolerated. Members are not expected to question the character, doctrine or judgment of their leaders or founders. People who think differently often keep quiet because they know that it is impossible to force their church to rethink on important matters.
• Strict Control over matters of personal discretion: Conformity to "acceptable standards" achieved through pastoral directives and peer pressure
○ enforcement of uniformity in dress (white clothes, for example)
○ preachers are not allowed to tuck in their shirts; they have to wear white shirts!
○ facial hair - mustache, beards, sideburns; some churches do not serve the Lord's Supper to those who sport a mustache or beard!
○ prohibition of jewelry, nail polish
○ Some pentecostal churches prohibit members from seeking medical treatment
○ Women's clothes - shunning of certain dresses
○ Pastors or their wives decide what a bride or a groom should wear for their wedding!
○ Matters of private discretion are discussed in public to humiliate people

Antidote to abusive leadership
"Church leaders must be accountable both to God and to the congregations that they lead."

"It is important to recognize that leadership depends on followership, and from a truly Christian perspective, that means cooperation with the leader rather than domination and control by the leader. The source of legitimate Christian leadership therefore lies in entrusted authority. The spiritual autocrat, the religious dictator, attempts to compel subordination; the true Christian leader can legitimately only elicit followership.

"They must strive to exemplify the qualities of our Lord Jesus Christ, 'that great Shepherd of the sheep.' Leaders are meant to be facilitators not despots. Their role is essential. But they must use their authority in the way Jesus did."

Being Church rather than Going to Church ...

2011-04-03T16:07:00.005+05:30

It's Sunday; yet we didn't go to "church!" For a change, we want to "be" church rather than "go" to church. We sincerely want to discover what it means to be God's people' and it is our prayer that God will fulfill his divine mandate and purposes through our lives.

Most Christians know that "church" is not a place or an event or a meeting. Church is God's People - redeemed by Jesus Christ with a purpose and a mandate. And yet, they talk of going to "church." For them, in spite of their theological convictions, "church" is a place or a meeting.

And often "church" has to be a specially dedicated place - often bought or rented at a premium price. It surprises me that even small groups of Christians take ridiculously expensive loans to buy a piece of land and to put up a building. A large portion of the money that flows into India for "God's Work" actually goes into brick and mortar instead of being invested in building up God's people or for the propagation of the gospel.

"Church" also is a special place for special conduct. Any code of conduct mentioned in the New Testament concerning how the "church" should function is upheld within the four walls of the so-called "church." For example, within the sacred walls of their "churches," some conservative evangelicals do not allow women to teach men, for the New Testament prohibits women from exercising authority over men. "I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet" (1 Tim 2:12). But there are "non-Church" situations, they say, when women can "speak" or teach men. Pious women who wouldn't dare to teach men in "church" are quite comfortable teaching their men or exercising authority over men at home! There may be other fitting examples to illustrate "church" and "non-church" behaviour. Once people return to their homes, they switch back to "normal" mode of living. People easily switch between "church," "home," "work," and "recreation" modes of existence.

Shouldn't God's people - the church - meet? The early church met together, mostly at homes, for prayer, for instruction, mutual encouragement and to "break bread" (an expression which means "to share a meal"). There was no "sanctuary" or sacred place for "worship service." There was no "church" where people went on a holy day for a holy time of worship led by a set of holy people from the front.

Moreover, the early church was a "go" church rather than a "come hither" church. Christians went out to meet people where they were - in synagogues, in the market place, on the riverside, beaches, halls, etc., instead of inviting sinners to "come over to our church" to hear the gospel.

It would be a great injustice to all that the Lord graciously invested in us if we settle for anything less than the Biblical ideal, anything that is short of what God demands of us.

Let’s shut up if we can’t talk sense

2011-03-31T23:02:00.005+05:30

The tragedy that is unfolding in Japan over the past three weeks is getting worse by the day. The tsunami that followed a massive earthquake wrecked more damage and killed more people than the quake itself. However, the nuclear radiation leak from four nuclear reactors is the worst of all sorrows that has plagued Japan. The nations of the world are showing their concern and extending a helping hand towards people in need. And even before the chapter of disasters has drawn to a close, evangelical Christians are doing what they are best at--they are promoting their favorite ideas from the Bible!

People like Tim Lahaye - of the ‘Left Behind’ Series fame - expressed their opinion that the Japan quake is a sign of the "last days." Speaking to World Net Daily, he said, "The Bible tells us in Matthew 24 that one of the signs of the last days – one of the birth pangs to occur – is an increase in earthquake activity and intensity. We’re seeing that happen here. It’s not just earthquakes, but hurricanes and all kinds of natural disasters." Secular critics are quite upset with Lahaye. They think that Lahaye and his friends do not know the geological causes behind an earthquake!

The point is not whether Lahaye knows certain geological truths; Tim Lahaye and a very large number of Christians believe that the world is hurtling towards to a catastrophic end. They believe that we are living in the "last days" - days that run up to a grand finale of history marked by disasters, famines, war and the like. And why do they believe it? They get their "truths" from the Gospels and from some other books of the New Testament. They quote the very words of Jesus Christ - from Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

Yes, indeed, the New Testament speaks of "last days." The crucial question is, Are the writers of the New Testament and Tim Lahaye in agreement on what "the last days" is all about? Interestingly, the apostles Peter, Paul and the writer of Hebrews believed that Jesus and his followers lived in the "last days" (Heb 1:2; Acts 2:17; 2 Tim 3:1-9).

What did the New Testament writers mean by "last days?" If it’s the “last days” that they lived in, it should be the “last days” of some definite period. Were they referring to the last days of the world as we know it? Or were they referring to the "last days" of something else? How can the "last days" that began at the time of Jesus last for two thousand years? These are questions that evangelicals or their pastors don't encourage.

A careful reading of the New Testament will show us that the "last days" mentioned in it are actually the last days of the old Jewish order of things. The death of Jesus Christ on a cross did not do away with the physical realities of the Jewish religious order. The temple, the sacrifices, the priesthood and paraphernalia - all of which found their legitimate fulfillment in Jesus - continued in Jerusalem even after Jesus' death. Which is why Hebrews says, 'When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.' And disappear they did, as we all know, in AD 70! Even now, the so-called state of Israel does not have a Temple, without which their religion is defunct and empty. And God forbid the return of the old order - along with a Temple and sacrifices - which would cock a snook at the finished work of Christ!

The period in Israel's history that ran up to the destruction and disappearance of the symbols of the Old Covenant (The Jewish Temple, priesthood, sacrifices, etc.) was referred to as the "last days" by NT writers. Malachi prophesied that an "Elijah" (John the Baptist) would be sent before the great and terrible day.

"Look, I am sending you the prophet Elijah before the great and dreadful day of the LORD arrives.
His preaching will turn the hearts of parents to their children, and the hearts of children to their parents. Otherwise I will come and strike the land with a curse." Malachi 4:5-6

If John's arrival was to be sign of a great and terrible day, then that day shouldn't be too far removed from John's time. When John came, he warned the Jews that an axe of divine judgment was already placed at the root of the 'tree.' Judgment wasn't far away! Jesus too, in Matthew 24 spoke of events related to Jews and Jerusalem--events that should have found fulfillment in that very generation (Matt 24:34). And how accurately were the predictions of Malachi, John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ fulfilled in AD 70! After a terrible and unprecedented siege of Jerusalem for 3 1/2 years, Jerusalem fell to Roman forces. (Refer Josephus' historical writings for more details of this period of Jewish tribulation)

Let us therefore read the Bible and the newspaper sensibly. People who fail to do this err time and again in their attempt to find the "signs" mentioned in Matthew 24 in modern day events. When faced with disaster, silent acts of mercy and prayer are more useful than exercises in conjecture.

Fake Pilots and more!

2011-03-16T17:17:00.002+05:30

Was anyone in India surprised when news of the arrest of a few "fake" pilots in India broke? In this country ruled by incompetence and mediocrity, we expect only the worst news.

The arrested "fake" pilots/commanders of commercial flights had managed to get their flight licenses using forged documents, certificates/mark sheets and/or falsified flight logs. Everyone who aspires to fly a commercial jet has to have competence and experience. Flight experience is logged and a pilot has to log 200 hours of flight to be eligible for a "commercial pilot" license. A commercial pilot has to log 1500 hours of flight to be eligible for a flight commander license. It is a shame that our corrupt pilots pay money to get to "hours" on their log books!

If these pilots are "fake" pilots, then most of the motor drivers on Indian roads are "fake" drivers. Majority of Indians pay their way through motor driving tests. Those who learn driving in a driving school don't realize that their fee might include a kickback to some corrupt motor vehicle inspector. Driving schools in India, with a few exceptions, are a big joke. Paper work is all that matters. No doctor who issues a certificate to a prospective driver ever checks his/her eyesight. A certificate is issued for a fee. Very often, driving schools have a tie-up with an eye hospital to secure such medical certificates in bulk - without sending the candidates to the doctor concerned. Is it then any wonder that road accidents kills thousands each year in India? To make matters worse, drunken driving too is on the rise. Yet, our "Fake Drivers" don't make headlines because the lives lost on our highways are not considered as precious as the lives of those who can afford to fly!

But why shouldn't these "fake" pilots and drivers bribe their way up? They and millions of their countrymen have always paid money to get things done. In many Indian colleges, students pay money to obtain the required "attendance" so that they can appear for their examinations. Employees pay their doctors to cook up false "medical certificates." We pay our way through railway reservation hassles, school admissions, lengthy and cumbersome government procedures, etc. That we can pay our way through is etched deep within our minds. It has coloured our spiritualities too. We attempt to bribe God or whatever deity we worship.

The DGCA might muster enough courage and will power to scrutinize all pilot licenses granted recently. But who will go through the length and breadth of this country and pull up the dime a dozen "fake doctors" who practice medicine in India? Throughout rural India, homoeopaths and ayurvedic doctors practise allopathic medicine. There may be exceptions to this. Very often, a village hospital is run by a homoeopath. Administration of a bottle of glucose intra-venous is the most common "treatment" given to hapless villagers. Those who insist on getting a "powerful" injection end up getting distilled water shots on their rear side.

The discovery of "fake" pilots is just the tip of an iceberg. Our land is teeming with "fakes" - fake doctors, fake teachers, fake engineers, fake mechanics, fake consultants, fake scientists, fake 'godmen' and 'godwomen', ... the list seems endless. Like spiders that spread an elaborate web to catch an unsuspecting fly, these unscrupulous people lie in wait for their victims.

Most Indians are incurably selfish. Concern for the neighbour is far from anyone's mind. We spit out through the window of a bus. All that matters is that the spit leaves OUR mouths. Upon whom it lands is not our problem! The attitude of these "fake" pilots and others is similar. "I want to fulfill my ambition. I want to be a pilot and make lots of money. I don't care how many people's lives I put at risk as long as my desires are fulfilled."

Enforcement of strict laws and monitoring are needed. But this alone will not cure a people who are given to such hyper pretense and mediocrity and utter disregard for the safety and welfare of those who depend on them. Those who endanger the lives of the others for mere fulfillment of their dreams must be sent to the gallows.

KJV: Time to celebrate; Time to go beyond

2011-03-09T15:31:00.001+05:30

This year, the church is celebrating the 400th anniversary of the release of the King James Bible. There are millions of Christians who value the King James Version. Many of them would go to any length to defend their preference for this classic version. Yet, I believe that it is high time for Christians to stop romanticizing the KJV and go beyond this classic version.

The KJV came as an answer to the prayers of many Christians. Most notably, the prayer of William Tyndale before his martyrdom is remembered. Indeed, the KJV has its place in world history as the book that singularly influenced generations of Christians, the world of arts, literature, governance and law.

Recently, I visited a Christian family and took part in their "family prayer." The man of the house selected a passage from the book of Isaiah and read it out to his family. I knew instantly that he was reading from the venerated KJV. I looked around and saw the blank expression on the faces of his children. They weren't getting the head or tail of what he was reading. I too was unable to get the import of the verse. I knew this family's hard core devotion to the King James Version. A thought that flashed through my mind was this: sticking to the KJV is probably the best way to keep the next generation from understanding the Word of God!

Why would anyone root for a Bible written in archaic English? Why would anyone impose a disadvantage upon his/her own children and grandchildren especially when it comes to understanding the Word of God?

While interpreting the parable of the sower, Jesus said that the good soil represented people who received God's Word and understood it (Matthew 13:23). Those who do not understand the Word can never bear the fruit of obedience! The archaic language and constructs of the KJV prevents easy comprehension of God's Word.

I am told that the KJV is the 'original' English Bible. This is because, supporters of KJV say, the KJV is translated from the most faithful version of the Greek New Testament, commonly known as the "Received Text" or "Textus Receptus." Modern translators favour other Greek versions to the "Textus Receptus."

Is the "Textus Receptus" Greek NT superior to other "critical" versions? That question should be answered by Biblical scholars. The matter is more complex than can be handled here. The first Greek NT was printed in 1516. Hundred and twenty years later, in 1633, the publisher Elzevirs of Leyden added a "blurb" on the title page of the Greek NT. It read, "textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum, or, "therefore you have the text now received by all." It was from this that we get the commonly used term "received text." Unfortunately, the term was wrongly applied to all the preceding Greek NT editions that were released prior to 1633. The question is, should a publisher's blurb be treated as a stamp of God's approval or as mark of the superior text transmission?

The translators of KJV did not restricted themselves to one printed edition of the Greek New Testament. Primarily, they relied on Beza's edition of 1598. Over 170 times, they departed from this text preferring other editions of the Greek NT. Over 60 times, the translators of KJV departed from all the available Greek NT edition for the Latin Vulgate! Until 1881, there was no Greek NT edition that fully agreed with the KJV. Therefore, it is unwise to claim that King James Version relied on one Received Text" or to claim that KJV is superior to other English versions of the Bible.

We are told that the King James Version is the only "authorized" version of the Bible. Who "authorized" the KJV? Even it is none other than King James who authorized it, who is man to authorize God's Word?

If we get to talk about the errors in this "authorized" version, there are plenty of them. A few months ago, a retired scientist who belongs to the Brethren Assemblies said to me, "The Bible doesn't say that Jesus is divine. Jesus himself didn't claim to be divine." I asked the gentleman which version of the Bible he read all his life. He said that he read the King James Version. I guided him to Titus 2:13 in the KJV. It read, "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ". Any reader would understand this verse as referring to the appearance of God the Father and of Jesus Christ, the Saviour. The KJV missed out a crucial comma. The verse should read, "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus." (NAU) Undoubtedly, Jesus Christ is here described as "our great God and Savior." A man who spent more than 70 years in the Brethren Assemblies missed out on this great truth because he restricted himself to the KJV. That's too much of a loss for "KJV only" readers.

That's not the only verse where the KJV got it wrong about the Lord Jesus Christ. Check out the opening verse of 2 Peter . The KJV renders it as "Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:" Here again, the righteousness seems to be that of God the Father and of Jesus the Son. Instead, it should be "the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ." Peter describes Jesus as "God and Savior."

Even if there are no other reasons for me to go beyond the KJV in favour of other versions of the English Bible, these two verses are good enough.

We the Disposable People of India

2011-01-15T17:07:00.004+05:30

Here we are, at the dawn of a new decade. The eyes of our planners and rulers are fixed on decadal goals for growth in economic activity and production. We take pride in India's growing significance on the global scene and about our newly allotted place in the UN Security Council. We are proud about our population lately, especially after we discovered how our booming millions kept India's economic engine rolling even though the rest of the world experienced recession. And yet, there may not be another country on earth where people's lives are less valued than in India.

The National Human Rights Commission's verdict regarding a shocking incident hit the dailies a week ago. The NHRC ordered the state of Goa to pay a compensation of Rupees fifty thousand to a beggar who was dumped in a garbage dump by Goa police. The state of Goa has been asked to recover the amount from the salaries of the errant police constables. Besides, the NHRC has ordered the state of Goa to take steps to rehabilitate the beggar and to file a compliance report by mid February.

The shocking incident took place in June 2009. A businessman in Goa complained to the police about the nuisance created by a beggar in front of his hotel. Police picked the disabled beggar, aged 47, and told him that he would be taken to Mother Teresa's hospital. However, that rainy night, the police dumped him in a smelly garbage dump and left him there to die.

Incidentally, the garbage dump was situated right in front of a local YMCA building. The president of a local YMCA chapter, Mr Joseph Vaz, noticed the beggar who managed to crawl from the dump to the YMCA campus. With great difficulty, the beggar said that he was from Tuticorin district of Tamil Nadu and that a police party had dumped him on the garbage dump. He had worked on board a fishing trawler for nearly 30 years before he met with an accident that disabled him waist down.

It is bad enough for a handicapped fisherman to end up on the streets begging. The state did not come with a helping hand when he was in need. As if his predicament wasn't bad enough, the kind arm of the state threw him into the waste basket of ultra-modern India.

The story did not end like the story of the "Rich Man and Lazarus" that Jesus narrated. Taking notice of this gory incident, the NHRC has come up with a compensation package for the beggar. We do not know how the learned judges of NHRC arrived at the figure of Rupees fifty thousand as compensation for the barbaric act committed by an arm of the state. Probably, this paltry compensation is due to the beggar's status as a non-productive member of society. If it had been an industrialist or an exporter or an MP, the compensation would have run into millions.

Throwing a person into a garbage dump is worse than sending him to the gallows. It is an attack on the dignity of the person - a poor, handicapped person in pain. When done by the police, it becomes an official statement of government policy: "Get rid of the unproductive poor and sick and thus get rid of poverty." This is why I believe that the NHRC should have ordered the head of state of Goa to personally apologize to Mr. Shelton (the poor man has a name!). The policemen who dumped him on the garbage pile should be dumped at the very same spot on a rainy night for 24 hours with their hands and legs tied up! And the state of Goa should adopt Mr. Shelton to take care of him and rehabilitate him all the days of his life.

Life without onions

2010-12-28T11:54:00.001+05:30

Over the past two to three weeks, the price of onions went up steadily from around Rs. 20 to Rs. 70. This is the second time in the past decade that onion prices shot through the roof. Yet, farmers in Maharashtra complain that they are not making more money out of this sudden price-rise. The government seems to be clueless. They sure did impose a ban on the export of onions and decided not to impose any tax/duties on the import of onions. In any case, onions have left almost all of India in tears during this holiday season.

If the price of onions go unbridled, it can bring down a government - be it at the centre or at the state level. In 1999, the "humble onion" brought the Delhi government to tears. The BJP government in Delhi was forced out by the sudden rise in the price of onions. This might explain why Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who was at his usual silent best during the stormy winter session of Parliament, intervened and spoke up! He expressed 'deep concern' over the sharp rise in the price of onion. It is said that the PM demanded an explanation from the Union Minister for Agriculture Sharad Pawar. Governments in various states scrambled to hold special vegetable marts to sell onions at a subsidised rate.

The easiest way to deal with price rise of a commodity is to avoid it at least for a season. Yet, no politician or leader advised us to shun onions if we couldn't afford to buy onions at Rs. 70 a kilo. If all us just avoided onions for a fortnight, its price would have come down!

That would be like asking a Malayalee to live without coconuts! Or, it's like asking a Bengali to forgo fish. Indians - except for those who abstain from onions due to religious reasons - cannot live without this 'humble' vegetable. Is there any curry that doesn't start off with the frying of onions? I doubt. Almost all recipes of Indian dishes begin with this instruction: "Saute onions in oil till they are golden brown." Which is why our people bought onions at such high prices.

For over a month, I've been doing almost all the cooking at home. (My wife, who is a good cook, is recovering from an illness.) I decided not to buy the regular big onions ever since its price went above Rs. 40/kg. We decided not to use onions in our curries. Wherever we had to have some onions, we used the cheaper shallots. Fried cumin seeds and asafoetida can give a flavour similar to that of onions according to wisegeek. The bulbs and stalk of fennel too are excellent substitutes for onions, says Offtotheright.

We adopted a similar approach to coconuts a decade ago when we moved out of Kerala. From a household that had enough coconut palms and a good yield for domestic consumption, we moved to various states where coconuts were used only as a part of religious rituals. Can a Malayalee live without coconuts? Impossible, we might say. But we did it for several years--without any considerable damage to our regional identity.

I am sure that there are many who did not consider it worthwhile to spend hours outside government stalls to procure subsidised onions. With sufficient ingenuity, we can overcome our silly dependence on one vegetable or food item. Or else, we'll fall prey to the schemes of traders.

Church Halls - Our Under-used [and misused] Assets

2010-12-14T21:31:00.003+05:30

A Pentecostal Church hall in Mizoram remained shut for a week after someone discovered an unmarried couple locked in an unholy communion with each other in the porch. Conjugal acts in the church premises was considered "blasphemous." After the church committee pardoned the couple, the hall was opened for regular religious services. That was unusual in Mizoram, a place where people tear down desecreated church buildings to build new 'santuaries.' This 'act' by the couple in a church building was most certainly not unprecedented, at least in Mizoram.

Different people might raise different questions about this incident. Secular media wondered whether coitus was considered as an unholy act by Mizo Christians. Whether it's a holy or unholy act, the couple should have picked a place other than a place of worship, argued some others. While still some others commented that churches are usually the only available secluded place in an otherwise crowded city or town for anyone who is looking for solitude.

They are right, aren't they? Sadly, they are. From Monday to Saturday, most Church buildings are quite places, free from prying eyes and 'intruders.' Our halls are used just for a few hours a week. For the rest of the week, they remain closed. Mid-week prayer meetings are usually held in homes. At the most, a half-day "fasting prayer" is held on one of the week days. We are aware of churches that put their halls to better use. Such churches are too few in this country.

And come to think of it. Churches in India spend a humungous amount of money, time and effort to buy real estate and to erect a church. After all the effort and tears, we end up spending just a few hours a week in these halls. Christians in China are unable to comprehend this phenomena. A majority of them, several times the number of Christians in India, do not see a need for a church building, big or small. They meet in homes. They know how to be Christians in their homes, the place where it matters. Most "church-going" Christians in the world find it difficult to practice Christianity in their homes!

Indian Christians do not have the money to build big "church" buildings. They collect money from fellow Christians in India and abroad. They take expensive loans from banks. After their "church" is ready, they end up paying Rs. 50,000 or more every month for five to seven years or even longer. It never occurs to these churches that their hard earned money should be invested in the edification of church members and not on steel and mortar structures. How can Indian Christians choose to do that as long as they mistake a building for "church"?

Worse, many Christians hold on to the "sanctuary" mentality even though Jesus taught clearly that there is no place on earth worthy to be called "house of God." Contrary to the Samaritan woman's contention (or Jewish contention, for that matter) Jesus explicitly stated that God, who is spirit, will no longer be worshipped in a few 'holy' places. It is neither Jerusalem nor Gerisim. The Father seeks such worshippers who understand His omnipresent nature and worship Him according to that principle. Worship in "spirit and in truth" is worship offered by people who understand God's transcendent nature and as a result do not assign holiness to any particular place on earth. People who consider one place to be holier than another fail to appreciate God's spiritual nature.

What then is church? Church is God's chosen people. God's church is free to worship God anywhere on earth. Let's stop feeding banks and contractors, building large buildings; instead, let us invest our time and resources on God's people.

Service: the essence of leadership

2010-10-10T18:22:00.001+05:30

A visiting professor in a Bible Seminary was angry with his boss, the Academic Dean, because he was not assigned to teach any class that semester. He wanted to know why he was sidelined. The Dean explained to him that there were enough resident teachers to handle the subjects offered that semester.

The visiting professor would not buy any of that. "Who do you think I am?" he asked, shivering with anger and frustration. "I am a part of the team that started this college. I put in my money into this institution so that I can teach here."

Some truths cannot be hidden for long, the Dean thought. Some "great" men donate money and establish colleges for their own sake--not for the sake of students who need training!

Such incidents are not isolated ones. We encounter proud men and women everywhere. There is one thing in common in all of them. They all think that the system around them was created for them instead of perceiving that they are there to serve those around them.

There are teachers who think that schools were built so that they can earn a living or get a platform to display their intellectual wares. There are bus conductors in our country who think that buses and passengers exist for the sole purpose of giving them a livelihood. Some of them think that they're doing a favour to passengers. There are doctors and nurses who think that the sole purpose of setting up hospitals is to give folks of their profession a chance to make money. There are pastors who think that churches and church-goers exists to ensure their financial well-being. The list seems to be endless. There are 'government servants' in this country who think that government and its offices exist for providing them jobs. Many politicians are no different.

As a student, I have frequented the offices of many universities. Workers in these offices often behaved as if the university existed for their sake. Students who went to them asking for certificates or mark lists were seen as pests who 'disturbed' their peace! How very often students and members of the public are asked by "government servants" to "come back next week" when in reality, their work can be done in a few minutes! Even Christians in this country do this to their subordinates or to those whom they serve. They forget the biblical injunction, 'Do not say to your neighbor, "Go, and come back, And tomorrow I will give it," When you have it with you.' (Prov. 3:28). It goes without saying that these miserable people need a re-orientation or a change of attitude.

The Lord Jesus, on the night he observed his final Passover with his disciples, left a sterling example for all of us. He knew that the Father God had given all things into His hands. His ministry was a resounding success. He was about to go back to His Father. Contrary to what lesser mortals would do at such a time as that, he displayed the essence of true leadership, which is none other than selfless service.

When the Master and his disciples sat for the meal, there was one thing that had to be done before the meal. There was no host there to look after their needs. There were no slaves around to wash their feet. Each disciple must have noticed that they were about to have a meal before the customary washing. Yet none of them volunteered to be a slave for a few minutes. That's when Jesus rose up and wrapped a towel around his waist. He volunteered to wash the feet of his disciples instead of ordering the youngest of his disciples to so. He knew that He was there to serve instead of being served.

In remembrance of the Master's act of humility and in obedience to his command that this disciples imitate Him, many Christian leaders and bishops wash the feet of their subordinates once each year. They, like many, have missed the point. Jesus commanded his disciples to imitate his example of humility and service in their daily lives.

Washing of each other's feet is not the need of the hour in our times; nor is it customary in our culture to wash the feet of guests. However, if we keep our eyes open, we can notice numerous opportunities of service. Many a menial tasks are left undone for the lack of servants or attendants. All too often, we consider ourselves too dignified even to pick up a piece of paper from the floor. Files languish on a table in most government offices just because a peon or attendant is on leave. Doors creak and toilets stink. Our neighbourhoods are mega garbage dumps. Our streets are filthy. Our environment goes from bad to worse. "That's not my job!" is our favourite chorus and Mei kya karoo? ("What am I to do?") is our national anthem.

"If it's nobody's job, then I'll take it up and do it." That was Jesus' attitude. He provided us a good example. Unless the Church in India provides such a living example to this country that is plagued by various problems, our nation doesn't have much hope. Ever menial task is despised in India. People who do menial tasks have for long suffered as "untouchables." Jesus has given a new twist to this whole gamut of lowly and menial tasks. Those who are condemned to a life of slavery and drudgery can derive a new liberation by following Jesus' attitude. And those who are in positions of authority need to understand that they are there to serve those placed under their care.

Let's discover the essence of leadership in service.

Remembering Revival

2010-09-29T10:49:00.003+05:30

What can be worse for a Christian community than the remembrance of or even boasting about a revival that had visited it long ago when there is no sign of revival today? This is true in the case of individuals too. Yet, without realising this, many Christians boast about past revivals. Of what good is a history of revivals if we aren't blessed to experience one today? The study of revivals is useful only if it can stir us out of our complacence and drive us to seek God in prayer and repentance.

The campus of Pandita Ramabai Mukti Mission has a story to tell. It’s a story of a revival that is seasoned with the bitter reality -- a lack of similar spiritual climate within its walls today.

Miss Abrams, a missionary in Mukti Mission, was woken up from her sleep on the morning of June 29, 1905, at 3:30. It was a senior girl who brought this news: “Come over and rejoice with us. J. has received the Holy Spirit. I saw the fire, ran across the room for a pail of water and was about to pour it on her, when I discovered that she was not on fire.”

When Miss Abrams reached the place, she saw a number of girls on their knees. They were in prayer, confessing their sins and weeping bitterly. They praised God and exhorted each other to repent.

The following evening, on June 30, when Ramabai was expounding John 8 in their daily prayer meeting, the Holy Spirit descended on the girls in power. They were overcome with grief for their sins. All of them prayed loudly at the same time, confessing their sins. Some saw heavenly visions.

One of the marks of the revival that God sent on the inmates of Mukti Mission was a great sorrow regarding one’s sins. Many confessed their sins to God for hours. Once they were through with their confession and weeping, they knew that God had forgiven their sins. Their faces shone with a heavenly radiance. So strong was the conviction of sins that came upon the girls and women that the Mission had to abandon it daily schedule at the Bible School, the industrial school and other places of work. On several occasions, many continued in prayer throughout the night.
One of the Mukti workers wrote about these events thus:

"Even young girls are stricken down with the spirit of repentance. They cannot eat, sleep, or work, until they go to the bottom of things. They seek the peace of pardon, and immediately begin to seek sanctification and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. They search and weep before God, until He shows them the state of their heart. They repent, restore, confess, and finally come into such joy that it knows no bounds. They call it a baptism of fire. They say that when the Holy Spirit comes upon them it is almost unbearable – the burning within. Afterwards they are transformed; their faces light up with joy, their mouths are filled with praise." (Helen S. Dyer, Revival in India, 1907)

Was Ramabai disturbed that the Holy Spirit had taken over her place, upsetting schedules and decorum? Not all. At first, she tried to control the revival by bringing in some order. Later, she realised her mistake and yielded to the full control of the Spirit of God. She was even glad to reduce the working hours in her schools so that people could spend more time in prayer.

While writing about the lessons she learned from the revival, she wrote, "Our work will bear lasting fruit if we work less and pray more. For the present, the Lord would have us spend more time in prayer. The school work and industrial work have suffered much by letting the girls go to the enquiry room or stay up all night and spend most of the day in praying for themselves and others. But the Lord wants us to give time to our children to enquire into the state of their own hearts. In doing this, we have excited much criticism, but we are content to be criticised.

“Some have laughed at us, for we have become fools. The Spirit-filled girls cannot suppress their sorrow for sin or their joy in salvation. They burst into loud crying and laughing, they shake, they tremble, some of them dance with joy, and almost all pray simultaneously in loud voices."

Another characteristic of this revival was a God-given desire to spend more time in Bible study. This is quite a lesson to those who neglect the Word while giving themselves to prayer. No wonder then that Ramabai was able to translate the entire Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Marathi.

There was also a greater desire to preach the gospel to those who lived in sins. The combination of intercession and evangelism did wonders. Miss Soonderbai Pawar remarked: "We have thus far believed that we had to speak to convince those who listen to us, and thus we have been depending much on our own means and ways. But now it is my experience, and that of others who have toiled for years, that it is through prayer that hearts are reached."

A visitor to Mukti gets to know of all the wonderful things that God did here a century ago. The book titled "The Baptism of the Holy Ghost and Fire" written by none other than Miss Abrams is still in print and is available at the Mukti Mission office. However, the cemetery-like order and decorum in the Mukti Church of today will make one wonder whether this indeed was the place that was rocked by the Holy Spirit a century ago. If only the stones in the century old church building could speak! They would ridicule anyone who places Holy Spirit baptism, revival, prayer, Bible study and evangelism on the back burner to give pre-eminence to social work.

It is only natural for anyone to wonder why the Asuza Street Revival (1906) in California brought in lasting results - in the form of a worldwide Pentecostal/Charismatic movement and an explosion of evangelism in the 20th century - while many revivals in India died out in their infancy. Mukti Mission, a century ago, was more ‘Pentecostal’ in its outlook and experience than most Pentecostal churches of today. Yet, how did the revival die down? How did the word ‘Pentecostal’ become a despised by-word? We'll leave that question to the historians among us!

Remembering Ramabai

2010-09-16T17:40:00.003+05:30

It isn't very often that you get the feeling that you are standing on holy ground. If ever there is one such place in India, in my opinion, it is the private study of Pandita Ramabai, now a part of the venerable Pandita Rambai Mukti Mission's head quarters in Kedgaon, Pune.

The doorway to this wood-floored square room is low, requiring most visitors to bow a little before they enter it. This is where the Mother of Modern India lived, worked and died.
Each block of dressed granite that sits neatly in the walls have a story to tell - stories of valour, toil, endurance, grace and piety of a dimunitve four-foot tall Brahmin widow who initiated a revolution in Indian society.

In 1922, on a fine morning, her associates found her kneeling beside her bed. Her Bible was opened to Psalm 16 in which David sang, "The lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage." Ramabai had gone to be with her Lord; she died while in prayer. The previous night she had completed translating the entire Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Marathi. That this saint remained standing beside her high table during the course of her work shows how much she respected the Word of God.

Although the Bible Translation project was the hardest work she undertook, she is known for her good works. She looked after young Brahmin widows, orphans and destitute women. At one time, she even had 2000 women and children under her care. Her community of faith relied on God for their every need.

Ramabai was

the first woman to be given the title Pandita & Saraswati
the first woman in India to get Kaise-e-Hind Award (equivalent to Bharat Ratna).
the first woman in the world to translate the Bible into Marathi language.
the first woman to encourage the education of women doctors in India
the first woman who suggested that Hindi should be India's national language.
the first woman to invent Marathi Braille/Typeset.
the first woman to organize cottage industry, especially the making and wearing of khadi
the first woman to organize widespread relief work for orphans and widows during famine.
the first woman to organize the kindergarten system of education in India
the first woman who raised her voice for the rights of women, against political authority (The Hunter Commission).

Isn't it a pity that most Indian Christians have not heard about Ramabai? Yet, her contribution to this nation remains greater than those of the Gandhhi family. As a nation, we have not done justice to the memory of this saint. After much coaxing, the Indian Government released a postage stamp in honour of Ramabai in the late 80s.

Ramabai Mukti Mission spread the gospel in various villages and towns in Maharashtra. The revival that God sent here in 1905 is well known. A group of poor women were in prayer while God sent His Holy Spirit upon them in a spectacular manner. The women were literally on fire. Some of them ran out to fetch water to douse the flames. Ramabai witnessed this incident and she understood that it was a heavenly fire that had descended upon the praying women. Later, Ramabai wrote at length in defence of this experience which she and her associates referred to as the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. Although a similar revival in Azusa Street, California, gave birth to the Pentecostal movement which further led to the largest explosion of evangelism and mission in the world, the revival in Mukti Mission got quenched. Some chroniclers in later years even tried to ignore such a marvelous divine intervention. What was begin in the Spirit, of course, needs to be continued in the Spirit.

It was seventeen years ago that I first visited Ramabai's institution. Each time I am here, I am reminded of God's grace and faithfulness to those who cast their lives into His hand. Ramabai once said, "A life totally committed to God has nothing to fear, nothing to lose, nothing to regret."

Around six hundred children, girls and women today live in the home that Ramabai set up. Every Indian Christian should visit Ramabai's Mission and gain inspiration from her life and work.

Grain, Grain, Everywhere!

2010-09-15T23:24:00.001+05:30

It is good to hear from the Prime Minister once in a while. Recently, when he spoke to the media, the group of editors who listened to his decisive pronouncements hailed him as a decisive Prime Minister who clears the cloud of confusion at the right time. The Prime Minister trashed the "suggestion" of the Supreme Court when he said that grain that is literally rotting in the government's godowns cannot be distributed freely to the poor. He said that regardless of the lack of proper storage facilities this country has, his government is committed to procuring grain at a support price in order to save the farmers.

The farmers produce grain and the government procures it using tax payers' money. What happens to the grain after that does not seem to be the government's concern! The shameful fact is that India does not have proper storage facilities for the grain she produces. The Food Corporation's grain storage facilities were exhausted long ago. Private godowns were leased for the purpose and yet, we are no way close to having adequate and safe storage facilities for our grain. Our leaders do not have the answers to this Catch-22 situation. If it doesn't procure grain, many of our farmers - who have a greater voice in Parliament - will commit suicide. If the procured grain rots, needy people within and outside the country suffer want and die. Our Prime Minister seems to say that his government would rather save the farmers than the starving millions.

Any one who has ever ridiculed the Bible's relevance for today's rulers and nations should take note of the biblical narrative on Joseph's prime ministership in Egypt. Having been warned of a famine, and having been appointed by the Pharaoh to save Egypt, Joseph first constructed adequate storage facility for the grain Egypt would produce in the seven years of plenty. Before the grain was brought in by farmers and revenue officials, he had a place to store it! In other words, before he put on his shoes, he put on his socks.

Our rulers don't seem to appreciate that logic. They would rather wear their shoes first and then struggle to wear their socks. While we planned and worked for a Green revolution, we should have set up world-class silos to hold the grain we would produce. China has four or five times the grain storage capacity that we boast of. We are not talking about godowns here. China has scientifically designed silos to stock up their food grain for ages.

Our country has got its priorities wrong. We peg our nation's honour on some prestigious Games and we pour in our blood and sweat into it. The Games are so important, the rulers say, that investigations into corruption charges can wait till the Games are over! But we do not have the wisdom or the will to allocate resources to build grain silos to preserve our grain. We do not even have the technical know-how to build good silos. We do not have a means to correctly identify the poor among us who deserve to be fed. We do not have a strong PDS to make sure that the grain reserved for the poor will reach their mouths.

In such times as this, should we wonder how modern day Robinhoods got access and inroads into those regions that are untainted by the fruits of our much hyped "development?" Even as we condemn their violent ways and idealistic dreams, the people of India has the right to ask their rulers to get their priorities straight. Instead of getting bogged down in silly battles over jurisdiction with the honourable Courts, the Executive must read the pulse of the nation and do something positive to prevent grain wastage.

Vanity Fair 2010

2010-07-30T19:03:00.001+05:30

The Commonwealth Games 2010, we are told, is the pride of India. A huge amount of money is being spent on the Games and related infrastructure, all in the name of national pride. Work on various stadia and sports facilities is progressing at a frenetic pace, 24x7, to meet the deadline. On the positive side, Delhi got a new ultra-modern terminal and a new metro rail line linking the city with the airport. However, the former Union Sports Minster Mani Shanker Iyer's comment on the Games has opened a Pandora's Box for the Organisers and the Union Government.

It is reported that Mr. Iyer never was in favour of India hosting the Games in 2010. Yet, as a part of the Union Cabinet, he too was responsible for that decision to host the Games in India. In order to get the chance to host the Games, India, he says, had to outmaneuver Canada's efforts to secure the 2010 Games by offering a huge sum to commonwealth countries. Mr. Iyer had signed the cheques albeit unwillingly because he always felt that India was not economically strong enough to host the Commonwealth Games. Besides, he says now that the money paid to secure the Games for India was actually a bribe. According to Mr Iyer, "Gandhi's India" cannot justify payment of bribes or payoffs--whatever be the name one ascribes to it. Mr Iyer feels that the hundreds of millions spent on the Games is a colossal waste by a poor country. This is why he said that he would be happy if the Commonwealth Games 2010 was unsuccessful! That way, he hoped that the Indian government will not feel like bringing in costlier Games such as the Olympics to India.

Some dismissed the former Sports Minister's view as "anti-national." But we feel that this Indian is more patriotic than all the others who pin India's honour to a flamboyant Games. Mr. Iyer had proposed that the Government should spend money to create sports infrastructure in every town and village of India in order to make India a sporting country. Instead of granting that request, the government chose to go for the costlier option - with the hope that the Games would spark interest in sports and games in the Indian youth.

Are the woes of the Organising Committee over? No. Fresh allegations of corruption and ham-handedness are surfacing. Workers who are made to work 24x7 at this stage cannot deliver the best results. Quality of construction is often compromised in the last minute rush to get works completed. Workers are being killed for want of safety or proper rest. There are claims that the bids were rigged. The cost of the Games has exceeded the budgeted figures by several times. That's not all. There's now a stench of corruption emanating from various quarters. Times Now reported that the criminal investigation team of the United Kingdom's Revenue and Customs department is investigating illegal money transfers to a UK-based company that supposedly provided services to Organising Committee of the Commonwealth Games. The Indian High Commission is reported to have written to the Sports Ministry to investigate the money trail.

Legitimate questions should not be shot down in the name of "national pride." Should a country like India that does not have adequate facilities to scientifically store even one third of its food stocks ever think of pursuing a vanity such as hosting a Commonwealth Games? We hear that the Railways do not have money for procuring better safety systems! The radar in Delhi IGI airport did not function for twenty minutes. The Mumbai airport does not have a radar to monitor ground traffic! Our state governments do not have money to widen roads in order to minimise road accidents. Our police forces are ill trained and ill equipped to face terrorists. Yet, we have hundreds of crores for hosting a Games! Where do our priorities lie?

Leadership through lottery?

2010-07-28T22:30:00.003+05:30

One of the leaders of an indigenous Pentecostal denomination recently opined that the time has come for his denomination to scrap elections in favor of selecting leaders by lot. Church leaders - or leaders in the organizational setup, to be precise - in several Pentecostal churches are selected through high voltage 'democratic elections.' Elections are mandatory because these 'churches' are registered with the government as 'societies.'

Elections have almost always brought the worst out of Pentecostal Christians. Aspirants to high offices in the denominational structure often stoop to the levels of secular party politics. At times, the people whom we call "dirty politicians" show better sense of judgment or ethics than some of our great leaders who fight it out in the open to become the President, Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, etc., of an executive or governing council. In the heat of election campaigns, members of these churches get polarized; party spirit takes over. Finally, those are adept at self-aggrandizement, those are wealthy enough to buy votes or cart voters to the polling stations grab the reins of respective organizations.

Divisions, party spirit, rallying under one spiritual leader to isolate another leader, boasting about one leader at the expense of another - all these are condemned as gross sins by the Apostle Paul in his epistles to the Corinthian Church. But who cares to study or apply these Scriptural lessons to day-to-day functioning of their Church?

Many people who are fed up with "dirty" politics in their churches might welcome the suggestion that leaders must be chosen by lot. After all, it gives us the impression that God is the one who chooses one person or a set of persons out of many candidates. And we have a biblical precedent too! The apostles selected Matthias by lot to fill up the vacancy created by Judas Iscariot's infamous exit from the apostolic team.

A closer examination will reveal that these claims are dubious. The casting of lots in Acts 1 can hardly be taken as normative for the Church. First, casting of lots was a Jewish practice. Acts of the Apostles, being a book that shows the transition of the Church from an all-Jewish body to an all-inclusive body of believers from all kinds of backgrounds faithfully shows the remnants of Jewish practices in the early church. Second, the practice was never repeated. Finally, we do not see any evidence of God's intervention in the selection of Matthias! Whether God intervened or not, one of the two candidates would have been chosen. That being the case, how can we say that it was God who chose Matthias? If God had chosen Matthias to be part of the Twelve, then why is there no reference about this man either before or after this event?

Even if we suppose that God is the One who chooses people whenever we prayerfully cast lots, we have further questions to answer. Who decides the candidates whose names will be recorded on the lots? It's us humans! We select the candidates and then we afford God the "freedom" to choose His favorite(s) out of the given candidates. What magnanimity! In short, we will decide the perimeters of God's selection!

If God should have total control over the entire process of selecting leaders by lot, then, the process must include every member of the Church -- quiet similar to how Achan was chosen out of every tribe, every clan and every family! But surely, none of these churches will ever dare to include the names of every member in the box of lots!

The New Testament clearly shows that it is God or Christ who selects leaders of the Church. God does not do that on the basis of dynasty, caste, color or proven intellectual prowess. The risen Lord Jesus gives "gifts of grace" to each member of the Church according to His discretion. He makes some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists and some pastors who teach. To some others he gives the supernatural ability to leader or perform administrative tasks. It's these spiritual gifts that should determine who all should lead the Church. In other words, God determines the leaders of the Church.

We need to make way for God and His charismatic works in our midst. Let human 'masters' step aside to see God's anointed leaders!

Gender and Church Leadership

2010-07-14T15:28:00.002+05:30

Learning to be content with God's design and purpose

When God created man, he created them male and female. This divinely instituted gender differentiation holds the key to the success of any society or individual. As creatures, it is best for us to submit to God's design of sexual differentiation and all that such a differentiation brings into our lives.

There has been a sustained campaign to erase or minimise the divinely instituted gender differentiation from both inside and outside the Church. Those who wish to pretend that there are no differences between men and women have for long deployed various arguments to buttress their position.

The most common among them is the claim that men and women are equal. Any one who dares to question this claim is dismissed as a Pre-Cambrian ignoramus. The trap is a subtle one. Those who claim that men and women are "equal" do not qualify their statement. In what respect are a man and a woman equal? Is it an equality in terms of their strengths and abilities? Or does it mean that they both are "equal" before the law - equally liable to prosecution if found guilty? Or, is male-female "equality" merely a political one - by which they both have "equal" political rights?

An unqualified statement "men and women are equal" is as meaningful as the statement "apples and oranges are equal." Political and legal equalities are guarenteed by law in civil society. Therefore, any one who wishes to highlight the differences between the sexes, if he or she is not specific, falls prey to the designs of those who cannot think beyond political or legal terms. Men and women aren't equal either physically or emotionally. Gender differences aren't superficial; they are etched on every cell, down to the level of chromosomes.

Those who pretend to know everything dismiss "gender roles" as another flawed human invention. The task of bearing and rearing children, they would say, was given to women by oppressive men! And yet, none of these 'liberated' men or women have been able to modify their bodies in order to reassign or alter reproductory functions! Will they be able to produce altered men or women -- something akin to "seedless grapes"?

What about the task of bread-winning? The so-called enlightened women would ask, "Why should that be the exclusive preserve of men? Let us also do it and prove our mettle." That God, in the garden of Eden, assigned the responsibility of breadwinning to men and that of bearing children to women does not matter to them. They would gladly take upon themselves both the "labour" of childbearing and the "labour" of breadwinning!

In short, both men and women find it difficult to be what God has created them to be and to do what their specific creation entitles them to do. We are willing to be anyone else and to do anything else! The recent case of woman lawyer's choice to become a "man" illustrates this wayward tendency. In order to defeat "male dominance" in society, she paid the ultimate tribute to men by opting for a sex reassignment surgery. The success of the surgery is still suspect.

The Anglican Church's debate on the question of ordaining women as bishops has brought gender-debate to the fore once again. Those for the ordination of women candidates talk about gender equality. They want their church to grow out of "old-fashioned" and "biased" Biblical teachings, which they claim were written by men from a male-dominated society.

An arbiter in this gender war should certainly not be a man or a woman! Both men and women cannot but be biased. Both stand on either sides of the gender divide! A man cannot see a woman's perspective as a woman sees it. Neither can a woman see a man's perspective as a man sees it. In such an impasse, those who believe in the divine inspiration of Scriptures are at an advantage over those who see the good Book as a set of human writings. If the Bible is God's Word, inspired by the Holy Spirit, then it certainly is above human biases. The Scriptures thus help us to rise above our biases and to understand the meaning of our lives as men or women.

In the Church, the body of Christ, both men and women are equally precious before God. Men and women are equal as recipients of God's grace. However, men and women are assigned different roles. Men are called to lead and to exercise authority. Men who refuse to lead their Churches and families are as guilty before God as are women who refuse to submit to such leadership.

There are Christians who cannot stand the idea of a hierarchy in Church. Yet, the Bible is clear on this matter. "I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ." Are men protesting because Christ is their head? Or is Christ protesting about the Father being His Head? Then why should women protest about men being their head? We are all under God and the chain of command leads to the throne of God!

The Bible teaches that God created Eve after He created Adam. This was a deliberate divine action that supports another biblical teaching that Eve was created for Adam and not vice versa. The Bible's prohibition of a woman assuming authority over men in Church is not based on St. Paul's fancy but on the historical priority of the creation of Adam and on Eve's initial fall into sin (1 Timothy 2:12-14). Those unwilling to submit to God's authority and God's Word will dismiss this passage as archaic and irrelevant to modern society.

Those who demand ordination of women as bishops point out the failures of men as leaders. Men in leadership have failed in the past; they might fail in the future too. Women may be able to showcase excellent leadership. And yet, men's failures or women's abilities are not the factors that should decide who should lead the church. Women's exclusion from leadership does not mean that they are incapable or inefficient. Men are to lead because God wants them to do so. And women submit in order to please God. It's is God's design and purposes - not the standards of the world - that should hold sway in His Church.

Suicides: Looking for scapegoats?

2010-06-14T11:20:00.001+05:30

Suicide is a deeply personal and secret decision. Should anyone be blamed for the suicide of another?

These days increasingly we hear of children, teenagers, and adults who committed suicide. The latest one is the news from Kolkata. A student of standard VIII killed himself.

For several weeks, the news media reminded us about Ruchika’s suicide. There was also a pair of sisters from Madhya Pradesh who committed suicide after a policeman disrobed and filmed them without their consent and against their wishes. Several months ago, a college student in Kerala threw herself down from the top of her college building.

In all these and other cases of suicide, members of the “victim’s” family, friends, political parties, activists, and journalists rallied together to pin the blame for these suicides on someone. College authorities, schoolteachers, molesters, criminals, etc., were charged with the crime of ‘abetting’ respective suicides.

In the latest episode, a premiere school in Kolkata was blamed for the suicide of one its students. It seems the Principal of the school caned the student a few days prior to his suicide. Those who wish to press charges against the ‘unrepentant’ Principal might have a tough time to establish a cause-effect relationship between the caning and suicide before a court of law.

There is of course this debate on the necessity and ethics of corporal punishment. It is not my intention to focus on that issue given the fact that corporal punishment in schools is banned under relevant provisions of the law in India. The teacher concerned may get prosecuted for violating that law.

The question which I wish to raise is, can we or should we blame the school or its teachers for the suicide of a student?

Just as the decision to implement corporal punishment was taken by the Principal – for which he is rightly held accountable – the decision to kill himself was taken by the student. And the student is alone is responsible for that decision. Just as twenty men cannot make a horse to drink water even though just one man can take it to the waters, twenty teachers cannot make a student commit suicide against his/her wishes.

If on the other hand the teacher should be blamed for the student’s decision to kill himself, then, as a necessary corollary, the student too should be blamed for the teacher’s decision to execute corporal punishment. No one in his right mind will blame the student for the teacher’s decision to adopt corporal punishment. Since we refuse to blame the student for the teacher’s actions, we must desist from blaming the teacher for the student’s decision to end his life. Let each person bear responsibility for his or her own actions! Suicide is a personal decision. The blame for it must not be placed on someone else.

If teachers should at all be blamed for the suicide of a student, then the charge against them should not be that of ‘abetting’ suicide but of failing to impart life-skills to that student. And in this matter, parents are equally, if not more, guilty.

When I say ‘life-skills’ I refer to the skills needed to survive in this world that is unfair, hurtful, offensive and harrowing. If we fail to teach a child to love life and to overcome every odd that life throws at him/her, what good is every other lesson that we teach?

The student concerned was indeed hurt. His teacher caned him. He must have been subjected to intense humiliation before his classmates. But are these reasons sufficient and reasonable enough to justify his decision to opt out of the land of the living? If all school-going children of my generation had thought of suicide as a potent tool against teachers who meted out corporal punishment, then not many of us would have survived till today. The quantum of corporal punishment that we endured in school is beyond the wildest imaginations of today’s children.

How is it that our children are not able to bear the slightest of sorrows or hardships? Something must be wrong with the way we raise our children. I know it is dangerous to generalize. Of course, not every child in India today is considering suicide on account of corporal punishment or bullying faced at school. However, the number of cases seems to be increasing as the years roll by. Rising number of suicide cases – often attributed to flimsiest of reasons – is a pointer to the poor mental health and poor life-skills of our children.

Instead of raising a generation that is seasoned by hardships, many of us are guilty of raising a generation of touch-me-nots. We over-protect our kids. We rush to meet the wants of our wards and train them up in instant gratification. Even before they make a wish list, we will be at the mall shopping for them. We dismiss domestic corporal punishment and discipline as the most foolish ideas of older generations. Our kids control us and dictate terms to us. They cannot take ‘No’ for an answer. Neither can they accept failure, insult, humiliation or hurt. Their capacity to endure hardship and sorrow is pitifully low. No wonder that our young adults (in their early twenties) live like overgrown babies.

Suicide happens when a person is overwhelmed by sorrow or shame or a similar emotion. There can be an accumulation of sorrows in a person’s mind. And the ‘last straw’ that leads to suicide might appear to be a very small reason to all who know the “victim.” The suicide, however, was not necessarily caused by the latest sorrow but could be the result of accumulated sorrows or stress factors.

Any counselor or health worker would know that such stress factors or burdens could be halved by the simple act of sharing it with someone who cares. If the ill-fated student of Kolkata had decided to share his sorrows with his parents – assuming that channels of communication with his parents were open and accessible at all times – he would have lived to see his teacher punished for his offenses.

Even in seemingly hopeless situations, a person who cares can often impart a sense of hope to a person who does not see anything other than the end of the tunnel ahead of him/her. In the terrible series of events that led to Ruchika’s suicide, had there been someone who could provide hope to her, or, if she had been able to muster courage and hope, she would have remained alive. In fact, Ruchika would have been the happiest person to see Rathore behind bars.

Many a victim fails to endure; they see no hope of victory or respite. Despite the cruelty of their tormentors, these ‘victims’ alone bear the responsibility for choosing to press the “Escape” button on life’s keyboard. Imparting hope and life-skills to our people can increase chances of their survival as they go through dire straits. Let’s stop the blame game and do something constructive to reduce the number of suicides among children.

The Father seeks true worshippers

2010-05-30T13:48:00.006+05:30

The worship of the Living God, the father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is our greatest privilege and our primary duty. Although Christians in general agree on this matter, disagreements about the manner of worship or its expression are common. Evangelical Christians, including those in Pentecostal folds, say in one voice that the God who is Spirit should be worshipped “in spirit and in truth.” What exactly does that mean?

My associations are largely with Pentecostal churches, especially with those from Kerala. Several times, I have heard pastors preach from John 4:24 - “God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth.” All of them consider Jesus’ words as an attestation of Pentecostal styles of worship as opposed to worship found in mainline churches that use a written liturgy or congregations that follow quieter forms of worship. Whenever they speak of worship “in the spirit,” they refer to glossolalia, speech in unknown languages, as given by the Holy Spirit. This they say by citing Paul’s assertion that a person who prays in an unknown Spirit-given language prays in his spirit. Those who pray in their own language pray with their minds while those who pray in “another tongue” pray in their spirits. They slap Paul’s statement about glossolalia (1 Corinthians 14:14) on to John 4:23 to get a definition for “worship in spirit and in truth.” Therefore, for most Indian Pentecostals, “worship in spirit” is equivalent to speaking in an unknown language to God, either individually or together in a church service.

None of Paul’s injunctions against the loud use of glossolalia in public worship meetings – except with interpretation for the edification of those gathered – is considered worthy of obedience. Paul’s guidelines for increased private exercise of glossolalia in the place of immature public flaunting of this gift are torpedoed by their compulsion to “worship in spirit.”

What did Jesus mean when he said that true worship is “worship in spirit and in truth?” Was Jesus asking his followers to “worship in other tongues?”

The Lord’s reference to true worship is taken from his conversation with a Samaritan woman. The woman had a past and was living in sin. When Jesus revealed her secrets, she understood that the man who spoke to her was a “prophet.” She quickly switched the conversation over to a debate that existed in that land about worship. “Our fathers worshipped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.” Samaritans preferred Mt. Gerizim to the temple at Jerusalem. She wanted to know what this “prophet” thought about this issue.

Jesus’ reply was different from what she expected to hear. She did not succeed in pulling Jesus into a debate over where people should gather to worship God.

Jesus said,

“Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth.” John 4:21-24

First, Jesus said that the Samaritans had got it all wrong. The Jews were right. God had revealed himself to the Jews and they were right to worship God at Jerusalem.

Second, Jesus took the discussion to a higher plane. He said that the time had come for Jews and Samaritans – or anyone for that matter – to stop arguing about the right place to find God. God isn’t limited to a place. He is not a part of this material universe. Instead, He is spirit. He transcends time and space. The question that matters is not “where do you worship” but “whom/how do you worship.”

Therefore to “worship in spirit and in truth” is to worship God sincerely with the realisation that He is omnipresent. It is to recognise that no place on earth is holier than another. For the true worshipper, the whole world is a sanctuary. He does not recognise any special “holy” label attached to or attributed to places of worship. A true worshipper need not go on a pilgrimage in search of God. As a necessary corollary, we need to say that any form of worship that localises God to a particular place, that considers a “place of worship” as holier than other places, is “false” worship.

Jesus was also announcing the divine De-recognition of Jerusalem or its temple as a “holy” place. If God is spirit, and if true worship is that which recognises God’s transcendence over time and space, then Jerusalem can no longer be called a “holy” city. God’s name could no longer be tied to one city or one temple. The Jews acted according to the revelation that they had until then. They got it right, compared to other peoples who were in the dark, as far as worship was concerned. Salvation was to come from them. Now that the Messiah had come to them, it was time for the Messiah to usher in a new scheme of things. The Jewish religious economy and the Temple in Jerusalem – the ultimate emblem of their religion – was to be torn down shortly by God.

Finally, the Messianic age is characterised by the impartation of God’s Holy Spirit upon His people. People have to born anew (as seen in the previous chapter, John 3) by water and the Spirit, in order to be a part of the Messianic kingdom. Those outside the kingdom are born just by the “flesh” while those in the Kingdom are born by the spirit. “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit” (John 3:6).

Therefore, when the New Testament contrasts the new Messianic order with the old Jewish order, it uses expressions such as these:

“... for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” 2 Cor 3:6
“ ministry of death” versus “ministry of the Spirit” 2 Cor 3:7-8
“ministry of condemnation” versus “ministry of righteousness” 2 Cor 3:9
“... Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” Gal 3:3

Therefore, when Jesus said that “true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth,” he was referring to the worship of God by those who received the Messiah, those who were regenerated the Spirit. In other words, he said that true worship is the worship offered by the global church of Jesus Christ. He invited Jews to turn their backs on the old and to welcome the new age.

Without realising this, many Pentecostals think that John 4:24 is about turning our backs on liturgical or a quieter form of worship to a more noisy form of worship marked by speaking in “other tongues.” Such a skewed understanding forced many Pentecostals to discount the importance of songs, adoration and praise in their own languages. The songs they sing get reduced to mere launching pads for “speaking in other tongues,” which they consider to be “real worship.”

Tongue-speaking is a form of prayer. The one who speaks in a strange tongue in the Spirit talks to God. That is not necessarily worship. Let’s not confuse prayer with worship. Let us use glossolalia in our private times of prayer. Even if we are led to burst out in ecstatic speech in other tongues while in church, let us do so quietly. That’s perfectly in sync with Pauline teaching in 1 Corinthians 14:28 - “... if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.”

The Father seeks true worshippers. Let us worship God, ascribing all the glory due unto His name. Let our worship arise from the knowledge of God that we get from Scriptures. Let us worship with the full assurance that we who believe in Jesus Christ are the true worshippers.

A ‘Sentimental’ Nation

2010-05-14T12:36:00.007+05:30

The Principal of a school in Alleppey, Kerala, was recently suspended over the row created by a transfer certificate issued by the school to a Muslim student. However, the father of the girl student, a Muslim clergy, who claimed that the school did not permit his daughter to wear a headscarf to school is not satisfied.

The father has taken the matter to court. He wants to the former Principal of the school to be jailed on criminal charges. It is highly probable that the parent’s motives are suspect. If his intention was to get justice for his daughter, he would have welcomed the school’s gesture and re-admitted his daughter there. He, however, wishes to wreck vengeance and make a mountain out of a mole hill. This suspicion is all the more strengthened because there are Muslim girls in the school who wear a headscarf. The school’s claim that it does not have a rule against head scarves seems to have fallen on deaf years.

All that matters now is the “reason” written on the Transfer Certificate: “The school does not permit the wearing of headscarf.” How did this ridiculous “reason” get on the TC if there is no such rule? The school management had earlier contended, as it appeared in newspapers, that it was the girl’s father who forced the Principal to write such a statement! Some thing is fishy here! A parent who threatens and forces a Principal to write a ridiculous reason and then sues her on religious grounds! Of course, the Principal has paid for her folly. Neither the district administration nor the press was inclined to dig further into this matter – probably due to a fear of Muslim backlash.

That’s what happened in Pathanamthitta. One Mr. Sam had written a book titled ‘Chinvat Paalam’ (Chinvat Bridge) as an apologetic against Islamic claims. He was advised by his Muslim friends, it seems, about a potentially dangerous reaction against this book from those closed-minded Muslims who are unaware of the teachings of their own holy book. Therefore, he chose to get it publish it after his death. The book was released on the day of his funeral. There was widespread outrage against the book. Even the author’s brothers who came there for his funeral were arrested! They, along with a couple of pastors who had nothing to do with the book, and the author’s son are now lodged in the Pathanamthitta sub-jail. The Kerala government worked hard even to get their bail cancelled - with an eye on Muslim votes.

It seems that Chinvat Bridge was written as an answer to another book, written by a Muslim, against the Christian gospel. We are now living in perilous times when Muslims are allowed to write or preach anything against Jesus Christ and His gospel while Christians or Hindus are not allowed any freedom to criticize Islam, their holy book, or their prophet Muhammad. Any criticism is torpedoed by the clever law that says that we Indians are not allowed to hurt the “religious sentiments” of others. Thus, we have become a nation that is governed by ill-defined “sentiments” instead of being governed by well-defined reason and good sense. The proverbial camel that sought a little space in the Arab’s tent knows very well how to make use of these silly laws and to walk away with the tent.

Any thing said against prophet Muhammad is treated as ‘blasphemy.’ Well, if you think that ‘blasphemy’ is a sin that you can commit only against God, you are right. No one knows why Islam, a monotheistic religion, is considering their prophet to be divine enough so as to charge his critics with ‘blasphemy.’

Tune in to ‘Peace TV’ and listen for a few minutes. You will surely come across remarks against the Christian faith and against Jesus Christ. Walk into any Islamic book store and you can lay hands on several subsidized books that hurt the “religious sentiments” of Christians. If criticisms against the prophet Muhammad are intolerable, how much more intolerable should be comments or arguments against Jesus Christ, the Son of God? Certainly, Christians place Jesus Christ far higher than any prophet. The Christian “sentiment” has to be honoured. But not in this land!

Books written by Ahmend Deedat are available across India. Deedat claims that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross. Thus, he rubbishes the Christian faith in the resurrected Christ. What business has Deedat, or any Muslim for that matter, to attack the Christian faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Look at a selection of Deedat’s books that are offensive and blasphemous and hurtful to the Christian “religious sentiment” -

“Who Moved the Stone [from Jesus’ tomb]?
‘Resurrection’ or Resuscitation?
What was the sign of Jonah?
Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction?
50,000 Errors in the Bible

If the relatives and pastors or friends of the author of Chinvat Bridge should be arrested and jailed on criminal charges, how much more should Ahmad Deedat, his publishers in India, owners of Islamic book stores and anyone associated with the production and distribution of such corrupt books be arrested and jailed? (Christian leaders in Kerala who have smartly washed their hands off their brethren in jail should ask themselves why they are not filing cases against the publishers and distributors of these Islamic books?)

Muslim double standards are not only visible in India but all over the world. Leaders of Islamic countries are thronging to join International Human Rights organizations. Yet, these Islamic countries that have deplorable human rights record should be first asked to set their own record straight before they recommend human rights to other countries. Leaders of such Islamic countries are crusading to promote the “anti-blasphemy” law in as many countries as possible through their influence in such human rights organisations.

Muslims in the West make use of every “human rights” law to get their way and to make their lives comfortable. Yet, they would not practice these human rights principles in their own homes or communities. Muslims buy churches in England and convert them to mosques; yet, they will not allow a church in Saudi Arabia or other strict Islamic countries. Politicians in the West work hard to get Islamic study centres founded in their cities – with generous funding from Islamic countries – without asking for a Christian University in Islamic countries. Similarly, several political leaders in Kerala (and India) are very eager to please the Muslim community without taking into account the less-than-holy intentions in some minds.

There are good Muslims who lead honourable lives. They respect other religions and religious-cultural diversity. I have great respect for them. Their influence in their own community has to increase, and thus, they should be able to quell the voices of intolerance and expansionism. The governments in our land and our courts should exercise sufficient discernment to dismiss silly claims or complaints on the basis of a nebulous and ill-defined “hurt religious sentiments.”

“Satyameva Jayate:” No wonder we are failing!

2010-04-29T23:44:00.002+05:30

There is no dearth of patriotic pride in any Indian. "Mera Bharat Mahan," My India is Great! Every Indian boasts about India, her cultural heritage, diversity and grandeur. Unfortunately, we are reluctant to address issues that bring shame to our country because we think that patriotic people are not supposed to rake up such issues. As a result, we sweep such things under the carpet.

The most recent index on corruption shows that India is at the 84th position. That is, there are 83 countries that are perceived to be less corrupt than India. It is meaningless to compare ourselves with Pakistan, which is at position 139, or with Sri Lanka, which is at 97. Neither is it useful to criticize the index. We who seek to be in the league of great countries, we who seek to be included in every forum of significance must make it a national priority to pull ourselves out of this infamy.

With such poor perceptions about our political, commercial, and administrative systems, how can retain the motto “Satyameva Jayate” (Truth alone triumphs) on our national emblem? Instead of telling the world about our national virtue of honesty or about the secret of our triumph, this motto indicts us. It tells the world and to our collective conscience the real reason for our debacle, our tragic failures, on many fronts. Truth indeed triumphs. Those who stand for truth will triumph with the truth even if it means that they should go through a ‘death’ and a ‘resurrection!’ On the other hand, nations that thrive on falsehood, deception and corruption will fail miserably. There are honest people in India. They are an exception, sadly. Corruption and falsehood (that includes our unwillingness to search out truth in spite of our beliefs) have permeated all strata of our country. This is proving to be our undoing.

For the past fortnight, we were force-fed with an overdose of news and rumours about the Indian Premier League that unfortunately became the Indian Proxy/Paisa League. As a country that is shame-oriented, our people are ashamed only when they are caught. They are not troubled by their wrong doings per se. Investigations might reveal the height and depth of corruption and money laundering in the IPL.

In the heat of the IPL drama, many of us missed another great story – the arrest of the top guy in the Medical Council of India. He was arrested on bribery charges. A friend who appeared for an MCI accreditation examination tells me that medical graduates from other countries are forced to pay huge bribes to pass their exams. Close on the heals of this scandal, we hear of the arrest of two top civil servants in the Union Ministry of Home Affairs. And as of now, the latest story of corruption is about the Indian diplomat who spied for Pakistan!

The common man, the 'aam aadmi’ in political parlance, knows that the Indian democracy is a fake democracy that works only for those who can cough up money whenever he/she reaches an administrative road-block. A little here, and a little there. Money lubricates India’s grand bureaucratic machinery. Life has to go on. And people have to get their things done. So they pay and forget about it. Few people have faith in the police, the so-called custodians and enforcers of law. Recently, policeman posted on a highway intersection got into my friend’s car for a short ride in order to accept a bribe without being caught on security cameras!

Probably, India should consider legalizing bribes the way some countries have legalized prostitution or gambling. I say this out of desperation and derision; not because I believe bribery should be institutionalized.

We have institutionalized bribery in our spiritualities too. We bribe our gods with flowers, fruits, nuts, oil, ghee, money, and even blood. How foolish of us to think that the Almighty withholds blessings from us in order to get our gifts! We Indians are imitating our gods. There is nothing surprising in this. We will all one day become like our objects of worship, at least according to our perceptions of the divine. We too will withhold the rights of others as long as they will not pay us a tip.

India will remain poor and underdeveloped as long as corruption rules her. If all the grants allotted for development and for the welfare of the poor had reached their targets, we would have long been a developed country. We need to repent of our corruption, our greed, our falsehood, our daylight robberies, our deceptions! We need to team up with the Truth in order to triumph with the Truth.

Cohabitation: SC Ruling Poses No Danger to Marriage

2010-04-17T14:29:00.003+05:30

It’s futile to drag a matter to a court of law unless there is a law in the land that deals with the matter under consideration. The people or agencies that sued Tamil super star Khushboo for her remarks about premarital sexual relationships and/or live-in relationships probably did not realize this.

Five years ago, Khushboo had allegedly said that she found nothing wrong with premarital sex as long as women who engaged in it took adequate “precautions.” She also allegedly said that it was “not fair of any educated youth to expect his wife to be a virgin.”

A number of cases were filed against her by various individuals and organisations for outraging public decency. People worried that the super-star’s views would misguide young people into immorality. Some Tamil nationalist groups accused her of attacking Tamil culture. Interestingly, the Madras High Court upheld the charges against Khushboo.

The actress filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court seeking the quashing of over twenty pending cases against her. Those who opposed Khushboo’s views brought out their arguments. However, a bench of the Supreme Court that included eminent judges wanted to know just one thing: “When two adult people want to live together, what is the offence?”

The Court did not say that cohabitation does not offend anyone. The court did not even say that it was supporting cohabitation at the expense of marriage. All that the court wanted Khushboo’s detractors to realize was that a cohabiting couple does not fall foul of any existing Indian law. The word “offence” in the above question refers to a transgression. In effect, the judge asked, “When two adult people want to live together, which law might they break?”

Many who read the headlines the following day were troubled. ‘How could the learned judges of the Supreme Court say that live-in relationships or cohabitation was okay,’ they wondered. In fact, it would be unfortunate on our part to attribute such views to the honourable Supreme Court. BJP’s Venkiah Naidu sought consolation in his view that the judges were airing their person opinions. Conservative evangelical Christians expressed concern about the future of marriage in India. They saw the SC’s ruling as a portent of evil days that lie ahead.

The Supreme Court has indeed made it clear that the right of two consenting adults to live together is part of their right to life. This does not mean that the Supreme Court was recommending cohabitation as a viable option that could replace marriage. The honourable Court just said that no one can drag a cohabiting couple to court.

Very many newspapers, without realising this important point, praised the Court’s observations thinking that that the Supreme court was supporting licentious lifestyles. They waxed eloquent about the need to kick out medieval morality and to usher in modern or post-modern free lifestyles, which is not very different from old immorality.

Similarly, the court wanted everyone to know that each person has the freedom to hold his own or her own views about marriage and sexual relations. Which is why the judges said that they were not bothered about Khushboo’s personal opinions. The Supreme Court did not endorse Khushboo’s views on premarital sex. The court just wanted Khusboo’s accusers to know that she had not broken any Indian law while she expressed her private views.

The Courts give their rulings on the basis of existing laws of the land and not on the basis of various religious traditions or moral codes. As long as there is no law in the land that prohibits cohabitation or premarital sex, how can the courts punish anyone for promoting these practices? As long as there is no law in this land that prohibits the expression of one’s views – views that trash religion or moral codes – how can anyone drag Khushboo to court?

This brings us to the crux of the issue: If marriage and morality are so valuable to Indians, why is it that we do not have a law that prohibits premarital sexual relations or the practice of cohabitation? On one hand, Indians and their leaders cry themselves hoarse against “foreign” influences that corrupt the “glorious” Indian culture. None of our representatives in various State Assemblies or the Parliament had the guts to raise his or her voice for India’s moral values. If for 60 years they could not bring a law against premarital sex, political parties that ruled India have no right to talk about the sanctity of sex within marriage or about the dangers of pre/extra-marital sex.

Parliaments of the world are not the final authority when it comes to standards of human behaviour. Nor are human courts the ultimate arbiters of all disputes. Laws that determine the morality of human actions must come from a Source that transcends humanity. Human law makers and human judges are just a shadow of an unseen reality – there is a Supreme Law Maker and an ultimate Judge whom the Bible calls God Almighty.
In His wisdom, God instituted marriage and family as the fundamental unit of a healthy society. Governments and religions came much later. While it is not illegal to cohabit without the boundaries of marriage, cohabitation is not the best option.
We only need to look at Western societies to realize the dangers of cohabitation. These “trial marriages” do not provide any security to the men and women involved. People who tried cohabitation were more inclined to divorce their partners later in life. According to an article in Population Trends: ‘For every duration of marriage, the cumulative proportions of marriages which had broken down are higher amongst marriages in which there was premarital cohabitation than amongst marriages in which there was no premarital cohabitation.’ (Trends in marriage and cohabitation: the decline in marriage and the changing pattern of living in partnership. John Haskey, Population Trends 80; Summer 1995; OPCS.)

Further, cohabitation does not provide a secure environment for the arrival and nurture of children. Which is why abortion rates are much higher among cohabiting couples. People who cohabit are willing to live together as long as it suits their individual conveniences. But they are not committed to bear children and to raise a family.

The incidence of promiscuity is high among cohabiting couples. Therefore, cohabiting couples are at a greater risk of contracting and spreading sexually transmitted diseases. Besides, women who cohabit are at a significantly higher risk of displaying neurotic symptoms than women who do not.

Marriage on the other hand is a secure environment where a man and a woman become “one flesh.” They are “joined together” by God in the presence of witnesses who are part of the larger society. Thus, a new family is welcomed by society as a new building-block. Cohabiting couples are concerned only about their interests and not about the interests of the society around them.

The Archbishop of Canterbury once said, ‘the wisdom and truth of the Christian tradition (is) that a married man and woman and their children should be the basic building block of family life. Cohabitation is not, and cannot be, marriage in all but name... Those who choose to cohabit on the grounds that their relationship is a private matter and nothing to do with the wider society are, frankly, deluding themselves. Marriage, not cohabitation, is the institution that is at the heart of a good society and let us not be reluctant to say so. I do not say this in condemnation; I say it as an invitation to a better way.’ (Cited by Flanagan and Williams, ‘Cohabitation or Marriage.’)

Finally, if we value chastity and marriage, let us prepare our young adults for timely marriage as soon as they attain the legal majority. The government has stipulated a minimum age for marriage. Let us honour it and prepare our teenagers for marriage. The practice of postponing marriage for various reasons only serves to undermine marriage and to put pressure on our young people. No amount of preaching can then save them from premarital misadventures. Let us practice what we preach.

Irreverence and Intolerance

2010-04-01T13:43:00.005+05:30

Thodupuzha, a small town at the foothills of Western Ghats in Kerala, was gripped by violent protests and curfews last week. Muslims protestors ravaged the town and forced shopkeepers to close down their shops. They were up in arms against a question paper that insulted their god ‘Allah’ and their prophet Muhammad.

The offending question paper was part of an internal examination in the Malayalam language department of Newman College, Thopuzha. The head of department, one Prof Joseph, had included a few lines of fictitious conversation between the prophet Muhammad and Allah to test his students’ skill at punctuation and grammar. Little did the professor realize that this exercise would be a full stop in his career! Those lines portrayed Allah and the prophet in bad light. The author of those lines – whether the professor or someone else – betrays his malice and folly.

Malice, because the writer portrays Allah and the prophet as persons bereft of any intelligence. The writer places abusive words in the mouth of Allah. Whatever one thinks of Islam or its followers, it is indeed wickedness to ascribe folly and vulgarity to the Muslim’s god. If the ‘conversation’ included in the exercise had been between two ordinary Muslims, things would have been slightly different.

This was an act of folly because the professor allegedly created a joke about Allah and Muhammad as if he were creating a Sardarji joke. The Sikh community has a sense of humour that is unique; they laugh at themselves even as others laugh at them, thereby nullifying the effect of any cruel joke. It was foolish on the part of the professor to ridicule the Muslim community. If people think that he did this deliberately to create a religious uprising or riot, they cannot be blamed. Mr Joseph, being a professor, will find it difficult to convince anyone that he was unaware of past Muslim objections to criticism and ridicule. The whole world knows what will happen if someone makes a cartoon or a joke about any Islamic icon.

Newman College suspended the professor from service. The Catholic diocese under which the college functions expressed regret. However, it is unfortunate that the entire blame is now on the professor. How is it that the Principal of the college does not share any blame? Responsibility for any academic issue should finally be on the Principal’s shoulders.

The ministers in charge of Education and Home Affairs called for strict action against just the professor. They wanted to press criminal charges against Prof Joseph. If the Principal and the management of the college can be let off the hook, and if the latter can wriggle out of the situation by just issuing a notice of regret, why can’t the professor be given a chance to apologize unconditionally? After all, he is a teacher – that too, a teacher of the local language. The examination was an internal assessment—not a University exam in which the question paper could get wide circulation. The Kerala Government’s decision to frame criminal charges against the professor might be interpreted as an attempt to please a minority community at the expense of another.

Students who were offended by the question should have complained to the Principal. They should have sought the professor’s apology or suitable in-house punishment instead of taking the matter to the streets. The disturbance in the region was not caused by the question paper; it was the decision of the students to take the matters to the wider religious community that created widespread disturbance. One breach of law does not excuse or justify another. One negative action should not have been dealt with by another larger negative reaction.

More women MPs = Women's Empowerment?

2010-03-12T23:43:00.004+05:30

The day the Upper House of Indian Parliament, the Rajya Sabha, passed the Women’s Reservation Bill, Indian women in general were happy. If the Bill becomes a law at the Centre and in the states, 33 percent of seats in state legislative assemblies and in the Parliament will be reserved for women.

The celebration and jubilation are not surprising. Various women’s organisations worked hard for and dreamt of that day for fourteen years. The bill certainly will sail through the lower house, the Lok Sabha, and through various state assemblies. No political party wants to be seen as “anti-women.” Therefore, regardless of the dissonance heard within political parties, the bill will indeed become a law.

In the midst of this celebration, we need to be modest in the assessment of our country’s progress. The very fact that we needed a law to force political parties to field significant number of women candidates shows the pathetic state of affairs in our societies. Even in the absence of such a law, political parties could have fielded eligible women as candidates. No one prevented them from doing so. However, all political parties displayed a general negative discrimination against women. Lack of suitable candidates might have been an issue. Even otherwise, political masters favoured male candidates over female candidates.

Can a few women who sit in Parliament or state assemblies effect any change in the real status of women in Indian homes or societies? In India, women, irrespective of their caste, are regarded as constituting the lowest caste – the shudra. Even a Brahmin’s wife is technically a Shudra. Indian religions portray woman as an inferior slave. The Bible however portrays woman as “help meet” - a suitable helper who stands alongside her husband. Unless there is a fundamental shift in our beliefs and attitudes – with or without the Women’s Reservation Bill - women in India aren’t going to experience any real emancipation. Women who lead a jet-set life style, cruising in chauffeur driven ‘official’ cars that bear a red beacon may still be discriminated against, kicked around, and despised by people who believe that every woman is a shudra.

The real reason behind the suffering of the Indian women was not the absence of women in Parliament or state assemblies; it is the set of religious beliefs and greed that deny life to the unborn girl child; that sees the girl child as an unnecessary burden. These days, couples who have more than two children are mostly those who have only daughters; they pursue their dream of having a son – be it the third or fourth or fifth attempt! Which law can erase the now infamous Indian preference for sons? Some of our states have just around 700 women for every 1000 men. Where are the missing women? They have been sacrificed at the altar of greed and cruelty. Murder most foul! The most religious nation in the world has no qualms about killing and mutilating their girl children while they are still in their mothers’ wombs.

God gave us our daughter after He gave us three sons!

What about parents who let the girl child live? Many of them deny quality education to their daughters even when they send their sons to good schools. Any money spent on enriching a girl’s life is seen as wasteful expenditure.

While some parents unburden themselves by sending away their daughter in marriage, some parents keep their daughters with them to get maximum benefit from their earnings. Most Indian parents do not divide their property equally among their sons and daughters. Daughters are sent away with a pittance. This is one reason why a groom’s party demands more money. The practice of demanding dowry is commonplace even though there are laws to punish offenders. Those who do not wish to “lose” their property by giving an equal share to their daughters have a smart way of doing things. They give their daughters in marriage to close relatives (even first cousins). That way, the property remains in the extended family. Even as a girl child is born, parents pledge her to her cousin brother!

In most of India, a woman has no role in her family’s process of decision making. Women are not allowed anywhere near the family’s male council. With a veil on her head, she leads a sub-human existence. Women are sometimes not allowed to own property or open bank accounts. All these happen, in spite of India’s preference for goddesses and worship of mother.

Even though critics of the Indian church say that Christianity did little to erase caste system in India or within the church, it can be said that the gospel has done wonders to the status of women in India. It was Pandita Ramabai, a Brahmin woman who chose to follow Christ, who pioneered the education of girls in India. Her father let her study even when their law said that women and Dalits who heard Sanskrit should have molten lead poured into their ears. The school and orphanages that Ramabai founded are still functioning near Pune. Similarly, if it were not for the efforts of William Carey and Raja Ram Mohan Roy, many more millions of Indian widows would have been burnt on their husbands’ pyres.

The status of women in states that welcomed the gospel is far better than those in areas that rejected the gospel. The education and elevation of women in these societies brought great changes in their quality of life – changes that could never be legislated by any state. We cannot legislate the emancipation of women as long as religions that devalue and destroy women have a free run in India.

Even women who think they are emancipated need a change in attitude. If people think that true emancipation of women is effected by drawing women away from marriage, the bearing of children, and home-making, they can’t be more mistaken.

True emancipation happens when women discover their Creator’s purpose for their lives; when men value and honour women as God’s gift to human society. That woman is emancipated who recognises what she alone, as God’s special creation as woman, can do without any competition from men and then excels in those tasks. For she knows that men cannot do those things that God has given to her alone.

Those women who constantly devalue their feminine identity and seek satisfaction in beating men at their tasks will never ever find true satisfaction in their lives. Imitation is the greatest form of tribute. By imitating men and by constantly trying to be “on par with men,” women trample their God-given identity. They will be found wanting as they stand before their Creator unable to give a satisfactory account of what they alone could do as women.