Is Your House In Order?

It is a natural craving of every human being to live as long as possible. If given a chance, we would choose to die after we graduate from college; maybe our wedding or some of us would rather wait till we see our grandchildren or even great-grandchildren. The bottom line is: None of us want to die anytime soon. We are enjoying life to the core and that is exactly what our Creator intends for us. Once, Isaiah who was a great prophetic figure of biblical times visited King Hezekiah who was very ill. The meeting turned out to be quite horrifying when the prophet wagged his bony finger at the king and told him, “Set your house in order, for you will die and not live.”It came as an alarming news to the sick king but isn’t Isaiah declaration applicable to every living creature? Is not all of creation prone to death?

On the dawn of 13th November 2010, my best friend Noble John was promoted to glory. He was a luminary in terms of conduct, academics, and above all, his relationship with God. It was through him, after a‘07 ICPF youth camp at Manganam, Kottayam, that an ICPF prayer cell in AmalJyothi Engineering College, Kerala was formed.  Being raised up together under one roof in Saudi Arabia, we shared similar tastes and developed a bond that nothing could separate. Just before officially graduating as an engineer from AmalJyothi Engineering College, Kerala, God called him back home. The news of his departure came as an arrow right through our hearts. The grief of his departure left a mark on the walls of many hearts. The deaths of young lives are always considered untimely and the horrifying news of their deaths startles us because they are expected to live upto a span of 70 or 80 years.

It is anticipated that all of us including our near and dear ones would live throughout a lifetime. However, the truth of the Bible proclaims—Tomorrow is promised to no Man.The fact that there is no guarantee of being alive the next moment can be frightening. To bring it into perspective, consider these statements: This day can be the last day of our life,or, reading this article can be the last thing you will be doing. The psalmist in Psalm 103: 15 declares, “As for man, his days are like grass…” As for the epistle of James, it is an evil to brag and boast about our future because we do not know what tomorrow holds for us. Life is short and uncertain. In the past, we could take for granted that death would meet us after entering old age but in the 21st century, we are surrounded by news of young people falling prey to death. However, let not the thought of life’s uncertainty frighten us.

Life can be terrifying and insanity can creep in if one starts to live as though today was the last day for his/her existence on earth. I lived that kind of life for about two months when Noble passed on. Fear engulfed me and I lived as though death was waiting for me at my doorstep. Nevertheless, God’s grace was sufficient for me. Through this bitter experience God taught me certain Kingdom principles. Life on earth should be lived in the light of eternity. Everything that we do on earth is a preparation for what holds for us in eternity. It is that eternal hope that sustains us and keeps us going in this world. Jesus came into this world and conquered death so that we could have life and life eternal.

When we live in the light of eternity, there is a new meaning and a purpose for life. Every little thing that we do in this world will matter in terms of the eternal glory that we will inherit. Having the realization that life is shorter than we think, I am reminded of the words of John Wesley who states, “Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, in every place you can, at all the times you can, with all the zeal you can, as long as you ever can.” When our work on earth is done, God will call us home. Is our house set in order? Are we living in the light of eternity or obsessed with the world and everything in it so much so that the hope of life is lost. When we close our eyes on earth, will we open our eyes to see Jesus? Start builder a closer relationship with God and the people that God has given you because what you do on earth matters! Dear friend, will you set your house in order? Time is running out!

- Renny Cherian,
  UBS, Pune

LIVING IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD

Living in the presence of God is not a good way to live life

but it is “only way to live life.”

              

Ashish Gavit  (BD Final year)

Psalm 91

Those who live in the shelter of the Most High will find rest in the shadow of the Almighty.

This I declare about the LORD: He alone is my refuge, my place of safety; he is my God, and I trust him. (Psa 91:1-2 NLT)

only in the shelter of the most high we will find rest.

Reason is so simple no traps, no disease, no fears, no calamities, no disaster will touch me. (Psalmist says in V. 2,5-7NLT)

Because He will cover you with his feathers. He will shelter you with his wings. His faithful promises are your armor and protection (Ps 91:4 NLT)

Thousands may die around u because of diseases, calamities, fears but He will save you.

No evil will conquer you; no plague will come near your home. (Ps 91:10 NLT)

For His angels will protect you.

HE will give you authority to crush lions and serpents under your feet because you Love your God, you trust in Him, You seek Him all the time so He will be on your side all the time.

¹⁵ When they call on me, I will answer; I will be with them in trouble. I will rescue and honor them. (Ps 91:15 NLT)

God will also reward them who live with Him and rewards are ‘Long life’ and ‘salvation. ‘

All those people who want rest, protection, safety and power to overcome evil must live in the presence of God.  

Just look at the flip side of it.

The more we go away from His presence we face more stress, fears, calamities and disasters in our life. We invite more tension, more stress, more problems which removes/decreases our peace, joy, love from our heart and mind. We pursue our own goals not God. Life becomes constant struggle to reach those goals at the expenses of our moral and ethical decay. We become self centered rather than God centered.

Do not waste 10 years of your life to understand such simple truth of life.

Struggle here with us as Christian is we think God will remove all our “PAIN” but bible do not support this view

I will be with them in trouble. I will rescue and honor them. (Ps 91:15 NLT)

Paul says in Romans 5:3-4 NLT

We can rejoice, too, when we run into problems and trials, for we know that they help us develop endurance.

 And endurance develops strength of character, and character strengthens our confident hope of salvation.      

Paul in his letter to Rome rights about his suffering and he rejoices for it but we know that his suffering was from God. In the book of Acts God says “And I will show him how much he must suffer for my name's sake." (Act 9:16 NLT)

Suffering has very important role to play in our life but it needs to come from God.

And God is faithful. He will not allow the temptation to be more than you can stand. When you are tempted, he will show you a way out so that you can endure. (1Co 10:13 NLT)

Even Jesus was tempted by satan. Satan made trap for Jesus but he was not able to seize. 

Just open your eyes, and see how the wicked are punished. (Psa 91:8 NLT) but here we see that wicked are those who refuse to live in the presence of God and hence God will bring all these problems in their life as a punishment for their refusal.

Psalmist talks about unnecessary suffering which is coming from our own refusal and from satan. Bible says 

“The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy……” (Joh 10:10 NRS)

This type of pain or suffering is not constructive but it is destructive.

I do not know which type of suffering comes from God and which is from satan. But I know for sure that God will never allow me to suffer unnecessary.

So ultimately we understand that in order to live life we need God and without Him there will be “no life” left in us. Living in the presence of God is not a good way to live life but it is “only way to live life.”

Exodus of the Garos

Every religion, society, community or tribe have stories to share. The term exodus can be defined as coming out from one place to another. Most of the tribal people too have stories of their own exodus. In the Old Testament in the book of Exodus, we have the story of the Exodus of the Israelites. In this short article, I would like to mention few things about the exodus of a particular tribe called the Garos. Presently, Garos are living in the Western part of Meghalaya, in North Eastern part of India.

Linguistically and ethnologically speaking, the Garos belong to the Bodo race. Dr. Milton Sangma in his History of Garo Literature says that the Bodos, in turn were a section of the Tibeto-Burman race of the Tibeto-Chinese family, whose cradle is said to have been the North-Western China between the upper waters of Yangtse-Kiang and Huangho. Prabod Sangma one of the present Garo writer also says that the word Bod(o) is from the Tibetan language which means snow. Garo’s oral tradition also say that once they lived in the land of Ti·bot (Tibet). But when faced with several natural calamities, such as famine, they gathered in the house of Olbin Nokma Bonepa and decided to move on to in search of other, better place to live. After wandering through many places they reached to present Garo Hills, in Meghalaya and settled there.

As far as my observation is concerned, the Exodus of the Garos can be divided into three exoduses; i.e. Geographical, Sociological and Spiritual Exodus.

A. Geographical Exodus: In simple words the geographical exodus can be said of as moving out or coming out from one place to another. One of the Garo writer, Moniram R. Marak in his A·chik Katta (Word of the Garo) mentioned that once the Garos lived in the land of Tibet, near the Chinese border. As I mentioned above, oral tradition of the Garos also says that once they lived in the land of Ti·bot (Tibet). As years went by, they had to face great economic depression. They went to the jungles in search of alternative food source like wild yam, leaves of the trees, but hardly found any. Some died of starvation. Therefore, all the elders of the village gathered together in the house of Olbin Nokma Boneba (Olbin is the name of a person, Nokma is the title given to a village head, Bone is the name of Olbin’s son). In that meeting they decided to move on to another place in search of a better place to live. In Milton’s History of Garo Literature, is written that the Garos after coming from Tibet they settled in Koch Behar for about four hundred years and then moved on to Dhubri, but later, the ruler of Dhubri did not allow them to settle permanently. Then they moved on the Jogigopa. According to Garo tradition the word Jogigopa comes from two Garo words - jogi, the name of a beautiful maiden (probably Garo name for Parvati) and gopa, which means hidden. According to their stories, there was a beautiful girl in one of the Garo families. When they settled in that place (Jogigopa), the ruler of that place fell madly in love with Jogi. The Garo custom then did not allow inter-community marriage; and that ruler was trying to marry her by force. Therefore, the Garos tried to hide the young and beautiful Jogi in a certain cave and fought a war with that ruler. The Garos lost the fight and Jogi was forcefully married to that ruler. They were then forced to move across the Brahmaputra River by making the boat out of plantains. After facing many enemies and wondering many places, they reached to present Garo Hills under the leadership of Abong Noga and settled permanently.

B. Sociological Exodus: The Garos are unique in terms of following the family linage. At present, they follow a matrilineal system. The tradition says that the Garos once did followed the patrilinial system. At that time, the women had to live with men’s family far away from their own parents and relatives. Women were discriminated by men for many reasons. The tradition says that there are many reasons for changing of patrilinial society into matrilineal society. One of the reasons for this was a famine. As I already mentioned above, while they were living in Tibet, they had to meet a great economic depression. Therefore while they were meeting in the House of Olbin Nokma Bonepa, some of the village elders realized that famine occurred because they neglected women and discriminated them. So they began to give a special privilege to women – family linage should be taken from mother’s side, man should come to woman’s house, youngest daughter should inherit the property, and the father should arrange one of his nephews to marry her youngest daughter and look after family and to inherit the properties. Besides this, it was also decided that the other daughters also should get some share of the properties.

C. Spiritual Exodus: In those days, Garos followed the indigenous tribal religion called Songsarek. They worshiped and sacrifices to different gods. Unlike Hindus, they don’t have idols. They also have mythological figures like Goera, Gonga, Kalkame, and Dikki-Bandi and they regarded them as heroes.

It was Omed Momin and Ramke Momin who first accepted Jesus and became Christian from among the Garos. Both of them were strong believer of Garo traditional religion, but their thirsts for true God was not satisfied. They studied Hinduism and Islam, but also found them unsatisfactory. That time, Omed was working in Goalpara as a Primary Teacher and his nephew Ramke was living in of the Official’s house in Gauhati. There were some people distributing tracks called Apathy Nashak and Omed received one of these tracks. When Omed read this booklet he came to know that it was a word from God, and he tried to share it with his nephew, Ramke. At the same time where Ramke was living, a servant when cleaning the house found another small booklet which had somehow come into the house. When Ramke read it, he knew that it was a word from God too. It was amazing that, both the uncle and nephew got the same pamphlet and both of them began to share their experiences. So they wanted to become Christian and therefore they went to Guahati in search of Missionary, there they met Rev. Kandura. A few days later, on the 8th of February1863, on a Sunday morning, both Omed Momin and Ramke Momin were baptized in the Sukheswar Ghat of Gauhati by Rev. Miles Bronson. They were the first converts among the Garos which can be termed as the spiritual exodus of the Garos. After becoming Christians, they suffered many persecution but they continued to be focused on their faith and converted many other Garos and neighboring tribes into Christianity. At present almost 80% of the Garos are Christians. Before, they were known as head hunters but today, they are soul winners.
Though the materials are taken from the oral source, we cannot deny that these stories are not true. Many researchers found that there are some similarities with those stories. Dr. Lee from Korea, who is working in Bharati Hospital Pune, once told me that there are some people in China near Tibet border who followed the matrilineal system. Even today, many Garos are found in places like Koch Behar, Jalpaiguri and some parts of West Bengal, Assam, almost all parts of North East and even in Bangladesh. But the Garos of Koch Behar and Jalpaiguri are not in touch with their language and culture. The only identifying factors they have are the clan names like Sangma, Marak, and Momin etc. Whatever the case may be, it was God who brought them to present Garo Hills to meet the American Baptist Missionaries so as to know about Him. Thanks be to God that he has opened the eyes of the Garos, including a concern for women, which can serve as an example to other peoples in the world.

- Bluwin Ch. Sangma, N.B.D.III

What Distinguishes a “Paradigmatic Reader’s Point of View” from other Critical Readings?

1. What is “Paradigmatic Reader’s Point of View” (PRPV)?

While original readers or historical readers are considered as those who lived “once upon a time” and disappeared from the scene, first time readers are those read the scriptures for the first time. This definition is crucial when we decide the stature of paradigmatic readers. Paradigmatic readers are those in constant touch with the scripture(s). They read, re-read and in-depth-read due to the fact that they value the scripture(s) as prima factors for the development of their faith and understanding. Here, reader of the text plays neither the role of an original reader nor the role of a first time reader, but his/her involvement is as a “paradigmatic reader”. In the process of text-reader interaction, a paradigmatic reader has to take up some of the important procedural concerns into serious consideration: (1) the historical context of the text; (2) the text in its final/canonical form; (3) the paradigmatic reading activity; and (4) the “live”/contemporary context of the reader. While the canonical document(s) is/are considered as the ‘starting point’ of interpretation, historical context, the paradigmatic reading activity and the contemporary context are to be analyzed in a relational way. Historical context of a text is brought into focus only when the scripture(s) invite(s), and, hence, historical analyses of the text are secondary to the final canonical products themselves.

Stibbe is of the opinion that, “paradigmatic readers are… people who proceed from a carnal to a spiritual reading [1], from a superficial to an in-depth appreciation…. Paradigmatic readers… are ones who do not resist the narrator. They are ones who agree to read the story from above not from below (in other words, with faith and understanding)”[2]. Paradigmatic reading is a faith-constrained reading of the scripture(s) by way of literary appreciations, historical interrogations, theological perplexities, moral exclamations and hermeneutical challenges. A paradigmatic reader’s point of view develops as a result of perpetual interactions between her/himself and the scripture(s). In doing this, the text is the motivating factor for the reader in order to reflect upon the socio-religious and politico-cultural realities of the “live” context.


2. How is “Paradigmatic Reader’s Point of View” Distinctive?

(a) Historical Critical Methods (HCM): HCM are crucial as they invite the readers toward a time and a space ‘behind’ the text. While “Source Criticism” (SC) focuses on the hypothetical documents the evangelists would have incorporated into their final canonical products, “Form Criticism” (FC) invites the reader’s attention toward the Gospel communities and oral development of the pericopes. “Redaction Criticism” (RC) further captures the acumen of the readers toward the editorial seams and Sitz-im-Leben Jesu/Sitz-im-Leben Kirche/Sitz-im-Leben of the evangelists (as Willi Marxsen suggests). In all these approaches, readers’ attention is drifted away from the final canonical products to the historical backgrounds of the first century (AD). While SC invites reader’s attention toward the conjectured sources those the evangelists would have incorporated (like Ur-Markus, Q, M, L, Mark, Antiochene traditions, Itinerary Sources, Sign Source, Glory Source, Discourse Source, and others), FC informs the reader about the individual pericopes and their developments among the Gospel communities. RC captures the attention of readers toward the redactors/editors and their individual theologies. The major drawback a reader notices in all these readings is “author”/“community”/“context”-centeredness over against text-centeredness. In other words, instead of discussing about “what the text has to say” these critical tools focus on “how the text came into being”.

(b) Literary Critical/New Literary Critical Methods (LC/NLCM): LC/NLCMs are mostly text-centered interpretations. LC/NLCM begin and end within the textual/literary framework and, sometimes or almost always, reduce or weigh down the text to the level of a “museum product”. E. V. McKnight states that, “Literary Criticism… is concerned with literary conventions and the significance of such conventions for meaning”. He further says, “Theological and historical pre-understandings of Christians will influence their use of literary criticism. Literary criticism and appreciation also impinge on theological and historical considerations”[3]. Some of the major tenets of LC are study of narratives, deconstruction methodologies, and quest of genre, form and structure, plot development, narrative world and rhetoric, characterization and dynamism of authors and narrators. The favoured terms of NLCM are “irony, paradox, imagery, metaphor, and symbol”[4]. LC/NLCM’s aesthetic-focus on the act of literary communication, style, beauty and artistic means invite a reader’s attention toward careful reading strategies and procedures. The major drawback of LC/NLCM is its confinement within the text sans “live” contextual application. It mostly remains as a “way of reading for the sake of reading”.

(c) Liberationist Readings (LR): Liberationist readers begin their theological/interpretative initiatives from the contemporary contextual realities. “Context” is the most important element in liberationist articulations and from there a reader looks unto the text. Liberationists in Latin-America, India and elsewhere (including Biblical scholars) are attuned to those subjective (and even biased) procedures and interpretations. While “text” is reckoned secondary to the “context”, readers are prone to “read into the text” from their own emotional punches and situational cravings. This fosters a kind of “self-centeredness” rather than “text-centeredness”. Reading is mostly taking place on the basis of reader’s “needs” not mostly on the basis of faith-constrains. One of the most important dangers of LR is its methodology of “choosing reader-friendly texts” and “appropriation of scriptural terms, statements and pericopes for contextual purposes” (for example, Book of Exodus in the Old Testament and Gospel of Luke, especially Nazareth Manifesto, in the New Testament). This is usually done without considering the larger framework of the scriptures. Reading texts “out of context” and “application of the context into the text” (rather than “application of the text into the context”) make it sometimes a form of reading closer to “allegorization”.


(d) Reader-Response Criticism (RRC): As in the case of LR, in RRC the starting point is “reader” not the “text”. McKinght says, “Reader-response criticism views literature in terms of readers and their values, attitudes and responses”[5]. Baldick defines RRC as “a general term for those kinds of modern criticism and literary theory that focus on the responses of the readers to literary works, rather than on the works themselves considered as self-contained entities”[6]. In RRC, reader has all the freedom to conjecture in his/her own way. Its methodology is mostly eisegetical than exegetical.

3. Recapitulation

Now, “How can we look into the text from a ‘Paradigmatic Reader’s Point of View’”? In paradigmatic reader’s point of view, the text is the starting point of theological articulations, but meaning transcends from the textual horizons to reader’s “live” context. In another sense, text is performative and its meaning permeates to the societal levels for effective transformation. It advocates a text-to-context sequence by way of an exegesis-to-hermeneutics development. In the process of this reader-scripture dialoguing, HCM, LC/NLCM, LR and RRC are not abnegated; rather, they are considered only when the text requires and also within the textual purview. “Paradigmatic reader’s point of view” develops as the end result of the activity of “constant reading” and that further reflects in the reader’s societal interactions and praxes. The following points are important with regard to PRPV: (1) ‘text’ is the starting point and a reader reads the scriptures from their own historical context; (2) ‘reader’ is a ‘dynamic’/'active’ person who acts both as an “authentic interpreter” and a “relevant interpreter” to his/her own “live” context; and (3) ‘contemporary context’ is the platform for the paradigmatic reader for scriptural application. Paradigmatic reading methodology emphasizes that “reading the scripture(s) is necessary for relevant action”. In this activity, scripture is reckoned as authoritative, and reader and his/her context exist only in relation to the text.

Notes:

[1] F. Kermode, The Genesis of Secrecy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979, ch. 1.

[2] M. W. G. Stibbe, John, Readings: A New Biblical Commentary. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993, 16.

[3] E. V. McKnight, “Literary Criticism”, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1992, 473.

[4] C. Baldick, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1990, 150.

[5] McKnight, “Literary Criticism”, DJG, 476. McKnight further says that, “The nature and role of the reader varies in the different forms of reader-response criticism, but in all forms there is a movement away from the view of interpretation as the determination by an autonomous reader of the meaning of an autonomous text”.

[6] Baldick, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, 184. Baldick further says, “It is not a single agreed theory so much as a shared concern with a set of problems involving the extent and nature of readers’ contribution to the meanings of literary works, approached from various positions including those of structuralism, psychoanalysis, phenomenology, and hermeneutics”.

By Johnson Thomaskutty, Union Biblical Seminary, Pune, India

Not Me LORD!

Not Me LORD!

There is a story of a man who was lost in the desert, and was dying of thirst, when suddenly, he stumbled upon an old shack. Right next to it was a rusty old water pump. He crawled over to it, grabbed the handle, and started pumping for water. But there was no water. Then he noticed a jug of water with a note saying, "My friend, don't drink this water. Empty this jug in the hand pump in order to first prime the pump. The note further stated, “and don't forget to fill the jug again before you leave." The man was uncertain about what to do because he was terribly thirsty. If he drank the water he would survive for at least a little longer. What if he followed the instructions and poured the water into the pump, and nothing happened? But what if it worked? He would actually have all the water he needed. He considered his options. Hesitantly, he poured the water into the pump. Grasping the handle he started pumping. Nothing happened! He tried again. Finally, a little dribble of water came out, then a thin flow, and then it began to pour out of the pump! The man was finally able to quench his thirst.

This story illustrates that often in life we have to take risks to achieve something. If that young man had decided not to take the risk of pouring all that water down, he would never have got the water; neither would those who would come there after him.  It is only in losing all the water that he had could he actually gain all the water he wanted. It reminds me of what Jesus said in Matt 16:25 “For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.”  What Jesus was really saying is like that young man in the desert, its only when we take the risk of pouring our life out for His sake that we can truly experience the fullness of life. But so often we choose to play it safe and live within our comfort zone. The call of Moses in Exodus 3 is a perfect example of how God urges His people to step out of their comfort zone and go into uncharted waters trusting in Him.

Moses in his comfort zone

To understand Moses‘comfort zone we need to place this chapter in its context. Exodus chapter 1 describes the oppression of the Israelites by the Egyptians who were intimidated by their numbers. (Exodus 1: 9)

Exodus chapter 2 is about the birth of Moses, of how God in His providence not only spared Moses‘ life but also brought him up in Pharaoh‘s palace. As the story unfolds, although Moses was brought up in the Pharaoh‘s palace, he never forgot who he was. One day he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses intervened and killed the Egyptian hiding his body in the sand. The very next day he saw two Hebrews fighting and when he tried to settle their dispute, one of them turned around and asked him “Are you going to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian”. Moses, afraid that his secret was known fled to Midian.  In Midian he married a woman by the name of Zipporah and had a son through her. For the next forty years Moses looked after his father-in-law‘s flock. He had comfortably settled into the role of a husband, a father and a shepherd. His previous life as an Egyptian prince was a distant memory, but now all that was going to change. 

In Exodus 3 God appeared to Moses in a burning bush and told him, that He had heard the cry of the Israelites and had now come to rescue them. Moses may have been thrilled when he heard this. Finally, after all those years, God was going to intervene and rescue His people. So far so good; but what God said next must have knocked the day lights out of Moses.

In Ex. 3: 10 God says to Moses, “So now, go I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt”. Moses‘first thought may have been why me? I am happy with my life, why would I go to a place from where I escaped as a fugitive? In chapter 4:10 Moses expresses this out loud, when he says to God “O Lord, please send someone else to do it”. So often we like Moses refuse to move beyond our comfort zone, hoping that God will call someone else to step out. We are excited when we see God at work, but we would rather be a spectator than a participant in God‘s kingdom. Although Moses gave excuses after excuses for not going, God did not give up on him, but worked through each and every one of the excuses, and finally convinced Moses to step out in faith. As we see how God dealt with Moses there are three principles that we need to remember when God squeezes us out of our comfort zone.

When God sends — He sustains

Moses‘first excuse was his own sense of inadequacy, in Ex. 3: 11 Moses says to God “Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?” In response to this God says to Moses “I will be with you…” (Ex. 3:12) What God was essentially doing was, shifting Moses‘attention from his own inadequacy to God‘s sufficiency. In other words God was telling Moses, that the success of his mission depended not in his ability but on God‘s sovereignty. In fact it is interesting to observe how God explained the strategy for His rescue mission. In Ex. 3: 7 God says to Moses “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians …” Notice, God says “I have seen…I have heard…I am concerned…So I have come down…” The work of liberation was God‘s work and not Moses‘. Moses was an instrument in God‘s Hand, but God alone was the redeemer.

The task at hand can be accomplished only because God is at work. In promising to be with Moses God was assuring him that he would not lack anything. God would sustain him all through the way. God‘s sustaining power can be clearly seen in the way He cared for them as they wandered in the desert for forty years. Years later as Nehemiah, praised God for His sustaining power he said this, “For forty years you sustained them in the desert; they lacked nothing…” (Nehemiah 9:21) When God calls us for a task we can be sure that God will sustain us. If God is asking you to step out in faith, remember He will be with you every step of the way. Through the good times and bad times His faithfulness remains unchanged. As He promised through the prophet Isaiah, “When you walk through the waters I will be with you…” So step out, with the assurance that where God sends you, He will sustain you.

When God enlist — He empowers

Though God promised to be with him, Moses was still not sure if he could do what God was asking him to do. He came up with another excuse. In Ex. 4:10 he says “O Lord, I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue.” Now this was not entirely true. Acts 7:22 says that earlier in his life, during his days as a Prince of Egypt, he was "...educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech and action." But that was half a life-time ago – according to Moses the "golden years" of his life. Now he saw himself just an old shepherd. His current skills in public speaking were limited to the words and sounds that were used to motivate sheep-not people-not a nation-not a pharaoh! God‘s answer to this was a strong rebuttal. In verse 11 God says to Moses “Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the LORD?” What God was really saying to Moses, was ―Moses don‘t tell me what you can do and what you can‘t do, I know you better that you know yourself. So trust me.

Forty years ago, Moses had tried to liberate the people of Israel trusting in his own strength. Now God was telling him, “This time, trust me. You tried it your way, now do it my way, in my strength.” Now, how did God empower Moses? He asked him what was in his hand (Ex 4:1) and Moses replied a staff. Little did Moses know about the power his simple staff would yield when it became the rod of God? The staff was a symbol of God‘s power to both the Israelites and the Egyptians. When Pharaoh refused to let the people go, God sent Moses to him with these words “By this you will know that I am the LORD: With the staff that is in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile, and it will be changed into blood.” (Ex 7:17) When the Israelites stood before the Red sea with the Egyptian army in their pursuit, God told Moses “…lift up your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it…” (Ex. 14:15) When God enlisted Moses for His mission, He also made sure that He empowered him to fulfill that mission.

When God assigns – He amazes

An anonymous writer once wrote these words:

 I am not sent a pilgrim here, my heart with earth to fill;

 But I am here God's grace to learn, and serve God's sovereign will.

He leads me on through smiles and tears, grief follows gladness still;

 But let me welcome both alike, since both work out His will.

 No service in itself is small, none great, though earth it fill;

But that is small that seeks its own, and great that seeks God's will.

 Then hold my hand, most gracious Lord, guide all my doings still;

And let this be my life’s one aim, to do, or bear thy will.

There are times when God calls us to do His will and then there are times when we have to bear His will‖ In either case, when His will is done it will amaze us, how God can transform our trials into triumphs. In Gen. 50:20 Joseph says to his brother who had sold him into slavery “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” The Bible teaches us that our limitations do not handicap God‘s plan and purpose. On the contrary often it is our limitations that enable God to work His glory in and through us.

At the beginning of Ex. 3 we meet Moses as a whiner, complaining about his own inadequacy, but at the end of his life the scriptures testify to his life with these words. “Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face. He was unequalled for all the signs and wonders that the Lord sent him to perform in the land of Egypt…” (Deut. 34: 10-11). What a testimony! Moses would have missed the greatest adventure of his life, had he refused to obey God. When we fulfill what God has assigned us to do, it will amaze us what God can accomplish through us.

Adventure with God

John Wesley once said, ―Man‘s greatest discovery is to know God‘s will, and his greatest adventure is to do God‘s will‖. Embarking on an adventure means taking risks, going in the unknown way. One cannot be in his/her own comfort zone and experience the thrill of an adventure. What comfort zone is God asking you to move out of? It may be in the area of finance, where God is asking you to trust in His provision, or may be in the area of relationships where God is asking you to let go. No matter what God is asking you to do, remember when He commands, He also sustains, empowers and amazes you for His glory. So that at the end of the day, we too, like Paul can boldly affirm, ―Not that we are competent of our selves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God‖ (2 Cor.5-6)

- by Rev. Paras Tayade, Faculty UBS