“I Personally Do Not See Much Value in ‘Academics’ for Its Own Sake”, says Dr. Brian C. Wintle

[Dr. Brian C. Wintle completed his Mechanical Engineering (BE) from the University of Madras in 1965, Bachelor of Divinity (BD) from the Union Biblical Seminary (Yavatmal) in 1972, and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in New Testament from the University of Manchester in 1977. He was a teaching faculty in the Department of New Testament at the UBS, Yavatmal and Pune (1978-1995) and served in various administrative positions of the seminary including that of Principal (1987-1995). Since 1995, he is involved with the Asia Theological Association and, at present, serves both as the Regional Secretary (India) and as the Associate General Secretary of ATA. Dr. Brian is an ordained presbyter of the Church of North India (CNI) of the erstwhile Diocese of Kolhapur, Maharashtra. During his UBS tenure, he was also serving on the pastoral staff of the St. Paul’s Church in Pune. Presently, he is a pastoral staff of the Divya Shanthi Community Churches of India, Bangalore. His publications include articles in various magazines and journals, two volumes in the ATA Commentary Series (Ephesians and Colossians & Philemon), Synoptic Studies (Vols. I & II, TBT, Bangalore), and Small Groups in the Local Church (TBT, Bangalore). Presently he is General Editor of and contributor to the forthcoming South Asia Bible Commentary, a one-volume contextual commentary on the Bible.]

 

See the interesting interview with Dr. Brian below…

Question: Dr. Brian, you have served as a Professor of New Testament and Principal of Union Biblical Seminary, and now you are working as the Regional Secretary (India) and Associate General Secretary of Asia Theological Association (ATA). You are one of the few people who excelled both in ‘academics’ and ‘leadership’. May you please share your experiences in brief with the younger generation scholars and leaders?

Dr. Brian: I personally do not see much value in `academics’ for its own sake. I believe that all ideology and theology must be made to serve the important task of helping the Church to become the people of God in everyday living. Christians must be challenged to think through their faith, to work out for themselves what is involved in becoming the persons God wants them to be. And that is where someone who is a sound scholar can make a contribution.

Question: In my observation, you are one of the leading Evangelical scholars in India today. As an “Indian Christian”/”Evangelical”/”Biblical scholar”, how do you view the concept and praxis of Mission in the present day Indian context?

Dr. Brian: In my opinion, a primary need in the Church is that of sound Bible exposition. That was the perceived need when I made the decision to train to become a Bible teacher, and I believe the need remains today. The Church needs Christian thinkers – members who have allowed the truth of the gospel to shape their thinking, their convictions, their lives and their responses to people and to situations in which they find themselves. In our country, piety is often confused with religion – ritual, and performance. But the essence of being Christian has to do rather with being – with the kind of persons we are. And it is our thinking that will determine that.

Question: As a New Testament scholar, what is the usual method you employ when you interpret the scripture? Do you have any special advice(s) to share with the upcoming New Testament scholars in particular and biblical scholars in general?

Dr. Brian: My starting point in Biblical interpretation is the authority of Scripture. I come to Scripture as a member of the faith community, and trusting that, if I use the necessary tools of interpretation correctly, the Spirit will guide me to the truth. I do not have much respect for approaches that sit in judgment on the Biblical text.

Question: Who is the biblical scholar who influenced you the most? May you describe a bit about her/him and the way s/he influenced you?

Dr. Brian: In my days as a student in Union Biblical Seminary, my NT Professor, Dr Peter O’Brien, had a profound influence on me. He taught me to handle the Biblical text with respect, and to submit to it as the Word of God. Dr O’Brien was a meticulous exegete, and at one time, his commentaries on Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians & Philemon were acclaimed as the best available in evangelical scholarship. He has left a lasting impression on me.

Question: What is your opinion about “bridging the perspectives of the Eastern and Western New Testament scholarships?” In your opinion, whether the scripture has to be interpreted ‘locally’ or ‘globally’?

Dr. Brian: I’m not sure that there is wisdom in making a choice between interpreting Scripture globally or locally. Surely we need to look for both global and local relevance and application of a text. Similarly, in trying to understand a text, we can learn from the history of its interpretation – no matter whether the latter is from the West or elsewhere. However, in the light of my earlier comments I may say that it is the interpretation of Scripture in the local context that primarily helps Christians to develop biblically in their thinking and practice.

Dr. Brian, we appreciate you for your generous contribution toward UBS, New Testament scholarship, Indian Church, and ATA.

Interviewed by Johnson Thomaskutty, Union Biblical Seminary, Pune, India

“Fifty Years as an Educator, Leader, and Theologian”: A Friendly Conversation with Dr. P. S. Jacob

While Dr. Saphir Athyal (Former Principal of Union Biblical Seminary) considers Dr. Jacob as “one of the outstanding educators of present-day India”, Dr. Ravi Tiwari (Registrar of the Senate of Serampore University) writes about him: “Gentle, humane and humble to the core are the true characteristics of Dr. Jacob. His deep knowledge, communicated through his life and teaching, has benefited all who have come into contact with him, especially his students, theological and secular alike”.


About Dr. Plamthodathil Samuel Jacob in Brief

Professor Plamthodathil Samuel Jacob began his career at Ahmednagar College, Ahmednagar in Maharashtra in 1959 after his MA in Psychology at the University of Pune. He was associated with the growth and development of the All India Association for Christian Higher Education (AIACHE) and was its president from 1990-1993. Jacob served as the Principal of Ahmednagar College from 1982 until his retirement in 1993. All long his teaching career, he nurtured a keen interest in Philosophy. After his MA in Philosophy from the University of Pune in 1964, he proceeded as a Fulbright Scholar to teach Philosophy courses at Colby College, Waterville, Maine (USA). While Jacob was on the Fulbright programme, he joined the Ecumenical Fellows’ Program in Advanced Religious Studies at The Union Theological Seminary, New York in association with Columbia University, New York. While he was in New York in the Columbia University programme, he met V. S. Naravane, professor of Modern Indian Thought at the University of Pune, who encouraged him to return to India to pursue his doctoral research. His thesis titled “Christian Influence in Modern Indian Thought: A Study in the Philosophy of Religion” was completed under the supervision of Professor S. S. Barlingay and was awarded the Gurudev Ranade Dalme prize by the Univrsity of Pune for the best doctoral thesis in Philosophy during 1972-1973. During 1990-1991 he served as visiting professor at Columbia Theological Seminary (CTS) in Decatur, Georgia. He served as visiting professor in the Department of Religion at Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia during 1993-1994. Jacob’s association with the Union Biblical Seminary (UBS) began in 1973 at Yavatmal as a visiting professor. Since 1996, he has served as a full time adjunct professor of Contextual Theology and recently as the Principal of UBS during 2009-2010. For more details, read: Jacob, Grace., and Pulikottil, Paulson, eds. Beyond Borders: Challenging Boundaries of Philosophy, Faith and Education, A Festschrift Celebrating Five Decades of P. S. Jacob’s Career in Education. Bangalore: Primalogue: 2010.

Interview with Dr. Jacob

Question: Dr. Jacob, you served as a secular university professor, principal of Ahmednagar College, professor and principal of Union Biblical Seminary, visiting professor at several international universities, and also as a committed writer. May you share your experiences as a leader and writer with the younger generations of scholars?

Dr. Jacob: As a leader I found that:

(i) A fervent commitment to the transformation of the young people’s lives (my area of service) did really help me to keep the motivation intact.

(ii) Disappointments and discouragements are part of the experience; and cultivating patience persistently and consistently turned out to be very rewarding for ‘going beyond’.

(iii) Another upholding power which came from God was to feel satisfied with the outcome of the work when young lives blossom in transformation; though others take the credit for ‘your’ work, with or without any reference to ‘your’ hard work, it becomes no hurdle. The concentration has to dwell on praising God for the fruit beneficial to a few or many and not to dwell on the credit that you received or not received. All glory has to be for the Lord and if others ‘steal’ the credit, it is not important for you to fret or feel disappointed! It is hard but regular meditation and prayer and love for others who ‘steal’ the credit is a Christ like quality that as a leader I endeavored constantly to get closer to.

(iv) As a leader one has to be a ‘pioneer’ and not confined to traditional practices and educational ideals. A leader is not a follower (others follow him!). Jesus was a pioneer and a creator of newness. As a follower of Christ ideals, I strived hard to imbibe it as much as I could. Practically speaking, one comes across obstacles when pioneering in academic and administrative applications. People may misunderstand you and you may become a victim of jealousy and malice but one has to prod on. In pioneering, one has to begin standing on the familiar ground and break new paths steadily and patiently. Pioneering is necessary because the young people are ‘new age people’ and their development should not be smothered by traditional practices alone. Always provide some area of new beginning in teaching, learning and practical application in life keeping the challenges of new age in front of them. The challenge has been to keep one foot on the familiar ground and another on an unknown new ground and keep the back foot ready to step beyond.

(v) I found that a title of a book by a famous industrialist-philanthropist, William Danforth: “Not Things but Men”. Those were old days, when the word ‘men’ also included ‘women’. Perhaps, today we may rephrase it as “Not Things but humans”. I was lucky to find it on the logo of Ahmednagar College with an added phrase introduced by the founder of the College (Rev.Dr B.P. Hivale) “I Dare You”. It is that daring that I decided to exercise and it did help me very much. Identification of the potentials of each young man and woman that God brought under my care in the College/Seminary/University has been a stimulating exercise in leadership activities. Revisualizing their new age life is a constant challenge and one needs to keep up in understanding their dreams and visions for life. Help them to ‘dream dreams’ and ‘see visions’ that are meaningful for them and others through leadership role, always remained a challenge.

(vi) There may be resistance to change from one’s colleagues, coworkers or Governing Board periodically while introducing change. One has to patiently help them to understand the need for change and its possibilities meaningfully. Most people will understand it eventually but some may refuse to give up! It doesn’t matter, keep moving!

(vii) I have learned to ‘walk alone’ in the midst of thorny paths but the light of the Lord made the ‘walk’ possible though painful along the way. Dwelling on the joy and peace that come from God has been my strength, focusing on harmony along with ‘newness’.

(viii) As a writer, the challenge has been to strive for transforming scholarly findings in an inspiring form for the readers (keeping the readers and listeners in mind).

(ix) I have found that leadership is a process in daily living and there is no perfect form that is complete; we learn daily. Let leaders be learners.

(x) All leaders make mistakes and pioneers make more mistakes but one learns to transform those into successes over a period of time through patience and corrective measures.

Question: As a Christian scholar specialized in Hinduism and Indian Philosophy, what were your major challenges/promises?

Dr. Jacob: The major challenge has been to maintain authentic scholarship without prejudice and precaution. Learning Hinduism as a “Hindu does” and understanding the intricacies of the complexities of Indian philosophy as an “Indian philosopher does” without being prejudiced by one’s own belief or personal philosophy, remained a persistent challenge. It remained a constant ‘great’ effort while visiting archives of oriental research libraries, orthodox Hindu worship places, engaging in conversation with people of other faiths in love and engaging in discussion with other scholars who differed while maintaining an unfailing thirst for true knowledge. Listening to what others have to say and understanding it in the way they do, proved to be another challenge. The promises have been to know the truth of their belief/persuasion directly and not to be misled by monumental scholars who agree with you. I found that there is a great challenge in scholarship to apply Jesus’ own words: Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you really are my disciples. Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free” (John 8: 31, 32; NIV). One could go beyond the doctrinal boundaries, and apply it to ‘secular’ knowledge, education and teaching and learning. Understanding the truth (in the field of science, humanities, social sciences, and theology) will set you free from the prejudices and precautions. It releases you from confinement to human made boundaries of knowledge those restrict you; and helps you to ‘leap forward’.

Question: As a scholar in Hinduism/Indian Philosophy, how you read/interpret the New Testament writings?

Dr. Jacob: What helped me most was to interpret New Testament writings by going back to the light of the words of Jesus in a fresh way. The good news is in his words. Try to interpret the writings in the light of his original words. God chose an oriental setting for the incarnation of His Love, in the earthly life of Jesus, his death and resurrection. It remained my constant light and I found that his words in Oriental expressions are easily understood in the Hindu and Indian Philosophical context. While there is a wealth of knowledge and variations of interpretations by scholars from all over the world, as a committed learner of Hinduism/Indian philosophy, going back to the Eastern mode of his words and understanding the NT in that context helped me.

Question: In your opinion, what is the best methodology one can employ when s/he interprets the NT in the pluralistic context of India?

Dr. Jacob: In the pluralistic context of India, one could dwell more on the ‘Universal’ appeal of Jesus as the savior of all with openness of understanding, that is, what I am tempted to call “openness methodology” (currently I am working on its format in spelling it out more concretely; others are welcome to give their contribution to it from different perceptual angles).

Question: Do you have any special advice to give for the upcoming biblical scholars, especially NT interpreters, in India or elsewhere?

Dr. Jacob: My suggestion to them is that while reviewing the earlier interpretations, venture into new interpretations which are more understandable by people of other faiths as well. It will certainly lead us to unknown possibilities. New Testament is the word of God and it cannot be confined to doctrinal interpretations alone. Word of God has ‘infinite’ possibilities of understanding and those possibilities should be explored as much as the interpreters can. Scholarship comes from understanding a wide range of possibilities while one holds on to one’s belief and above all unfailing faith in Jesus.

Thank you Dr. Jacob for sparing your valuable time with us and opening up yourself in order to share your ideas with new generation scholars.

Interviewed by Johnson Thomaskutty, Union Biblical Seminary, Pune, India

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

Holy Land Tour

There is a Holy Land Tour with Prof. Paulson Pulikottil presented by EL AL Israel Airlines. The first batch leaves on November 22 from Mumbai and the booking closes by October 18, 2011. For more details contact 992 394 7792 (Mobile), or 020-24213597.

Also check out the link over here for a highlight of the places to visit (that includes Nazareth, Jordan River, Jerusalem, Jericho, Birth Place of John the Baptist, Bethlehem, Tomb of Jesus, Mount Olives, Gathsemene, Stations of the Cross, Calvary) and for more on Prof. Paulson Pulikottil and other details.

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