Saturday, March 20, 2010

Christian Response to Nationalism

Christian Response to Nationalism
                                                                               Shibu Joseph

INTRODUCTION

Freedom and self-identity are the desires of every human being. Nobody likes to be the subject of any body. Every nation, state, or tribe wants to be independent. The main reason for the most of the turning points in the history of the world was quest for the freedom and identity. Similarly our nation India also had great turning point due to the search for its identity and freedom, which took almost a period of century. Many political and religious parties gave their strength and resources for it. Even Indian Christians had a great part in the struggle for the freedom fight.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how in fact the Indian Christians did respond to the Nationalistic Movements in India. This article touches upon the spirit of nationalism which was infused in the Christians, and their role in India’s freedom struggle. The author will touch upon the background of Indian Christianity, its triumphs and travails and finally show how the Christian community tried to come into the national mainstream. This paper covers broadly the Christian movements in later 19th century, in a nutshell political back ground of India, response of Christians towards nationalism and it impacts in Christianity.

1. WHAT IS NATIONALISM

The term Nationalism is referred to political movements seeking or exercising state power and justifying such actions with nationalist arguments. According to John Martin, Nationalism is an ideology about individuated being. It is and ideology concerned with boundedness, continuity, and homogeneity encompassing diversities. It is an ideology in which social reality, concerned in terms of nationhood, is endowed with the reality of natural thing

1.1 The Origin of Nationalism

The nationalistic movement was formed in the later half of the 19th century and was developed in the full form in 20the century. There are at least three opinions concerning the origin of nationalism. It is believed that by most of the scholars that Indian national congress paved the way for nationalism. Few others consider that the Sepoy mutiny in 1857 to be the beginning of nationalism, who fought the first fight against the British for independence. There are people believe that the undenominational Christian movements in the mid-nineteenth century are the root of nationalism. Nationalism was supported by all who resisted the establishment and expansion of British rule in India. In nature,
Nationalism was not specifically an anti Christian movement; but it was an anti British movement, many missionaries and other Europeans were attacked, they even persecuted the Indian Christians for their relation with Europeans. A thorough study highlights the causes of the rise of nationalism.

1.2 The Causes for the Rise of Nationalism
       
1.      It was a reaction against the British rule.
2.      Political subjection and the resulting misery and humiliation led the educated Indians to search for self-identify.
3.      Influence of European Nationalism and the liberal, political ideas.
4.      Revelation of India’s past as a result of studies of oriental scholars and the consequent pride that felt in the past.

1.3 The Two Faces of Nationalism
1.3.1 Nationalism Based on Hindu Religion

The nationalism based on Hindu religion paved the way to the formation of Brahma Samaj, which was started by Raja Ram Mohan Roy. He attempted to strengthen Hinduism to withstand the cultural and religious onslaught on British rule in India. A militant sect was formed by Dyananda Saraswathi, which is known as Arya Samaj, was based on the rejuvenation and protection of Hindu religion. Liberal leaders were pushed back by others to interpret nationalism in the terms of the Hindu religious tradition with its closely related structure of Hindu metaphysics, religious aspiration and religious exercise. Due to this growing identification of nationalism and Hinduism and development of an aggressive communalism among Hindus, which made effects on minority communities and their relation to the Indian National congress, many associations of Muslims refused to join it when the congress met in Calcutta, in 1886. This thought of nationalism paved the way for the formation of Muslim league in 1906.

1.3.2 Nationalism Based on Politics

Political nationalism began with the formation of Indian national congress in 1885. The political awareness emerged in the later half of 19th century made them to demand for a part in the Indian civil service and representation in the imperial and provincial legislative council of India. In regard to this reason political movements were formed through out India, which led the formation of the Indian national congress in 1885. In order to promote social relation with and cooperation between the Indian leaders and British government the initiation was taken by Octavius Davies Hume, who was a European. There were some Christian leaders from India also had great role in the formation of Indian National congress, they are Krishna Mohan Banerjee and Lal Behari Dey. Christians also began to participate in the activities of Indian National congress. The Christian women leaders were active in the Indian National congress, the chief among them was Pandita Rama Baj, who was the Indian Christian representative for the first meeting in 1888 in Bombay.

2. NATIONAL MOVEMENT FROM LATER HALF OF 19th CENTURY

During British rule in India, the Indians lacked equal job opportunities. They were not allowed to advance to high positions in government service or to become officers in the army. In 1885, a number of Indian lawyers and professionals formed the Indian National Congress. Members of the organization belonged to various religions and came from all parts of India. Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis and others who were arose to bring reform in religion and society. Congress members debated politiand economic reforms, the future of India, and ways for Indians to achieve equal status with the British.

The Muslim League, on the other hand, continued to support the British. British reform efforts were put on hold during World War I. As the war was ending, India fell into a deep depression. The people of India are taxed more than twice as heavily as the people of England and three times as heavily as those of Scotland. According to the latest statistics at hand, those of 1905, the annual average income per person in India is about $6.00, and the annual tax per person about $2.00. Think of taxing the American people to the extent of one-third their total income yet such taxation here would not create a tithe of the suffering that it does in India, because incomes here are so immensely larger than there. Here it would cause great hardship, there it creates starvation.

The Swadeshi movement was formed in 1905-1906. The Swadeshi Movement was protest against economic exploration inherent in the colonial rule. It was in the first decade of the 20th century that Indians began to feel that freedom from the British government was a prerequisite for national progress. In 1905, the British divided the state of Bengal into separate Hindu and Muslim sections. Indians protested this act, the Swadeshi movement took the form of a multifaced boycott of British goods and a series of bombings and shootings. In an effort to stop the violence, the British introduced the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909. These reforms enlarged the viceroy’s executive council to include an Indian. They also allowed Indians to elect representatives t the provincial legislative councils. In 1911, the British reunited Bengal. When World War I broke out in 1914, Britain declared that India was also at war with Germany. Indian troops fought in many parts of the world. In return for support, the British promised more reforms and agreed to let Indians have a greater role in political affairs. Nevertheless, protests against the British continued.

In 1900 Joseph Baptista, an East Indian, brought the idea of Home Rule. According to Tilak, “Home Rule” meant nothing more than power in the hands of the people carry through beneficial projects”. In the initial days of this league Mahatma Gandhi did not join with Home Rule, because he was not sure that the Home Rule would carry the message of freedom to the people, but later he joined with the league. Mahatma Gandhi became the first president of this league on 28th April 1916 when it was formed as League. The first annual conference of the Indian Home Rule league was conducted at Nasik on 17th & 18th may 1917.

In March 1919, the British passed the Rowlatt Acts to try to control protests in India. The acts attempted to restrict the political liberties and rights of Indians, including the right to trial by jury. But demonstrations against the government increased in response to the British Rowlatt acts. On April 13, 1919, thousands of Indians assembled in an enclosed area in Amritsar. Troops entered the meeting place and blocked the entrance. The British commander then ordered the soldiers to open fire on the unarmed crowd. The shots killed about 400 people and wounded about 1,200. This event called the Amritsar Massacre, proved tobe a turning point. From then on, Indians demanded complete independence from British rule. The British promised more reforms, but at the same time they tried to crush the independence movement.
 The Montagu- Chelmsform Reforms were passed in late 1919 and went into full effect in 1921. The reforms increased the powers of the provincial legislative councils, where Indians were most active. The central legislative council was replaced by a legislature with most of its members elected. However, the viceroy and the governors still had the right to veto and bill. The Indians did not believe the reforms gave them enough power. By 1920, Mohandas K. Gandhi had become a leader in the Indian independence movement and in the Indian National Congress, which had become the most important Indian political organization. Gandhi persuaded the Congress to adopt his program of non-violent disobedience, also known as non-violent nonco-operation. Gandhi’s program asked Indians to boycott British goods, to refuse to pay taxes, and to stop using British schools, courts and government services. As a result, some Indians gave up well-paying jobs that required them to cooperate with the British. Gandhi changed the Indian national congress from a small party of educated men to a mass party with millions of followers.

In 1928 the congress resolution was passed that if Britain did not give Indian dominion status with in a year, the congress would launch a mass disobedience movement. On 12th March 1930 the campaign started March with Gandhiji form his Ashram to Dandi on the sea cost and he broke the Salt act there. They continued the boycott for foreign goods. Nehru and Gandhiji were arrested. This led to a mass revolt against the foreign rule, thousands of people were imprisoned. In 1940 the Civil disobedience Movement held individual satyagraha where Pinto was arrested. Gandhiji’s Quit India call of 1942 was harkened to by thousand of people.

In 1946 December the Constituent Assembly of India commenced functioning as the constitution making with Dr.Rajendra Prasad as its chairman. The advisory committee set up on 24th January 1947 was to consist of not more 72 members of the assembly. On the main adversary committee the representatives of minorities were 7 Sikhs, 3 Anglo-Indians, 3 Parsees and 7 Indian Christians. The dream of the Indians became true on 15th August 1947.

3. CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO NATIONALISM

In the early years of Indian national congress, Indian Christens enthusiastically participated the national congress and attended its annual meetings. The missionary journal, Harvest field, gives the record of the presence and influence of Indian Christians in the Madras meetings in 1887, and claims that 40 people among the 700 delegates were Protestant Christians and Christian ministers. Though the Christian population was less than 0.75 per.

There were great leaders from Indian cent, the Indian Christian alone made up 2.5 per cent of the total attendance. Christians, who had political responsibility and participated actively. Kali Charan Banerji was the founder of the Christo Samaj that came into being in Calcutta in 1887. He was a Brahmin convert to Christianity and became a practicing lawyer, playing a pioneering role in Indian nationalism and the Indian Christianity movement. There were come other Christian leaders involved in the National movement they are, R.S.N Subramania, a Christian barrister, and Municipal councilor, Madhu Sudan Das, Lawyer and deputy magistrate in Orissa, and Peter Paul Pillai, a schoolmaster.

Though the next four meetings of congress held in cities, which are for from the main Christian centers, the Christians had active participation in these four sessions. The proporation of Indian Christian delegates remained very much higher than their proportion in the population. The Christian leaders were the speakers of these meetings. They were Kali Charan Banerji, C.G Nath and Peter Paul Pillai of Madras.

Christian women also had participated in Indian national congress, though they did not speak in the early sessions. Pandita Rambai was one of the first Indians who up held the right of Indian women to participate in national politics. The first time when women attended the congress meeting in 1888, there were no less than ten lady delegates. Some leaders among them are, Pandita Ramabai, Trimbuck and Nicamble, who devoted their time and energy to the cause of both secular and religious education. The another interesting thing was, the Indian Christians were often encouraged to attend the national congress by the European missionaries. In other side it is understood that they still tried to have a dominating power on them.

But in other hand many missionaries, like W Harker, warned Indian Christians of the dangers of joining with Hindus. In 1890’s records say that Muslims and Parsis had departed from the congress and National congress became virtually an organization of Hindus and Christians. Since the Christians were so few they were completely at the mercy of their Hindu associations. In this situation the majority of the missionaries expressed their favour towards Indian Christian participation in National congress.inspite of the arguments for the sake of their influence over community as a vehicle, Christian missionaries should not be associated with any political grouping, a few missionaries went  and attended the congress sessions. Many of their collages in other parts  of India also welcomed the nationalistic movement. Rev. Greaves wrote in 1910, that Indian Christians might be found in the very frontline of the national congress.

3.1 The Decline of Christian Participation in Indian National Congress

The Christian participation gradually began to decline by the end of 19th century. According to the record in 1892 only 2 Indian Christians attended the meeting at Allahabad. The decline in attendance is very clear when it compared with the number and proportion of Indian Christian delegates at the different sessions of congress held in the same city. For example; in 1890 there were 677 delegates at the Calcutta session 15 Indian Christians attended. In 1896’s session Indian Christians attended were 9 in number 1.2 per cent. In 1901 session it was 6 in number 0.68 per cent. And in 1906 session 7 in number 0.4 per cent of the total delegates. In the same way there were similar decline in Madras, Bombay, Allahabad and Lahore in the number and proportion of India Christian delegates.

3.1.1 The Reasons for the Declining Attendance

1, The main reason for declining attendance was the fear of Indian Christians of being      regarded as disloyal and in an anxiety about what might happen if the congress and the nationalists achieved their objects and India became independent democracy by a Hindu majority.

 2, The Indian Christians thought that their faith is purely personal and cannot be related it to politics and worldly affairs. One of the writings in 1910 says, Seeking for God in the high heaven we have failed to find him in the affairs of man…..No better proof of this position can be found then, in the frequently expressed view that we Indian Christians, as a people, have got nothing to do with    such mundane things as politics, our only mission being to preach the Gospel.

3. It was brought into light of Christians that the administration did not entirely approve of congress activities. The congress was attacked by the officials in India and even the British parliament criticized congress activities. Therefore some Christians understood that losing support and favour of the British authorities through an association is a foolish thing.

During this time there were two divisions among the Indian Christians. One held the view to support and participate in National congress and in other side some wanted to remain aloof from national congress and to have favour from British government. C.F Andrews wrote a letter in which he deplored the apathy of Indian Christians and urged them to participate more fully in the nationalistic movement. As a reply to it Rev. J.J Ghose wrote that the chief aim of national congress is extreme politics, which has for its propagandas Boycott, Swedeshism and Swaraj, therefore it will bring detriment to the Indian Christians. But some of the Christians did not agree with the policy of aloofness from congress and the nationalist movement. K.T Paul became one of the distinguished leaders of Indian Christian community. His view to solution was not withdraw or aloofness but active participation.

After the round table conference of 1926, Prof. C J Varkey in his address at Trivandrum said … “Let the Indian Christian community try to advance politically and nationally. Let them not only Christians, but also Indians…. We have to join hands with members for common civic and political purpose.” Mahatma Gandhi visited Mangalore in 1920 as a result to that the Kanara Indian Christian civic league was founded on 27th January 1925. When Gandhiji visited in November 1927 Christians offered more than Rs.10, 000/ worth of gold.

In 1930-32 when the British parliament called the Indians for the discussion. There were K.T Paul, and S.K Dutta to represent the Indian Christians at the 2nd round table conference in London. In 1930 the Nationalist Christian party was founded by Joachim Alva in Bombay. In 1931, Joseph Benme became the president of the Nationalist Christian party. The National Christian party was advanced by Jawahar Lal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose in 1937 in Bombay. In 1940 that the National Christian council came under the leadership of Christian Indians which Changed the attitude towards the nationalist struggle. The council declared its solidarity during the Quit India Movement. The Christians and other associations depressed their disapproval to view Christians and other minorities as separate from the total nation.

In 1945 the all India conference of Indian Christians voiced the stand of protestant Christians, when they passed the resolution giving up communal electorates and reservations. When Joachin was arrested, his wife Violet Alva was an active member of the N.C.C and was vice president of all I.C.C in 1946.

4. IMPACTS OF NATIONAL MOVEMENT IN CHRISTIANITY.

By the rise of the national Movement changed began to take place in the church. Religious, cultural and political awakening took place in the nation challenging the Indian Christians to reconsider their position in the Indian society. From the end of the 19th century, there arose new movements within the church leading to unification, indianisation and indigenisation of the church in India. The church had to re-state its beliefs and practices in the context of this new situation when the churches had to be closer to each other and it had to re-think its relation to the nation. And the great growth of associations of Protestant Indian Christians from 1868 onwards in different parts of the country. The search for identity reflected in the undenominational organization of India such as Protestant Christians in Calcutta, Bombay and Madras in the late 19th century. As well as the Presbyterian movements in Punjab.

National Movement inspired the Christians to have self-confidence and to raise their demand for freedom to manage their own affairs. Therefore the missionary societies handed over the administrative responsibilities of the church to Indian Christians. The indigenous missionary societies like N.M.S and I.M.S were formed due to the development of self-identity, with the aim to evangelize Indian sources, Indian people and Indian administration. It also helped to grow the various church union movements like S.I.V.C and C.S.I. The allegation that Christianity as a foreign religion religious led the Christians to attempt to indigenous the theology, life style, music, architecture, and liturgy.  As well as the theology of the mission was revised and gave more priority to concern to non-Christian religion.

4.1  Evaluation of Christian Response

The study about Christian response to nationalism tells us that though the involvement of Christians in the nationalism did not give them a full freedom for the work of evangelism it helped them in many ways. But it is true that since we are Indians we have a part to play with other Indians in the struggle for the freedom. It is true that, we cannot neglect the people who brought us to light of Jesus Christ, but it has nothing to do with our political affairs because most of their primary purpose was not evangelize our Land but the primary purpose was trade and business. In fact the missionaries who came to India for propagation of Gospel did not involve or intervened in the political affairs. On the other hand the Britishers who tried to dominate the Indians were looting our natural resources. Therefore we have a great part to play for our nation India, like Prof. C J Varkey said in 1926, that we are not only Christians but also Indians. Christians should not forget that truth

Conclusion

As we have seen in this paper that independence was a necessary thing for every Indian. Irrespective of religion, caste, colour, or culture it is matter of every individual in India. After all having studied this subject the researcher is proud to say that in the midst of problems, difficulties, humiliations and persecutions Indian Christians had a great role to pray for their nation India, along with other religious and political parties. And many of the Indian Christians were leaders in the National Movements. Indians cannot forget their effort and work, which they spent for the nation. But the problem Christians face today is that, regardless to what the Indian Christians had done of the nation the other religious communities claim that India is their land and Christians have no part in India, and Christianity is foreign religion. There are many developments took place among the Christians due to its involvement in the National struggles.

                                                            Bibliography

Firth. C.B. An introduction to Indian church History. Madras: CLS, 1982,188.

Singh, D.V. “Nationalism and the Search for identity in 19th century Protestant
           Christianity in India”, Indian Church History Review. (December 1980), 105-116

Francis, Kranti K. “Nationalism among Catholics of Western India with special reference
 to Catholics of Mumbai”, Indian Church History Review, (December-2001),168-204.

Mundadan, A.M.. Indian Search for Identity & Struggle for Autonomy. Banglore:
            Dhavaranam Publishers, 1984.

Oddie, G.A. “Indian Christians and the National congress, 1885-1910”. Indian church
            History Review. (June 1968), 45-54.

Vethanayagamony, Peter. Introduction to History of Christianity in India, (A course hand
           book for B.Th Correspondence course).

Webster,John C. The Christian Community and Change in Nineteenth Century North
          India. Delhi: The Macmillian Company India limited, 1976.

------------------. “Punjabi Christian and the Indian Nationalist movement 1919-1947”.
         Indian Church History Review (December 1980), 66-89.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The Mystery of Trinity

             The mystery of trinity
                                                             Shibu Joseph
                                                             

The Bible is the book given to men to know about God, and it talks very clearly who God is. Thus, the Bible is a theological book. Among the many divisions of theology, the doctrine of trinity is one of the most important as well as disputed one.
Trinity is distinctively the Christian understanding of the nature of God. It is the most enigmatic of all Christian doctrines. This is the most difficult and yet one of the most important doctrines of the Christian faith because not only is it concerned with what God is like in Himself in His very being, but it is also related to other issues like our salvation and the deity of Jesus Christ. When we try to understand the trinity, we are trying to understand the very nature of God. If we understand fully about something then it is not God. No one can fully understand God only to the extent of His revelation given in the scripture. This means that we only see hints and hear rumors of God’s existence and nature from the world around us, but God’s only revelation of Himself gives us deeper insight into His nature and that there is bound to be mystery in our understanding of what God is like.
Christianity has peculiar teaching in relation to God. It does not believe in One simple theism but Trinitarian Theism. Therefore, Christianity is unique among the world religions in its Trinitarian understanding of God. There is no other religion that gives us this kind of special insight into the nature of God. This may be the reason that this doctrine has been widely disputed and has provoked debate throughout the history of the church. This doctrine is attacked as being insufficiently monotheistic and is accused as thritheism (believing in three Gods) by Jews, Muslims and Jehovah witness.
The doctrine of trinity must be distinguished from both thritheism and Sabellianism. Thritheism denies the unity of the essence of God and holds to three distinct Gods. Sabellianism held to a trinity of revelation, but not of nature. It teaches that these are not three distinct persons but three different personalities of one Person.
The term trinity does not occur in the Bible, but it had very early usage in the church. Its Greek form, trias seems to have been first used by Theophilus of Antioch (A.D 181) and its Latin form, tritutas by Tertullian (A.D 220). Since, the term ‘trinity’ is not found in Bible, people often say that this doctrine is invented by the Christians and it is not biblical teaching. Therefore, this article will focus on how the Bible progressively reveals God to us as Trinitarian being.
Scriptural Proof for the Doctrine of Trinity
The Bible never deals with the doctrine of trinity as an abstract truth, rather reveals the Trinitarian life in its various relations as a living reality, to a certain extent in connection with the works of creation and providence, but particularly in relation to the work of redemption. Its most fundamental revelation is a revelation given in which the redemptive work of God is more clearly revealed, as in the incarnation of the Son and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Trinity in the Old Testament
Many people think that the doctrine of trinity is found only in the New Testament but not in the Old Testament. But it is not true. If God eternally existed as ‘One God in Three Persons’ and revealed Himself progressively then there must be some indication of this in the Old Testament. Unquestionably the O T emphasizes the unity of God. However, there are clear suggestions that there are more than one Person in the Godhead. Therefore, one might say that the O.T contains intimations which allow for the later revelation of the triunity of God.
  1. The Unity of God
The main emphasis in the O T is on the ‘Oneness’ of God. The celebrated Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4, which became Judaism’s basic confession of faith teaches the unity of God. According to these verses there is only one God and He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The passages like Exo. 20:3, Deut. 4:35; 32: 29; Isa. 45: 14 and 46:9 insist on Israel’s loyalty to the one God.
But there are some kinds of plurality indicated in different sections of O. T within the being of this One God. It does not mean that there is more than one God but Oneness of God or unity of God.
  1. The Plural Words
The first person plural of Genesis 1:26; 3:22 and 11:7 is generally regarded as a clear evidence for the doctrine of trinity in the O.T. It is obvious that the passages in which God speaks of Himself in the plural, Gen. 1:26; 11:7 contain an indication of personal distinctions in God, though even these do not point to a trinity but only to a plurality of Persons. Some try to explain it as a plural of majesty. But this does not carry much weight because in the O. T  Hebrew there are no other examples of such use of the first person plural by a monarch. Some others teach that God probably was speaking to the angels. But this cannot be true because Bible never says that angels participated in the creation of man. Moreover, man is not created in the image of angels but in the image of God (Gen. 1:27).
  1. The Angel of Yahweh
Bible says angels are the creation of God and they are inferior to Him. Therefore, they are His servants subjected to carry out His will. Nevertheless, this is not true with the Angel of the Lord referred in the O.T. He is clearly in some sense a separate person from God, sometimes that angel is referred to as God, yet distinguished from Him (Gen. 16:7-13; 18: 1-21; 19: 1-28, Mal. 3:1). This point to personal distinctions within the Godhead. Since the angel is called God, He could hardly be only a prophet.
  1. Distinction of Persons
Some passages apparently distinguish Persons within the God head. (1) The Lord is distinguished from the Lord ( Gen. 19:24; Hos. 1:7). (2) The redeemer is distinguished from the Lord (Isa. 59: 20). (3) The Spirit is distinguished from the Lord (Isa. 48: 16; 59: 21; 63: 9-10). This distinction indicated that there are different persons in the Godhead.
  1. Personification of Wisdom
Wisdom is personified in some of the O.T passages like Prov. 8:12-31 and Psa. 33:4. In Proverbs 8 the write invites men to receive instructions from her. From verses 22 onwards the write says about ‘wisdom’ that seem to go far beyond mere personification for literary effect. In this section the relationship of wisdom to God is expounded and the impression is created that this is a relationship between two persons. Apostle Paul spoke to Christ as the wisdom of God (1Cor. 1;24, 30; Col. 2:3). So wisdom here seems to really refer to the Son of God before His incarnation.
Trinity in the New Testament
Though the New Testament contains no explicit statement on the doctrine of the trinity of God, it does contain a great deal of evidence. That evidence lies along tow paths: one insists that there is only One true God and the other presents a Man Jesus and the Holy Spirit who both claim to be God. To emphasize the oneness while disregarding the threeness ends in Unitarianism. To emphasize the threeness while disregarding the oneness leads to thritheism. To accept both leads to doctrine of the triunity of God.
  1. The Evidence for Oneness
Like the O.T the N. T also emphasizes that there is only One God (Matt. 23:9, Mk. 10:18; 12:29; Jn. 5:44; 17:3; Rom. 3:30; Gal. 3:20; Eph. 4:6, 1Tim. 1:17; 2:5; Jam. 2:19; 4:12; Jude 25). N. T teaches that they are three and different divine Persons but One in Essence (Jn. 10:30; 17:11). The neuter gender word ‘one’ indicates that they are One in Substance.
  1. Evidence for Threeness
New Testament insists that the Father is God (Jn. 6:27; 1Pet. 1:2), also in the same way Christ referred as God in the N.T. He possesses the attributes which only God possesses. Like, omniscience (Matt. 9:4), omnipotence (Matt. 28:18), and omnipresence (Matt. 28:20). He does the things which only God can do, like forgiving sins (Mk. 2:1-12), and raising the dead (Jn. 11: 36) further, the N.T assigns other works which only God can perform to Christ, like upholding the things (Col. 1;17), creation (Jn. 1:3) and future judgments (Jn. 5:27). Holy Spirit is recognized as God. The term ‘Spirit’ (Greek Pneuma) is neuter gender in Greek, but surprisingly there are places where the masculine pronoun ‘he’ (Gk. Ekeinos) rather than the neuter pronoun ekeirzo is applied to the Holy Spirit (Acts 14:26; 15: 26; 16:13-14). And throughout the Bible we see explicit teaching that Holy Spirit is a different person and recognized as God (Acts 5:3-4). He possesses attributes which only God has, like omniscience (1Cor. 2:10) and omnipresence (1Cor. 6:19), and He regenerates people (Jn. 3:5-6,8), which is an exclusive work of God.
There are at least nine places in the N.T where all the three persons of the trinity are named together, they are (1Cor. 12: 4-6; 2Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1Pet. 1:2; Jude 20-21). The three persons manifested together at the baptism of Jesus Christ in Matthew 3:16-17, which is a clear evidence for the trinity. If it is One person with three personalities (which is Sabellinism) as it is impossible to demonstrate three personalities at a time. Therefore, it is not three personalities but three Persons. Also we read in Matthew 28: 19, Jesus is telling His disciples to baptize the people in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. The occurrence of three names for one purpose indicates that they are recognized as three divine Persons but there are not three Gods but One.
Therefore, God is unity of essence with plurality of Persons. This means that the divine essence is not divided among the three Persons, but is wholly with all its perfection in each One of the Persons. Therefore, the very term ‘Trinity’ means that, in the Godhead there are three Persons co-equal and co-eternal, One in Substance and three in Subsistence.

I have a plan for you……………

I have a plan for you…………
                                                        Shibu Joseph
                                                              

Exodus 3:10  Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou may  bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.

Now, after forty years of banishment God calls Moses, and says leave thy flock, thy family, and the land of Midian for I have a plan for you, I have been following you in the wilderness now it is the time for you to get out of this place. I have a vision for you; hence, your job, your position, reputation and life are going to be changed. I do not want you to always wander in this wilderness. All what you did in the past was just a training for your future. Your future is not in this wilderness, your lonely life will come to an end, I am going to bring you to the light where you are going to be a greatest leader whom the people of Israel had ever seen in their lives.

God does not start anything which He cannot finish, because He does not start anything from the beginning but from the last. If we write a 400 pages book we start with page no. 1 but when God writes he starts from page no.400 and when He finishes He says man to start. So God had completed your end, you may wonder what your end will be, but God does not, He says your end is a blessing. In Psalm 139: 13-16 God says ‘Before you were born My eyes have seen you and your days are ordained by Me”.

According to Eusebius when God called Moses, the Pharaoh who was ruling Egypt was Cenchres, the successor of Achoris. Now Moses is 80 years old, weak in the body, left alone in the wilderness, nobody to take care. Moses must have thought everything is over, He must have  had remembered all the stories his mother said while he was very young in the palace, that God has a purpose for him, when all his contemporaries were killed by the soldiers of Pharaoh He miraculously delivered him, and one day He will  make him a great man. But now, Moses is frustrated thinking that everything is over.  If God wanted to make me a leader, He could have made me when I had everything in the palace, but now nothing is possible, one day I will strike myself against a stone and die here.

Thinking of his fate, Moses reached the valley of the Mount Horeb, which is called the mountain of God. He saw something supernatural on the top of the mountain. He had seen so many wild fires but this was something different, a bush is being burnt but not being consumed. I believe, God was speaking to Moses, ‘Moses your life also was in the same condition for many years, you were burning in and out but just as this bush is not being consumed I did not allow you to be consumed’.

I do not know how many of you have this experience but I have experienced it. There were many times where I thought I am going to be ashes. Fire came  in and out of my life but my God did not allow me to be consumed.

When God called Moses, he was not ready to accept what God told him, because according to human perspective, he was good for nothing as an eighty years old man. He placed three significant excuses before God.

Who am I? (3:11)
But Moses said to God, “Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh and that I should bring the sons of Israel out of Egypt?
He thinks himself unworthy to do what God demanded from him. He thinks about his background and his situation, an 80 years old man, in the wilderness for 40 years, no one to take care, no position in the society, no good background to be a leader of the people. He thinks he wants courage and skill. The children of Israel are unarmed, undisciplined, quite dispirited, utterly unable to help themselves; it is morally impossible to bring them out. Therefore, he said who am I God?

May be it happens to our lives we are bound with our limitations and inabilities. We miss many opportunities because we count ourselves unworthy. Nevertheless, God says ‘Before you were born I consecrated you and I appointed you’ (Jer. 1:4). Angel came to a small city, Galilee with a special message from God to Mary, she said ‘How can it be, I am a virgin’, virgin can cook, sing, pray but cannot give birth to a child, that is not common or natural. When God chooses you, He chooses you to do some supernatural things, which you cannot do naturally. Angel said to Mary, I know you cannot do it by yourself but ‘Power of God will come upon you”. All what we need is “His Power”. And the angel asked her, ‘Is there anything impossible for God?’ Even today, God is asking the same question to us, is there anything? anything? anything impossible for God?
God said to Moses ‘I will be with you’. The creator of the universe, the El-Shaddai - ‘one who is more than sufficient’ the Almighty God will be with you.
God knows you are subject to the natural limitations, but God wants you to do supernatural things (1 Cor. 1:27).

They will not believe me (4:1)
Now Moses started thinking about his past life, that he is not a good person, and that people may not accept him because he is a murderer. He is worried about his past sinful life. God asked to Moses, cast the stick on ground and when he did, it became a living serpent. He says, if I can turn this dry stick into a living creature how much more will I be able to use you if you obey My words. Secondly, God asked Moses to put his hand onto your bosom, and when he did the same, his hand was leprous as snow. God indirectly tells to Moses that He knew what he meant. I know what you have done with this hand, I know your hand is bloody and sinful, God asked him, put it again on your bosom when he did it his hand became like other flesh of his body, God says I am the one who cleansed you. Do not worry about your past I have washed it and made you worthy to carry out my mission. Many times it happens to us also. Our past life limits us, it becomes an obstacle for us from excelling in our mission. But God says ‘My everlasting mercy is upon you’. Before you committed your first sin I knew you and loved you.

You may have disappointed God but He does not change His plans for you. He still loves you and wants to use you for His will. God says, take out the limitations off your life, stop limiting yourself, “It is not what you think of you, but it is what I think of you”.
People use different doors to come to a hall, it does not matter which door you came but what matters is that you are in the hall. Your background is just an entry for you to come to life, your unworthiness may be the quality that God found in you to carry out His mission.

I am not good in speech (4:10)
Then Moses said to the Lord, “Please, Lord, I have never been eloquent, either recently nor in time past, not since Thou hast spoken to Thy servant; for I am slow of speech and slow of tongue.

Here Moses is worried about his physical weakness. He thinks that it is necessary to be eloquent in order to be a leader. Many times we also look at our physical appearance and underestimate ourselves for God’s purpose.

God answered to Moses with a question, ‘ Moses who made you mouth?’, which means you or your parents came to know that you have a stammering tongue when you were 2 or 3 years old, i.e., when you started speaking, but I am the One who created your mouth and I knew it even before you were formed in the womb of your mother. By knowing everything about you I have called you for My purpose. God said, ‘I will be with your tongue’. He will be with your problems, with your weakness, with your disabilities. His grace is sufficient for you.
My dear ones, God knows everything about our lives much more than we know about our lives. You may have hundreds of problems in your life but God is not worried about your illness, weakness, or disabilities. They are the qualities that God has found in your life. He has a plan and a vision for your life, He does not look at your life like others look at your life, even He does not look at your life as you look at your life. Are you ready to stand for Him, you may have a lot of excuses but still He needs you, He has a plan for you.